HOW TO TEACH A FOREIGN
LANGUAGE
PROGRESS IN LANGUAGE with special referenceto English. By Otto Jespersen, Ph.D.,Professor of English at the University of Copenhagen.7s. 6d.
SOME OPINIONS OF THE PRESS.
“It appeals not only to specialists, but to all who concernthemselves with that most fascinating of modern questions,the origin and development of speech. The opening chaptershows us the independent thinker and original investigator.Throughout, the destructive criticism is clear, incisive, andcogent. It cannot fail to affect in time even the manual-mongersand the examiners who expect the innocent school to reproducethe fictions of the cram-books. A philologist, who sees withhis own eyes and sees straight, is a rare combination.”—Journalof Education.
“Mr. Jespersen, who is still young, has long ago gained ahigh reputation as a phonetician. The introductory essayprefixed to the tracts before us will, we believe, secure for hima distinguished position among philological thinkers. It is longsince we read so brilliant a performance of its kind.”—Academy.
“Our readers will find the book as instructive as it is farremoved from the dryness characteristic of most philologicaltreatises. It furnishes material for deep thought and mayalmost be called a new starting-point in philology.”—AsiaticQuarterly Review.
“The book is historical in its method, and attempts to show,by an examination of the typical characteristics of languagesin all stages of development, what the general drift of languagehas been.”—Guardian.
London: SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & CO., LTD.
HOW TO TEACH
A FOREIGN LANGUAGE
By
OTTO JESPERSEN, Ph.D.
Professor of English in the University of Copenhagen
TRANSLATED FROM THE DANISH ORIGINAL BY
SOPHIA YHLEN-OLSEN BERTELSEN M.A.
“This was sometime a paradox, but now the time
gives it proofe.”—Hamlet.
LONDON
SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & CO. LTD
NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN CO.
1904
PREFACE
When, in accordance with a wish expressed by Englishand American friends, I determined to have my Sprogundervisningtranslated into English, I found it difficultto decide what to retain and what to leave out of theoriginal. So much of what I had written appeared tome to apply more or less exclusively to Danish schoolsand Danish methods, and I had too little personal experienceof the practice of English teachers or of Englishschool-books to be quite sure of the advisability in eachcase of including or excluding this or that remark. Ihave, however, made my choice to the best of my ability,and if some parts of my criticism are not altogetherapplicable to English methods, I hope I may be excusedon the plea that what is now the really important thingis less the destruction of bad old methods than a positiveindication of the new ways to be followed if we are