Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

sons it usually supplies the subject; so, by way of distinction, it was called the word (verbum); but it has no such power in our own language. Having but few modifications, other words are employed to express what is expressed by the inflections of Latin verbs. Since all the modes, except the indicative and imperative, are expressed by other words, English verbs cannot be said to have mode. Our idea of mode is manner of affirmation; in Latin, mode is an inflection of the verb. Then mode in English is entirely different from mode in Latin. The verb "labored" will go through all the modes except the imperative; then how can it be said to be indicative? The idea of number and person is forced upon the English verb without the least show of reason or sense. Our ideas of number and person are that they are attributes of entities, and all know that verbs are not entities. The modifications that we ascribe to verbs are arbitrary, fixed by custom and defy all reason and analogy. We can only learn their forms, and accept them as we find them; and by so doing, we dispense with what is termed etymological parsing.

Language is learned more by the power of imitation and example than by all the rules of syntax that can be devised. Facility and elegance of expression are not learned by the study of grammatical rules. The meaning of words, the study of synonyms, and a careful and critical examination and study of the writings of the best authors, exercises in substituting other language to express the same thoughts, and cultivation of the taste for elegant language; these will do more in the acquisition of language than dependence on the memory for rules and definitions, that have neither bearing upon the subject, practical application to ordinary use, nor relation to the purpose for which they were given. A thorough inductive drill in constructing sentences and joining them together in logical arrangement must be regarded as indispensable in the study of language. The cultivation of the imagination affords. power, variety and beauty to the expression of language. The use of correct and elegant language is a matter of taste, formed by association and familiarity with general literature, rather than a knowledge of grammatical rules and definitions. The rules of syntax are designed to embrace two considerations-the first has reference to the agreement of words, and the second to that of arrangement. The English language having few inflections, has also few agreements. But few rules, therefore, are required to enable the learner to employ the requisite modifications. The most common errors in agreement are the use of plural pronouns having singular antecedents; the improper use in the comparison of adjectives and adverbs; the employment of the past tense of irregular verbs instead of their participial form; and adding the s or es to the verb in the indicative mode and present tense with a plural subject, and the unnecessary use and misapplication of propositions. A few general rules will reach all the changes in modification that agreement requires. In regard to arrangement, in common style, one general principle, if well understood, will be a sufficient guide for ordinary uses, and that is, that modifiers, whether words, phrases or clauses, shall stand as near to the words modified as possible. The benefit obtained from the use of rules and definitions is more apparent than real. There is a definite correspondence between signs and things signified. By a series of repetitions, forms and processes become automatically fixed in the mind. These mental processes are carried on by the law of association of ideas. All of these processes are automatic, and the will deals only with results, while the mental activities proceed unconsciously. In

66

[ocr errors]

speaking or writing the words come unbidden, the ideas always suggest the word-signs; but in reading or learning language, the process is reversed, the word-sigus suggest the ideas; thus a reciprocal relation being established, the processes are carried on unconsciously and independently of the will. So in the established forms of language as in spelling, or agreement, or arrangement in syntax, these forms are fixed in the mind, and any variations will instantly be noticed without reference to rules or definitions. A person seeing the word "having" with the "e" retained, or "compelling" with but one "," would detect the error without ever thinking of the rule for dropping the final "e,” or doubling the final consonant. And so a person familiar with general literature could not avoid noticing the disagreements, "You was, "His friends was there," or the disarrangements," He departed very instantly," Iyesterday saw him." Such expressions offend the ear, are unpleasant to the eye, and are instinctively avoided when the true forms are established in the mind. These forms are not fixed by the application of rules, but by a long series of repetitions of the forms themselves. Another objectionable feature in the use of grammatical rules and definitions is, they are seldom, if ever, seen or heard of outside of the school room. There is nothing in the practical use of language with which to associate them, therefore they are soon forgotten, and none but the teacher, who is in daily practice, is expected to retain them. The general law of mental action is, that all ideas expressed in language are reproduced in the mind of the recipient. One or two illustrations will explain my meaning. "California was admitted into the Union in 1850." The thought expressed by these characters has been elaborated or reproduced in your minds with inconceivable rapidity. At one period in your lives the process of associating ideas with their signs was impossible, at another, slow and difficult, the facility increasing with time and the number of repetitions. Again, the thoughts I am now expressing are connected with your minds through the medium of atmospheric vibrations. These vibrations give rise to certain sounds; these sounds, by a series of repetitions, are associated with certain ideas which become fixed and automatic in their action. In the communication of ideas there is mental activity on the part of the recipient, and not passivity, as many are led to suppose. In view of this law of mental action, and taking into consideration the definition of a grammatical rule, namely, an "abstract generalization of notions or conceptions of modifications, or agreements of words," we see how difficult and laborious are the processes of mastering and applying so great a variety and number of rules as are required in our present method of teaching the English language. Mr. Brown has twenty-six rules, twenty-six exceptions, eighty-seven notes, which are subordinate rules, about two hundred observations, also subordinate rules, amounting to three hundred and thirty-nine. In his remarks on syntax Mr Brown says: "The English language, having few modifications, has few concords or agreements" (Brown's Institutes of Grammar, page 227); and yet three hundred and thirty-rine rules! You who are quick at figures may make an estimate of the time, labor and expense incurred in a struggle too often hopeless and ineffectual to attempt to master a subject so intricate and difficult. Long have we looked for and desired a more simple and rational method of studying the English language. Grammarians, in their zeal for erudition, have gone beyond the capacity of the learner, and require him to come up to the standard that they alone have reached after many years of severe and arduous labor. Ordinarily,

it requires but a short time to forget what it has taken years to learn, and no person pretends to conform his language to rules and definitions. They do not enter into his mind-they are foreign to his purpose. In view, then, of arriving at a better method of acquiring a knowledge of the elements of the English language the following preamble and resolutions are submitted for consideration :

WHEREAS, The methods now in use of studying the English language being inadequate to the accomplishment of the desired object, and unsatisfactory in their results; therefore, be it Resolved, That it is deemed expedient by the teachers in convention for the President to appoint a committee of three experienced teachers, whose duty it shall be to prepare a series of formulas and exercises for the purpose of drilling pupils in the elements of the English language. Resolved, That this committee shall make their report at the next State Teachers' Institute, and if it be favorably received, then further

Resolved, That the State Board of Education take it into consideration, with a view of substituting it for the grammars now in use in the public schools in this State; and if so substituted, then be it further

Resolved, That the copyright of such formulas and exercises be secured to the State of California, and that they be furnished to the schools at the actual cost of printing and furnishing them; and further

Resolved, That the committee be allowed reasonable compensation for the preparation of such formulas and exercises prescribed by the State Board of Education.

I think it has been clearly shown, that the so-called "accidents' ascribed to English words, are foreign, inapplicable, factitious and absurd. The imaginative grammarian may, indeed, invest English words with them, but their enumeration and specification, in the process called etymological parsing, affords little or no aid to the learner.

If this conclusion be correct, then several important results may be arrived at, of great importance to the interests of the public schools, among which may be enumerated the following:

First-A vast amount of time and labor saved to the pupil, and interest developed by a method more in conformity with the principles of the English language.

Second-Greater facility on the part of the teacher, by having more appropriate formulas and exercises.

Third-A great saving of expense to the patrons of the schools, in having abbreviated and simpler, and consequently cheaper books; and Fourth-A more thorough and complete knowledge of our language.

REMARKS

ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE OBJECT SYSTEM AND OBJECT TEACHING; OR, OBJECTS, PRINCIPLES AND SYSTEM.

BY MRS. M. LEWIS JORDAN.

I had thought that the accurate judgment of Dr. Fitzgerald would have seen the necessity of excusing me from so responsible a duty as that of speaking to you in behalf of the object system-responsible, because I believe that this system, thoroughly understood and properly carried out, by teachers who are fitted for their work, will do more for the amelioration of the condition of the human race; for the bringing about of the "great millenium," than even the preaching of the gospel. Although I do not like apologies, in this case I must make an exception, and apologize to you for attempting to speak on a subject of so much importance to us all, without having made any previous preparation. I would not now proceed, did I not know that patience and charity are the crowning attributes of the true teacher.

I am not going to make a speech. I do not believe in the popular theme "Woman's Rights," but I do believe in women's right position and unwavering discharge of duty, and will try to throw out a few suggestions on the difference between the object system and object teaching.

A failure on the part of most educators to discover this difference, by not giving the subject proper thought and investigation, is why so many have such an aversion to what they think is the object system; which aversion is caused by the observation or obnoxious results of a certain kind of object teaching, adopted by those educators who depend entirely for their knowledge on Calkin's, Willson's or E. A. Sheldon's Manual; which books, if written correctly, are only intended for suggestions. E. A. Sheldon's Manual, being the only manual which contains even suggestions on the idea of the object system (nor was it intended for any other purpose), contains but fragments of the system as a system; and as for Calkin's and Willson's Manuals and school charts, they are worse than nothing, as they prevent the cultivation of originality and encourage the obnoxious "object teaching," preventing a knowledge of the genuine object system.

The idea of objects as suggestions to knowledge is as old as the creation of the world. Practical lessons by use of objects or illustrations

had their birth with common sense. The principles on which the object system is founded originated with Christianity; which principles have been beautifully illustrated in the teachings of our Saviour, who always explained the unknown by the well known, as seen in the lessons on "The Lilies of the Field," "The Fowls of the Air," ""The Leaven in the Three Measures of Meal," etc. This is nothing new. What, then, is new? The system. Not objects, sound principles, common sense, fragmentary lessons and illustrations by use of black-boards and crayonfor which black-boards and crayon we are indebted to the practical common sense of Pestalozzi. Although we owe something to Locke, yet never were the above fragments brought together and arranged into a system of education until necessity prompted the philanthropy of Pestalozzi to give it its first mouldings. After which, the Rev. Dr. Mayo, making necessary improvements, gave it publicity and solidity by its introduction into the London schools.

It is to the untiring efforts of E. A. Sheldon, of Oswego, assisted by Miss M. E. M. Jones, that we owe its successful introduction into the United States. First into the State of New York and thence into nearly every State in the Union. To perfect this system in its adaptation to every phase of human progress, including science and art, profession and trade, is left for the handiwork of California.

The object system is the first complete system of education that has ever been brought before the public. It does not, like other systems, furnish a method for the presentation of certain subjects, but a way to teach every branch in the English language, commencing at the earliest stage of the child's education, extending to its complete close; grading every subject into steps, adapted to the age, grade and stage of each child; saving at least three years of every six of the time spent in school, by compelling the teacher to prevent the planting of weeds while she develops and cultivates the seeds; carrying out the old adage, that “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." Every succeeding lesson is dependent on the preceding one, and is a two-thirds review of the same presented in a different form. Each subject commenced in the lower grades is so presented as to prevent nearly all the difficulties with which teachers in the higher grades now have to contend.

The object system compels the teacher to be thorough. Its leading feature is consecutiveness. A system which develops the three-fold nature of the child, on the principle that "union is strength." Believing that to make the true man, the strong man, that the spiritual, intellectual and physical should be harmoniously cultivated as one, each helping to form the man of earth into the image of his Maker, whose trinity is so perfectly blended into one allwise God, that the philosophy of the world cannot separate them.

[ocr errors]

Object teaching" consists of two methods of giving a lesson on common objects. One method is that in which the teacher tells all she knows about the object that she has chosen for her subject, the children repeating after her until the information thus obtained is thoroughly memorized. The other leads the children to discover for themselves, through observation and experiment, proceeding step by step, the teacher making proper use of the objects she has supplied herself with, etc. This may be a very interesting lesson. But both are greatly deficient in the following respects:

First-They have no connection with or relation to any other subject taught in the school.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »