connection with modern English pronunciation, grammar, sentence-construction, and word-meanings. 66 The whole system of English pronunciation with its constant change of accentuation, its peculiar vowels, and its slurrings," is the very antithesis of the Latin regularity of accent and the Latin full-sounding vocables. Yet the writer of the March article claims that the study of Latin will help in the better pronunciation of English. In view of the facts, how can such a claim be justified? Then compare Latin and English grammar. How can the former, essentially synthetic in structure, help us practically with modern analytic English? Subjunctives and “indirect discourse" are useless lumber: they will not show us how to use our idiomatic auxiliary verbs. Prepositions have taken the place of cases; but our prepositions do not correspond exactly to the Latin cases. A knowledge of the latter will not help us in the practical use of the former: if, for example, you wish to know how to employ the English "of," do not waste your time comparing it with the Latin subjective genitive, partitive genitive, etc., but study it from an English point of view. Even that fetish, the accusative case, can be studied very well in the English pronouns, and still better in the modern idea of word-order. The general conception of a direct object is there as easily disentangled as in Latin “am, um (both nominative and accusative), as, os, es (nominative, accusative)" and "a (nominative and accusative).” Look at such constructions as "he gave me it," "I was given the book," "without speaking," etc. These are just where the difficulties of English lie; and Latin does not help us a bit here. Or consider the precision of the common English "man," "a man," and "the man": Latin with its vague "homo" is again helpless. Latin, too, wholly disregards the significance of modern word-order,—a thing of the utmost importance in English. Finally, even from the point of view of the practical command of the meaning of English words, Latin is by no means so useful as it is often considered. In the first place, half of the most important English words are derived from Anglo VIII DISCUSSIONS FOREIGN LANGUAGES IN THE HIGH SCHOOL I read with great interest an article in the March number of the REVIEW ON "Foreign languages in the high school." I am not a school-teacher, but have been interested in languages and the methods of teaching them ever since I was in college fifteen years ago. I have also read a good deal of educational literature, have tried to keep abreast with the times, and have given some instruction in language during the past few years. Perhaps, therefore, my point of view as a layman not wholly unacquainted with the subject may be of some interest. According to the author of the above-mentioned article, foreign languages are studied in the high school for two reasons: first, to obtain practical mastery of the language studied; and, secondly, to help one's English. Latin, he admits, is inferior to Greek from the literary point of view, and to German and French from the practical one. Yet he advocates Latin because of its supposed assistance in mastering the English language. Such a claim seems to me to have an insufficient foundation. A good knowledge of Latin will undoubtedly help one to understand the English language: so will a good knowled of French or Anglo-Saxon or German. But the k edge of any of these which can be acquired will be of much assistance in the practical lish is very doubtful. Three months of I with a good dictionary and a modern one's English more than a four years' hi Latin. Briefly consider Latin from the fo A sentence-construction, and word meaning « The whole system of English pronuneration t the March article claims that the sturdy of Fatu wall be the better pronunciation of Era.. Saxon: a good share of the remainder come to us thru French, and are considerably changed both in form and meaning from the Latin originals. The roots, suffixes, etc., of what is then left can be learned almost as well with the help of an English dictionary as with that of a four years' high-school course in Latin. One does not have to learn Anglo-Saxon in order to use properly the prefix "un un" or the suffix ness" or the 66 From all these facts, then, we are justified in concluding that the study of Latin is of very little use to the high-school student in the practical mastery of English. Latin must therefore stand" on its own feet" in its claim to be the high-school study. From this point of view it seems to me to have a very poor chance of success: literature and ancient thought speak for Greek; practical advantages and modern thought, for French or German. BROOKLINE, MASS. J. F. TWOMBLY CONCERNING THE EVILS OF CREDIT FOR QUALITY May I say just a word in regard to the subject discust by Professor Ladd in this REVIEW for March and by Professor Kelly in the issue for May, the subject of Credit for Quality? In his account of the alleged failure of the system at this University, where it has now been in use for six years, Dr. Ladd admitted that he was merely giving his personal opinion. That he was not voicing the ideas of the majority of our faculty is manifest from the fact that the plan is still in use. In spite of the criticisms offered by Dr. Ladd most of our faculty believe that the system produces excellent results. Professor Kelly's replies to Dr. Ladd's objections are exactly to the point. He has analyzed the situation with remarkable keenness and clearness. Of course those who are opposed to the use of any artificial stimuli to promote scholastic attainments, preferring to rely wholly on moral suasion or the sense of duty, naturally oppose this system. Of course, too, any new plan as first devised is likely to be imperfect. Changes and improvements will be found necessary. That has been the history of the Credit for Quality idea with us. Since it was first adopted we have made several slight modifications, never, however, losing sight of the fundamental idea of giving credit to whom credit is due. The details have evolved naturally, until we now have a system which we feel is just to the student and helpful to the spirit and life of the institution. Its faults, if faults it has, are, so far as we can see, only those inherent in any marking system of human invention. Perhaps a few figures based on our last mid-year examinations may be of interest as illustrating the actual working of the plan. In these examinations seven per cent. of all the marks given were A's, which carry .3 extra credit. Twentyone per cent. were B's, which carry .2 extra credit. This does not mean that seven per cent. of the students will be able to finish in three years, for few of those receiving an A receive it in all their subjects. It does mean that about thirty per cent. of our students are receiving some extra credit. Of these perhaps four or five per cent. receive enough to enable them to gain their degrees in three years. In view, however, of the present collegiate tendency, illustrated for example by Harvard, where one-third of the students now graduate in three years, this can hardly be called an excessive lessening of the time of academic residence, especially as many of these three-year bachelors stay on for a fourth year, taking the master's degree. The great majority of the other twenty-five or twenty-six per cent. will finish their course a few credits ahead. In some cases this has suggested the desirable idea of returning for a master's degree toward which the extra credits can sometimes be made to count; in other cases the student merely has the satisfaction of having several credits in excess of the requirement, a feeling which tends to self-respect and comfort. Meanwhile to most of us there is evident among the students, as a whole, a sane and healthy pride in doing good work. It is generally realized that this is the wise and thrifty thing to do. This spirit is in marked contrast to that pre |