difficult for us to find out the meaning of the whole sentence. Every sentence becomes, through our want of a sufficient stock of words, almost an equation with three and more unknown quantities.

We ought not, in my opinion, to begin translating with our pupils before we have given them a sufficient number of words; and that number of words ought to be given, even before they begin grammar at all. This is the natural way of beginning a language. The substance must be ready before forms can be applied. The exercises we make with words known to us, are not only easier, but make also a deeper impression on our minds, and lead us safely and surely to the true understanding of the grammatical forms we are practising, and through it to the formal genius of the language. This applies particularly to the ancient languages, where the case-endings seem to acquire, in the minds of boys, a different character from what they really are. Besides, there is no doubt but that, in order to learn a new language and its grammar rapidly, one's ears and organs of speech must be accustomed to, and have been rendered familiar with, the new sounds. It is true we have done without it, and many have succeeded on the usual method; but it is not less true that, at the very outset of our grammatical studies of a foreign tongue, we load our pupils with two difficulties at once, and the more harassing of the two is precisely the one for which the master usually has no indulgence at all, I mean the pronunciation of Latin and Greek. The two following results of experience with boys are well known; first, they are much inclined to learn things mechanically by heart; and, secondly, they do not learn quickly a new accidence, though they are in most cases only required to learn it mechanically by heart. These two statements would contradict one another, if we had not to add that the first applies to the mother tongue, where the boy's organs have to do so only with known sounds, while the second relates to a foreign language, where all is new and difficult to him, even the mere pronunciation. His interest, his memory-and memory is nothing else but that interest, that attention which we may be led to attach to any thing-is drawn off from the forms or endings to the unusual sound of the word, and the difficulty which his organs of speech have in pronouncing it. If a boy repeat his declensions or conjugations badly and almost stammeringly, it is very often, not because he

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, s 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."

1 Becker, Dr. K. Ferd. Ausführliche D. G., Ed. 11. 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 übereinstimmen oder von ihnen abweichen, nachzuweisen." The true object of any grammar is to him "die Sprache zu verstehen." But in der to understand a language, one

must first learn it; and to teach a language 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. 11. 1844; T. H. Kaltschmidt's Sprachvergleichendes Wörterbuch der Deutschen Sprache, Leipzig, 1839; the Tauchnitz Editions of the Dutch, Danish, and Swedish Dictionaries; T. Bosworth's Dictionary of the A. S. Language, 1838; Erasmus Rask's Grammar of the A. S. Tongue, 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, palePfahl, 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: apeAffe, 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.3

To prepare a boy for this sort of study, nothing more is re

English Language, by Professor Latham, 1841; T. M. M‘Culloch's (D.D.) Manual of English Grammar, Ed. IX. 1845; Allen and Cornwell's English Grammar, Ed. XI. 1846; J. Grimm's Deutsche Grammatik, Ed. 11. 1822; K. F. Becker's Ausführliche Deutsche Grammatik, Ed.11. 1842; T. E. Riddle's Latin and H. G. Liddell and R. Scott's Greek Dictionaries.

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 following 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,) whole s. 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

quired 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

culate sounds, it is no little advantage to the English boy, that the vowel system of his mother tongue is, in a physiological point of view, the simplest and the most regular, its system of consonants one of the most complete of all the Germanic languages. Latham, 1. c. p. 100-113; p. 112, "Concerning tion," does not seem fully to appreciate that system.

4 E. gr. Long English o, (in note,) and Dutch ee, (a in ale,) sound as woe-wee, roe-ree, road-reede, ghost (germ. Geist,)-geest, alone (allein)— aleen, oath (Eid)—eed, whole (heil)— heel, most (meist)-meest, token (zeichen)—teeken, soap (seife)-zeep, woad (waid)-weed, rope-reep, mare -meer, loam-leem, loan-leen, &c.

And then from the German, e. gr., German ü, and Dutch oe, (oo in ooze) as sühnen (versöhnen, to reconcile)—zoenen, schwül (sultry)—zwoel, süsz (sweet)-zoet, fügen (to join) voegen, fühlen (to feel)-voelen, führen (to lead)-voeren, wüst (desert, waste) -woest, rühmen (to extol)-roemen, rühren (to touch)—roeren, prüfen (to

examine)-proeven, müde (tired)-moede, &c.

Or when intending to learn Danish, one would first read over the rules and examples of transition that exist between the English and Danish, e. gr., that of t unchanged, as: cat-kat, salt

salt, malt-malt, tin-tin, mint— mynt, stilt-stylte, net-net, &c.; referring then to the rule, that English t answers to German z (or tz,) and therefore German z also to Danish t, many more Danish words would be found, by this rule, that are not in the English language, as: Germ. Kerze (candle)— Dan. Kert, Ketzer-Kiätter (heretic)— nützen (to be useful)-nytte, stolz (proud) stolt, zwingen (to compel)tvinge, Zwang (compulsion)-Tvang,

&c.

But the German d answers also in many cases to the Danish t, as: dienen (to serve—tiene, drücken (to press)— trykke, dingen (to hire)—tinge, Dirne (lass)-Terne, &c. And as this German d, together with the Danish t, corresponds with the English th, we have, in this case, the whole law of transition