Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 28

Histoire Épistémologie Langage

The study of foreign languages in 17th-century England


Vivian Salmon

Citer ce document / Cite this document :

Salmon Vivian. The study of foreign languages in 17th-century England. In: Histoire Épistémologie Langage, tome 7, fascicule
2, 1985. La réflexion linguistique en Grande-Bretagne — 17e-18e siècles. pp. 45-70;

doi : https://doi.org/10.3406/hel.1985.1314

https://www.persee.fr/doc/hel_0750-8069_1985_num_7_2_1314

Fichier pdf généré le 16/01/2019


Résumé
RESUME: Au dix-septième siècle, · on observe un accroissement du nombre de langues connues des
savants anglais, tant dans la famille indo-européenne (l'irlandais et le russe, par exemple) que dans
d'autres groupes (le turc et l'arabe). Cette étude se propose d'examiner les raisons de l'intérêt
croissant pour ces langues; qui les étudiait et où; les différentes approches de la méthodologie de
l'enseignement des langues et les relations de ces langues à l'anglais. nest possible--que la
connaissance de langues orientales et africaines, comme le chinois, le malais, l'arabe, et des langues
de l'Afrique méridionale, ainsi que la publication · de grammaires et de dictionnaires du Natick, de
l'Irlandais, du Russe et du Turc soit directement par des savants anglais, soit sous leur égide, ait
contribué à la fonnation. de la conscience linguistique plus aigüe perceptible vers la fin du siècle. On
ne fera que parcourir ce domaine, restreint ici en presque totalité à l'Angleterre, en espérant ainsi
suggérer des directions pour des recherches futures.

Abstract
ABSTRACT: The seventeenth century saw a widening of the range of languages with which English
scholars were acquainted, both from the Indo-European family, like Irish and Russian, and from other
language groups, such as Turkish and Arabic. The purpose of this study is to examine the reasons for
the growth of interest in these languages; where and by whom they were studied; the different
approaches to the methodology of language-teaching; and the relationships of these lan~ ages to
English. It is possIble that -knowledge of Oriental and African languages such as Chinese, Malayan,
Arabic, and the languages of So. uthern Africa, and the publication of grammars and dictionaries of
Natick, Insh, Russian and Turkish either by, or under the aegis of, English scholars, may have assisted
towards the greater linguistic awareness shown by the end of the century. This can be ne more than a
survey of the field, restricted almost entirely to English scholarship, but it is hoped that it will point the
way to further directions for research.
Histoire Epistémologie Langage VII-
2 (1985

THE STUDY OF FOREIG

SEVENTEENTH-
CENTU

ABSTRACT
family,
with like
which
Irish
: The
English
and
seventeenth
Russian,
scholarsand
century
were
from
acquai
saw
oth
46 The Study

The reasons for studyin

''century England were not m

as Bischoff (1961) has descr

Ages - leaming at home,

major differences, both in


The Study of Foreig

· he has seen very few of them -

Cambridge
Italian
and very
were
One Syriac,
example
«dexterous
( Wordsworth,
fluently
(1631-
Chaldee,
was
»»4
, 5)
in
and
Thomas
1877
a
who
Persian,
it
wide
:is
163).
knew
true
Comber
range
Greek
tha
He

During the seventeenth century

to remedy the situation, since, as


48 The Study of

difficulties for the Englishman

never
Swedish,
his interview
knew
1855:
''Whitelocke''s
German,
1,230-
what
with 8Latin,
language
Queen
).
Embassy
Chris
Fren
the
to

,«Whoso
foreign
Howells''
they
While
and
entry
extensive
In
lacking
their
1605:
Latin
addition,
speak
If
-
malapropisms
devoted
to
loans
Englishwomen
sig.
, acquaintance
languages,
consisted
Englishmen
hath
a
printer
B2r.)
and
French
cultural
and
Latin
not
their
serious
schoolboys
Latinate
sorne
remarked,
qf
and
was
it
heritage
and
ti~
were
a
with
was
of
than.
Italian
knowled
ean
body
their
at
suffi
ortho
aid
part
Lat
uns
we
sch
wh
wh
16
o
p
a
The Study of Foreig

Bible in the Original1 Tongue» (Kn

these
early
of
students
Bible
tongues
determined
divine
1959the
Chaldee
:108).
Syriac:
(in
languages
discourses
New
and
such
of
Daniel
Not
there
to
Testament
the.
cf.
and
as
«improve
only
as
Eliot,
Bible
and
of
were
Syriac,
Syriac,
weIl
our
Ezra)
was
also
was
went
1593:
Saviour
as
rnyself
itwas
the
it
severa!
Hebrew
were
«accoun
agreed
21)
even
latter
in
in
reg
bu
co
an

as
that
understanding
who,
Talmud
anthereof
«The
having
aid
the
»;
ofand.
to
Arabie
English
»l?
frrst
biblical
(Treatise,
it
ecome
ofwas
Arabic
the
tongue
( Watt,
exegesis;
a
keeper
Ebrue
Catholic
1646:
textbook
will
1824:
ofBible,
3).
one
do1,485
orien
Scot
as
Cl
scd
50 The Study

William Bedell learnt Italian

Ambassador
languages
households
legal
English
language
lawyers
of
(Watson,
at
international
foVenice.
(cf.
the 1909:
Desainl
English
Fre
48

for
and the
South-
purposes
west Parts
of explora
of the

Celtic
Lhuyd oflanguages
explaining
our Ancient
were
thatNames
he
studi
wa

of
(
thereofused
1707:
«aIl
ofsig.
that
scientific
B2r.);
arePhysik,
in Curious
and
writings
Arabic
Astron
in an
t
The Studyof Foreig

-Russia ta the Levant. Although ît

«the French is the only trading tang

Heinrich
these
and
in
Mediterranean
trauaile
fact
a
for
which
South
1593:
group
1605.
them
that
Aleppo,
trading
sig.
with
of
was
ouer
of
Ludolf,
The
there
in
Europe
Blr.,
merchants
about
claimed
several
ail
the
most
settlements
B2v.),
1s
wasArabic
the
published
«not
and
Levant
1600
important
great
other
English
tain
a (Collison,
inmore
Russia,
be
the
Company
Turks
were
.in
vernacula
-«very
mercha
languag
near
ticklis
Oxfor
«know
the
Kin
Mar1
Eu
52· The Study of

detailed record seems to have c

Art~ usius, who wrote, dialo

Richard Hakluyt presented to

,(1634:
of bilingual
Spalding,
nearly
the
acknowledgement
authors
(Marshall,
himself
A the
Dutch,
century,
· into
202-
adozen
East
belonging
been
have
a
Malayan-
an
5Malayan-
).
however,
merchant
India
chaplain
producing
enthusiastic
«had
yearsprevious
in
to
E
Company,
relation
English
nglish
Thomas
who
to
employed
the
Malaya
the
stude
foste
vers
unit
voc
com
toM
h
The Study of Foreig

ratum. John Tillinghast, for exampl

Turkey and India who had not hea

Cromwell
Seaman''s
of
the
about
merchant
with,
Vedas
concludes
was Robert
known
Gospel,
at
their
scholar
andleast
»grammar
, that
inin
the
Boyle,
Erasmus
conversion;
must
Ireland,
Europe
partly,
John
rites
his have
of
President
Marshall
of
expertise
till
settled
religious
Turkish
Smith,
the
come
And
the
Brahmins
spent
present
there
of
who,
(1670
strang
was
motiv
as the
ah
m
54 The Study

instruction was provided by

Jacob
status
at
that
of Arabic,
Cambridge
individual
with Ethiopian,
Barnet
thewas
institutions
(Wordsworth,
modern
employed
Persian
lekto
sh

Chinese
that
67).
languages
but
Brian
dictionary
(
was
were
refugees
middle
of
Italian,
Corro,
in
even
1669).
London,
these
following
Most
boys
on
spoke
modern
taught,
which
Walton
of
who
Although
-Robert
who
teaching
Oxford
were
of
«a
will
the
ofwhere
began
the
taught
whole
seftled
vernaculars,
the
pnvately
(learn
seven
sixteenth
1654-
editions
writings
Farreau'',
refugees
publication
the
the
they
in
Colledge
these
Spanish.
oriental
there
1France
657)
officia
dead
and
and
offer
insp
cent
lan
aft
inc
wh
ar
E
The Study of Foreig

'' Winchelsea (Vann, 1924: 6), and L

for
taught
and
Alternatively,
approved
had
years
in
regarded
than
go
recorded
1909:
choosing
abroad
self-
English
leamt
he
ofhimself
the
440).
French
t
had
study
as
uition
(Wordsworth,
of
poor
too
more
texts
There
undesirable
an
by
leamt
young
ill-
(Hartlib,
by
.
French,
people
appropriate
if
those
French
into
prepared
necessary;
was
aofbilingual
those
Englishmen
like
do
Latin
a
1877:
Italian
1654:
because
in
further
English
to
language
Richard
less
place
148)
profit
from
46).
Llord
nurse
and
than
«m
to
d
Tw
a
«
56 · The Study of

taught to

call for his Meat, Ooaths

and Entertainmen

to that
with
in his
Chlldren
Tongue
Relations;
at
.(Brough
their
nay, p

Perhaps the most important of

''.in
author
and
easily
record.
mies
in
was
advocated
even
Merriott
1620s
case
1677:
inculcating
Latine
»
to
that
Joseph
of
.was
if
19).
ed,
perceive
''(Salmon,
of
little
NaturaIIy,
ait
pointed
the
«savage
the
was
the
advocated
the
On
then
Webbe,
purpose;
child
Dutch
them
necessary
«immersion
the
the
«immersion
»
out
1961)
hee
when
taught
from
other
difference
in
Tutar
(1660:
who
by
to
hath
their
the"
put
Sorne
to
a
schoo
hand
no
»prac
(165
»sig.A
hit
bri
pu
be
Ca
m
do
m
r
The Study of Foreig

Associated with the advocacy

argument that. it. was necessary to b

native language before attempting t

pt. 2,5) reported, for example, that

for Latin
speech is...byAnd
teaching
this 1
them
did to
by «
Enta

Orbis
foIlowing
mony
me
eventually
of
(1677)
wrote
later.
exemplification.
Hartlib
the
to
that
«He
(Walker,
wassermonis
the
«syncrisis
word
»was
Images
not
children
of
». Sensuaiium
A
eyes
what
of
Elisha
and
must
(1654:
.new,
learning
»
1655:
angry
second
were
Hoole''s
gained
as
of
emendatione
found
of
»he
not
having
,25)
could
Coles
Mitte
Children
a
Things,
sig.
provided
at
described
One
by
rhetorical
be
argument
such
who
me
Pictus
A3r.).
imitators
translation
not
actually
already
mistakes,
mihi
translated
of
for
»whether
advised
,popularity
learn
(for
the
and
But
1535).
(1658).
it
verbum
as
»term
in
been
propos
schoolb
entitled
becom
first
his
as
from
of
aas
orSamu
«let
Wal
pain
«sy
me
wis
Co
«a
Br
us
A
t
(t
58 The Study o

Robertson, 1653): Oriental (i

Ravis,
1649).
1640):
(Davies,
1686- 1611):
71649-
Dutch
): (
1621):
Russian
b) Modern
50;
Portuguese
( Richardson,
lrish
Walton,
(Ludolf,
(Lhuyd,
languages
(J.,
1655
167
169
17
1

diversity,
been
Brerewoodts
(1622:
of
Although
most
26).
Christians
the
As
strongly
survey
astonishing
English
a result
in
ofimpresse
seuerall
scholar
«the
ofvari
su
se
The 8tudy of Foreig

If we enquire what insights t

widening
that
traditional
«grammar
range
eight
» of
still
parts
languages
normally
of speech.
known
mea

Anglicana:
from
Lord,
help.
vernaculars,
published
Latines,
differences
«signs
examination
that
Latin,
in
adverb
of
Christ
is
will
with
scholar
in
Latin
grammatical
judge.
(.
items
but
which
Latine)
1624)
»
Latin
where
in
ois
for
there
in
to
and
recognize,
which
come
word
more
are
Praecipue
example,
English
notice
had
Christ
is
they
and
is
no
that
(Greaves:
at
headed
omitted
order''
more
is
than
been
mustbe
inversion
fonn
Wallis
the
were
of
reasoneth,
in
this
where
as
the
quatenus
the
beginning
half
Latin
searching.
as,
noted
«A
between
practical
principally
(
in
1594),
fact.
1653)
English
relative
for
expressed
a
is
difference
English
Latin
Christ
century
require
by
examp
Christ
Conseq
a
while
was
of
»
Eng
trac
Lat
Lily
has
Sor
pr
c
w
a
(1
h
60 '' The Study

from as early as 1530 (Palsg

·
seventeenth-
Their
(Festeau,
Mauger
(1653:
asked
and
72)
person
«1
they
foreign
authors
126);
Of
doubt
pronoun
advised
could
sorne
1667:
clanguage
questions
entury
whether
noted,
against.
20-
men
with
not26).
accounts
tell
that
in
imperati
for
awere
the
the
man
In
me
exam
wer
An
»us
th
a
;

is etween
b.
of
These
Spanish
English
inversion
ne
thepassez
»
include
use
use
the
(Sanford,
of
of
pas
of
better-
apersonal
voz,
perceptive
plus
noun
kan
avant
1611
nown
~ «abiec
d
prono
»
:17)
ver
m
co
(F
The Study of Foreign

and greeke ( where there is more r

memorie,
little
about
of
and
cometh
many
observe,
compendious
the
the
amomalies
pronownes
and.
contrated
that
had you
ones,
never
[sic]
here.
have
ones,
they
and
yet
For
but
would
defect
caIled,
leame
what
ten

Nevertheless,
in
example,
certain
(1709:
the
hard
grammar
English,
differences:
unfamiliar
languages
to
244),
pronouns
however,
find
showed
pointed
and
languages
many
of he
analogies,
North
(Cowan,
out
seem
«are
grammarians
draws
a to
by
always
America,
though
curious
·1984l.
an
indicate
refere~
analog
enta
not
feat
tri
the
Wi
ceh
62 The Stud

though it is not possible to c

other
31-
Jesuit
known
were
comments
which
5);published
reports
Nieuhoff,
_were
hefinds''
missionaries
concems
the
ofby
«Chinese
1669:
hath
Oriental
Sir
the
in mixt
157-
Thom
the
speec
(cf.
an
1w

phrases
his
Have
Mohelia,
to
Madagascar
pronunciations
He be
sentences
exemplifies
you
a Arabie
wich,
«mish-
an
any
he
island
include
incidentally,
»fine
mrecords
and
in
this
ash
different
shirts?!
tothe
of
languag
Are
the
a
Arab
nativ
len
yo
So
F
s
The 8tudy of Foreig

.Substantive in the N[ormative] Ca

Method,
called between
made the 1696:
Subject;
57).
«natural
all
Ofthat
»increasing
and
follows
«arti
it

was
kind
(Enkvist,
equated
of ordering,
1975:
with
285;
the
«grammatical
Kohomen,
«poetic » (Ho
»19
,

were
Latin
function
the beginning
formulated
or the
oforder
vernacular
of the
for
incentury.
the
describing
(Walker,
vemacula
Corr
16
gr

you gives
Vou
different
particularly
change
canqui
· make
languages
a the
en
grammatical
theverb
ceux
no
order
sence
final
is
fidelement
of
also
position
of
sentence
these
itundert
». wor
Com
Jes
ini
64 The Study of

REFE

Note. Items
(Menston:
series. Scolan
reproduced
Press) in faesimile
are denoted

Accessing
Mierofùms
English International.
Books, 1641- 1700

ACOSTA,
West
W. Aspley.
Joseph
Indies,
( 1604)
transe The
by Natur
E[ dw

ALSTON,
year
Robin
1800. C.
A eorreeted
(1974) A reprin
Biblio

ARTHUSIUS,
, guages, transe
Gothardus
by Augustine
(1614) Dia
Sp
The Study of Forei

CASTELL, Edmund (1669) Lexicon Hepta

COLES,
Leaming
( EL.
Elisha
313).
(1677)
Latin by
Syncrisis,
Comparingor, it
thew

COLLISON,
London:
Robert
Deutsch.
L. (1982) A Histor.

CORRO,
London:
Anthonie
Johnde
Wolfe.
(1590)
( EL.
The36).
Spanis
'

COWAN,
Histoire
P. UL.
William
des
(1984)
Théories
«John
Linguistique
Eliot''s In

CURTIS,
London:
Stanley
University
J. (1967)Tutorial
[ 1948]
Press.
Th

DAVlES, John (1621) Antiquae Linguae

J. Billium. ( EL. 70).


66 The Study of

True Pronouncing and Speed

dix Barret.
w. to Queen
( EL.
Anna''s
105). New W

GERBIER,
Languages.
Sir Balthazar
[London]
(1648) The

[GERBIER,
Read Publiquely
Sir Balthazar]
at Sr
( 1650)
Balthaz
T

GREAVES,John (1649) Elementa L

GR[ EAVES],
(E. L. 169).
P[ aul] (1594) Gram

HARTLIB,
Tongue.
Samuel
London:
(1654)
R. &
The
W. Tru
Ley

HERBERT,
1626 Sir
into Thomas
Afrique &
(1634)
the Grea
A
The Study of Foreign

' KNOLLYS, Hanserd (1648) The Rudime

English. London.

KOHONEN,
syntaxV.
in (1978)
early (1550-
«On the
1 660)
develop
descr

grammarians,
79,44- 5logicians
8. and rheto

LAMBLEY,
Language
Manchester
Kathleen
in
University
England
(1920) Press.
during
The Teachin
Tudo

LEIGH,and
Edward
Leaming.
(1663)
London:
FoelixC.
Consortium
Adams.

LHUYD, Edward (1707) A Brief Introduc

Language, part 9 of Archaeologia

(E. L. 136).

LILY, William,
London: and
Reginald
John Wolfe.
COLET ( EL.
( 1549)
262).
A
68 The Study

NIEUHOFF, John (1669) An Emb

Unitedby
transe Provinces
John Ogilby.
to the
Lond
Gr

OFFELEN, Henry (1686-


7) A Doub

London: the author.

PADLEY, G. Trends
Arthurin
(1985)
Vemacular
Gram·

PALSGRAVE,
R. Pynson
John
& J.
(1530)
Hawkyns.
Lesclar
(E

PEARSON,
Levant
John
Company."
B. (1883)
Cambridg
A Bio

PILKlNGTON, Roger (1959) Rober

A " Plaine
66).
Pathway to the French T
The Study of Foreig

ROBERTSON, William ( 1653) A Gate or

in English.. London: Joseph Crango

ROWE, John Dowland ( 1974) «Sixteenth

Studies in the History of Lingu

Bloomington, London: Indiana Uni

SALMON,
in
on 17th-
language-
Vivian
1979).
century
et Renaissance
(1961)
teaching
England,
«Joseph
and23.
the
by
324-
Webb
natu
V. 3

SALMON-,
linguistics
Study
Amsterdam:
Vivian
of »Language
. (Benjamins,
1975)
Historiographitl
«
inJohn
17th-
1979).
Brinsle
c
Ling
entu

SALMON,
27-39.
Vivian
in . Seventeenth-
(1983) «William
Century
Bedel
Irel
.70 The Study'' of

TILLINGHAST, John ( 1657) Six Sev

TITONE, Renzo
University
(1968) Teaching
Press. F

TORRIANO, Giovanni ( 1640) The It

A Treatise Concerning Tongues. ( 1

Armes.

The True Method


Sam Burrows.
of Learning
(EL.the
290
L

VANN,
Texas:
,William
BaylorUniversity
H. (1924) Notes
Pres

VAUGHAN,
J. Robinson.
Thomas ( E.
( 1709)
L. 93).A Gra

WALKER, William (1655) A Treat

wait.