@article{oai:shudo-u.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000755,
 author = {Benson Malcolm J. and Benson Malcolm J.},
 issue = {2},
 journal = {広島修大論集. 人文編},
 month = {Feb},
 note = {P(論文), For much of the nineteenth century, modern foreign language (MFL) pupils laboured under the Latinate, or classical, system. That system appeared to offer the correct, best, and most appropriate pedagogic model for language learning, starting as it did with the foundations and moving upwards to complete the whole edifice: the "architectural" metaphor. Consequently, MFL teaching began with the letters (Orthography) , then proceeded to the words (Etymology/morphology), and finally to complete sentences (Syntax). A data set of the major French grammars of the nineteenth century gives at least a partial picture of how MFL teaching was usually conducted. Further, the Latinate approach is seen as coping tolerably well with the social and pedagogic realities of the era, and therefore was not as indefensible as some accounts of "grammar-translation" would suggest. One conclusion of the paper is that for MFLs the Reform Movement was slower to take effect than is generally imagined.},
 pages = {93--109},
 title = {The Latinate Structure of French Grammars in Nineteenth-Century Britain},
 volume = {43},
 year = {2003}
}