Page images
PDF
EPUB

-(i. e. in articles, pronouns, prepositions, adverbs, conjunctions, and interjections,)—and, hence, derives that clearness or precision, which is its great characteristic :—Ce qui n'est pas clair, says Rivarol,-n' est pas Français; ce qui n'est pas clair c'est encore Anglais, Italien, Grec, ou Latin."—

And is it so, Sir? and do you, really, believe your friend Mr. Rivarol, (—anglice Rigmarol?)—when he says--“ that which is not clear is not French" ?--What, then, are we to understand by the following advice from a celebrated French statesman to Mr. D'Alembert?" Je ne veux point admettre dans les arréts de Conseil un vrai trivial, une clarté trop familiere. Je veux un vrai de recherche, une clartè elegante, une naiveté fine, toute brillant de termes pompeux, relevés inopinément de phrases arrondies, de vocatifs intermediaires, et d' adverbes indefinis."

It is necessary that this statesman's advice should be generally understood, for it is of great importance; we shall, therefore, translate this notable passage for the benefit of the mere English reader.

"I would not allow the admission of a trivial truth in the decrees of council, or a clearness, which is too easy and familiar. I choose to have a subtle kind of truth, an elegant perspicuity, an artful, a refined naiveté, all brilliant with pompous terms, unexpectedly elevated with a roundness of phraseology, with intermediate vocatives, and indefinite adverbs.”—

Now the assertion of M. Dufief and M. Rivarol, that what is not clear is not French, reduces us to this dilemma, either to conclude, that Messrs. Rivarol and Dufief know not what they say, or that the state-papers, and official dispatches of the French politicians are not French.

The truth is, that nothing can be more characteristic of French Statesmen, than the doctrine laid down in the letter to Mr. D'Alembert, to which we just now alluded. At first, they are always sufficiently unintelligible—(see the dispatches of Charles Maurice Talleyrand, as furnishing a very satisfactory specimen of French clearness and precision)—they make abundant use of their vocatifs intermediaires, and their adverbes indefinis, and succeed to admiration. They have language without meaning, words to delude, and ideas to blind the mul

titude; but when their end is obtained, when they acquire the power, their style is altered, their tone is changed, and their language becomes perfectly intelligible.

It must never be forgotten, that in every department of society, in religion, in literature, and in politics, the French have, àlways, maintained one uniform system of deception, alike when bending before the throne of the Bourbons, or writhing under the bloody domination of their unrelenting republic, or offering the incense of unblushing slavery to the present God of their idolatry. Their mode of arguing has always been full of sophistry, and full of fraud.

So much for the bold position, that what is not clear is not French.

After dwelling, at great length, upon the wondrous benefits of his plan, M. Dufief, (who has certainly copied, with much aptness, the example of his worthy predecessor, honest Dogberry, who, without any scruple, openly declares,-"And please your worship, an I were as tedious as a King, I could find it in my heart to bestow it all upon your worship,")observes in a note, as a confirmation of the superiority of his new and expeditious mode of teaching the French language, so infinitely superior to all the "trite jargon! of grammar," that-" many people could be produced in every nation, who write with propriety and elegance, but who could not, with propriety, answer the commonest grammatical questions.”

But we would beg leave to ask M. Dufief, how a language can be said to be written with propriety and elegance, if it be not written with correctness and accuracy?—Now the universal voice of the wise and the learned, in all ages, has required, that all well-educated persons should write a language with grammatical accuracy, in order to distinguish their compositions from the miserable effusions of the untaught and ignorant multitude, who mangle and murder all language at their pleasure, and, whenever they write, present a mass of matter, as unintelligible, as were the jabberings at the tower of Babel, when men were confounded in their speech;—or as incomprehensible as the sounds, which proceeded out of the mouth of Cerberus, who is reported to have uttered a leash of languages at once.

[ocr errors]

But it seems, according to M. Dufief, that people can write with propriety and elegance, although they know nothing at all of grammar.-This is, indeed, a jubilee for the ignorant, and the dull; for, as all the rules, which have been hitherto found necessary to reduce language into symmetry and form, to give it strength, correctness, ease, and elegance, are declared to be null and void, the dunces are invited to advance in shoals, and to challenge all the hitherto best and most approved writers in every language to meet them in this new literary combat, where people can write with propriety and elegance, unshackled by the restraints, and unfettered by the bondage of grammatical accuracy.

M. Dufief, who is, himself, never fatigued by making new discoveries, now tells us, that-" It will, I believe, (--N. B. N. G. Dufief's faith, in this instance,surpasseth all understanding,)--be conceded to me, that Language, and Grammar are two very different objects, and, consequently, no way analogous; the former as physical, the latter as metaphysical."

Pray, what is meant by saying, that language is physical? is it, that language is natural, in the strict sense and acceptation of that word, as excluding art?-If this be the meaning of M. Dufief, his assertion is incorrect; for all language, which is spoken, and written, is the offspring of art and not of nature; since nature only gives the voice, or organs of sound, or, in other words, the capability of emitting inarticulate, and of imitating articulate sounds; and art does the rest; she teaches the tongue to learn all those varieties of speech, the possession of which so eminently distinguishes man from all other animals; that faculty, peculiar to man, which raised the admiration of Socrates, and induced him to use it as one of his chief arguments to demonstrate the being of God; these are his words, which we need not translate for so very profound a scholar, as the author of "Nature Displayed.”

- Και μην γλωτταν γε παντων των ζωων εχοντων, μονην την των ανθρωπων εποίησαν οιαν, αλλοτε αλλαγη ψαύεσαν το στοματος, αθρών τε την φωνην, και σημαίνειν παντα αλληλοις, ο βουλομεθα.”

Or does M. Dufief mean, by language being physical, that— but why should we multiply questions upon this head, since nonsense is inexhaustible?

And what is meant by grammar being metaphysical?—Oh! we recollect ourselves, and we beg M. Dufief's pardon ;-we recollect that M. Dufief has already explained what he means by grammar being metaphysical, namely, that it is—" the continuation of the science of ideas."-A sublime discovery, on which we have before commented with admiration and astonishment.

Having thus informed us, that language is physical, and that grammar is metaphysical, M. Dufief, with his accustomed modesty, subjoins the following note, which we transcribe for the edification of the reader:

"Grammarians have continually confounded grammar with lan guage and vice versa. This strange perversion of ideas has been the cause of their ill success, all over the world. Instead of boasting of teaching language by grammar, (which was, in fact, placing the cart before the horse) they should have said, they taught grammar by language."

Euge, bene, recte, bravo, da capo!!!

M. Dufief, next informs us, that nature teaches children phrases first; his words are these" the following, which is the result of repeated observation, proves this position to be correct, and throws some light on the subject."

M. Dufief, then proceeds to throw some light on the subject, by saying that," Phrases taught children by nature are always verbal preludes to actions performed to give them pleasure or pain; and those very actions necessarily attract their attention on language, as they are not performed, until the phrases, that have given rise to them, have been uttered. Children, of course, learn phrases first; with regard to single words, they obtain them, when their opening minds are capable of abstracting, from the phrases they have acquired, such words as they want, in order to form, by analogy, regular combinations, or phrases of their own."

Now, until M. Dufief had thrown some light on this sub`ject, we must confess, that we were so much in the dark, as to fancy, that phrases were made up of single words, and, that, consequently, each single word, which enters into the composition of any given phrase,must be learned before the phrase

itself could be learned. We always thought that this was as self-evident, as that well-known axiom, that-every whole consists of all its parts.-But now, if we may believe M. Dufief,— the wholeis not equal to all its parts,--neither are phrases made up of single words ;--for the learned author goes on to say,"that children are instructed in language by detached phrases, and not otherwise, every discerning mother, (-N. B.-the discernment of the mother ought to be very acute in this instance,)-will be ready to acknowledge."

Lest, however, any one should be inclined to doubt M. Dufief's own great authority, he calls in the aid of another wonderful philosopher, even that of Mr. Thomas Jefferson, the President of the United States, whose philosophical sanction to N. G. Dufief's philosophical plan of instruction is thus introduced to our notice.

"I am happy to find, that Mr. Jefferson, President of the United States, was of my opinion, when he wrote the following, in a letter, which he did me the honour of addressing to myself."

"The proposition to teach a language by phrases, is new as a method; although, besides infants learning their native tongue, we have seen persons learn a foreign language that way."

This step has been taken with M. Dufief's usual judgment, for Mr. Jefferson's profound philosophy, and extensive knowledge of language, are already fixed, by the publication of that scientific wonderment, Notes on Virginia, on a basis too firm and too broad to be moved or shaken even by the praises of the author of Nature Displayed.

But not willing, that the public should rest altogether on his own, and Mr. Jefferson's authority, on this important subject, M. Dufief procures the assistance of another, a third person, of equal importance, in matters of philosophy, with himself, and the President of the United States ;—his words are these,

"I know a little girl, two years old, who has at her command an infinite number of phrases, and whose conversation is absolutely interesting, &c, &c, &c.—"!!!

Who, now, can presume to doubt, in contradiction to the £at of three such very respectable philosophical authorities,

« PreviousContinue »