object is held up to view. Next he introduces the notions and names of colors, forms, shapes, etc., and when they have acquired a sufficient stock of nouns and adjectives, the commoner verbs of motion, fear, fondness, etc., are added, and similarly fixed in the learners' memory by the aid of appropriate pantomime and pictures. The ice being thus broken, and the most necessary words having been acquired, the pupils are gradually drawn into conversation and induced to put questions to the teacher. Their numerous mistakes are promptly corrected, and they are encouraged to repeat their utterances in the proper form. Incidentally a great deal of useful knowledge is imparted, such as facts of history, and natural science; and not the least important thing learned is elegance of manners, with ease and confidence in speaking, by reason of their imitating a polished and scholarly European.

It is readily seen that this kind of instruction puts life into the language and is highly fascinating. The work can be indefinitely expanded to meet the most exacting requirements. Juvenile pupils are usually so engrossed in the pleasurable lesson that they are unconscious of the lapse of time, nor are adults less thoroughly entertained. Experience has shown that boys of twelve years, when taught by the natural method, learn in one year to speak a foreign language as well as they do their mother-tongue. Indeed, it has been observed that in the hands of a brilliant teacher, they can acquire a polish of phrase and a selectness of expression such as their homes offer no facilities for securing in English.

However, appearances are occasionally deceptive, and, in estimating the benefits of such a year's work, it must be remembered that a boy makes up in volubility for what he lacks in vocabulary, and that his command of words will necessarily always correspond with his stock of ideas. Whether the fluency remains after the instruction has ceased, must be determined by an examination of individual cases. The prevailing opinion is that the benefits will last through life and are worth far more than they cost.

In the households of the European nobility and aristocracy, where the children from their earliest years are taught by native governesses and tutors to speak

The various other "methods" of language-teaching do not come within the purview of this paper. The best of them are chiefly serviceable in providing a wide range of phrases and idioms. Some undertake to give an accurate indication of the pronunciation by means of English phonetic equivalents, or figured letters whose phonetic values are determined by reference to a table of keywords separately explained. When the learner cannot obtain the aid of a teacher in his home it will be necessary for him to go to the nearest city where, for a few weeks, proper instruction can be had for mastering the key-words and the exceptional difficulties which at the outset confront and embarrass all begin

ners.

If one only desires to translate, the pronunciation of modern languages can be totally disregarded; but this will diminish the enjoyment which comes from understanding them. The Hungarian patriot Kossuth first studied English this way, reading Shakespeare while in an Austrian prison. But afterwards he had oral practice and developed a lofty and impassioned eloquence, but little marred by the strong foreign accent. These remarks about methods, teaching, etc., may fitly conclude with an allusion to a fact which must have puzzled many.

Dr. L. Sauveur, probably the ablest living exponent of the "Natural Method" of teaching languages, has such a defective English pronunciation that his lectures in that language are almost unintelligible to those who hear him for the first time. Since he claims that his method will impart to adults a correct pronunciation in six weeks, one is tempted to ask why he has not seen fit to try its efficacy in his own case, during the twenty-odd years of his aggressive warfare on other methods.

For the information of those who may wish to know something about the characteristic peculiarities of German, French and Spanish, a brief sketch of each is subjoined.

GERMAN.

The English-speaking learner of German is very agreeably surprised to find that he can recognize, either by sight or sound, a very large number of words. For example, Hammer, Hand, Gold, Land, Finger, Name are spelled, and Fisch, Haus, Maus, Gras, Glas, Schuh are pronounced, exactly like their English equivalents. A still larger number of words are sufficiently alike in the two languages to be easily learned, e. g., Stein (stone), Schiff (ship), Wasser (water), Milch (milk), Kalb (calf). Examples of adjectives

are grün

(green), blau (blue), gut (good), alt (old), dick (thick), tief (deep); of verbs, schwimmen (swim), hören (hear), sehen (see), fühlen (feel), singen (sing). This resemblance is due to the kinship of English and German, and a very superficial acquaintance with the laws which govern the changes of sounds in the two languages, will enable the learner to trace many curious and instructive analogies. Thus "shirt" and Schürze (apron), "dumb" and dumm (stupid), "starve" and sterben (to die), "deer" and Tier (animal) are all akin.

In its power of forming self-explaining compounds, German far surpasses English. For example, instead of borrowing from foreign languages such words as "oxygen," "nitrogen,' "soporific," 'sanctimonious," the German forms them from its own resources, compounding simple words which describe the thing or quality. This gives in the cases just cited words whose literal rendering is "sour-stuff," "stifling-stuff," "sleepbringing," "seem-holy."†

Amusing examples are Fingerhut (finger-hat, i. e., thimble), Handschuh (handshoe, i. e., glove), Baumwolle (tree-wool, i. e., cotton). There are many perfectly intelligible German compounds, which no single English word will render, e. g., engelrein (angel-pure), himmelhoch (heaven-high), menschenleer (peoplemenschenleer (people

empty, said of deserted streets, etc.), übernächtig (over-night-y, as it were). This last word, when applied to persons, means "weary with watching all night." It is the exact equivalent of the Spanish word trasnochado.

German spelling is nearly phonetic, that is, words are spelled as they sound. This feature offsets in part the labor of memorizing its numerous inflections and learning its complicated syntax. Some idea of both may be formed by examin ing the following sentence from Grube, in which the inflectional endings are italicized and the parts of the verbs printed in full-face type:

Am 10 November 1483 ward zu Eisleben einem Bergmanne Hans Luther ein Söhnlein geboren, das am folgenden Tage getauft und Martinus genannt wurde.

Literally: "On the 10 Nov. 1483 was at Eisleben to a miner, Hans Luther, a son born who on the following day bap tized and Martin named was.'

FRENCH.

Although English is essentially a Germanic language, both in structure and vocabulary, still it has incorporated and

assimilated a considerable amount of French. The words introduced during the first few centuries after the Norman Conquest (1066) have changed the most in spelling, but with very few exceptions all have changed in pronunciation, so that the English-speaking learner's ear must undergo special training before it can recognize words already familiar to his eye.

There are more than 1000 nouns in ion that are spelled alike, or nearly so, in both languages, (e. g., confession, profession, action, proclamation); 40 nouns in al are alike (e. g., animal, journal); 250 adjectives in al are identical, or nearly so (e. g., brutal, principal); about 200 adjectives in eux have ous in English (e. g., fameux, ambitieux); over 200 adjectives in if have ive in English,

which is also the feminine form of the French adjective (e. g., actif, instructif). But it is unnecessary to multiply examples. The two languages have, perhaps, 3,000 words which are spelled alike, or nearly so, but pronounced differently. This accounts for the fact that many can read (i. e., understand printed) French without being able to comprehend it when spoken.

The language has no cases, but uses prepositions to express case relations, thus "the man's book" is rendered in French by "le livre de l'homme" (the book of the man). Nouns usually form their plural by adding s, and are either of the masculine or feminine gender, grammatically. French and German genders are equally illogical, and constitute one of the chief difficulties in acquiring these languages. Adjectives vary for gender and number and more frequently follow the nouns they qualify. regularly precede, and some have different meanings according as they precede or follow. Thus un pauvre homme signifies "a poor (i. e., pitiable) man," and un homme pauvre means a poor (i. e., indigent) man." It requires much oral practice to insure the English-speaking learner's accuracy in placing French adjectives.

A few

The verb, as might be expected of a language derived from the Latin, is far more difficult than ours, and has niceties and shades of meaning unknown to Eng

The use of the subjunctive mode to indicate doubt and uncertainty of statement is becoming more and more restricted in English, and thereby the language is losing in clearness, whereas French makes as much (and nearly the same) use of this mode as does the parent Latin, and in this respect is distinctly superior to English. Moreover, the so-called modal auxiliaries in English (can, could, may, might, must, etc.) are so lamentably deficient in tense-forms, that we are sometimes obliged to have recourse to a variety of cumbrous makeshifts in order to bring out the meaning of the complete French verbs which correspond to them. Thus je puis I can,

je pourrai I shall be able, je pouvais = I could (was able, during a certain time), je pus=I could (was able, at a certain time), je pourrais = I could (should be able), etc.

A consonant is usually silent at the end of a word, unless the next word begins with a vowel sound. This, together with a peculiar evenness of syllabic stress and sentence-emphasis, makes it hard for a learner to understand a sentence composed of words well known to him. when pronounced singly.

In the matter of spelling French is not so easy as German, but much easier than English. It has many sounds peculiar

The French words cited in the preceding section are, in Spanish, confesion, profesion, accion, proclamacion, animal, jornal, brutal, principal, famoso, ambicioso, activo, instructivo, all but "jornal" being exact equivalents. The words "le livre de l'homme" (the book of the man) are rendered by "el libro del hombre (in Latin, Latin, "liber hominis;" in German, "das Buch des Mannes"); "un pauvre homme"="un pobre hombre," and "un homme pauvre"="un hombre pobre, the expressions differing in meaning as in French;" pain" (bread) pan," and "pin" (pine)="pino.'

=

The adjective more usually follows the noun it modifies, and varies for gender and number. There is no inflection for case relations, prepositions being used instead, and plurals are formed by adding s or es. Spanish has more verbforms than French, but in the uses of the modes and tenses the two languages correspond very closely. The possession of two verbs meaning "to be" is anomalous, but gives the language remarkable precision. One of them, ser (derived from the Latin sedere = to sit) is used when a permanent or characteristic quality is to be indicated; the other estar (from the Latin stare to stand) expresses a temporary or transient quality or state : e. g., el hielo es frio = ice is cold (all the time); el agua está caliente = the water is hot (at this moment). For

eigners sometimes make grave mistakes in the use of these verbs, e. g., ella es cansada she is tiresome, while ella está cansada she is tired. Obviously the two expressions are not interchangeable! Unfortunately Spanish is as illogical as French in the matter of gender, all nouns being regarded as either masculine or feminine. Still the task of memorizing is somewhat lightened by the fact that certain final syllables determine grammatical gender.

The collocation of objective or governed pronouns is as confusing as in French, and the habitual omission of subjective ones often renders a sentence unintelligible to a foreigner not accustomed to guessing at the subject of verbs. In many respects, however, Spanish exhibits a marked superiority over French: it has no silent letters, and none of varying value; the words are spelled exactly as they sound, and when the learner knows the combinations of letters which are associated with the various sounds, he has mastered Spanish spelling, for it is strictly phonetic. If he knows certain words singly, he can distinguish them in any context, for they are never clipped

or slurred over.

The predominance of nasal sounds in French makes it seem trivial in comparison with the sonorous Spanish: it is as hard to make a French sentence seem grand as it is to make a Castilian one sound commonplace! In abundance and sweetness of vowel sounds it vies with Italian, while in the richness and variety of diminutive and augmentative suffixes to indicate size, fondness, depreciation, etc., Spanish excels all languages, ancient or modern.

The American business man, having resolved to learn a language, should give to it a large part of his leisure, letting the study and practice constitute his chief recreation. He can easily form the acquaintance of cultivated foreigners having kindred pursuits and congenial tastes, and their companionship in walks, drives, bicycle tours, or even on the streetcars, will afford opportunities for conversational practice. He will not be long in raising himself above the mechanical repetition of memorized phrases, and will unconsciously begin to think in the new language. His further progress will possess all the charm which attends in

creased proficiency in shooting, yachting, mountain-climbing, etc. Thus he experiences none of the irksomeness of a task, and is pleasantly led on to seek invigorating diversion in fields altogether outside of the domain of dollargetting.

It is not true that a man's mental powers are to be gauged by the number of languages he knows; but it is a fact that a linguist is brought into contact with things calculated to push his intellectual horizon far beyond the ordinary limits.

It is no small thing to know what other literatures contain, what other nations have accomplished, and such knowledge comes best through language-learning. As the study of Latin and Greek affords the only means of reaching a just appreciation of the civilizations antedating Christianity, so the study of modern languages furnishes the only key to the larger possibilities of the present. W. F. FLEMING.

[The most satisfactory small dictionaries of French and German are Heath's (D. C. Heath & pronunciation, but are later and better than Co., Boston, $1.50 each). They do not give the the Adler (German) and Spiers and Surenne (French) dictionaries of three times their size and price (D. Appleton & Co., N. Y., each $5.00). These two, and Velasquez's Spanish dictionary, have undergone no revision for fifty years, and will doubtless continue to be printed from the same old plates till Americans cease buying them.

There is no good Spanish-English dictionary of the Heath pattern to take the place of the antiquated Velasquez work.

Lopes & Bensley's appears to be little more than a French reprint of Velasquez. Neither indicates the correct use of the graphic accent as authorized by the Spanish Academy.

As soon as one is able to read fairly, Sanders' German dictionary and Littré's French dictionary, for the use of Germans and Frenchmen,

respectively, will be the best works on which to found a thorough knowledge of those languages. Less than half as large as the showy and pretentious "Century Dictionary," which Englishspeaking students have in the main to depend upon for their own language, they furnish more and better illustrative passages.

The best grammars for reference are Whitney's for French and German, and Ramsey's for Spanish (all by Henry Holt & Co., N. Y). The last named is the latest grammar of Spanish, and the only considerable one in accord with the rulings of the Spanish Academy on the use of the graphic accent. Tolhausen's Spanish-German dictionary conforms to the last edition of the Spanish Academy's dictionary, but is marred by omissions, bad typography, poor definitions, and misspelled words-German as well as Spanish.]

STORY-TELLING?

W

|HILE we have to thank the old chroniclers and historians for much, it must be confessed that, at times, they were very careless. Incidents of interest we have in plenty, and the names of the great ones who figured in them are preserved, but the foils, without whom the story would be valueless, have been allowed to drop into unknown graves. Nothing is known of them, not even their names. Their status in life we have, but that is all. To the reader of the present day, who is accustomed to peruse the minutest details in the careers of men who have been suddenly lifted into notoriety by crime, politics, or labor, this is positively exasperating.

Mr. Justin McCarthy, whose work was interestingly characterized in the last issue of SELF CULTURE, enjoys the unique honor of having been the first man to write history with the quick-moving pencil of the newspaper reporter. He never misses a detail. Even the boy Oxford, and Francis, the crack-brained, who assaulted the Queen, are enshrined in the fascinating pages of "A History of Our Own Times." The author knew what his readers wanted, and he never omitted to chronicle even the "small beer." When we look back, however, we must exclaim at the slovenly manner in which the older writers prepared their books. The student of achievement and great deeds is perplexed now-a-days when he ransacks the histories in vain for fea

tures which do not appear. We all remember the touching story of Alfred the Great and the cakes. If the poets failed to immortalize that distinguished monarch, in heroic stanzas, until the other day, the historians certainly have not neglected him. His remarkable career, his thirst for knowledge of every sort, his rare powers as a minstrel, his genius, his valor, his Christianity, his love of country, his marvellous gifts in short, have occupied the pens of many. In glowing prose his virtues are set forth. Of course, the tale of the burning cakes, which many regard as the turning-point in Alfred's career, is told and re-told with unction and close fidelity to facts.

The historians are agreed that it was

in the forest of Athelney that the King received his first lesson from the lips of a peasant's wife. The late Thomas Hughes, author of "Tom Brown's School Days," in his delightful monograph on "Alfred the Great," has even preserved the exact words which the neat-herd's wife used on the memorable occasion. "Drat the man," cried the frugal but angry spouse, "never to turn the loaves, when you see them burning. I'ze warrant, you're ready enough to eat them when they're done." It is also carefully explained that though the wife knew not the identity of her royal guest, her husband had been entrusted with the weighty secret. He was a faithful subject, and though his better-half was sharp-tongued and endowed with all the keen curiosity of her sex, he never told his partner the name of the inmate of their humble roof.

Now, it is just here where the early chroniclers, who have saved this beautiful legend from destruction, have fallen short in their professional work. Without the neat-herd, and, particularly, without the neat-herd's wife, one of the most important events in the history of Alfred, sometimes written Ælfred, Iwould not have occurred. The location of the hut, the scene of the disaster to the cakes, we know was in Selwood. We are also quite satisfied that while the neglected loaves were being reduced to cinders, the young monarch was absorbed in thought, and that while his fingers were busy in repairing his bows and arrows, his mind was running backwards and forwards to past misfortunes, and to thoughts of the future. Even the odor which must have arisen from the batch, did not cause him to turn his head. With shrewd circumstantiality, we are told how it was the neat-herd's wife herself, who was the first to discover the calamity, and the outflow of impatient objurgation was, naturally, not long in following. We are even made familiar with the feelings of the King, and to his credit, it must be said, he received his well-merited rebuke kindly, and without making a royal fuss over it.

And yet, despite the care which the historians have taken to gather these facts, the name of the herdsman is un