tion. It has brought them into contact with new theories, such as the Indo-European laryngeal hypothesis, or theories of the phoneme and the morpho-phoneme. Some express the opinion that the "hammering out" of certain new theories owes something, perhaps much, to the Institute; in other words, exponents of such theories have found it helpful to their development.

D. This is held to be true not only of theories but also of techniques of linguistic study, old and new. They have been set forth effectively, and in some cases perfected in part, at the Institute. To some persons even the relatively old and standardized comparative-historical method proved a revelation. Lexicographical methods can be studied to special advantage at the University of Michigan, and the Institute has greatly profited from this association. Many got from the Institute their first contact with the technique of dialect study and linguistic geography, and that of recording foreign languages from living informants. Some, to whom such things were not new, acquired new attitudes towards them; thus a scholar trained by X. in recording American Indian languages speaks of profiting from Y.'s somewhat different method, taught at the Institute.

E. Many, including some of the most distinguished scholars and teachers, have found the Institute a great stimulus and help in their personal research. It is "a unique opportunity for presenting new ideas"; it gives a "sounder basis" for research, and "fertilizes" it.

F. Among more direct and obvious contributions to "the advancement of knowledge" are publications. The invitation to teach in the Institute led one scholar to a systematization of the subject (the history of the language of his specialty), in which he had long been interested, and of which no account exists in print. He is now preparing a book on the subject, which will be the first in the world. A scholar who began to study a certain language at the Institute has since written over twenty papers in that field. Other publications, numerous in the aggregate, are mentioned as more or less direct outgrowths of Institute work; some by lecturers, but many also by other participants.

G. (a) The Linguistic Atlas of the U. S. and Canada is mentioned by many as a major project of research to which the Institute has been useful. Its Director writes: "Successful work would have been much handicapped, if not made impossible, without the facilities offered by the Institute. Aside from the training (of its field-workers, which was started at the Institute), conferences held in connection with the Institute have provided the means for creating an intelligent and

active interest in the Atlas."-Atlas work is now being extended to the Middle West and again the Institute has been helpful in similar ways. (b) Other specific projects of research are mentioned as having been directly fostered, even if not initiated, by and at the Institute. Prominently mentioned are certain important studies in American Indian languages.

H. Many, perhaps most, attendants at the Institute are teachers, present or prospective. The responses testify to the fact that it has been very helpful to the teaching profession in various ways.

Some came for very definite purposes. For instance, a university teacher of English literature suddenly faced the necessity of teaching Old and Middle English "as linguistic courses." He came to the Institute, registered in certain courses (mostly not in English), audited others, attended all the lectures and conferences, and "got just what I needed. I could not possibly have worked so effectively in one summer either privately or in any regular summer school in the country. I regard the Institute as having been of the greatest value to me."

Others came without knowing so clearly what they needed, but found equal benefits: "I am a teacher of English in a high school and as such have been immensely helped by being exposed to the teaching of experts in English phonology and morphology as well as general linguistics. Instruction in historical grammar... has directly helped my teaching more than I had supposed it would . . . I recall and feel indebted almost daily to the teaching methods of Prof. Z." (who conducted courses in general linguistics and American Indian languages).

Teachers of widely different subjects-English, Modern Languages, Latin, Greek, etc.-contribute testimony similar to both of these. The majority refer particularly to courses in their own specialties. Yet, besides the above, we find a college teacher of Middle English Literature impressed with the great interest and value of a course in American Indian languages (under a different teacher from the one just referred to); while another high school teacher of English found a third course (under a still different teacher) in American Indian languages most stimulating, not only to himself but indirectly to his pupils, the effect on whom seemed to him sufficient to justify calling that course a "contribution to the advancement of knowledge."

In a broader way, the Institute has "brought linguistic science to the attention of a wide range of people in responsible positions in American education, and thus opened the way for bringing the special knowledge of linguists to bear upon certain general educational problems-e.g.

X. (a scholar in general linguistics) and the problems of the teaching of reading. X's method of teaching reading has now been worked out and is being studied by certain school authorities."

An unsolicited but welcome letter has been received from the Director of the "Summer Institute of Linguistics" at Siloam Springs, Arkansas, testifying to the value of the Linguistic Institute in training workers of that (purely practical) school. "It has been directly or indirectly beneficial to most of our investigators and they are now working on over a dozen different languages on three different continents... Our own Institute... has looked upon your Institute as a place to send its investigators for additional training and has counted on sending at least six to you next summer, 1940, and others in successive summers." I. Two respondents were able to get their doctorates one year earlier than would otherwise have been possible, by attending the summer sessions of the Institute.

The single respondent whose net impression seems definitely unfavorable (although, curiously, he favors continuing the Institute every summer) says to Question 4: "I heard about phonemes and morphophonemes and similar gaga." To 5: "Very slightly. Yet the Institute at times contributes something that might be considered of value." To 7: "Cut out this old junkology and take up the study of humans in their milieu and daily activity and the speech arriving (query: deriving?) therefrom." The writer seems to be an extreme representative of a point of view expressed more moderately by some others (see under Question 7, E), that some participants in the Institute were not sufficiently careful to make themselves comprehensible to relative neophytes. While most of the responses seem to indicate that the general impression made on beginners was different, the Committee believes that if even a small minority got such an impression, this should be recorded and taken to heart.

7. "What suggestions can you make for the improvement of the L. I.?"

A. Fifty-four respondents to the questionnaire make no reply to the seventh question. It is clear, in a dozen or more cases, that this omission is due to lack of familiarity with the present situation, particularly when the respondent has not attended recent sessions. In most of the other cases, the replies actually made to other questions indicate that the respondent is satisfied with the Institute as it is.

Twenty of the respondents say explicitly that they have no suggestions for improvement, or that they want to see present trends continued, or that any improvement would be difficult.

B. As was to be expected, a good many want more emphasis upon the subjects in which they are personally interested, sometimes urging also that a particular subject in which they are not interested receive less attention. These suggestions tend to cancel out; but, since a majority of the respondents teach modern European languages, there is a slight preponderance of opinion in favor of more attention to English, French, and German, and less to the languages least frequently taught in American schools.

C. Nevertheless a number of respondents urge that the Institute should specialize precisely in those parts of the linguistic field that tend to be neglected elsewhere, and it is noteworthy that a considerable proportion of these are professionally engaged with the modern European languages. These suggestions differ in detail without being necessarily inconsistent with one another. Several of them are quite in accord with the policy that has always been followed by the Institute as far as circumstances have permitted. The following seem worthy of special mention:

Ca. Certain courses of fundamental importance for linguistics are never given in some even of the leading universities; e.g. Sanskrit and the historical and comparative grammar of Greek and Latin. It is more important that the Institute should give these courses every year than that it should always duplicate the work of nearly all universities by offering Gothic, Old English, Old French, etc.

Cb. The most pressing need in the modern language field is for courses not frequently given. The course in Portuguese recently given is cited as an innovation of the right sort. Courses in Rumanian, Sardinian, Modern German dialects, Yiddish, and the various mixed languages in the foreign language areas of the United States are mentioned as desirable.

Cc. Courses in unfamiliar languages such as the modern Indo-Iranian vernaculars or the Bantu languages are asked for. Several respondents want more stress on primitive languages.

Some respondents recognize that no course in such a language as those just mentioned could be repeated at frequent intervals; and it is definitely suggested that less repetition of courses would be desirable.

Cd. More direct observation of language by the use of informants

is urged, not only in the study of primitive languages, but also in the study of languages relatively well known.

Ce. Courses should be organized to treat the latest developments in all parts of the linguistic field. The laryngeals of Pre-Indo-European are mentioned in this connection. There is also room for courses in ancient languages just now in the process of decipherment. There is demand for work in phonemics.

Cf. It is suggested that more attention be paid to the practical application of linguistics, both in the elementary teaching of foreign languages, and in the reducing to writing of unwritten languages. The latter sort of work should be tied up with the project of the Mexican government for introducing elementary instruction in Indian languages. Cg. Several miss a formal treatment of syntax, semantics, and style. Ch. One respondent refers to the present vogue of Chase and Mencken as proving what a latent demand there is for easily-understood linguistics. Here is an opportunity for a kind of popularization that might widen the appeal of the Institute without lowering its standards.

D. There is a widespread feeling that a larger proportion of the distinguished linguists of the world should be drawn upon by the Institute. Very few foreign scholars have attended the sessions, and some of the most distinguished American scholars have never taught in the Institute or have done so only for a single session. This seems to be the most serious adverse criticism that is made. The tone of it may be gathered from the following paragraph submitted in reply to Question 7:

"The success of the Institute depends squarely on the presence there of as many great teachers and scholars as it can command. To collect as distinguished a faculty and as distinguished guests, themselves active in research, as it possibly can is the only way to keep the Institute worth attending. It is the only thing that counts greatly, for all other things will emanate from it."

E. Several respondents have found difficulty in understanding the technical terms used in public lectures as well as in some of the more advanced courses. They plead for a kinder treatment of novices; for example:

"It must be extremely difficult to fit the courses to the wide range of preparation of the students. When beginners and Ph.D.'s are in the same group there will always be times when the beginner is far beyond his depth and when the Ph.D. is bored. Yet I wonder if it would not be possible to teach some of the material on a level which the tyro can comprehend."