CONTENTS | ||
---|---|---|
PART ONE -- First Principles | ||
PART TWO -- Teaching Problems -- The Basic Approach | ||
CHAPTER | PAGE | |
6 . | ENGLISH -- TEACHING-MEDIUM OR SECOND LANGUAGE | 145 |
The demand for vernacularization. Can the time devoted to English be reduced without lowering the standard? | ||
7 . | AIM -- UNDERSTANDING OR EXPRESSION | 156 |
Should Burmese children be taught only to read English or to Speak and write English as well? | ||
8 . | METHOD -- DIRECT OR INDIRECT? | 162 |
English through English or English through the Vernacular? Is translation necessary? | ||
9 . | BALANCE -- SHAKESPEARE OR SHOP? | 189 |
What sort of English do Burmese children need? Must culture be sacrificed to earning-capacity? | ||
10. | PRONUNCIATION -- SOUND OR SENSE? | 195 |
How the teaching of English is needlessly dominated by phonetic considerations. | ||
11. | GRAMMAR -- CONSCIOUS OR UNCONSCIOUS? | 201 |
The place of grammar in the teaching of English cannot be decided without reference to word-selection. | ||
12. | GRAMMAR -- FORMAL OR FUNCTIONAL? | 212 |
A new way of giving the child an insight into the working of language -- 'for its own sake'! | ||
13. | READING -- AMUSEMENT OR INSTRUCTIONS? | 219 |
Is it possible for the child to establish a reading habit while he is at school? | ||
14. | READING -- WORD-MAGIC OR WORD-CONTROL? | 230 |
It has been said that 90 per cent of the reading public do not read intelligently. Is this true? How can we test understanding?. | ||
15. | COMPOSITION -- LICENCE OR LIBERTY? | 244 |
The relation between thought and language. | ||
16. | POETRY -- APATHY OR AFFECTATION? | 250 |
Why poetry is unpopular; Basic as a new method of interpretation. | ||
17. | SCIENCE -- THOUGHT OR LANGUAGE ? | 258 |
Science students with ten years of English behind them can barely follow university lectures. Can this be remedied? | ||
PART THREE -- Conclusion | ||
APPENDIX | 341 | |
INDEX | 373 | |
ILLUSTRATIONS |
What is wrong with Indian students is that they cannot think. They have not learnt their own language; they have not been able to master the foreign one forced on them they have fallen between two stools. When von take away the language of a community you take away its ideas too. All coherent thinking depends upon adequate expression of what we think. To write badly is to think badly. One who has not mastered any language is inevitably a bad thinker.
Of course I do not suppose that it is possible, for India is a long way off from swaraj ; but even after its attainment we could not afford to isolate ourselves from the main current of western thought. The world has become one as it was never before in world history. Our means of communication have become so rapid that a quick exchange of ideas is continually taking place. In order to keep pace with the march of events and the growth of new ideas we have got to link ourselves with the western world. English at the present moment is the language of many countries, and will gradually become, even if the British Empire breaks up, the language of three- fourths of the whole world. Therefore it is in our best interests that we should retain English as a second language in the curricula of our educational institutions.
I could understand and forgive a furious national reaction against the use of English in India. But that would be to impoverish unpardonably the intellectual life of India. No language today has a range so wide as English. It will open the New World no less than our little island. It will give Indians what they never had before in their history, a key to the other great civilization of Asia, for every educated Chinese knows English. And finally, may I say, as a European who has enjoyed the hospitality and learned to appreciate the courtesy of Indians, that while they retain English as a second language, they render easier of access to the rest of mankind their thought and their national personality.