ADJUSTMENT OF EXERCISES.

371 It cannot avail much, in reply, to advert to the peculiarities of the Latin and Greek Grammars—the more highly inflexional character of the languages; for each language has its specialities, and the business of the pupil simply is to attend to them. Every language must express the same facts of time and manner, and it cannot be very material, as far as regards mental discipline, whether it is by inflexion or by auxiliaries. The fact of inflexion is sufficiently experienced in any case; and how far it is carried is an inferior consideration.

In Science, far more than in Languages, is it possible to adjust the difficulties at each stage to the strength of the pupils, although, undoubtedly, to do this in any subject needs very good teaching. The Grammar of language being most nearly allied to science, can be best graduated in this way; while, in the miscellaneous chances of translation, difficulties start up without any reference to order or the preparation of mind of the pupils, and the thing cannot be otherwise.

The argument from Training is applied to certain special points, some of which will be considered under separate heads: such are the discipline in English and in Philology generally. Much stress is laid upon the remark that it is necessary to know more languages than our own to be delivered from certain snares of language; and the favourite example is the ambiguity of the verb 'to be.' It so happens, however, that this very ambiguity-predication and existence-was pointed out by Aristotle (Grote's Aristotle, i. 181).1

1 In an address to the Social Science Association in 1870, Lord Neaves recommended the study of Latin, Greek, and French, as the best means of cultivating precision of thinking. Now, whether or not the writers in

In the interesting Rectorial Address of Professor Helmholtz, delivered this year to the University of Berlin, the merits and demerits of the different academical institutions of Europe are freely indicated. With reference to the English Universities, Oxford and Cambridge, the professor thinks his own countrymen should endeavour to rival them in two things. In the first place, they develop in a very high degree among their students, at the same time a lively sense of the beauties and the youthful freshness of antiquity, and a taste for precision and elegance of language; this is seen in the fashion in which the students manage their mother tongue.' This must refer to the prominence still given to the classics in Oxford and Cambridge; yet, in Germany, the classics are far more studied than in England, whether we consider the universal compulsion of the Gymnasia, or the special devotion manifested by a select number at the Universities. Whatever good mere classical study can effect must have reached its climax in Germany. As regards Oxford and Cambridge, and particularly Oxford, the best parts of the teaching seem to be those that depart most from the classical teaching, as, for example, the very great stress laid upon writing a good English essay. It is often said, that even in a professedly classical examination, a candidate's success is more due to his English Essay than to his acquaintance with Greek and Roman authors.

After refuting a number of the alleged utilities of classical learning, Mr. Sidgwick still reserves certain dis

those languages are distinguished above all others for precision, it is a singular fact, that these are the languages of the three peoples most remarkable for confining their attention to their own language.

MATERIALS SUPPLIED.

373

tinct advantages as belonging to the study of language. 'In the first place, the materials here supplied to the student are ready to hand in inexhaustible abundance and diversity. Any page of any ancient author forms for the young student a string of problems sufficiently complex and diverse to exercise his memory and judgment in a great variety of ways. Again, from the exclusion of the distractions of the external senses, from the simplicity and definiteness of the classification which the student has to apply, from the distinctness and obviousness of the points that he is called on to observe, it seems probable that this study calls forth (especially in young boys) a more concentrated exercise of the faculties it does develop than any other could easily do. If both the classical languages were to cease to be taught in early education, valuable machinery would, I think, be lost, for which it would be somewhat difficult to provide a perfect substitute.' (Essays on a Liberal Education, p. 133.)

The materials here spoken of must mean the subject matter of the ancient authors, and not simply the languages; this, however, does not help the case, as the matter can be far better given in translations. The second reason-the exclusion of the senses, and the simplicity and definiteness of the classification to be applied-must refer to the language part; but it con tains nothing special to the classical languages. Moreover, as regards putting before the mind of a student distinct issues, and still more in adapting these to the state of his faculties and advancement, the learning of a language seems to me far inferior to most other exercises.

IV. A Knowledge of the Classics is the best preparation for the Mother Tongue.

This must have reference either (1) to the Vocables of the Language, or (2) to the Grammar and Structure of our composition.

(1) As regards the vocables, we have to deal with the presence of Latin and Greek words in English. There being several thousands of our words obtained directly or indirectly from the Latin, it may be supposed that we should go direct to the fountain head, and learn the meanings in the parent language. But why may not we learn them exactly as they occur in the mother tongue? What economy is there in learning them in another place? The answer must be, with a qualification to be given presently, that the economy is all in favour of the first course. The reasons are plain. For one thing, if we learn the Latin words as they occur in English, we confine ourselves to those that have been actually transferred to English; whereas in learning Latin as a whole, we learn a great many words that have never been imported into our own language. The other reason is probably still stronger, namely, that the meanings of a great number of the words have greatly changed since their introduction into English; hence, if we go back to the sources, we have a double task; we first learn the meaning in the original, and next the change of meaning that followed the appropriation of the word by ourselves. The meaning of 'servant' is easiest arrived at, by observing the use of the word among ourselves, and by neglecting its Latin origin; if we are to be informed

DERIVED ENGLISH VOCABLES.

375

what'servus meant in Latin, we must learn further that such is not the present meaning; so that the directing of our attention to the original, although a legitimate and interesting effort, does not pertain to the right use of our own language.

Besides the vast body of Latin words entering into our language, as a co-equal factor with the Teutonic element, there is a sprinkling of special terms both Latin and Greek, adopted for technical and scientific uses. The appropriation of many of these is recent, and the process is still going on. Even with these, however, it is unsafe to refer to the original tongues for the meaning; we must still see what they mean as at present applied. A knowledge of Greek would be a fair clue to the meaning of thermometer,' and 'photometer,' and a few others; but for the vast mass of these appropriations, it gives no clue whatever, or else it puts us on the wrong scent. 'Barometer,' as 'weight-measure,' would be most suitably applied to the common beam and scales; the real meaning would never be guessed. So, 'eudiometer' cannot suggest its meaning to a Greek scholar; 'hippopotamus' is equally enigmatic. Of the 'ologies' very few correspond to their derivation. We have such conflicting names as 'astrology, astronomy;' 'phrenology, psychology'; 'geology, geography,' 'logic, logographer, logomachy'; 'theology, theogony'; 'aerostatics, pneumatics.' 'Theology' being the science of 'God,' 'philology' should be the science of 'friendship' or the affections. It was remarked by Mr. Lowe that the word 'aneurism,' to a Greek scholar, would be misleading; he would not at once suppose that it is a derivative of the Greek verb ȧvɛvpúvw, 'to widen.' So