صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني

has forgotten the endings, but because his attention has been drawn from the endings to the unusual sound of the crude form or root of the word to be declined or conjugated, and because his organs prevented him from going on as quickly as he would have wished to do. We are right in supposing that he did it from inattention, but that inattention- is the necessary consequence of our method, and, consequently, not so much the boy's as the master's fault. The new crude form absorbed the boy's whole attention. That this is the case, may easily be proved by the following experiment. Suppose a boy is at the first Latin declension; he cannot decline musa or mensa without stammering. Make him say then the mere endings: a, a , a, am, d. They are easy, English sounds and words; after a few repetitions he will repeat them perfectly well; he will like to repeat them. You are sure he knows them. Take then musa or mensa again, and have them declined. You will find, I fear, that they will not go much better than before. But give him only an easy letter to pronounce before the terminations, as, 8 or t, and all will proceed as well as you could wish. Take again instead of 8 or t, another consonant hard for the boy to pronounce, and all the terminations will seem to be entirely forgotten again. I think these experiments must prove to every one, that the difficulty boys generally have in learning a foreign language and grammar, ancient or modern, lies not so much in the variety of grammatical forms, which, almost throughout, are simple and easy, as in the unusual sounds or compositions of sounds or letters, in the hearing or pronunciation of which the boy's whole attention is absorbed; that in consequence of this experience, boys ought to practise first their ears, eyes, and organs in a new language, before they begin its grammar. The most useful way of doing this, would be to give them a list of the most useful words to learn by heart. This stock of words would not only take away more than half from the beginner's difficulties, but afterwards most decidedly assist him in reading any author with facility and pleasure. But learning by heart mere words for the sake of introduction to an unknown language, seems to be objectionable on many grounds. Besides there are two methods used already by many authors of practical grammars (for beginners), by which it is intended to initiate the pupil at once into the genius of the language, and to furnish him in an easy practical way with the rules of etymology and syntax, that is, the explanatory examples in Latin or Greek are literally translated into English, or the English exercises are allowed to be in all cases literal Latin or Greek translations. These two methods, used either separately or together, are often attended with great success." Their principle is the right one: all study of foreign tongues must begin with a comparative study of the mother tongue. Yet the application seems to be objectionable, because one thing will be bad, either the literal translation of the English or that of the Latin. Bopp, Donaldson, Grimm, Latham, Pott, and others, in writing their comparative treatises, grammars, and etymologies, certainly never thought of first beginners to help them in that respect, yet their best researches and discoveries can be made accessible and useful to them. I proceed to explain the plan which, in my opinion, would answer those two requisites of a beginner's comparative grammar, which we have already been discussing: viz. 1. That it ought to furnish the pupil with a sufficient stock of words to begin with advantage the new accidence; and, 2. That the method by which it is attempted to get that stock, ought to proceed from a comparative study of the respective mother tongue. And I remark by the way, that it will be found to be further recommended by the fact, that it is founded upon the most practical of all practical maxims, “to make the best of what one has,”—that is, in the case supposed, the English language. The English language has about 53,000 words, of which about 3,820 may be considered primitives. Of these, about 2,500 (2,513,) belong to the Germanic, 1,250 to the classic stock.”

* Becker, Dr. K. Ferd. Ausführliche D. G., Ed. II. vol. 1. p. 8, applies this principle only to the Syntax: “Die Grammatik jeder besondern Sprache hat nur die der fremden mit der Muttersprache gemeinsamen Verhältnisse (des Gedankens und der Begriffe) zu entwickeln, und die ihnen entsprechenden Formen, wie sie entweder mit denen der Muttersprache tibereinstimmen oder von ihnen abweichen, nachzuweisen.” The

true object of any grammar is to him But in Rask's Grammar of the A. S. Tongue,

“die Sprache zu verstehen.”

must first learn it; and to teach a lan-
guage is the object of grammar also.
* The principal books that have been
consulted for the given results, are,
Charles Richardson's New Dictionary of
the English Language, Ed. II. 1844; T.
H. Kaltschmidt's Sprachtergleichendes
Wörterbuch der Deutschen Sprache,
Leipzig, 1839; the Tauchnitz Editions
of the Dutch, Danish, and Swedish Dic-
tionaries; T. Bosworth's Dictionary of
the A. S. Language, 1838; Erasmus

order to understand a language, one translated by B. Thorpe, 1830; The

Considering first the 2,500 Germanic primitives, we may fairly conclude, that as the English language, a daughter of the Anglo-Saxon, with the Dutch, German, Danish, Swedish, Icelandic, and their elder branches, the Gothic, &c. forms the Germanic stock of languages, the above number of words will, to a greater or less extent, serve us to begin with advantage any of those languages. We shall get in this way, for instance, about 2000 words for the German, without being obliged as yet to touch any of the difficulties of the language. There is no learning by heart; it is sufficient to read once or twice over the examples that follow a given rule, and they will be remembered. Without entering into any details of the consonantal law that rules the transition between the English and German languages, let us here give only, for illustration's sake, one rule separately with its examples: The English sharp labial p answers to the German labial aspirates, f or pf; 1st, at the beginning of words, English p to German pf, as: path—Pfad, pale— Pfahl, pan—Pfanne, penny—Pfennig, plaster—Pflaster, plum —Pflaume, to pluck—pflücken, plough—Pflug, port—Pforte, post—Pfoste, pound—Pfund, pool—Pfuhl ; 2d, at the end of words or syllables, English p to German f. ff or pf, as: ape— Affe, to gape—gaffen, to gripe—greifen, harp—Harfe, to help —helfen, to hope—hoffen, coop—Kufe, open—offen, ripe—reif, sharp–scharf, ship—Schiff, sleep—Schlaf ; carp—Karpfen, apple—Apfel, to hop—hüpfen, cramp—Krampf, copper—Kupfer; prop—Pfropf; pepper—Pfeffer, pipe—Pfeife, &c. It seems to me essential that the number of examples falling under one rule should be as complete as possible.”

To prepare a boy for this sort of study, nothing more is required than a fair knowledge of his mother tongue. He who has gone through and well understood the etymological part of any of those excellent English grammars now in use, is fully prepared for any thing that might be expected from him for the purpose of giving him the full advantage of the proposed method of comparative etymology. All the exercises considered necessary according to this plan, might be done in a little reading for the further practice of the organs of speech, the ear and the eye. Words found, that follow in their transition one of the known rules, are to be pointed out and looked for in the given list. A few weeks practice would be sufficient to give the beginner the required stock of words. Besides the German, the other languages of the Germanic stock may be learned on the same plan, and with the same advantages. Moreover, if any one knows already one of these languages, e.g. the German, and wishes to apply himself to Dutch, Danish, &c. he can get his stock of words now by comparing English and Dutch,” &c., but he will get a great

English Language, by Professor La-
tham, 1841; T. M. M'Culloch's (D.D.)
Manual of English Grammar, Ed. 1x.
1845; Allen and Cornwell's English
Grammar, Ed. xi. 1846; J. Grimm's
Deutsche Grammatik, Ed. 11. 1822; K. F.
Becker's Ausführliche Deutsche Gram-
matik, Ed.11. 1842; T. E. Riddle's Latin
and H. G. Liddell and R. Scott's Greek
* The mere comparing of simple
sounds, the very first step to be done
by this method, might be made a source
for acquiring words. Who knows the
secret of another's memory ! On com-

paring, e. gr. the three long vowels, a in
father, o in note, oo in fool, the follow-
ing words might be chosen to prove the
similarity of the English and German
sounds; are and aar, (an eagle,) art
and Art, (a kind, a manner,) spar and
spar' (spare thou, imperat.) bar and
baar, (gold, ready money,) far and fahr’
(drive thou in a carriage, imp.) coat and
Koth, (mud,) coal and Kohl, (cabbage,)
wholes. hole and hol” (fetch thou, imp.)
loan and Lohn, (wages,) do and du,
(thou,) noon and nun, (now,) room and
Ruhm (glory,) &c.
For the whole system of simple arti-

culate sounds, it is no little advantage examine)—proeven, milde (tired)-to the English boy, that the rowel sys- moede, &c. tem of his mother tongue is, in a phy- Or when intending to learn Danish, siological point of view, the simplest one would first read over the rules and and the most regular, its system of con- examples of transition that exist besonants one of the most complete of tween the English and Danish, e. gr., all the Germanic languages. Latham, that of t unchanged, as: cat—kat, salt i.e. p. 100-118; p. ii., “concerning —salt, malt—mai, tin-in, minttion,” does not seem fully to appreciate mynt, stilt—stylte, net—net, &c.; referthat system. ring then to the rule, that English t * E. gr. Long English o, (in note,) answers to German z (or tz,) and thereand Dutch ee, (a in ale,) sound as fore German z also to Danish t, many woe—wee, roe—ree, road—reede, ghost more Danish words would be found, by (germ. Geist,)—geest, alone (allein)— this rule, that are not in the English aleen, oath (Eid)—eed, whole (heil)— language, as: Germ. Kerze (candle)— heel, most (meist)—meest, token Dan. Kert, Ketzer—Kiitter (heretic)— (zeichen)—teeken, soap (seife)—zeep, nützen (to be useful)—nytte, stolz woad (waid)—weed, rope—reep, mare (proud)—stolt, zwingen (to compel)—

—meer, loam—leem, loan—leen, &c. twinge, Zwang (compulsion)—Tvang, And then from the German, e. gr., &c. German ii, and Dutch oe, (oo in But the German d answers also in

ooze) as siihnen (versöhnen, to recon- many cases to the Danish t, as: dienen cile)—zoenen, schwill (sultry)—zwoel, (to serve—tiene, dricken (to press)– siisz (sweet)—zoet, fügen (to join)– trykke, dingen (to hire)—tinge, Dirne voegen, fühlen (to feel)—voelen, führen (lass)—Terne, &c. And as this Ger(to lead)—voeren, wiist (desert, waste) man d, together with the Danish t, cor-woest, riihmen (to extol)—roemen, responds with the English th, we have, rtihren (to touch)—roeren, prüfen (to in this case, the whole law of transition

many more by looking over the rules of transition, with their examples, that exist between German and Dutch, &c." The greater part of the 1250 words that are taken from the classic stock, are only found in composition. Primitives, derivatives, and compounds, taken from this stock, make in all about 17,700 words. About 900 of the primitives belong to the Latin, about 330 to the Greek. With them the same method for preparing a pupil may be followed. But, as I am still engaged in working out that plan practically, and not time enough having yet elapsed to judge of its efficacy for these languages, I shall not now go into any details, but make only a few remarks. The changes that have taken place with the Latin and Greek words adopted in English do not follow organic laws like those existing between the English and the other Germanic Languages, or between the Gothic and the Latin and Greek, as given in the well-known passage of J. Grimm's D. Gr. I. p. 584. “The Latin (and Greek) words,” (says T. M. M’Culloch, D.D., in his excellent little English Grammar, p. 87,) “which have been adopted, have, for the most part, suffered (only) a change of termination.” If we wished to point out in these adopted words, examples of organic laws, we should have but to compare words of the same root, and the same original meaning, but the one coming into the English through the Germanic, the other through the classic stock. In fact, we should find examples enough to illustrate the whole of Grimm's law respecting the Classic and Gothic languages. Classic p and Gothic f, as pater(nal) and father; Classic f and Gothic b, as to (per)forate and to bore; Classic b and Gothic p, as burse and purse;" Classic t and Gothic th, as trinity and three; Classic thand Gothic d, as ther(iac) and deer; Classic d and

for the t—sounds before us, such as it
exists in its three gradations from the
classic languages to the Gothic and Old
High German, from Lat. tu, to Goth.
thu, and Ohg. du, e. gr., Dan. Ting—
Eng. thing—Germ. Ding, Torn—thorn
—Dorn, Trang—throng—Drang, tyk—
thick—dick, tynd—thin—diinn, Türst
—thirst–Durst, Tyv — thief— Dieb,
tänke—to think—denken, &c.
* Although J. Grimm has not given
that rule—for in exhibiting his law he
does not mention the English language,

(l. c. 1. p. 581,)—yet it may be said to
belong to him, as the English stands
almost always in the same consonantal
relation to the New High German as the
Gothic does to the Old High German.
All the examples are given from my own
collections.—Comp. T. Hewitt Key's
Alphabet. London, 1844. P. 49.
* J. Grimm, l.c. p. 58, says, that he
does not know any German word begin-
ning with p, high Germ. f(pf) answer-
ing the classic b, (as 342es, A. S. paad,
hg. pfad) to prove his law in this case.

« السابقةمتابعة »