538 POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



method comes into view. The mother tells the child that she is 

 pleased or displeased with him, that it makes her happy or unhappy 

 when the child does this or that, that she thinks he is a good or a 

 naughty boy, etc. — all of which remarks express her feelings, her 

 thoughts, in contradistinction to the actions which have occasioned 

 these feelings and thoughts ; the realm of the mind as opposed to the 

 world of activity. Let us here notice that the speech of every people 

 contains these two classifications of words, the objective and the sub- 

 jective; and indeed it must be so, since we perform actions and we 

 j,udge of our actions. By this method the child learns in about a 

 year from the time it begins to speak to express itself about what it 

 does and what it thinks. 



Now what is the method of the grammarian? The child learns 

 first the names of things that do not appeal to his consciousness, for 

 they do not start from his point of view, but from that of the maker 

 of a book. He learns lists of words — that is, he learns to know the 

 symbol, and not the thing; he translates. He learns about Caesar's 

 wars and the book of his father's uncle in what is called an exercise. 

 For both of these subjects he feels no interest, which is to be 

 expected, as they are abstract. He sees no action. Of the great part 

 of language, which may be called the speech of feeling, he also learns 

 only in the abstract. He reads that Caesar was glad or that his 

 father's uncle was angry, but the happiness and the anger are outside 

 of his consciousness; they have been presented to him by symbols, 

 that is, printed words. By this method the child learns in about 

 four years to read fairly well ; as a rule, speaking the language is en- 

 tirely out of the question. The pupils can not talk of their actions 

 and their feelings, because these are represented to them by symbols, 

 for such are printed words; they have not grasped them as actualities. 

 If on going into a foreign country they are able to understand what 

 is being said, the teacher may consider himself lucky. He has done 

 his utmost with the method he has chosen to employ. He has attained 

 something. It remains true that the mother accomplishes more in 

 a shorter time than the grammarian. 



But is it perhaps possible to put the two methods together, and 

 thus to create a method which shall contain the good of both? We 

 must not continue always to act as the mother does, to teach after her 

 method, or our pupils will continue to talk like a child of two years, 

 and be furthermore unable to write at all. How shall we manage 

 to melt the two into one compact, inseparable whole? 



Let us imagine a class is to take its first lesson in the foreign 

 tongue. First, what shall be the matter of the lesson ; then, how shall 

 it be presented? We shall be careful to choose a subject that can 

 be interesting to the pupil, hence a subject containing activity. 



