nfully done his best, and that he is
the better for the effort.

In their desire to disparage and discredit the already existing system of
learning Foreign Languages by means of a Grammar, the exponents of the
"Natural Method" and "Method of Nature" choose to ignore the existence of
the large number of Linguists who have acquired their knowledge through a
Grammar.

Mr. GOUIN is of opinion that one can learn a language perfectly in 900
hours, or 300 lessons of three hours each, one can know enough French to
feel at home in France, to understand what is said in street, cafe, or
railway, to read a French newspaper with ease and to talk French with a
French accent in six months lessons of 2 hours each, five days per
week--_see_ "_Review of Reviews_" 1892, _page_ 512, _and January_, 1893.

Most teachers under the Grammatical Method have to achieve success or
make the best of one lesson of one hour weekly. This is one-fifteenth,
or one-tenth of the time per week mentioned by Mr. GOUIN.

The saving of time shown by the Grammatical Method is due to
generalisation. It distributes words into classes, defines the laws or
rules that govern their use, and regulates the construction of sentences.
Sentences are thus taught in groups and not singly. The pupil learns to
construct sentences, and does not simply learn by heart to repeat them.
He can thus supply himself at will with an infinite number. If he fail
thus to apply his knowledge, only his own lack of diligence is in fault.

The writer first commenced the study of languages nearly forty years ago,
and during this time he has spent nearly twenty years abroad, in various
foreign countries, but he never met with a case where a pupil had
continuously, daily, earnestly, and honestly devoted one-fourth of the
time mentioned by Mr. Gouin to the study of a good grammar of a foreign
language who could reasonably complain of failure, nor indeed a shorter
space of time applied under the same conditions which did not meet with a
proportionate measure of success.

The titles of the new methods have been adroitly chosen, they claim to be
those of nature and by implication stigmatise the Grammatical method as
unnatural. They profess that they teach a foreign language as a child
learns to speak its mother tongue. A very high classical authority
coupled "ratio et oratio" reason and speech as complements and
indubitably speech can only improve and develop as the mind unfolds and
matur