Library Collections: Document: Full Text

Of the first, viz: writing, it is unnecessary to speak.

Of the second, indifferently denominated the finger alphabet, the manual alphabet, and dactylology, the public have, also, in general, some notion sufficiently definite. They are aware that its elements are certain positions of the fingers, representing the letters of the alphabet; and that its use is to spell words literatim. There are two species of dactylology in use, the first employs but a single hand, and prevails over this country and the continent of Europe. The other employs both, and is confined to the British Isles.

Beside simple alphabetic dactylology, instructors have, at times, devised systems of finger-spelling by syllables. Pereiré, a distinguished contemporary of De L'Epée in Paris, employed such an one with eminent success. Mr. J. R. Burnet, a meritorious young man of Livingston, NJ., deaf since the age of seven, but remarkably intelligent and well informed, and the author of a volume of poems, and papers on the deaf and dumb, about a year since planned out a system of syllabic dactylology, adapted to the English language, which evinced considerable ingenuity, and promised to be practically useful: but it has not yet been submitted to the test of experiment.

Articulation comes next. Little explanation is necessary in reference to this. For the deaf it means precisely what it means for others, the actual utterance of words.

Accompanying articulation, it is attempted usually to teach the power of reading words in the motion of the lips. Both these accomplishments have been actually taught to the profoundly deaf; though necessarily at the expense of much time and patient labour. There are many who hear partially, and are, on that account, more fit subjects for this species of instruction.

With this is completed our survey of the instruments of instruction. We pass next to the matter. This consists, first, of alphabetic language; and, secondly, of all the various subjects of knowledge, which constitute the substance of instruction to those who hear. To teach the first presents the great and peculiar task. It is true that language cannot be taught apart from that knowledge of which it is the nomenclature. It is therefore undoubtedly true, that fully to understand all the terms of any given language, is fully to understand every subject of knowledge which the language is sufficiently copious to treat of. Nevertheless, to acquire the use of a language is a labour as specifically different from that of accumulating knowledge, as to acquire the use of a tool is different from the study of the principles on which the tool is constructed.

In the execution of his task, the instructor is at liberty to choose between the two courses following. He may aim only to convey to his pupil a practical knowledge of language, like that which children acquire, as they grow up; or he may desire to make him also acquainted with the principles of grammar. If the latter be his choice, he may follow out the two branches simultaneously; or he may postpone grammar as a science, until language is practically taught. The simplicity of the latter course recommends it; and it is therefore the one most popular, and most generally pursued.

There are still two ramifications, into which the labour of teaching: language subdivides itself. To teach the nomenclature of ideas simply, is not to impart the power of communicating those judgements, which result from the comparison of ideas. The laws which govern discourse, or connected language, constitute, therefore, a distinct division of the subject, requiring the most careful and unwearied attention.

Language being, then, the chief matter of instruction, by what processes shall we expound its difficulties, and simplify its mysteries, to the narrow comprehension of an uneducated deaf-mute? The limits of this paper of course forbid our descending to those minute practical details, which would be necessary to guide a novice in the school-room. We may nevertheless be able to afford some illustration of what would be their nature.

The first ramification of the subject is that of teaching words or nomenclature. We need not remark that words will be of no value to the pupil, unless their corresponding ideas are first clearly and distinctly apprehended. It is the business of the instructor, therefore, to develop in the mind of the learner, a series of ideas, parallel to the words of alphabetic language, and as extensive as the vocabulary to be taught. For this purpose he will avail himself of a variety of processes.

Among these, the simplest are mere indication and description, which, as employed in teaching the names of visible objects, have been already exemplified. These two suffice for the nomenclature of the material world. In regard to description, it should be remarked, that it avails itself of the forms, qualities, and characteristic motions of material things, of their origin or production, of their purpose or uses, of their habits (if living), and of the fate which overtakes them at last. Any circumstance, which might come into a detailed written account of the object, are brought out if necessary, in the pantomimic scene.