THE PRINCIPLES OF LANGUAGE-TEACHING
The art of method-writing (or of course-designing, which is not very
different) is in its infancy; it has all the marks of the early or
even primitive stage; it is in a state of slow evolution comparable
to that which characterized the gradual perfecting of mechanical
inventions and devices such as the typewriter, the bicycle, or the
calculating machine. In the early stages of each of these (and many
similar things) each model was more or less rudimentary and clumsy.
A dozen different inventors working individually produced a dozen
different machines; although all designed to accomplish the same work,
the means adopted in each case differed fundamentally. In 1890 it was
possible to distinguish even at a distance the make of any particular
bicycle. At the present day we can still see great differences of
structure between the different makes of typewriters and calculating
machines. As time goes on, however, we notice a gradual convergence
of types; one inventor profits by the work of others; in spite of the
laws of patent, certain improvements are copied or adapted, individual
defects are gradually eliminated and devices or dispositions which have
proved their worth are adopted. The tendency is always towards the
more perfect type, the more efficient apparatus; and the path towards
perfection is marked by an ever-growing convergence of types. The
ideal appears to be reached when there is practically no scope for
further improvements; by that time the theoretical principles have
been worked out and have become common property; what divergences
do continue to exist are not concerned with essentials, they are
merely variations of equal value. Were we to ask a hundred different
bicycle-makers or boat-builders to design what they considered an ideal
model, the hundred resultant models would be for all practical purposes
identical.
Now, if we asked a hundred different language-teachers to design what
each considered an ideal course or text-book, the result at the present
day would certainly be a hundred different courses. They would differ
in every conceivable way; most of them would differ from the others
fundamentally. This would prove that the art in question is in a very
early stage; it would prove that few or no fundamental principles
are generally recognized. If, however, at some date in the distant
future we were to make the same request, restricting our invitation
to those who will have made a special study of the subject, to those
who will have been striving towards perfection, we should probably
find no great degree of diversity in the treatment; we should see the
converging tendency at work, and should gather that the fundamental
principles were beginning to stand out and to be respected. In the yet
more distant future the answer to our request might take the form of
a hundred manuscripts, all essentially the same, and differing only
in non-essential details; we should then know that the fundamental
principles had been established and had been accepted, but by that time
none but experts in the subject will ever venture to carry out such
highly technical work.
Much time will probably elapse before we arrive at this desirable state
of things; much error will have to be eliminated and much experimental
work will have to be accomplished. We shall have to ascertain exactly
what does take place when we learn, and exactly what are the mental
processes involved. We shall then have to grope about and feel our
way, adopting and rejecting, modifying and adapting, improving and
perfecting. We shall have to co-ordinate our efforts so that each may
profit by the success or failure of fellow-workers; we shall have to
experiment under all sorts of conditions, with all sorts of learners,
and with all sorts of languages. There are distinct signs to-day that
this kind of co-operation is coming about. We see, for instance, that
the branch of language-study concerned with pronunciation is already
far advanced in the experimental stage. For years past phoneticians
have been busily engaged in research work; at first working apart,
they are now coming together and pooling their efforts, each profiting
by the discoveries of the others. A universal terminology is coming
into existence; a universal phonetic alphabet is well on its way; the
principles of phonetics and of phonetic transcription are developing
rapidly, and the inevitable experts’ quarrels are becoming more
and more confined to matters of detail and to non-essentials. The
remarkable advance in this comparatively new science is one of the most
hopeful signs of progress, and a pledge of eventual perfection.
A similar advance in the sister sciences such as grammar and
semantics is not yet apparent, but there are signs that ere long the
many isolated workers in these domains will be able to do what the
phoneticians did twenty or thirty years ago; they will enlist new
workers, they will open up the field of research, they will draw up,
first tentatively and then decisively, the broad principles on which
the experimental and constructive work will repose, there will be
co-ordinated and co-operative effort in many countries, and we shall
witness the coming into existence of the general science of linguistics.
In the meantime, the subject is engaging the attention of
psychologists. Strangely enough, the psychologists, whose function
it is to ascertain how we learn, have not been consulted by writers
of language-courses, and few of them have ever intervened in the
matter. Each language-teacher has had to feel his way as best he
could, proceeding empirically, dabbling in psychology, which meant
that he did not always apply and often misinterpreted whatever
principles of the subject he may have picked up. There are signs that
speech-psychologists are about to co-ordinate their efforts with
those of the phoneticians and with the experience of those who are
actively engaged in making their language-teaching more efficient. We
can point to more than one centre both in England and abroad where
this co-operation is in its initial stage, and once this co-operation
becomes an accomplished fact progress will be very rapid, and the
progress will be sound. The work of Sweet, of Jespersen, and of de
Saussure (to cite only three of our modern leaders) has already paved
the way for the new and growing contingent of workers who are prepared
to take up the threads and to weave them together in the fabric of the
future.
What are the principles of language-study so far evolved? What are the
fundamental axioms so far postulated? Do they give us the impression
of soundness? Do they appear to us to be reasonable? Do they bear the
aspect of finality? We shall judge. We shall endeavour to formulate
the leading principles which have resulted from long periods of
experimental work so far carried on by individual workers. The list
will probably not be exhaustive, nor will the items be presented in
that perfectly logical sequence which the future reserves for it. It
will, however, seek to embody the largest number of important precepts
under the smallest number of headings, in order that we may see in a
concise form something which is still evolving and progressing towards
further efficiency and simplicity. We purposely omit from the list
certain minor principles and modes of application, nor can particular
details connected with the study of particular languages be well
included in the present work.
At the present day nine essential principles seem to stand out fairly
clearly, and may provisionally be named as follows:
(1) Initial preparation.
(2) Habit-forming.
(3) Accuracy.
(4) Gradation.
(5) Proportion.
(6) Concreteness.
(7) Interest.
(8) Order of progression.
(9) Multiple line of approach.
We append a brief definition or broad description of these principles,
and reserve for the following chapters a detailed explanation of each
of them.
(1) _Initial Preparation._--During the initial stages of the course the
teacher will, if necessary, endeavour by means of appropriate forms of
exercise to awaken and to develop the student’s natural or spontaneous
capacities for language-study, in order that he may be adequately
prepared for his subsequent work.
(2) _Habit-forming._--Language-study is essentially a habit-forming
process; the teacher will therefore not only assist the student in
utilizing his previously formed habits, but will also cause him to
acquire new ones appropriate to the work he is to perform.
(3) _Accuracy._--No form of work is to be adopted which may lead to
inaccurate habits of language-using, for habit-forming without accuracy
means the forming of bad habits.
(4) _Gradation._--The teacher will cause the student to pass from the
known to the unknown by easy stages, each of which will serve as a
preparation for the next, and thereby secure a constantly increasing
rate of progress.
(5) _Proportion._--The various aspects of language (_i.e._
understanding, speaking, reading, and writing) as well as the various
branches of the study (_i.e._ phonetics, orthography, etymology,
syntax, and semantics) to receive an appropriate measure of attention.
(6) _Concreteness._--The student will proceed from the concrete to
the abstract, and will therefore be furnished with an abundance of
well-chosen examples.
(7) _Interest._--The methods are to be devised in such a way that the
interest of the student is always secured, for without interest there
can be little progress.
(8) _Order of Progression._--The student should first be taught to
hear and to articulate correctly, then to use sentences, then to make
sentences, then to make (_i.e._ to inflect or to derive) words. In this
way he will secure rapid and yet permanent results.
(9) _Multiple Line of Approach._--The language should be approached
simultaneously from many different sides in many different ways, by
means of many different forms of work.
Text-books may differ in the sort of material supplied; teachers
may differ in their mode of presentation; there will be room for
individuality and personality. For years to come we shall not secure
perfect uniformity and ideal results, but if these nine essential
principles are understood and reasonably well observed by the
method-writer, course-designer, and teacher, the resultant teaching is
bound to be good and the results are bound to be satisfactory.