Almost all phases of historical grammar have been omitted because that view is not vital in the organization of the subject, nor is it necessary to a working knowledge of the science of the English sentence. It is thought that the pupil, at this age, has not a sufficient basis for such a discussion of the facts of grammar. The book, then, is an attempt to present a logical course in scientific, technical, descriptive, or formal grammar suited to the needs and capacities of pupils in the upper grammar grades. 2. The author's somewhat extended experience in teaching the subject in public and Normal schools, and his supervision of others in the work, has shown him how very easy it is to make the study of grammar a bugbear, a deadening, verbal memory grind to children. This is not necessary. The subject of grammar may be made as interesting to the pupil as the subject of botany, and it may be studied in much the same way. We used to study botany, physics, chemistry, from the text-book as we have been studying grammar. Bacon, Agassiz, and others showed us the error of our way. To-day, in the study of botany, we study plants, using the text as an aid. In the teaching of physics and chemistry, the laboratory is considered an essential. If the teacher of science today had to give up his text-book or his laboratory, he would, without hesitation, discard the text. It is thought that this same spirit of investigation, this same personal examination of the facts of the subject on the part of every pupil, ought to be introduced into the study of grammar; and that the great variety of sentences ought to stand before the student of grammar, for his scrutiny and examination, just as the great variety of plants is made to appear to him by the teacher of botany. The purpose of the author in this book has been to present suitable sentences and to ask such questions upon them as will lead the pupil to construct the science of grammar for himself. To this end only such definitions, statements of facts, and explanations, as have been thought necessary to help the child to think his way through the subject, have been inserted. There is no need of committing to memory any law or principle of language from a text-book. All the facts of grammar are embodied in the sentence, and the pupil may study them at first hand, just as he studies the flower in botany or the rock in geology. Should he forget the rule, he has only to examine a few sentences and restate it for himself. Nor is the teacher asked to accept a single statement in this book. Grammar is not a matter of authority; it is a thought subject, and if the teacher's thought on the materials here presented should lead her to a different conclusion from that stated in a definition, she should not hesitate to change the definition. There is no need to tell the pupil that the flower has so many petals and so many sepals, or to send him to a book to read it, says the botanist; he can discover these facts for himself. Can he not also discover the uses of the substantive clause? If he is able to see that the fish has so many spines in the dorsal fin, why can he not see that the noun has gender, person, number, and case? There is a close resemblance between this method of procedure in the language studies and that followed in the study of the natural sciences. True, no special laboratory, fitted up with tables, cases of instruments, or bottles of reagents, is necessary. The real unit of the subject, the sentence, is the material upon which we work; the instruments are the minds of the pupils, constantly at hand, and never in the way. The work as presented in this text, then, is based upon the following thoughts: 1. That the sentence, as determined by the thought which it expresses, is the unit and subject of study in grammar. 2. That there should be a twofold purpose in the mind of the teacher who teaches it; namely, to make the pupils familiar with the principles which underlie correct sentence construction, and to give them skill in the use of the sentence as an instrument in expressing their thought. 3. That the method which should be pursued in studying the subject should be inductive, and might appropriately be called the laboratory method. Acknowledgment is due Miss Harriet E. Peet of the Forestville School, Chicago, for assistance in the preparation of the work in Composition. For valuable criticisms on the manuscript and proof thanks are due Mr. T. E. Spencer of the Irving School, St. Louis, Missouri; Mr. A. Jones, Marion Normal School, Marion, Indiana; Miss Bertha L. Green, Lincoln, Nebraska; Mr. F. W. Nichols, Evanston, Illinois; Mr. F. E. Sanford, Lagrange, Illinois. J. B. W. Terre Haute, Ind., February 2, 1906. |