Let us sum up, and set forth in parallel columns the two most widely differing orders of progression in order that we may fully realize that each is the antithesis of the other.

The Ancient Order
(based on tradition)
The Modern Order
(based on psychology)
First, learn how to convert ‘dictionary-words’ (i.e. etymons) into ‘working sentence-units’ (i.e. ergons). This will be done by memorizing the rules of accidence and derivation. First, become proficient in recognizing and in producing foreign sounds and tones, both isolated and in combinations.
Secondly, learn the general structure of sentences. This will be done chiefly by reading and translation exercises. Secondly, memorize (without analysis or synthesis) a large number of complete sentences chosen specifically for this purpose by the teacher or by the composer of the course.
Thirdly, memorize the irregular or idiomatic phenomena of the language. Thirdly, learn to build up all types of sentences (both regular and irregular) from ‘working sentence-units’ (i.e. ergons) chosen specifically for this purpose by the teacher or by the composer of the course.
Lastly, (if necessary) convert the eye-knowledge’ of the language into ‘ear-knowledge’ by means of reading aloud and by ‘conversation-lessons.’ Lastly, learn how to convert ‘dictionary words’ (i.e. etymons) into ‘working sentence-units’ (i.e. ergons).

An irrational order of progression is bound to entail much ‘cramming,’ a process by which much information (valuable or valueless) is retained for a short time (generally for examination purposes), but without ensuring any permanent results except bad results.

A rational order of progression will not only rapidly secure useful and desirable results, but will also encourage the formation of the right sort of language-habits and ensure as a permanent result the capacity for using the foreign language in the fullest sense of the term.

CHAPTER XV
THE MULTIPLE LINE OF APPROACH

The ninth and last of the essential principles is, in reality, more than a mere principle of language-study, it is even more than a principle of study, it is almost a philosophy in itself. It seems to be a special application of a doctrine which, to many, constitutes a line of conduct, an attitude, towards most of the problems and interests of our daily existence. This attitude is fairly well designated by the term eclectic; this, however, is not an ideal term, seeing that, like so many others, it possesses a double connotation. Its first sense is distinctly pejorative; it suggests unoriginality, a lack of coherent system, a patchwork of other people’s opinions. In its second and broader sense, so far from being a term of disparagement or reproach it implies the deliberate choice of all things which are good, a judicious and reasoned selection of all the diverse factors the sum of which may constitute a complete and homogeneous system. If, therefore, we speak here of the doctrine or attitude of eclecticism, we are obviously using the term in its second and broader connotation; used in this way it stands as the antithesis of prejudice, of faddiness, of crankiness, and of fixed ideas. Many of those who practise eclecticism call it the ‘philosophy of the complete life’; whether this is or is not a philosophy in the true sense of the term, we will leave to philosophers to discuss; we will content ourselves by quoting a few maxims or aphorisms which will serve to make clear the attitude in question.

All is good which tends towards good.

The recognition and appreciation of any particular good thing does not necessarily invalidate those things which do not resemble it, nor even cause us to disparage or deprecate things which are seemingly in conflict with it.

Let us neglect nothing except futilities and things which we have proved to our satisfaction to be in themselves bad and harmful.