Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1907-11-29


pupil learn something for himself-he
may absorb some things without the
teachers aid but teach forms and con-
structions, the aim being to get at mean
ing, and let appreciation come of ITSELF
In the general discussion, Professor San
ford agreed with Mr.. Page that apprecia-
ton probably comes later, and again in
sisted that it will never come without
the preliminary drill. Mr.. Chittenden
wondered how many in the conference
could read Latin, in the Latin, as appre-
ciatively as they read English; he doubt
ed whether students in fitting schools
can do it. Professor Ogle argued for 1t,
nevertheless, as an ideal, whatever the
degree of success in his opinion by no
means impossible ideal for some students.
Mr.. Boyce of Middlebury believed such
untranslated reading to be the only true
aim, but said, in reply to Mr.. Chitten-
denis objection that the natural method
gives no sure test of the pupils real
knowledge, that he would remit no jot
of drill in forms.
| Mr. Hartman opened the third topic,
arguing against grammatical reference
notes on the ground that they encroach
on the teachers function; notes intro
duced to show the editors erudition he
considered equally beside the mark. On
the other hand, the average edition is too
sparsely furnished with notes that sug-
gestively open up the authors thought.
Mr.. Chittenden spoke first in general dis
cussion, expressing his belief in gram
NAUTICAL notes, especially for the over
worked teacher, and in insistence on the
students preparation of them; to which
Mr.. Hartman reiterated his Judgment,
advocating in preference to the giving of
grammatical guides in notes the assign
ing of the ablatives of one lesson, the
subjunctives of another, and so on. Mr..
Thomas deprecated in notes the too fire.
quent collateral quotations from other
literatures, and questioned the accuracy
of much of the grammatical interpreta-
ton presented in note form. President
Brainerd sounded an opposing note by
praising the much-annotated Anthem edi-
tions because of what they did for him
he regretted that they had become OBJ
solete. Mr.. Page, concluding, was of
opinion that to thoroughly drilled pupils
grammatical notes are generally unnec-
essary.
The fourth topic was introduced by
Mr.. Chittenden, who, while believing in
right translation, thought repeated re-
views the best method of cultivating the
power to read, basing his belief on actual
experience as a teacher. He pleaded
for little reading well done as better
than much reading carelessly done. Mr..
Robinson, following, took the other side,
not, however, deprecating the value of
reviews. The test of ability ito extract
the kernel of thought from the husks of
form" was best found. it seemed to him,
in ability to read at sight; and he would
cultivate this ability by a constant ham,
mering at forms rather than by repeated
reviews, whose best result should be
better use of English idiom. The teach
er, though, should use his head in the
choice of sight passages-all are not
equally available. In discussion MIR.
Hartman asked if the teacher of classics
may not sometimes give too much at
tention to the polish of the English
equivalents would it not be better to be
content with fair, plain English that
brings out the sense? Professor Sanford
found upon both sides the answer to the
topic under discussion. Personally he
had always put sight passage into every
examination; AS to reviews, he confined
them to the work of the two lower
classes. Mr. Eddy of Bristol argued that in
proper correlation of courses the review
gives fine opportunity to impress the
principles that we are endeavoring to
teach in English. The sight translation,
on the other hand, will impress on the
pupil the absolute necessity of knowing
forms. Mr.. Thomas added in conclusion
that in his own practice he confined re-
view work to the rendering of the text
in the very best English at the students |
command.
The fifth topic was presented by Mr.. |
Boyce, his argument being an earnest |
affirmative answer to the question pro-
posed. What in his judgment we should |
get rid of as quickly as possible is the |
unnecessary middleman in the shape of
the English equivalent of the Latin
word, so that we may pass directly from
that Latin word to the idea for which it
stands. Replying to Professor Burrage's
inquiry whether he had found limits to
the possibility of bringing about the de-
sired condition of things, Mr.. Boyce
discounted the natural method for the
teaching of Latin words : he would teach
that 'ubi' equals "where," but he would
bring the pupil as fully as possible to an
of the where" and a d.
rect passage from "ubi' to the idea.
Professor Sanford spoke of the varying
ability of pupils in this direction, express,
ing the belief that students in Latin
might be trained more fully than they
are, through the medium of the ear.
Mr.. Page confessed himself unable to
employ this method-an inability shared
perhaps by others-because of personal
limitation.
The closing remarks of the session
were made by Mr.. Thomas, as presiding
officer of the conference. He spoke of
the bugbear of composition, declaring
that he got best results out of oral
methods especially at the outset of the
work. He pleaded in general for the old
fashioned methods of instruction that he
was glad he had been trained in, believ-
ing as he did that they brought accuracy
through their painstaking care. AS to
another of the suggestions brought out
in the discussions of the morning, he felt
that the colleges should demand less in