no translations have been made in any degree sufficient to supply materials for the prosecution of the higher object contemplated; neither is it likely, in the nature of things, that either by original publications, or translations of standard works, the deficiency can be fully or adequately remedied, for such a number of years to come, as may leave the whole of the present generation sleeping with their fathers.” (Answer to Question 20, p. 17.)
Mr. Tytler’s reasons for his unfavourable opinion, in regard to the proposed plan, arise, he informs us, partly from the nature of language in general, and partly from the intrinsic difficulty of English itself. The difficulty, it strikes us, is magnified in Mr. Tytler’s imagination, and at any rate can scarcely be greater than that of acquiring Arabic and Sanscrit, which are about as foreign to the body of the people as English. “A bare knowledge of the English,” observes Mr. Tytler, “or of the words for objects, is plainly no increase of knowledge, unless it be accompanied with some additional information respecting the objects of which the words are the signs.” This is so self-evident a truism, that we are rather surprised Mr. Tytler should deem the stating of it of any use to his argument. The mere capability of uttering the word opium, for instance, would be of little use, unless accompanied by a knowledge of the qualities of that drug. It is not with a view to recommend a knowledge of mere words that we troubled Mr. Tytler for his opinion, and have now the honour of addressing your Lordship; but to rescue, if possible, the course of native medical education from this its pervading and crying evil; for assuredly, nothing, that has yet been made manifest to us tends to show that the pupils of the Institution, under the present system, acquire much beyond mere words; or to demonstrate, that an acquaintance with Sanscrit and Arabic vocables will give better ideas of things important to be known than English. In fact, to teach English science, English words must be
