Oldalképek
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

some primary notions about arithmetical operations, and the expressions used with them.]

Subtraction.

M. (Holding 5 pens in his hand :) How many pens have I got here? -A. There are 5 pens.

M. Now I take one away, how many pens are remaining?—A. 4 pens are remaining.

M. Say: If I take 1 pen from 5 pens, there are 4 pens remaining. You see we do something quite different from what we have been doing until now. Up to this time we only added to a sum, now we begin to take away from a number, or subtract. I take another pen away from the four, how many are there now ?-A. There are three pens.

M. Say in the same way as before.-A. If I take away one pen from four pens, there are three pens remaining. [Several similar questions are put and answered in the same manner, with or without material objects.]

M. Say once more, how many pence are remaining if I take one from ten? I will now say the same answer in different words; listen, in order to repeat it: Ten pence minus one penny are nine pence. Repeat that sentence. Which is the new word you heard now ?—A. Minus.

M. I will now show you how to write this new word. Look, I make a little stroke from the left to the right. Say how many are 7 minus 1, 5 minus 1, 3 .1 We must now write down what we have learned to-day. Let us begin with 10. Ten minus 1 are 9. What must I write first ?—A. Ten.

M. Well, here are ten strokes. Now minus. Who remembers the sign for minus? And so on until the following sum is written.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

M. Henry, count the pence I put on the table here.-A. One, two, three, four, five.

M. Take one away; how many are left? Take another penny away, how many remain ?-A. Three pence are remaining.

M. How many pence were there first? How many did you take away? And how many are left? Now say with me: Five pence minus two pence, are three pence. Did we take the two pence all at once, or one after the other? Now do so once more. Here are eight pens, take two away from them in the same manner, and say each time how many are remaining ?—A. 8 pens minus 1 pen are 7 pens, 7 pens minus

1 pen are 6 pens.

M. Conclude: Therefore

minus 2 pens are 6 pens.

[blocks in formation]

M. How many are 10 children, minus 2 children, 7 minus 2, &c. ?

At last the sums are written on the black-board, as usual, by the master or some of the children, and copied by the latter, in one of the following ways:

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

The subtraction of 3, 4, 5 is effected in the same way, 3 being decomposed into 1 + 2, 2 + 1, or 1 + 1 + 1; 4 into 2 + 2, or 3 + 1; 5 into 3 +2, 2+ 3, or 2 + 2 + 1.

We do again, and for the same reason as above, not exceed that number, and may even stop at four or three. At the end of this, and many of the preceding exercises, some problems from common life may be put to enliven the lessons a little more; for instance: Paul receives from his uncle 4 apples, and his aunt gives him 3 more, how many has he now? He eats 2 apples, how many are left? Again, he gives 2 to his sister, how many has he now? A servant is sent to the market with 8 shillings; she buys meat for 3 shillings, how much has she over? Then she gives 2 shillings for butter, how many shillings does she bring home? From Easter to Whit-Sunday there are 7 Sundays, 4 Sundays are gone, how many Sundays is it until Whit-Sunday? You are 6 years old, in how many years will you be 10?

(To be continued.)

HUMANIZING EFFECT OF CLEANLINESS.-A neat, clean, fresh-aired, sweet, cheerful, well-arranged, and well-situated house, exercises a moral as well as a physical influence over its inmates, and makes the members of a family peaceable and considerate of the feelings and happiness of each other; the connection is obvious between the state of mind thus produced, and habits of respect for others, and for those higher duties and obligations which no law can enforce. On the contrary, a filthy, squalid, noxious dwelling, rendered still more wretched by its noisome site, and in which none of the decencies of life can be observed, contributes to make its unfortunate inhabitants selfish, sensual, and regardless of the feelings of each other; the constant indulgence of such passions renders them reckless and brutal, and the transition is natural to propensities and habits incompatible with respect for the property of others, or for the laws.-Canadian Journal of Education.

[graphic]

HOW TO WRITE ENGLISH

[graphic]

LAIR justly observes that "it is not easy to give a precise idea of what is meant by 'style.' The best definition I can give of it is, the peculiar manner in which a man expresses his conceptions, by means of language." Now this is exactly the subject of this paper; and it may be that I shall follow it up by one or two other papers. My design is to point out by example and comment --but chiefly by means of the former, as being the more striking and instructive, what are the great requisites of a good style, and how to avoid the common defects which prevail just now in England. In order to make these papers practically useful, the specimens of good writing will be culled from a large field, with little regard to epoch, so long as such specimens be fitly chosen for models; but for specimens of bad style, I shall, I fear, be compelled to take examples a good deal from authors of our own day. The reason is that cardinal merits are always merits, and belong to no time, and are not matter of fashion; while faults in style are in their very nature shifting: each age and epoch producing its own peculiar crop, accompanied by its attendant abuses of phrase and term. To be thoroughly useful these papers must deal with errors and defects which now prevail, rather than with those which we are less liable to contract. Our book-shelves contain, no doubt, a plentiful supply of faults of style, all of which we are liable to adopt from them but inasmuch as we all read ten new books and a hundred new articles, for every one old book or article, the danger of contagion is far greater from the former than the latter.

I differ a little from Blair in laying it down as a starting point, that "All the qualities of a good style may be ranged under two heads, Perspicuity and Ornament." I should say CLEARNESS and FORCE. I do not regard ornament as necessarily a quality of "good style." It is ornament and nothing but ornament,- a thing essentially adventitious to what is substantial. Now, the essential qualities of a thing must certainly be substantial and primary, and nowise supplemental or secondary. I should say of a good style such as Addison's or Goldsmith's, that it was ornamental as well as good, but certainly not that either was good because it was ornamental. I am anxious thus to discard ornament as a primary quality of good writing or speaking, because it avoids a great discouragement. Few people can ever hope to write ornamentally and well, but all who have tolerably cultivated minds of average power, may by due care and practice learn to write well, and enjoy the reputation of a good style, a reputation the more desirable since a bad one is by far more common. Besides, ornaments in writing are very like edged-tools: and it requires a pure taste as well as great discretion to use them effectively. A man of genius acquires, or rather he possesses, a capacity for doing this, not given to lesser intellectual faculties. No man, therefore, who has not some genius and good taste should adventure on ornaments, beyond such as consist in

harmony and in the due choice of expressions, neither of which amount to what is commonly understood by an ornate or ornamental style. This consists usually of flowery or figurative language, and too often of sonorous words, used not because they best express the writer's meaning, but because he thinks them fine and effective.

Though I venture to differ from Blair on Ornament, I wholly agree with him in all that he says so forcibly on the other quality of good writing, which he truly terms fundamental, namely, Clearness:* "a quality," he says, "so essential in every kind of writing, that for the want of it nothing can atone." Oh, most truly said! And yet in what puzzle-headed modes of expression do even clever men among us often indulge; in what conglomerations of useless words; in what provokingly prolonged and involved sentences! How many correct thinkers and even learned men write obscurely,-taking no pains to explain fully what they mean to minds which, unlike their own, come freshly to thoughts well conned by the writers, but new and strange to the reader. How many-masters, too, of English,-purposely select long unwieldy words, when shorter and commoner ones lie hard by which are more apt and expressive. It may as well be remarked here, parenthetically, that some of these faults depend on and spring from faults and failings in the writer. Thus, feeble people write feebly; perverse people write testily; and dry, angular people always unpleasantly. Peevishness and irritability, sarcastic and morose dispositions, peep out in the style, just as they do in the countenance, the voice, and the conversation. These are defects which the heart and moral control and training can alone cure in style. All I can attempt to do is to grapple with such points as fall more within the domain of the artistic powers of the mind to mould and exercise.

To return to clearness of style, "without which," says Blair, "the richest ornaments only glimmer through the dark, and puzzle instead of please the reader."

Akin to clearness is force of style, but they are by no means inseparable: a weak, feeble style may be very clear; and I do not think that it would be useful to discuss them separately at first, but rather to give boldly the best models of strong thoughts clothed in good words, and written in a clear style.

Though previously to Hooker no writer had perhaps won for himself the full guerdon of gratitude due to the first writer who moulded the vernacular style, and created literature in the vulgar tongue, fraught with all the conditions of composition,-yet Sir Thomas More, in 1509, and Sir Thomas Elyot, in 1531, had avowedly attempted to do that for the language, which Wiclif did for the religion of England. But the light and steps of both were dim, devious and feeble, and their followers few. More's "Life of Edward V.," Hallam calls "the first example of good English language." Elyot's book, called "The Governor," went through seven editions. It was designed to set forth the graces of courtiers, and the duties of statesmen, but treats more fully of education. It is now worthless unless as a curiosity to the book-collector. Its style will furnish us with nothing to imitate, and much to avoid; but it had then the merit of giving to English prose a new status in European literature.

* Blair says "perspicuity," but I prefer the shorter and simpler word.

monu

It was among the earliest secular books in the vulgar tongue; and, measured by the light and learning of its times, it is one of the " ments of mind" among historical land-marks; and the first bold impression struck by More and Elyot imparted their type to a large progeny.

There is much of fashion in style. The history of literature is, in great part, a record of these fashions. "Prose and verse," says D'Israeli,* "have been regulated by the same caprice that cuts our coats and cocks our hats." First after the restoration of letters came a swarm of commentators and compilers. Verbosities attended the early dearth of intellect for barren thoughts cannot bear the exposure of terse expression, and seek to veil lack of fruit by foliage of words. Hence frivolities are usually verbose, whilst the style in which deep thought finds utterance is oftener simple and unadorned. Cicero was a more popular model than Tacitus. This troop, who long infested literature— afterwards unhappily revived by Johnson,-were first, according to D'Israeli, routed by the facetious Erasmus. Then followed the epigrammatic era, succeeded by a short reign of epics. Spenser's "Faëry Queen did much, however, to elevate the national conception of literature: but the polemical writers of the time of Elizabeth did more. Of these I would place Thomas Cartwright and Hooker among the foremost. They were the fathers of the stalwart English of Sir Thomas Browne, and the manly sermons thundered forth to king and crowd by brave old Bishop Latimer: and which, modulated by time and epoch, characterized the quiet vigour of "The Golden Grove."+

[ocr errors]

But let us first take a specimen from that prince of old English divines, Hooker. Hear what he says of Rome, and contrast his quiet power in speaking of her, with the feeble frenzy of some modern writers. How well he manages his thoughts, and how clearly they run, in well chosen words, through his lengthy sentences:

"The Schools of Rome teach Scripture to be so unsufficient, as if, except traditions were added, it did not contain all revealed and supernatural truth, which absolutely is necessary for the children of men in this life to know, that they may in the next be saved. Others, justly condemning this opinion, grow likewise into a dangerous extremity, as if Scripture did not only contain all things in that kind necessary, but all things simply, and in such sort that to do anything according to any other law were not only unnecessary but even opposite unto salvation, unlawful, and sinful. Whatsoever is spoken of God or things appertaining to God otherwise than as the truth is, though it seem an honour, it is an injury. And as incredible praises given unto men do often abate and impair the credit of their deserved commendation, so we must likewise take great heed lest, in attributing unto Scripture more than it can have, the incredibility of that do cause even those things which indeed it hath most abundantly, to be less reverently esteemed. I therefore leave it to themselves to consider whether they have in this first point, or not, overshot themselves; which God doth know is quickly done, even when our meaning is most sincere, as I am verily persuaded theirs in this case was."

Mark the manly power of this simple language: how fitly the words are chosen; how craftily managed is the relation and proximity of the different members of each sentence to the rest, and likewise of the sentences themselves, each to each, forming a natural sequence in the

* Curiosities of Literature.

+ Jeremy Taylor. This work was written at the Golden Grove, his residence, in Carmarthenshire.

D

« ElőzőTovább »