The Teaching and Cultivation of the French Language in England Part 52

The most versatile compiler of French manuals at this period was Guy Miege, a native of Lausanne, who came to England at the time of the Restoration. For two years he was employed in the household of Lord Elgin, and was then appointed under-secretary to the Earl of Carlisle, amba.s.sador extraordinary to Russia, Sweden, and Denmark. After spending three years abroad with the emba.s.sy, he travelled in France on his own account from 1665 till 1668, preparing a _Relation of the Three Emba.s.sies_ in which he had taken part. [Header: THE DICTIONARIES OF GUY MIeGE] His book was published in 1669, on his return to London. He then settled in England as a teacher of French and geography, and wrote many works for teaching the language. The first was _A New Dictionary French and English and English and French_ (1677), dedicated to Charles Lennox, Duke of Richmond. As usual, this French-English Dictionary is based on a French-Latin one--in this case that of Pomey. Miege was also closely acquainted with Howell's edition of Cotgrave's dictionary, last published in 1670; but he held it very defective in retaining so many obsolete words, and in not being adapted to the "present use and modern orthography--which indeed is highly pretended to in the last edition thereof, but so performed that the t.i.tle runs away with all the credit of it." He looked upon Cotgrave "as a good help indeed for reading of old French books (a thing which few people mind)." For his own part, his design was to teach the latest Court French, and he made a point of omitting all the provincial and obsolete words Cotgrave had searched out so carefully, words "that offend the eyes and grate the ears, but the Rubbish of the French Tongue." To "season the naturall dulness of the work" he included many proverbs, descriptions, and observations in both the English and French parts.

Considering that "the way to understand the bottom of a language is to learn how the derivatives are formed from their primitives and the compounds from their simples,"[1051] he arranged all the derivatives after their respective primitives; that nothing might be wanting, however, he placed them in their alphabetic order also, with a reference to the necessary primitive.

Miege's innovation in excluding all obsolete terms from his dictionary raised such a storm at its first appearance[1052] that he felt himself bound to yield to public opinion by making a separate collection of such words, which he called _A Dictionary of barbarous French or A Collection, by way of Alphabet, of Obsolete, Provincial, misspelt, and Made Words in French, taken out of Cotgrave's dictionary with some additions_. It was, he said, "performed for the satisfaction of such as read old French." By the time of its publication in 1679, however, the storm raised by his first work had died away.

Miege continued his lexicographical labours. In 1684 appeared _A Short French Dictionary English and French, with another in French and English_, a work of no ambitious aims, containing a list of words pure and simple, with no descriptions or observations, intended for beginners, travellers, and those who could not afford the price of the larger one, and, above all, for foreigners reading English. The English were too eager and advanced in the study of French to find much help in so slight a work, but foreigners evidently adopted the dictionary; editions appeared at the Hague in 1691, 1701 (the fifth), and 1703;[1053] another was issued at Rotterdam as late as 1728.

For the use of English students and those desiring to study either language more thoroughly, Miege prepared, during many years of hard work, an enlarged edition of his first French dictionary of 1677, which, he tells us, was compiled under great disadvantages; "the Publick was in haste for a French Dictionary, and they had it accordingly, hurried from the design to the composition, and from under my pen to the press." The new work, on a much larger scale, was known as _The Great French Dictionary, in two parts_, and published in 1688, eleven years after the appearance of its nucleus, the _New French Dictionary_ (1677). It gives words according to both their old and modern orthography, "by which means the reader is fitted for any sort of French book," and, writes Miege, "although I am not fond of obsolete and barbarous words, yet I thought fit to intersperse the most remarkable of them, lest they should be missed by such as read old Books." Each word is accompanied by explanations, proverbs, phrases, "and as the first part does, here and there, give a prospect into the const.i.tution of the kingdom of France, so the second does afford to foreiners what they have hitherto very much wanted, to wit, an Insight into the Const.i.tution of England...." In the _Great Dictionary_ Miege abandoned his plan of arranging the derivatives under their primitives, because it had made his former work "swarm with uneasy references"; he followed the alphabetical order strictly, "but in such a manner that, where a derivative is remote from its primitive, I show its extraction within a Parenthesis." [Header: MIeGE'S FRENCH GRAMMARS] Each of the two sections of the _Great Dictionary_ is preceded by a grammar of the language concerned. First comes the _Grounds of the French Tongue_, before the French-English Dictionary, and then a _Methode abregee pour apprendre l'Anglois_. This French grammar was a reprint of one of those which Miege had compiled while working at his dictionaries.

In 1684 Miege tells us that he had "put forth two French grammars, both of them well approved by all unprejudiced persons. The one is short and concise, fitted for all sorts of learners, but especially new beginners; the other is a large and complete piece, giving a curious and full account of the French Tongue. To this is annexed a copious vocabulary and a long Train of useful Dialogues." The more advanced of these grammars was the first to appear, being published in 1678 under the t.i.tle of _A New French Grammar, or a New Method for learning the French Tongue_. After dealing with p.r.o.nunciation, he pa.s.ses to the accidence and syntax, with special attention to his favourite theory of the importance of a knowledge of primitives and derivatives. He is much indebted to the grammars of Vaugelas and Chiflet, especially in his observations on letter-writing, on repet.i.tion of words, and on style.

The second half of the book contains a vocabulary, arranged under the usual headings, and familiar dialogues, without which he dare not offer the work to a public "so well convinced of their Usefulness, as to the speaking part of a Language"; therefore, "though it were something against the grain," he included such exercises, "exceeding even Mr.

Mauger's in number." The one hundred and fifteen familiar dialogues are followed by four more advanced ones in French alone, "for proficient learners to turn into English." The first deals with the education of children, and the others with geography, a subject Miege taught in either French or English "as might be most convenient."

The elementary grammar had been issued about 1682[1054] as _A short and easie French Grammar fitted for all sorts of learners; according to the present use and modern orthography of the French with some Reflections on the ancient use thereof_. In 1682 the vocabulary and dialogues of the earlier grammar were, each of them, issued separately, probably to facilitate their use with this second grammar.

In 1687 appeared the _Grounds of the French Tongue or a new French Grammar_,[1055] which Miege incorporated in his _Great French Dictionary_ in the following year. In general outline its contents resemble those of the grammar which had appeared ten years before. It is, however, an entirely new work. Most of the rules differ,[1056] and the vocabulary and dialogues are new. He breaks away from the old tradition of introducing the Latin declension of nouns into French grammars.[1057] The _Grounds of the French Tongue_ is about a hundred pages shorter than the grammar of 1678, and on the whole it is less interesting from the point of view of the student of French. The second part, called the _Nouvelle Nomenclature Francoise et Angloise_, which might be obtained apart from the grammar, had originally appeared in 1685 as part of Miege's _Nouvelle methode pour apprendre l'Anglois_.[1058] Consequently the dialogues are more suited to the student of English than to the student of French, as they deal chiefly with life in England and the impressions of a Frenchman in London, including an account of the coffee-houses, the penny post, the churches, English food and drink, and so forth.

Lastly, in about 1698,[1059] appeared _Miege's last and best French Grammar, or a new Method to learn French, containing the Quintessence of all other Grammars, with such plain and easie rules as will make one speedily perfect in that famous language_. A second edition was issued in 1705. The work was based on his first grammar (1678), which thus benefited by his long experience as a writer on the French language and teacher of that tongue.

Miege held that French was best learnt by a combination of the methods of rote and grammar, either being insufficient without the other; as for attempting to learn foreign languages at home by rote, "'tis properly building in the air. [Header: BEST METHOD OF STUDY] For whatever progress one makes that way, unless he sticks constantly to it, the Language steals away from him, and, like a Building without a foundation, it falls insensibly." Englishmen who learn French by ear in France soon find the fluency of which they are so proud slipping away from them after their return to England;[1060] and even Frenchmen who have never studied their language grammatically begin to lose the purity of phrase after they have been some time in England.

Accordingly "a great care ought to be taken to pitch upon the best sort of Grammar and to make choice of a skilful Master. Now a skilful master must be first such a one as can speak the true modern French: A Thing few people can boast of, besides courtiers and scholars, so nice a language it is." Therefore the student should not waste his time, as many do, with the common sort of teachers, who speak, for the most part, but a corrupt and provincial French, and yet are patronized by many. In the second place, the teacher should be a man of some learning; and in the third, he should have "some skill in the English tongue, not that he should use much English with his scholars,[1061] but because, without it, 'tis impossible he can teach by the grammar, or explain the true meaning of words." Lastly, he should himself be thoroughly acquainted with the grammar, and be able to find out what should be learnt "by rote, what by heart, and what pa.s.sages need not at all be learnt." But, when all is done, "there is an art in teaching not to be found amongst all men of knowledge."

Thus the right use of a grammar depends much on the skill and judgement of the teacher. Miege declares against overburdening the memory with abstruse and difficult rules. In most cases it is enough if the learner understands the rule; there is no need to confine him to the author's words or to make him learn long lists of exceptions. "The best thing to exercise his memory in, besides the general and most necessary rules, is to learn a good store of words with their signification. And then, whether he comes to read French, or to hear it spoke, one word doth so help another, that by degrees, he will find out the meaning." As for the dialogues, only a few, and those of a familiar type, should be learnt "without book." "An a.n.a.lysis is the best use they can be put to, but some teachers will find it too hard a task."

The best way, therefore, is "to lay a good foundation with grammar rules, and to raise the Superstructure by Practice"; the more adventurous the learner is in speaking French the better. If, however, "one be so very averse from Grammar rules as to look upon them as so many Bug bears, my opinion is that he may begin by Rote, provided he make good at last his Proficiency that Way, with the help of a choice Grammar. And then the Rules will appear to him very plain, easy and delectable."

In 1678 Miege was receiving pupils for French and geography at his lodging in Penton Street, Leicester Square, and we are told that in 1693 he was taking in _pensionnaires_ in Dean's Yard, near Westminster Abbey.

Towards the end of his teaching career in England he appears to have been on very friendly terms with another teacher of French, Francesco Casparo Colsoni, an Italian minister, who also taught Italian and English. Colsoni wrote a book for teaching the three languages,[1062]

called _The New Trismagister_ (1688), in which he drew freely from the works of Mauger, Festeau, and his friend Miege. In the meantime other manuals appeared, including a translation of a grammar which was first published at Paris in 1672[1063]--_A French Grammar, teaching the knowledge of that language.... Published by the Academy for the reformation of the French Tongue_ (1674), printed in parallel columns of English and the original French. _A Very easie Introduction to the French Tongue_ was published in about 1673, which claimed to be "proper for all persons who have bad memories." A certain John Smith, M.A., J.

G. D'Abadie, formerly of the Royal Musketeers and for a time teacher of French at Oxford, Jacob Villiers, who had a French school at Nottingham, and Jean de Kerhuel, a French minister,[1064] all published grammars at about the same time.[1065]

[Header: PIERRE BERAULT]

Among the more interesting French teachers of the period is Pierre Berault, a French monk who was converted to Protestantism when he was on the point of setting out for England to work among the refugees as a Jesuit emissary.[1066] On the 2nd of April 1671 he "abjured all the errors of the Church of Rome" in the French Church of the Savoy, London, and subsequently devoted himself to teaching French. Until nearly the end of the century he lived in various parts of London, "waiting upon any Gentlemen or Gentlewomen who have a mind to learn French," and using, according to his own account, a very sound method. At the same time he was busy with his pen. He began with a compilation setting forth his religious principles,[1067] and with books on moral and religious subjects, in French and English for the benefit of learners.[1068] Later he wrote _A New, plain, short and compleat French and English grammar_ (1688), which had an "extraordinary sale and reception," and pa.s.sed through numerous editions. Berault's motto as regards the teaching of French was _omne tulit punctum qui miscuit utile dulci_,--a fit combination of grammar rules and practical exercises. The grammar, which occupies less than half the book, begins with an explanation of grammatical terms for the benefit of those ignorant of Latin; it then deals shortly with the p.r.o.nunciation and the declinable parts of speech;[1069] lastly come a few rules of syntax and short vocabularies of the indeclinables. The reading exercises open with the catechism, creeds, commandments, and prayers. The dialogues, accompanied, contrary to custom, by an interlinear translation, are at first very simple, and arranged in syllables for the benefit of beginners, but they become more difficult. The following is a dialogue between a French tutor and his scholar:

Good morrow, Sir, how do you do?

Bonjour, Monsieur, comment vous portez vous?

Very well to serve you.

Fort bien pour vous servir.

Do you teach the French tongue?

Enseignez-vous la langue Francoise?

Yes sir, and the Latin also.

Ouy, monsieur, et aussi la Latine.

Will you teach me these two tongues?

Voulez vous m'enseigner ces deux langues?

I will do it willingly.

Je le feray volontiers.

What method do you hold?

Quel methode voulez-vous tenir?

Because you understand Latin Parce que vous entendez la langue Latine

I will begin by the p.r.o.nunciation Je commenceray par la p.r.o.nonciation

Which you can learn in two lessons.

Que vous pouvez apprendre en deux lecons.

Then I will teach you the nouns, Puis je vous enseigneray les noms,

p.r.o.nouns, verbs and other parts of speech.

p.r.o.noms, verbes et autres parties d'oraison.

And afterwards the rules of syntax.

Et ensuite les regles de Composition.

How long will I be in learning all that?

Combien seray-je a apprendre tout cela?

But little time if you will follow me.

Peu de temps si vous voulez me suivre.

Berault added a selection of Cordier's Colloquies in French and English to his work, as well as the usual proverbs, idioms and polite letters, and a vocabulary. The letters have no English translation, Berault believing that "whoso will peruse this grammar, he will not only be able to explain them but any other French book whatsoever." Accordingly he supplied a list of what he considered suitable modern French books, all of which could be obtained from one or other of the French booksellers in London.

In the second half of the seventeenth century the position of the French language in England was further strengthened by its growing popularity all over Europe. "I have visited," wrote the dramatist Chappuzeau in 1674,[1070] "every part of Christendom with care. [Header: FRENCH AND LATIN] It has been easy for me to observe that to-day a prince with only the French language which has spread everywhere, has the same advantages that Mithridates had with twenty-two." The French language was regarded as "one of the chiefest qualifications of accomplished persons," and "the common language of all well-bred people, and the most generally used in the commerce of civil life." Bayle states that in many parts of Europe there were people who spoke and wrote French as purely as the French themselves, and that in many foreign towns all the men and women of quality and many of the common people spoke French with ease. Writers of the time are unanimous in describing French as the universal language; and most French teachers write in the style of Guy Miege to the effect that "the French tongue is in a manner grown universal in Europe ... and of all the parts of Europe next to France none is more fond of it than England."

Thus, in the second half of the seventeenth century, French was in a position to dispute its ground with Latin. France herself set the example. French was the language used at Court, while Latin was used only by scholars. Significant it is that in 1676 Louis XIV., in consequence of Charpentier's _Defense de la langue francoise pour l'inscription de l'arc de Triomphe_, replaced the Latin inscriptions on his triumphal arches by others in French. Replying to Charpentier's essay, a Jesuit, P. Lucus, wrote a treatise in defence of Latin.[1071]

Charpentier retorted by two laboured volumes, _De l'excellence de la langue francoise_ (1683), and finally won the day. In this he refers to the universality of French, and draws attention to the advantages which would result to science if it were studied in that language. The long Quarrel of the Ancients and Moderns, which first reached England from France, also shows the spirit of the times. And Bayle a.s.serts as evidence of the supremacy of French that: "Veut-on qu'un libelle courre bien le monde, aussitot on le traduit en francois, lors meme que l'original est en Latin: tant il est vrai que le latin n'est pas si commun en Europe aujourd'hui que la Langue francoise."[1072]

In England French had long been a rival to Latin as the most commonly used foreign tongue, and after the Restoration it was generally recognized, among courtiers, men of fas.h.i.+on, ministers of state, and diplomats, as the more convenient means of intercourse. Only scholars and the universities continued to uphold the traditional supremacy of the Latin tongue, and even at the universities Latin had pa.s.sed out of colloquial use before the Restoration, though still used in disputations and other prescribed exercises.[1073] The victory of French in the world of fas.h.i.+on was an easy one. It had "long since chased Latin from the gallant's head," declares Sedley,[1074] and Ravenscroft in his prologue to the _English Lawyer_,[1075] in which a jargon made up of Latin and English predominates, thus addresses the gallants:

Gallants, pray what do you doe here to-day?

Which of you understands a Latine play?...

This age defies th' accomplishments of Schools, The Town breeds Wits, the Colleges make Fools.

Samuel Vincent,[1076] instructing the gallant how to behave at an ordinary, warns him to "beware how (he) speaks any Latin there: your ordinaries most commonly have no more to do with Latin, than a desparate town or Garrison hath."[1077]

Latin also lost what ground it held as the official language. Milton had been Latin secretary during the Commonwealth, but after the Restoration French was the language used. "Since Latin hath ceased to be a Language, if ever it was any, which I am not sure of, at least in this present age," wrote Lord Chancellor Clarendon,[1078] "the French is almost naturalised through Europe, and understood and spoken in all the Northern Courts and hath nearly driven the Dutch out of its own country, and almost sides the Italian in the Eastern Parts, where it was scarce known in the last Age." French, therefore, had little to fear from Latin as the language of intercourse with amba.s.sadors and other foreigners in England; and still less from English, which was not to receive any recognition at the hands of foreigners for years to come. [Header: FRENCH IN THE SCHOLASTIC WORLD] Considering the almost universal popularity of French, and the general neglect of English, most Englishmen were obliged to agree with Clarendon that it was "too late sullenly to affect an ignorance" of that language because the French "will not take the Pains to understand ours," and we may gain much by being conversant in theirs. He adds "it would be a great Dishonour to the court if, when Amba.s.sadors come thither from Neighbour Princes, no body were able to treat with them, or converse with those who accompany them in no other language but English, of which not one of them understand one word; not to mention how the king shall be supplied with Ministers, or Secretaries of State, or with Persons fit to be sent Amba.s.sadors abroad," if those who aspire to such rank are not acquainted with the necessary foreign language.

Before the Restoration, French, in spite of the important place it held in the world of polite education, had received very little recognition at the hands of educational writers. Cleland alone, in his _Inst.i.tution of a n.o.bleman_ (1607), had treated it seriously. After 1660, however, its widespread use and popularity rendered this omission no longer possible, and at this time occurs a break in the tradition of cla.s.sical scholars.h.i.+p.[1079] The case for French was put most forcibly and with greatest effect by Locke in his _Thoughts on Education_. Referring to the young scholar, he writes: "As soon as he can speak English, 'tis time for him to learn some other Language. This no body doubts of, when French is proposed ... because French is a living language, and to be used more in speaking, that should be first learned, that the yet pliant Organs of Speech might be accustomed to a due formation of those sounds and he get the habit of p.r.o.nouncing French well, which is the harder to be done the longer it is delay'd. When he can speak French well, (which on conversational methods is usually in a year or two), he should proceed to Latin."[1080] For the same reasons Clarendon would have French learnt first, by "rote," "without the Formality or Method of grammar."[1081]