ページの画像
PDF
ePub

analysis itself, to which this work is really preparatory, could the required aid in practice be so completely furnished.

With this last object in view, the author has spared no pains in the endeavor to make Part III., as an outline of classification, and a collection of examples for practice, as complete and exact as possible. And, without intending any disparagement of the works of others, least of all, of those of the author of the system herein advocated, it is believed that this portion of the work will be found to be the most systematic and complete Exercise Book extant. As such, it is also believed, that it can not but be of eminent service to all who are pursuing the study of English Grammar, not even excepting those who are only familiar with the current text-books on the old system.

However all this may be, the book is now committed to those for whom it has been prepared, in the earnest hope that it will both add to their knowledge of the English sentence, and deepen their interest in the systematic study of its scientific analysis. FREDERICK S. JEWELL.

STATE NORMAL SCHOOL,
ALBANY, July 6, 1867.

GRAMMATICAL DIAGRAMS.

INTRODUCTION.

The effort to make use of analysis and the diagrams-Difficulties have to be encountered-Need of some work as a supplement. ary aid-Reasons for considering the diagrams, chiefly-First, Difficulties in analysis emerge in the diagram-Secondly, The solution of difficulties is more clearly evinced in the diagram— Thirdly, The construction of diagrams requires a peculiar skillFourthly, It is important that the successful use of the diagrams should be ensured-Lastly, The diagrams are the most common object of attack.

THERE are many teachers who, with a commendable regard for improvement in science and in methods of instruction, are faithfully endeavoring to redeem the study of English Grammar from its old-time restriction within the narrow bounds of mere verbal etymology and syntax, and its absurd culmination in the pitiful practice of oral "parsing." They have seized upon the logical analysis of the English Sentence, as the only legitimate means of securing for the subject of grammar a truly scientific development, and are availing themselves of Clark's grammatical diagrams as a philosophical and effective means of rendering the study of the analysis interesting and practical.

Experience has, however, shown that, in both direc

tions, peculiar and sometimes serious difficulties have to be encountered,-difficulties not unfrequently resulting in the comparative failure of such teachers to sustain themselves in the work so justly and generously attempted. There are figures employed in the diagrams which are inconsistent; there are many points for which no seeming provision is made in the diagrams; the real philosophy of the whole scheme, from being barely hinted at, fails to suggest those legitimate variations which are often called for in peculiar or advanced cases; no such systematic directions for the constructive drawing, as will secure the best results, are given; and no such grounds in reason, for the use of the diagrams, as will enable the teacher to justify himself in departing from the "tradition of the elders," are adduced.

That it is important that these difficulties should be practically met, can not admit of a doubt. It is quite evident, however, that this can not be consistently done, except through the medium of some work supplementary to the grammar already in use. Were not the grammar beyond reach, the facts that the object sought is altogether specific, and that the matter to be presented is somewhat peculiar, demand the preparation of a distinct treatise adapted solely to the existing want.

It will be observed, that, while both the analysis and the diagrams have been referred to as involved in these difficulties, the chief attention has been given to the diagrams: This has been done for several reasons.

First. There is no difficulty in the analysis, which does not ultimately emerge in the diagrams.

Secondly. The proper solution of the difficulty in the analysis is almost invariably more clearly and more con

« 前へ次へ »