It is of the greatest importance to use the weak forms of these words in speaking and reading except where for some special reason they are emphatic. The idea of many teachers that clearness and effectiveness are achieved by giving full value to every word and every syllable is contrary to the principle of economy of attention: first, because if the attention is wasted on words that have little or no meaning, there is just so much less for the important words; and second, because attention goes in rhythmical waves, and if words are spoken without rhythm, it is much harder to attend to them.

This rule of using weakened vowels applies not only to words, but to syllables as well. In the sentence already quoted the suffix of the word deceitful (which would, as the independent word full, be pronounced [ful]) is weakened to [fǝl]. The prefix also, instead of being given its full value [di], is weakened to [d], so that we have the form [disitfəl]. The pronunciation [disitful] not only sounds slow, heavy, and pedantic, but ruins the rhythm of the sentence.

From earliest times our language (as contrasted, for example, with the French) has been characterized by a very strong stress on the important syllables. This is doubtless one of the chief reasons for the use of the weakened vowel so prevalent in English, since the vocal organs save themselves trouble after the vigorous effort of the stressed syllable. In the sentence "Can he go?" we have three forms according to whether the can receives the main stress, or is next to the accented syllable, or is two removed from it (in which case it receives a slight accent): thus, ['kæn hi goʊ], [kn'hi goʊ], and [kən hi 'goʊ]. Similarly we have ['konvikt] (con'vict), [rekn] (reckon), and lastly [kən'vikt] (convict') where the vowel of the prefix retains some value because of its etymological importance.

2 Phoneticians usually place the stress mark (') before the accented syllable, as [ri'fa], [repju'terSən], ['admirǝbl], etc.

Syllable Stress, or Accent

The question of syllable stress or accent is one of the most difficult features of our language. In general, English stress is recessive, that is, it tends toward the beginning of the word. An instance of this recessive tendency is seen in the word automobile.3 When it was first introduced into the language, it retained its accent on the last syllable, and the usual pronunciation was [ɔtomo'bil]. Very soon, however, the stress receded to the penult, and many dictionaries still give as the preferred pronunciation [ɔto'moʊbil]. Now it has receded still further and ['otomobil] is the favorite pronunciation, at least in the groups in which we have tested it.

But the matter is unfortunately not so simple as this, for there are several influences in our language which prevent the uniform working of this tendency.

The first of these is the influence of the Old English or Anglo-Saxon system of root accent. To this day words of Anglo-Saxon stock are stressed on the root syllable: examples are handsome, handily, two-handed, and secondhand.

The second is the influence of the French progressive system. A good many anglicized French words like prestige, caprice, machine, still retain their final accent. In regard to others there is uncertainty: chauffeur, garage, valet, are accented sometimes in the English and sometimes in the French fashion. Many words, like crochet, croquet, sachet, which with us are still accented on the last syllable, are accented on the first syllable in England.

The third influence is that of the mutable accent of Latin. English words of Latin origin preserve their tendency to shift the accent, so that we have groups like mutable, mutation, and mutability; constitute, constituent, constitution, constitutionality.

3 The French accent is progressive—that is, it tends toward the end of the word.

The fourth influence is that of sentence rhythm, especially in words of level stress, as: sixteen, but, "It happened in sixteen-eight" and "She is sweet sixteen"; red cross, but "He contributed to the Red Cross" and "A Red Cross knight forever kneeled to a lady in his shield."

The fifth influence is the preservation of the distinction between two uses of the same word, as August, august; frequent, frequent; subject, subject.

The sixth is the shifting of accent for contrast or special emphasis: as, improvident, but "I didn't say provident, I said improvident"; and absolutely, but (sometimes) "I believe her absolutely."

And lastly, there is the difficulty, especially for an untrained tongue, of saying a number of unaccented syllables in succession. This develops a secondary accent, as laboratory, departmental; or leads to the dropping out of a syllable or two, as ['læbrǝtrı]; or pulls the accent forward again, as is observable in the growing tendency to such pronunciations as condolence, lamentable, hospitable, exquisite.

The student who wants to speak well should master these general principles of accent and train his ears to recognize the exceptional cases, so that he may be able to decide intelligently whether he prefers ['læbərə'tori] or ['læbrətəri] or ['læbrǝtri] and whether he wishes to say ['ekskwIsIt] or [ǝk'skwisit].

The matter of word stress will be discussed more fully in later chapters,

CHAPTER VIII

FIRST PRINCIPLES OF GROUP DISCUSSION

Need for a Technique of Group Discussion

LIFE is increasingly a complicated affair of demands and obligations. It is no longer possible, as it was in colonial days, for human beings to live in comparative isolation and independence. But if individual liberty is in some respects curtailed by this modern scheme of living, it is in others greatly increased. To an extent never before dreamed, the average man, provided he has the necessary wisdom and skill, can control the conditions of his own life and help others to control theirs. The keynote of life today is not independence but interdependence.

One

One of the most important skills for this complicated modern life is the ability to help in formulating such group opinions and group plans as will ensure for each individual the greatest liberty consistent with the general good. would naturally suppose that a group of persons who are discussing a question in which they are all interested would have only one object-to arrive at the truth. In reality such a condition is extremely rare. Most of us, even in matters where it is vitally important for us to reach the truth, are more eager to prove ourselves right and our fellows wrong than to build up a group opinion that would be nearer the truth than the guess of any individual member. Similarly, in discussing a plan the average person is more interested in carrying through his pet project than in helping to formulate a course of action that would represent the mature judgment of the group and thus have,

since it reflected, in some measure at least, the thought and desires of all, the best possible chance of winning wholehearted support.

Why is this true, even among intelligent persons? Partly because one of the most deeply ingrained traits of human nature is that of forming judgments hastily and then clinging to them tenaciously. Having once uttered an opinion, no matter how little it may represent our sober judgment, we feel that our honor is involved in proving it wise and just. Everett Dean Martin says in his Psychology: "Intelligent public discussion is almost impossible for the reason that people ordinarily are not using their language habits to solve their problems. They are striving to vindicate their principles, not to verify their hypotheses." In some of the medieval lists of the Seven Deadly Sins a prominent place is given to self-justification.

A little honest self-examination will convince most of us that one of the hardest things we ever have to do is to say, even in a small matter, "You are right and I am wrong.” No doubt one reason for this is that our opinions are in the main so insecurely founded and so jerry-built that we voice them with tremendous assurance to cover our self-distrust, and having thus boldly asserted them, we feel humiliated if we are obliged to retract or modify them. Chiefly, however, our dogmatism and contentiousness are due to the fact that almost never in the history of the world has there been a system of education of which the main purpose was to give human beings the desire and the ability to think together for the common good.

Perhaps the sole instance in which the method was ever given a fair trial was in the ancient republic of Athens. Thucydides puts into the mouth of Pericles these notable words: "We differ from other states in regarding the man who holds aloof from public life, not as 'quiet,' but as useless; we decide and debate, carefully and in person, all