3. How do we proceed after finding the lowest terms?

4. Do we revive any part of the original sentence each time we make an addition?

5. How much of it?

6. Is the intellect kept occupied in this way?

7. Does this not make a deep and lasting first impression?

8. Every time this is used what should be the result?

9. Should the natural Memory be strengthened in both stages?

10. Does this process admit of more than one application in the case of a long sentence?

MODERATION ADVISED.

The practice of the above method is so attractive to a beginner when it is applied to single sentences, that he is apt to work at it too long at a time. Let him not at the outset a.n.a.lyse and reconstruct more than from 3 to 4 sentences at one sitting or lesson, but let him do what he attempts in the most thorough manner, and after a time he will not find it necessary to apply this method in future memorisations.

EXAMPLES FOR PRACTICE.

1. A bachelor is a wild goose that tame geese envy.

2. Law is a trap baited with promise of benefit or revenge.

3. Conversation is the idle man's business and the business man's recreation.

4. Attention is adjusting the observer to the object in order to seize it in its unity and diversity.

5. a.s.similative Memory is the Habit of so receiving and absorbing impressions and ideas that they or their representatives shall be ready for revival or recall whenever wanted.

INTERROGATIVE a.n.a.lYSIS USED FOR SHORT SENTENCES.

Interrogative a.n.a.lysis or intellectual Inquisition is another and most effective mode of inciting the intellect to pa.s.s from a pa.s.sive into an active =a.s.similating= condition when trying to learn by heart as well as to help create the habit of the intellect staying with the senses. The process consists of two parts: (1) _To not only ask a question on every important word in the sentence to be memorised_, but, (2) _to repeat the entire sentence in reply to each question, while specially emphasising_ that word of the sentence which const.i.tutes the _answer_ to the question. Take the pa.s.sage from Byron:--

"Man!

Thou pendulum 'twixt a smile and tear."

1. _Who_ is a pendulum 'twixt a smile and tear? "_Man!_ thou pendulum 'twixt a smile and tear." 2. What function does man perform 'twixt a smile and tear? "Man! thou _pendulum_ 'twixt a smile and tear." 3.

'Twixt a tear and what else is man said to be a pendulum? "Man! thou pendulum 'twixt a _smile_ and tear." 4. 'Twixt a smile and what else is man said to be a pendulum? "Man! thou pendulum 'twixt a smile _and tear_." 5. By what word is the relation between "pendulum" and "a smile and tear" described? "Man! thou pendulum _'twixt_ a smile and tear." 6.

Is the pendulum which man is said to be 'twixt a smile and tear addressed in the first, second, or third person? "Man! _thou_ pendulum 'twixt a smile and tear."

The pupils will see that the above method is fundamentally unlike the ordinary question and answer method. In the latter procedure, a question is asked and the answer is given by "yes" or "no," or by the use of one or more words of the sentence. To ill.u.s.trate: What is "man" called in this pa.s.sage? Ans. A pendulum. What swings betwixt a smile and tear?

Ans. A pendulum, &c., &c.

1. Define Interrogative a.n.a.lysis.

2. What does it incite the intellect to do?

3. What does the process consist of? What are they?

But in my Method the aim is _to repeat as much of the sentence as is possible informing the question and the whole of it in each reply_; and in _question and reply_ the _word_ that _const.i.tutes the point of both_ is to be especially _emphasized_, and in this way _the mind is exercised on each word of the sentence twice_ (once in question and once in answer), and _each word of the sentence is emphasized in reference to the whole of the sentence_. And in all these separate steps it is impossible for the mind to remain in a pa.s.sive state, but must be _active_ and _absorbing_ throughout, and thereby a most vivid =first impression= is secured, and the remembrance of it a.s.sured.

Besides the habit of exhaustively considering and weighing a sentence which is created by this method, it not only secures the faithful recollection of the pa.s.sages to which it is applied, but it gives another great advantage. What usually makes a person dull in conversation? Setting aside timidity, we find that well-informed persons are sometimes good listeners, but no talkers. Why is this? In conversation their minds are apt to remain in a _recipient pa.s.sive_ state. Hence no trains of thought arise in their own minds. And having nothing in their minds which seeks utterance, they remain quiet. Now the practice of Interrogative a.n.a.lysis compels such persons to interrogate--to propose questions--to think. And when such mental activity becomes strong, it will break out in conversations by interrogatories and critical and often original interesting remarks.

1. Is this method like the ordinary question and answer method?

2. How are answers given in the latter procedure?

3. What is the aim in my method?

4. How much of the sentence is repeated in each reply given to the question?

5. What word is to be especially emphasised?

6. How often is the mind exercised on each word of the sentence?

7. In all of these separate steps, is it possible for the mind to remain in a pa.s.sive state? Must it not be active and absorbing throughout?

Teachers often complain that they can never induce some of their pupils to ask questions on their tasks. The reason is that their pupils remain in a pa.s.sive state of mind. Had they been thoroughly drilled in Interrogative a.n.a.lysis as I teach it, they would quickly have questions to ask on all subjects.

I show them _how_ to interrogate. They cannot help practising this method. They commence with the first word of a sentence and go on to the last. And from the numerous examples I give, they see exactly how this is to be done in all other cases. But if I had merely told them to ask questions on the sentence to be learned, they would have had no guide or rule of procedure to follow. As I fully ill.u.s.trate my Method the pupil at once knows how to proceed, and he gains confidence in his ability to use the method every time he tries it, and at length the Habit of active thinking has been formed, and he is almost sure to be an interrogator and thinker on all subjects.

1. What is thereby secured?

2. Is the remembrance of the first impression a.s.sured?

3. What other great advantage does the method of Interrogative a.n.a.lysis give?

4. Are all well-informed persons good talkers?

5. If not, why?

6. In conversation, in what state are their minds apt to remain?

7. Do any trains of thought arise in their own minds?

8. What does the practice of Interrogative a.n.a.lysis compel such persons to do?

9. What do teachers often complain of?

10. What is the cause?

11. What does my method show them?

12. Can they help practising it?

13. Do I not fully ill.u.s.trate my method?

14. Does not the pupil gain confidence by practising this method?

15. Does not the habit of active thinking thereby grow upon him?

The following sentence will be made use of as an example for practice. I deal with it by the a.n.a.lytic-Synthetic, and also by the Interrogative a.n.a.lysis methods.

"The Devil hath not, in all his quiver's choice, An arrow for the heart like a sweet voice!"

1. The Devil hath an arrow. 2. The Devil hath _not_ an arrow. 3. The Devil hath not an arrow _for the heart_. 4. The Devil hath not an arrow for the heart _like a voice_. 5. The Devil hath not an arrow for the heart like a _sweet_ voice. 6. The Devil hath not, _in his choice_, an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice. 7. The Devil hath not, in his _quiver's_ choice, an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice. 8. The Devil hath not, in _all_ his quiver's choice, an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice.

THE SAME BY INTERROGATIVE a.n.a.lYSIS.

1. _Who_ hath not in all his quiver's choice an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice? The _Devil_ hath not, in all his quiver's choice, an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice. 2. Hath the Devil in all his quiver's choice an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice? The Devil hath _not_, in all his quiver's choice, an arrow for the heart like a sweet voice. 3. What hath not the Devil in all his quiver's choice for the heart? The Devil hath not, in all his quiver's choice, _an arrow_ for the heart like a sweet voice. 4. For what hath not the Devil in all his quiver's choice an arrow like a sweet voice? The Devil hath not, in all his quiver's choice, an arrow _for the heart_ like a sweet voice. 5.

Like what sweet thing hath not the Devil in all his quiver's choice an arrow for the heart? The Devil hath not, in all his quiver's choice, an arrow for the heart _like a sweet voice_. 6. Like what kind of a voice hath not the Devil in all his quiver's choice an arrow for the heart?

The Devil hath not, in all his quiver's choice, an arrow for the heart like a _sweet voice_.

"A bad workman blames his tools."

Who blames his tools? A _bad workman_ blames his tools. What kind of a workman blames his tools? A _bad_ workman blames his tools. What bad man blames his tools? A bad _workman_ blames his tools. How does a bad workman treat his tools? A bad workman _blames_ his tools. Whose tools does a bad workman blame? A bad workman blames _his_ tools. What things belonging to a bad workman does he blame? A bad workman blames his _tools_.

"Judgments draw interest at six per cent."

What draw interest? _Judgments_ draw interest at six per cent. How do judgments operate on interest? Judgments _draw_ interest at six per cent. What do judgments draw? Judgments draw _interest_ at six per cent. At what rate do judgments draw interest? Judgments draw interest at _six_ per cent. A part of what sum is the interest of six dollars which judgments draw? Judgments draw interest at six _per cent_.

"Effort is the price of success."