The titles of the new methods have been adroitly chosen, they claim to be those of nature and by implication stigmatise the Grammatical method as unnatural. They profess that they teach a foreign language as a child learns to speak its mother tongue. A very high classical authority coupled “ratio et oratio” reason and speech as complements and indubitably speech can only improve and develop as the mind unfolds and matures. Those who adopt the new method appear to think the limitations imposed by the immature child’s mind worthy of imitation when dealing with the riper adult. Rule of Thumb has the advantage that being born of and acquired by
practice it can be applied and put into practice, but it is certainly rather late in the day to revert to it in the acquirement of languages. We have had some experience of Rule of Thumb in this town. The Grammatical Methods of teaching languages are those of teaching any science in a thorough manner. They classify the various parts of speech for the purpose of reducing them to rule, these are studied in detail and the rule defines the conditions and limitations under which they can be used in construction. This rule teaches us how we can correctly form thousands of sentences on the model of one, instead of regarding each as so many distinct phenomena. One Grammarian, Lennie, 47th Ed., defines Grammar as the art of speaking and writing the English Language with propriety. I venture to say that in dealing with a foreign language one cannot express one’s self with accuracy, nay one cannot be confident of expressing one’s own meaning at all without a grammatical knowledge of it. But, of course, speech means practice, and no amount of theory can become a substitute for this.
Mr. Gouin was a youthful unmarried student of Caen University distinguished by a capacious but not very retentive memory. He was sent by the Professors to attend lectures at Berlin University and Hamburg and proceeded to master German. He learnt the German Grammar in ten days. But being unable to understand the lectures he learns the 1000 German roots in four days, and again tries the lecture room with the same ill-success. He then decided to learn the German Dictionary by heart and did so in one month, but on again attending the lecture room, he was still unable to understand. He passed ten months in similar efforts and states that on one occasion he attended the lectures for a whole week, without understanding a single sentence. He subsequently states, that his previous ten months work, so far from being useful to him in a new effort was detrimental. He had a wrong pronunciation, and there was not a single verb in the whole language to which he did not attribute a meaning other than the true one. He had to unlearn, then relearn. After ten months labours he returned to France unsuccessful. Under a teacher’s guidance, with much less labour, he would have achieved an unqualified success.
By observing a young nephew of four years he is led to his present method. He returns to Germany, puts it into practice, and is speedily and eminently successful. He banishes Dictionary, Grammar, Roots, Ollendorf and Robertson.
Mr. Gouin appears to have thought that since a language is
made up of grammatical rules and words, it was only necessary to commit them to memory to have mastered the language. His mistake was that of the person who should suppose that since strength is derived from food, the more food he swallows the stronger he becomes. He exceeded his capacity of mental digestion and assimilation.
Another cause of Mr. Gouin’s failure was that of supposing that a knowledge of the theory carries with it the ability to practice.
Mr. Gouin states that his memory was in his eye not in his ear, and that a month’s interruption of his labours proceeding from disease of sight brought on by overwork was sufficient to efface from his memory Grammar, Dictionary all previously learnt. Dicken’s Yorkshire schoolmaster, Mr. Squeers recognised that knowledge acquired, ought speedily to be put into practice. Mr. Gouin would have found in Paris, many young Frenchmen engaged in commercial pursuits who speak Italian or Spanish or Portuguese, and even English or German, well, who have never been in any country where these languages are spoken. This was the case so far back as 1866.
Review of Reviews, 1892, page 88.—Professor Blackie says that after five months in Germany, he knew German as well as his mother tongue. He attended Professor’s lectures, took regular lessons in German. He added to this the text-book used by Professor, daily intercourse with students, and the constant reading of easy German books. By this combination of social intercourse, primary training of the ear, and secondary use of relative books both in reading and writing, he spoke German like English in five months. Memory depends upon force of original impression and frequency of repetition. He says that at the University pupils did not learn to speak Latin. A new professor came who spoke it, made a speech in it, and called upon the pupils to reply, Blackie was the only one who ventured to do so, and had learnt by “spouting” Latin speeches of Cicero etc. in his room. He used Italian vowels.
Dr. Hanes says it is impossible to learn a language by the translation of disconnected sentences, referring to the usual exercises of the Grammatical Methods, and by learning lists of words. The sentences are only disconnected in that they do not always form question and answer, but this the student can easily and profitably remedy. Besides all speech is not dialogue. See page 7. They are no more disconnected than are so many soldiers of a regiment, moving at the impulse of one mind, and marching to the attainment of one object. The connection is that all