Library Collections: Document: Full Text

But though the majority of suffrages were early, as we see, in favour of articulation, the simpler form of the art had its disciples. Wallis transferred himself to this class. Beside him, appeared, in England, Bulwer and Dalgarno; and in Germany, Lasius, and probably others, whose names we know, without being particularly acquainted with their practice.

In France, among the first essays attempted in this art, were those of Father Vanin and of Pereiré, whose methods were both sufficiently remarkable to deserve separate mention. The minute details of neither have come down to us, but we know that Father Vanin made design the great instrument of instruction and the basis of his system. By means of this alone, he sought to explain every thing, even of the mysteries of religion.

Pereiré, on the other hand, depended chiefly on a method of syllable dactylology, lost with him, by means of which words could be very rapidly produced. The language of action he rigorously excluded. Articulation was his ultimate aim, it is true, but the channel through which he sought to approach it was peculiar to himself.

Design and the manual alphabet, are, at this day, peculiar to no system. The utility of the first is universally acknowledged, though little has been done toward developing the extensive resources it presents. The second is tolerated every where, on account of its convenience, in producing words without the aid of writing-materials. It is, however, to be feared, that a too early and too constant use of this instrument, may lead to the habit of conceiving words as exhibited by the tedious process of literatim spelling on the fingers, rather than as they appear on paper, in which form the mind will speedily become accustomed to regard them as units.

The aim of modern instructors has not been so much to strike out paths new and untrodden, as to remove obstacles from the old. The search for a method radically different from any yet tried, would probably be a fruitless labour, inasmuch as methods are characterized, as we have seen, by the combinations and the applications which they admit, of the instruments of communication; and as these instruments are few and known. Modern industry and modern investigation have been busy with theory, as well as with practice. They have called in the light of philosophy, to aid in discovering a touchstone for the practician, by which to test the genuineness of his methods. They have turned their attention to a branch of the subject, independent of what are called systems, and equally important to all, viz: the order in which the details of that vast subject, language, should be unfolded to the mind of the learner; embracing a consideration, first, of the principles which should guide in determining the due succession of difficulties, presented in the various forms of connected discourse; and, secondly, of the means of facilitating the development of ideas, by so arranging their nomenclature for the purposes of instruction, as to make each step in advance, a natural guide to the one succeeding.

These are complicated and difficult questions. They are still employing the ingenuity of distinguished individuals. For, though the general and fundamental principles which they involve, are obvious and easy of comprehension, yet the extent of the subject renders their perfect application in practice, a matter of great difficulty

In speaking of the actual state of the art, at the present day, we should say that it is characterized by most vigorous efforts, to introduce philosophical method into the teaching of language. Half a century ago, and even later, the instruments of instruction, and the means of perfecting them, seemed principally to absorb the minds of instructors. In our own time these, in the estimation of intelligent men, have found their true level; and the best methods of simplifying the task, which these instruments are to be the means of performing, are now the grand object of study.

After this account of existing methods, the writer may be expected to express a preference for some one in particular. There are certain principles, admitted by the ablest writers on the subject, at the present day, to be in accordance with sound philosophy, which may serve as a guide in the formation of such a preference. These are,

1st. That it is expedient for the instructor to borrow the entire language of action in possession of his pupil, as being the earliest available instrument of communication.

2d. That the pupil should be taught to associate his ideas directly with the visible forms of written words.

In proposing to the pupil to receive words as the immediate signs of his ideas, we aim, of course, to subvert his long standing habit, of conducting mental operations by means of pantomimic signs. Every expansion of his natural language, therefore, whatever advantages it may bring with it, is attended with at least one important evil, viz: that it strengthens the pupil's attachment to his old habits of thought and his accustomed modes of communication. It renders the task of supplanting signs of action by words, greater; and the disposition on the part of the pupil to aid in the execution of that task, less. The sagacious instructor, therefore, especially if he have but few pupils, will spend very little labour in correcting and improving, and much less in developing, the meagre dialect they bring him. Whatever expansion it acquires in their intercourse with each other, he will turn to the best advantage he can, in the prosecution of his task. Existing in an expanded state, it may be made of use; but its utility is hardly sufficient to justify its cultivation for this specific object. Indeed, the use of the sign language, from the earliest period of instruction, should be daily more and more discouraged; and, as the course of education approaches its termination, it should be, if not rigidly prohibited, at least barely tolerated, and never suffered to appear, save when alphabetic language fails. No teacher can be too watchful in this respect. So copious and so convenient has become the language of the schools, and so elegant and picturesque does it appear in practice, that there is a constant propensity to indulge in its employment; when the less showy and more difficult, but at the same time more useful, language, common to the rest of the world, ought to be substituted; and on occasions most valuable for practical instruction. The ordinary conversations between master and pupil, out of school, too frequently, I should say constantly, go on in the language of action; and the great purpose, for which the community are assembled together, seems wholly forgotten. On this subject M. Recoing, a late luminous writer and able instructor of France, whose volume "by the father of a deaf-mute" is cited at the head of this article, has given us some forcible remarks.