be literal; if literal, it will not be understood. Numerous instances may, accordingly, be pointed out, in which Mr. Hamilton has sacrificed his system to the necessity of reducing foreign idioms into a form intelligible to the English learner.

The greatest error into which he appears to us to have fallen, is the changing the order of words in the original. This is calculated to defeat the very object of the system, and to fix in the mind a wrong set of associations of the most important kind. This applies with peculiar force to the German language, in which the construction is so remarkable, that any liberty taken with it, appears fatal to the usefulness of the translation.

The sum of Dr. Jones's objections, (exclusive of those which apply peculiarly to Mr. Hamilton,) is, that the method of teaching by literal translation cannot give that theoretical acquaintance with the grammar, which he considers essential to the knowledge of a language. This is indisputable, and it would be therefore a waste of words to say any thing about it. It is, however, no less certain that familiarity with the idiom of a language can be attained by no other means than by reading or speaking; and that no conceivable number of rules could enable the scholar, even supposing him in possession of every one of the several idioms, to attain to that graceful and appropriate application of them, which characterizes what is commonly called an elegant style.

With regard to inflected words, we are strongly inclined to think the old way the best, particularly with young children, whose ear is caught with the jingle of sounds. We believe that a child would learn the parts of a noun or verb with much less trouble in the sing-song way, than by picking them up detached as they occur. This is, however, a question of fact and experience. Whichever way it may be determined, it has nothing to do with the learning of grammar rules, which take no hold on the ear, nor, with very few exceptions, on the understanding of a child. Ascham, as we have seen, sets out with supposing the accidence learnt; and his royal pupil, though all her knowledge of the syntax and idiom of the Greek and Latin tongues was gained by reading and imitating the best authors, began by learning the inflexions of the nouns and verbs.

The present work has been selected as one of unexceptionable authority as to style. It is presumed that, after reading the first three books with the translations, a pupil of ordinary capacity and attention will find little or no difficulty in the remainder.

The free translation is by no means proposed as a specimen of elegant English. It is, to use the words of the Edinburgh reviewer, "not a paraphrase, but only so free as to avoid any awkward or barbarous expression." The objection made by some to the literal translation, that it contains expressions which are not English, is founded in complete misapprehension of the object in view; let it be remembered, that it is not English we are teaching, but French. But of this we have said enough.

We must repeat, that in our opinion the accompaniment of a free translation is indispensable. The literal translation is of no language, but having the words of the one and the idiom of the other, forms the intermediate link between the two. On one point the Edinburgh reviewer and Mr. Hamilton are at issue. Mr. Hamilton says, that "each word is translated by one sole undeviating meaning, assuming it as an uncontrovertible principle in all languages that with very few exceptions, each word has one meaning only, and can usually be rendered correctly into another by one word only, which one word should serve for its representative at all times and on all occasions." To this the reviewer replies: "Now, it is probable that each word had one meaning only in its origin; but metaphor and association are so busy with human speech that the same word comes to serve in a vast variety of senses, and continues to do so long after the metaphors and associations which called it into this state of activity are buried in oblivion. Why may not jubeo be translated order as well as command, or dolorem rendered grief as well as sorrow?"

We are inclined to think both are to a certain extent right. It appears to us, that wherever a set of words of nearly synonymous meaning in one language, has a corresponding set of words in the other, it is by far the safest way to allot to each its nearest equivalent, and to adhere to it. Thus, to order has a manifestly different primary signification to command; and if the Latin language affords a more strictly equivalent word, it would be wrong to use that word indifferently with jubeo, which is precisely to command: dolor, tristitia, luctus, &c. ought to have each its appropriate rendering; we have ‘grief,' 'sorrow,' 'woe,' &c. Is the reviewer sure that in all cases, without exception, they are perfectly convertible? if not, here is a source of error opened, which Mr. Hamilton would avoid.

66

On the other hand, there are many cases, (and not as Mr. Hamilton says, very few,") in which one word in French has several corresponding words in English. In these cases as each of these English words must be rendered by the one French word, no error can arise from using them indifferently.

The English language, springing, as it does, from two distinct roots, affords numerous examples of two exact equivalents to one word in the French, or in any other language which has not this twofold origin. Thus menacer may be translated either by to threaten, or to menace, without the possibility of leading the pupil into error, since neither can be rendered back by any other word :

And many others fall under the same rule. In these cases Mr. Hamilton's law would lead to nothing but the complete exclusion of either the Saxon or Roman word.

This

Others, again, have two meanings so entirely different, as to render it impossible to trace the primary, or usual, through the secondary or unusual one. applies to a great number of the particles.

In other cases, the excess is on the side of the French: e. g. Lieu, endroit, place, have no other equivalent than place, unless, indeed, spot, which will sometimes give the force of endroit, and oftener of lieu, but which cannot be safely allotted to either.

66

We think that the reviewer, on reflection, will see that it is precisely because metaphor and association are so busy with human speech," and because in every language their work has been different, that it is extremely important to fix the attention of the pupil on their various operations. For instance, to express an ultimate act of the judgment and will, we borrow our metaphor from the Latin, to decide, i. e. to cut from; the French, in certain cases which it is not necessary to go into here, use arrêter. If we translate, la cour arrêta, 'the court decided,' the pupil loses all the benefit of the shock which the literal interpretation, stopped, would have given to his attention. The free translation (without which we hold it impossible to pursue this useful course) will give him the key to the metaphor, and you have gained nearly a certainty that the characteristic distinction will not be lost upon him.

Some farther explanation of the points in which this translation differs from the translations of Mr. Hamilton, and of the reasons for this difference, will be found in a few notes at the end of the volume. They might have been multiplied with satisfaction to the translator, and perhaps not without use to the learner; but the object was not to write a dissertation on language. Many, therefore, which presented themselves were, on reflection, rejected. In some few cases, we found reason, at an advanced stage of the work, to change our view of the translation of a word or phrase. In others, from the great difficulty of bringing the eye and mind to mark as errors, what, in any other mode of writing would be correct and familiar, we have suffered renderings to escape us, which, though not otherwise inaccurate, are inconsistent with the plan of the work.

We have therefore thought it right, in order that nothing might be left doubtful, to subjoin a list of errata.

The Italian work, now in the press, consisting of a selection from the most eminent Italian classics, chronologically arranged, is done upon the same system, and in part by the same hand.

Since the above Preface was written, we have seen the December Number of the Journal of Education-a very useful periodical, published at Boston, in the United States; and, to the shame of England, the only journal in the language devoted to that most interesting and extensive subject.

The Number in question contains some extracts from Mr Carter's "Letters on the Free Schools of New England.” The following remarks appear to us so judicious, and are so immediately to our purpose, that we are glad to strengthen ourselves by his authority.

"In our most approved schools, the method of teaching languages has been, to put into the hands of the pupil a grammar of the language to be taught; and require him to learn, as it is improperly called, the general principles of the language. This is done commonly at the expense of from three to six or twelve months' time, and a thorough disgust to the whole subject. This disgust very naturally arises from being kept so long, on what he does not in the least understand. At the end of this time, if the teacher has been inflexible in his purpose, and the pupil not unreasonably stupid, he will have committed to memory his grammar from end to end, including all rules and all exceptions; to which he probably attaches equal importance. He may have fixed perfectly in his memory, all the subtle refinements of all the philosophers, who have spent their lives in studying the principles and anomalies of the language; but he has made but a small approximation to a knowledge of it. This is studying the philosophy of the language before the pupil is acquainted with the facts of it.

"This system of teaching proceeds upon the supposition, that the language was invented and formed by the rules of grammar. Nothing is more false. A grammar can never be written till a good knowledge of the language is attained; and then, contrary to what the pupil supposes, the grammar is made to suit the language. Now why invert this natural method in teaching language to young learners? Must not the facts be learned before they can be classed under general principles? What are the rules and principles, which the pupil has learned at so dear a rate? They are no more than the verbal generalisation of facts. How have they themselves been formed? By the experience of those whose attention has been directed to the observation of the facts. They are abstract principles, the truth of which can neither be perceived, understood, nor believed, till some single instance, within the comprehension of the principle or rule, presents itself to the learner. And then he will perceive the fact in the particular case, long before he discovers its identity with the rule, if he is ever so fortunate as to discover it.

"The facts of a language must be first learned, and they always are first learned, all the arrangements to the contrary notwithstanding. The rules in the learner's memory are perfectly useless, till he has learned the particulars or facts of the language; because he cannot till then understand them. And when the pupil is learning the language by experience, he will make rules for his own convenience, precisely as a philosopher does; and always make them as general as his experience will allow. As he makes further progress, and becomes acquainted with more of the minutiae of the language, he will extend the comprehension of his rules, till they become as general as the nature of the subject admits. Then the exceptions will be noticed, and classed under the rules to which they are exceptions.

"Is not this natural and philosophical? and if so, wh rity do we pursue a method diametrically opposite to both? What then is the busineingss of the instructor; and must every pupil learn the language under all the disadvie Santages, which we should encounter in attempting to learn a dead language withoup Ot grammar or instructor? The business of the instructor is, to lay before his pupil at those facts which are easiest perceived. Such are the meaning of the words, hand the construction of the simplest sentences. And as a knowledge of the words is attained, and the formation of the sentences understood, a principle of limited comprehension is established in the mind of the pupil, and sentences of more difficult construction are put in his way.

66

It may be remarked, that there are several methods of communicating the elements or obvious facts of a language, without even the sight of a grammar. That will come to aid in classifying the facts and knowledge of the language; but those facts and that knowledge must be attained, before they can be classified. The instructor may construe literally a few of the easiest passages or simplest sentences, which can be selected, and the learner be required to go over the same sentences by himself, till he has learned to construe them without assist

ance.

"Another method would be to put an easy book, with a perfectly literal translation, into the hand of the learner, and require him to learn a portion to recite without the translation. This gives a knowledge of the words, the first thing to be attained in the acquirement of a language. The particles, from their frequent occurrence, will be soon learned. And as they are supposed to be known to the pupil, the meaning of them may be left out of the translation. In the same manner common words may be dropped from the translation, care being taken to always give the meaning of a new word, or a new sense of the same word, till it can be fairly supposed to be learned. In this manner the inflexions will be better understood than in any other method. For the learner sees, at once, the different terminations, and the different relations of the words expressed by them.

During this stage with the pupil, the grammar and dictionary may be at hand; but they are to be consulted as a means of learning the lesson, and not to constitute the lesson itself. After an intimation from the instructor, that the grammar contains information, which may be useful; and perhaps after a reference to it, by way of example to the pupil, let him consult it just as often as he pleases, and no oftener. If he does not find any aid from it in learning his lesson, or feel the want of something of the kind, it will be of but little use to drive him to it. But instead of wearing out some half dozen grammars, before he is advanced to any other book, and absolutely loathing the sight of one, it will be the very dearest book on the table. He will find all the inflexions and rules laid down in the book so consonant with his own experience in the language, that he will be very much disposed to adopt that arrangement for the classification of his own knowledge."

THE HISTORY OF CHARLES THE TWELFTH, KING OF SWEDEN

un tiers plus grand que la France, mais bien

a third-part more great a third larger

well

than the France, but
than France, but much

'moins fertile, et aujourd'hui moins peuplé.

less

fertile, and to-day less fertile, and now

Ce

less peopled. This less populous. This

pays, large de deux cents de nos lieues, et long country, wide of two hundreds of our leagues, and long country, two hundred of our leagues wide, and three

de trois cents, s'étend du midi au nord, of three hundreds, himself extends from-the south hundred long, extends from about the

depuis le cinquante-cinquième degré,

fifty-fifth

degree,

the seventieth degree north latitude,

to-the north, fifty-fifth to

environ,

about,

jusqu'au soixante et dixième, sous un climat rigouuntil to-the sixty and tenth,

VOL. I.

under a climate rigorunder a severe climate,

A