[270.] First of all, one’s language was acquired by hearing it spoken, by receiving it from others, by imitation; it was refined or vulgar; it was perceived accurately or indistinctly; it was imitated by organs, good, bad, or indifferent. Little by little the imperfections of the earliest stage are outgrown, where cultured persons set a daily example and insist on correctness of speech. Sometimes, however, it takes years to bring about such a result.
[271.] Another factor, and one deeply rooted in individual temperament, is the stronger or weaker impulse toward expression through language. This fact elevates the language of each one above mere imitation; its improvement must start from the thoughts which it seeks to express. Striking progress of this kind often occurs during adolescence.
The differences noted in this and the two preceding sections are psychological, hence common to German and American children. The problem of teaching American children their mother-tongue, assumed to be English, is both harder and easier than to teach German to German children. It is easier in that English is mostly uninflected, hence unencumbered by nice distinctions in grammatical form. This same fact, on the other hand, causes didactic difficulties, since most teachers are at a loss as to what definite body of knowledge they should or can impart that will train the child into a mastery of good English speech. The last twenty years have seen a large number of experiments on the part of authors in the effort to present a body of information and exercises calculated to secure a good training in the mother-tongue. These efforts have met with but partial success, owing to the inherent difficulties of the subject. Many who can teach a foreign language, where there is a movable fulcrum of difficulties to be overcome, such as those found in inflection, or in the meaning of foreign words, fail when confronted by a language that is practically uninflected, and in which the words are easily understood.
The old recourse was technical grammar. But this is an analytical study, calculated to lead to apprehension of subtle meanings, rather than to an instinct for correct form. Furthermore, the grammar cannot be successfully studied until after the habits of speech are fairly fixed. For these reasons, it bears much the same relation to living speech that formal logic does to real thinking. Grammar makes the mind keen to detect formal errors of speech, just as logic trains one to detect fallacies in reasoning.
The first important instrument for securing good English in the early primary grades is narration by the teacher and repetition by the children. This means, potent enough to form the speech of any child whether from the slums or from the homes of those who know no English, is rarely utilized up to the full measure of its efficiency. Teachers are filled with the prepossession that they must enable their pupils to write good English, forgetting that if the mind is habituated to think in good English first, the problem of writing it is well-nigh solved. The requisites for successful oral training in the mother-tongue are first, the selection of a body of interesting and appropriate literature, and second, skill in narration by the teacher. Given these two things, and we have the first in great abundance, and every child will be able in a year to give extended and correct speech within the range of his sphere of thought to an almost unlimited extent. His tenacious memory for forms frequently heard, together with his delight in repeating almost word for word stories told in his presence, will produce astonishing facility in correct speech. As much of this may be written as seems best, but it is probable that there would not be great loss if a child were not called upon to write a ‘composition’ before he is ten or twelve years old. Could we be sure he would go through the high school, formal writing might be postponed until he enters it. Not much is ever gained by attempts to produce fruit before its natural period for appearing.
Upon the basis of this training in correct oral speech, the children may begin, when nine or ten years of age, to have systematic language lessons, which should be calculated to produce two results: first, a facile use of the pen in recording thought, special caution being given not to weary the mind and body too much by unduly extending the length of the written exercises; second, an inductive approach, through brief written exercises, toward the classifications and distinctions of technical grammar. To be of use, this latter requirement should be clearly understood. The method of approach is purely synthetic. It consists in devices to enable the pupil repeatedly to use a given construction, say a relative pronoun, until the name and construction seem natural from use alone.[35]
At the age of thirteen or fourteen the analytical study of grammar should be begun. The essential thing here is that the pupil should connect words with the ideas they express, and sentences with the thoughts that give rise to them.[36] Seeing mental distinctions clearly, he has small difficulty in their written or oral expression.
[35] For extended illustration of this point, see the “Annotator’s Language Lessons,” the Werner School Book Co., New York, Boston, and Chicago.
[36] This position is best exemplified by Mr. George P. Brown in his “Essentials of English Grammar,” the Werner School Book Co., New York, Boston, and Chicago.
[272.] Now such facts might seem to point to the conclusion that no special periods of instruction are needed for the mother-tongue, or at least not for language lessons alone. On the one hand, it might be urged that cultured teachers will improve the language of their pupils by their mere example, and by the occasional corrections which will of course be necessary; while, on the other hand, the gradual progress of mental development will shape the means of expression from within, to the natural limits of individual capacity. But before accepting the view here given, we need to remind ourselves, in the first place, that for a long time the educated teacher is only imperfectly understood by the uneducated listener, and that instruction is very much impeded if each unusual turn of expression necessitates an inquiry as to whether its meaning is clear.