Chapter III: CONCURRENCE is the sequence or co-existence of impressions or (5)

Where a great power of Attention has been renewed or originally acquired, it requires considerable effort to _continue_ that power. The unnumbered objects of thought which civilization constantly brings before the mind, without giving any opportunity for a mastery of many of them; the fierce rivalries of interest, and the enervating habits of body which are constantly being formed or perpetuated--all alike and together tend to break down an acquired power of Attention. It is said that Alexander Hamilton used to go through the demonstrations of Euclid's Geometry before the commencement of each Session of the early Congress. For what purpose? In order to be able to make use of geometrical knowledge in debate? Certainly not. He reviewed this study to stiffen the back-bone of his power of Attention. And he possessed this power in an extraordinary degree by nature. I am not suggesting any such severe course of self-discipline. But if the pupil whose _attention was formerly weak_ will never allow a date to come before him without fixing it in mind by my method, and if he will also occasionally learn by heart a passage of prose or poetry by my _assimilating_ methods, he will train his Attention in a pleasanter and more effective way than Hamilton did his by his studies in Euclid--besides making himself conspicuously accurate where most men are notoriously inaccurate.

[It is a most misleading mistake to suppose that the principles of the following or either of the previous chapters are to be _consciously and constantly_ used by the pupil, whether he be a student or a man of business. It is only used at all during the training period--rarely afterwards. But during the training period, I desire the pupil to make as much use of the devices and principles of the system as he possibly can--and the more he uses them the sooner he no longer has occasion to use them.]

1. Does it require any effort to _continue_ that power?
2. What tends to break down an acquired power of attention?
3. What suggestion is here given the pupil in regard to this?
4. Is this method easier and less severe than Hamilton's?
5. Is it not more effectual?

THOUGHTIVE UNIFICATIONS.

CONNECTING THE UNCONNECTED.

A Congressman could not remember the name of Zachary Taylor, the twelfth President of the United States, but he could always readily recall his nick-name, "Rough and Ready." In this case there was no _revivable_ connection established in his mind between the _name_ Zachary Taylor and the idea or image of the _man_ known as Zachary Taylor--but there _was_ a revivable connection in his mind between the name "Rough and Ready" and the idea or image of that man. Now the thing to be done to enable this Congressman to readily recall the name Zachary Taylor was to _establish_ or _make a revivable connection_ between the name Zachary Taylor and the image of him, or some characteristic of him, as it was known to that Congressman; or to connect the well-remembered name "Rough and Ready" to the usually forgotten name Zachary Taylor. This would be a _device_ for helping him to revive this hitherto unrecallable name. But another and better way to aid him would be to STRENGTHEN his REVIVING POWER GENERALLY, so that he could readily recall the name Zachary Taylor as well as his other previous experiences; for there is no doubt that he had a _record_ in his mind of the name Zachary Taylor; for whenever he failed to recall it, he _recognised_ it the moment he saw it, or it was mentioned in his presence. This proved that he _knew_ the name but could not _revive_ it.

1. What difficulty did the Congressman have in connection with Z.
Taylor?
2. What caused it?
3. What would have been his best aid to remember the name?

HOW TO HELP THE MEMORY.

There are therefore two ways of helping the memory. (1) By a device resorted to in each separate case to help make a more vivid First Impression. Nearly all Memory Systems hitherto taught have only been such Devices; of little benefit except in the cases where they have been _actually applied_--mere temporary appliances, and many of them of doubtful value, devoid of any strengthening power. (2) By a Method of Memory TRAINING. This is the unique character of my System. It is used as a device during the process of developing the latent powers of the Memory and the Attention, but the _result of its use_ is to so strengthen the Memory that, as a Device it is no longer required. As a trainer my System operates in three ways. (1) It increases the general _Impressionability_, so that all First Impressions must be more vivid than they have ever been before. (2) It increases the general _Revivability_, so that First Impressions are more under the control of the will, and can be afterward recalled when desired. (3) It compels the Intellect to stay with the senses and thereby it abolishes mind-wandering.

1. Did he have a _record_ of the name in his mind?
2. How many ways are there of helping the memory?
3. What is the first way?
4. The second?
5. What is meant by Memory Training?
6. What is the unique character of my system?
7. What is the result of its use?
8. In how many ways does my system operate as a Trainer?
9. What are they?

A one-sided view of the Memory proclaims that if vivid First Impressions are made in all cases, that is enough. This opinion implies a limited acquaintance with the different kind of memories. In some cases where a person is troubled with chronic forgetfulness, a vivid First Impression may be received, and no recollection of it will long survive. That a vivid impression was received is proved by the fact that, shortly after the occurrence, his memory of the details of it is possibly nearly perfect, and yet, after the lapse of a few days, or weeks, or months, the recollection of every trace of the occurrence has vanished. After the total oblivion of the matter in his waking moments, he will sometimes recall all the details of the affair in a dream. This is demonstration irresistible that the trouble in this case lies, not in receiving vivid First Impressions, but in the weakness of his reviving power. In fact, some memories are much oftener weak from deficiency in reviving power than from feebleness of first impressions. If, however, Impressionability be increased to the highest degree in all cases, and Revivability be strengthened to the same extent, all memories will be good, however bad some of them may theretofore have been in any or in all respects.

MODES OF ESTABLISHING CONNECTIONS.

RECOLLECTIVE ANALYSIS is used to memorise a series of words or facts between every pair of which the relation of In., Ex., or Con. exists. It equally applies to a single pair of such words or facts.

RECOLLECTIVE SYNTHESIS OR THOUGHTIVE UNIFICATION is used where _no relation exists_.

A _revivable_ connection is established in such cases by means of a Correlation which always consists of one or more unifying intermediates. And the words, hitherto un-united, which are thus cemented together, are called Extremes.

We had experience in learning the Series in the first chapter that the application of the Laws of In., Ex., and Con. enable us to memorise those Series in much less time than it would have taken had we not known _how to make use of_ those Laws. Many people could _never_ have committed to memory such Series by mere _rote_ or _repetition_, and not one in a hundred could have learnt to say them backwards by _rote_ alone. Yet my Pupils easily learn them both ways, because Analysis affords the highest possible AID to the Natural Memory. In fact, the _deepest_ and _most abiding_ impression that can be made upon the Natural Memory is by impressing it with _relations_ of In., Ex., or Con.; because these are the Memory-Senses (if the phrase be allowed), these are the Eyes, Ears, Touch, Taste, and Smell of the Memory: and we have only to impress the _Memory_ according to the laws of its own nature and the _Memory_ will RETAIN the impression. This is exactly what my Art does: for I translate every case of Synthesis into an Analytic series by supplying one or more _Memory-intermediates_ that grow out of the "Extremes," each one of which is an instance of In., Ex., or Con.--Thus, every example of Synthesis is a =developed or extended Analysis=. To make this translation from Synthesis into Analysis requires no intellectual ingenuity--no constructive power of imagination--but only a _recall to consciousness_, through In., Ex., or Con., of what we already _know_ about the "Extremes." I call a specimen of developed Analysis a Correlation, because the Intermediates sustain the _direct_, _immediate_, and _specific_ relation of In., Ex., or Con. to the "Extremes" (having nothing in common, in principle or nature, with the old-fashioned Mnemonical "Links," or "Phrases").

1. When is Rec. Analysis used?
2. Rec. Synthesis?
3. How is a revivable connection established?
4. Have you carefully read every question at the bottom of the
previous page, and _thought out_ or written out answers to them?
5. Since questions are valuable helps to the learner, will you
faithfully read all the questions hereafter in this lesson, and
write out or think out the answers thereto?
6. What have the laws of In., Ex., or Con. enabled us to do?
7. Could all people have learned them by rote?
8. What affords the highest possible aid to the natural memory?
9. How are the deepest and most abiding impressions made on the
Natural Memory?
10. What are the Memory-Senses?

EXAMPLES OF CORRELATIONS.

Make your own Correlation (different from mine, given below) between each of the following seven pairs of Extremes:

[_In._ may be represented by 1, _Ex._ by 2, and _Con._ by 3]:

1. ANCHOR (1) Sheet Anchor (1) Sheet (1) Bed (1) BOLSTER
---- (3) Capstan (1) Night-cap (3) Pillow (3) ----
---- (3) Roadstead (1) Bedstead ----
---- (3) Sea Bed (1) ----
2. PEN (3) Ink (1) Ink-bottle (1) Smelling-bottle (3) NOSE
---- (1) Pensive (2) Gay (1) Nosegay ----
---- (3) Wiper (3) ----
3. SLAIN (3) Battle (3) Joshua (3) MOON
---- (1) Struck-down (1) Moon-struck (1) ----
---- (3) Fallen (2) Risen (3) ----
4. TEA (1) Teaspoon (1) Spooney (1) LOVER
---- (3) Sugar (1) Sweet (1) Sweetheart (1) ----
5. ARROW (3) Tell (3) Apple (3) Cider Mill (1) TREADMILL
---- (3) Flight (3) Arrest (3) Convict (3) ----
6. BEE (1) Beeswax (1) Sealing-wax (3) Title deeds (3) ATTORNEY
---- (1) Queen Bee (1) Queen's Counsel (3) ----
7. LASH (1) Eye-lash (1) Glass Eye (1) Substitute (1) VICARIOUS

Children and Adults, who have thoroughly learned Recollective Analysis and practised its exercises, find no difficulty in making Correlations, unless they are so afflicted with Mind-Wandering that they have never _digested_ the impressions they have received, or unless their intellectual operations have been twisted out of the natural order by perversities of early education; but even in these cases the _diligent_ student will be able--usually before these pages are finished--at once to correlate any word whatever to any or all the words in any dictionary. A learned Professor declared that no person unacquainted with astronomy could correlate "Moon" to "Omnibus." He did it thus: MOON--(3) Gibbous [one of the phases of the Moon]--(1) "Bus"--(1) OMNIBUS. I asked a pupil then present--a girl nine years old--to connect them. She promptly replied, "MOON--(1) Honey-moon--(3) Kissing--(1) Buss--(1) OMNIBUS." A moment after, she gave another: "MOON--(1) Full Moon--(1) 'Full inside'--(3) OMNIBUS." Once more: "MOON--(1) Moonlight--(1) Lightning--(3) 'Conductor'--(3) OMNIBUS." Another pupil imagined it would be _impossible_ to correlate the following _letters_ of the alphabet to _words_ beginning with the same letters, as "A" to "Anchor," "B" to "Bull," "C" to "Cab," "D" to "Doge,"--as well as "Cooley" to "The." There are, however, no words which my Pupils cannot soon learn to correlate together with the greatest readiness, as:

"A" (1) First Letter (1) First Mate (3) Ship (3) "ANCHOR"
" (1) Aviary (3) Bird (3) Flew (1) Fluke (1) ----
"B" (1) Bee (3) Sting (1) Sharp Pain (1) Sharp Horns (1) "BULL"
" (1) Below (1) Bellow (3) ----
"C" (1) Sea (3) Ocean Steamer (1) Cabin (1) "CAB"
"D" (1) "D.D." (1) Clerical Title (1) Venetian Title (1) "DOGE"
"COOLEY" (1) Coolly Articulated (1) Definite Article (1) "THE"

1. What must we do in order to make the memory retain the
impression?
2. Does my Art do this?
3. Into what do I translate every case of Synthesis?
4. What does it then become?
5. What is a correlation?
6. Are correlations difficult to make?

All possible cases to be memorised can be reduced to (1) ISOLATED FACTS, where each fact is correlated to some fact in its surroundings through which you must think as the _Best Known_, in order to recall it--many instances will be given in this lesson:--or, (2) SERIAL FACTS, which must be remembered in the _exact order_ in which they were presented to the mind--illustrated by many examples in this Lesson.

NEVER FORGET that this System serves two distinct purposes: (1) That it is a Device for memorising any Isolated Fact or Serial Facts by means of mere Analysis, otherwise called Instantaneous Assimilation or memorised Correlations, as well as by other means. (2) And that by memorising and repeating for a considerable period Analytic Series, and especially by _making_ and _memorising_ one's own Correlations, it is an unequalled system of Memory-TRAINING. Let the ambitious Pupil =learn as many examples as I give in the lessons in order to so strengthen his natural memory that he will no longer have to use the _device_ for memorising, his natural memory permanently retaining all he desires to remember=. This result comes only to those who carry out ALL the directions with genuine alacrity--not shirking one of them.

1. Do all persons find them easy?
2. What persons do not?
3. Can such persons become expert in making them?
4. How?
5. Make an original correlation of your own between these extremes.
6. To what may all possible cases to be remembered be reduced?
7. What are Isolated facts?
8. What two distinct purposes does my system serve?

ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS COMPARED.

It is sometimes asked, cannot "Analysis" cement together unconnected "Extremes"? This question implies a contradiction of terms. I reply, "Yes, by _accident_, and by accident only."

Analysis is _declaratory_--Synthesis is _constructive_. Analysis _discovers_ and _describes_ the relations actually existing--Synthesis applies connecting intermediates where no relations previously existed, and then Analysis characterizes the relations introduced by the cementing intermediates.

Even in the First Exercises the Series are Synthetic. Every pair of words of which such Series consists exemplifies the relations either of Inclusion, Exclusion, or Concurrence. I used to call that Lesson Recollective Analysis, because in it the pupil is engaged in familiarising himself with those Laws of Assimilation, and in _discovering_ and _declaring_ the character of the relations between the words of such Synthetic Series. He commits to memory such a series by _thinking_ of the relations between the words. A minor object is to memorise the Series--but a greater and higher object never lost sight of in these Lessons is to train the Memory and Attention. And let the pupil clearly notice _how_ this training comes about. Merely running over a Series--two words at a time--without discriminating the _kind_ and _quality_ of the relations between the words--hoping that the mind unpractised in the Laws of Assimilation will intuitively feel those relations, constitutes no training of the Memory. Such reading neither strengthens the old power nor develops any new power. It is a blind act of unconscious absorption, however little be absorbed. But if the mind _acts_ in such cases and _tries to find_ and _characterise_ the relations, then the appreciation of the relations of In., Ex., and Con., is quickened and invigorated and becomes in time so intensified that those relations are thereafter almost automatically felt, and the impression they make on the Memory, henceforth, is the most vivid possible.

1. To whom only does this result come?
2. What question is frequently asked?
3. What is the reply?
4. Is analysis declaratory?
5. If so, why?
6. Is Synthesis constructive?
7. If so, explain why?
8. Why is the first lesson called Rec. Analysis?

Every Correlation is a Synthetic Series. It can be and should _always_ be analyzed, but Analysis never makes a Correlation. That is the function of Synthesis. Since "extremes" are words with no relation between them, Analysis cannot find what does not exist. But _accident_ sometimes makes a _spelling_ or _letter_ relation between the "Extremes," and then Analysis can memorise these "extremes" by means of such accidental relations. To illustrate:--

A physician was troubled to remember on which side of the heart are the "mitral valves." As they are on the left side of the heart, he might have noticed that "mitral" ends with the letter "l," and that the word "left" begins with the letter "l"--as "l" belongs to both of these words, here would be a case of analysis. Such a device, however, could never be erected into a rule, for it is founded on accident only, and cannot be used in all cases. How much more vivid to many persons in this example is a Correlation, thus: "_Mitral valves_ ... mitred Abbots ... none left ... _left_."

To remember which of the University crews wears _dark_ blue and which _light_, we can note that the vowel "I" belongs alike to Cambridge and "Light" and is absent from Oxford and "Dark."

Take a case in Trigonometry--a _Complement_ is what remains after subtracting an angle from _one_ right-angle. Take 60 degrees from 90 degrees, and we have the complement 30 degrees--a _Supplement_ is what remains after subtracting an angle from two right-angles. Take 120 degrees from 180 degrees and we have the supplement 60 degrees. How to remember that "Complement" relates to one right-angle, and "Supplement" relates to two right-angles, is a difficulty for a poor memory. Looking at the accidents of the subject, we see that Supplement and two right-angles have a relation in this, that Supplement begins with S and two begins with _T_. S ... T. Hence we must remember that Supplement relates to _T_wo right-angles, and, of course, the word Complement to one right-angle.

Or to use the Synthetic Method: "_Complement_ (compliment) ... praise bestowed ... prize-winner ... won ... _one right-angle_" (_Complement_ completes right-angle ... _one_ ... _right-angle_) or "_Supplement_ ... supple ... bend double ... 'two double' ... _two right-angles_" (_Supplement_ ... added to ... more than one right-angle ... _two right-angles_).

I could give many other illustrations of the narrow scope of this Method of Accidents, though _genuine within that scope_, and how, in _all_ cases, by the Synthetic Method we can find in the facts _to be remembered_ the means of their recollection. One case more: In regard to memorising the statement that "the Posterior Nerve of the Spinal Column is Sensory, and the Anterior Nerve is Motor," using this Method of Accidents, "You observe that Posterior and Sensory go together, and that Anterior and Motor go together. The initial letters of Posterior and Sensory are P and S, and the initial letters of Anterior and Motor are A and M. By considering that A and M are in the upper part of the Alphabet and P and S are in the lower part of it, you will be sure to remember that Anterior is associated with Motor and Posterior with Sensory." I admit that the _first time_ one hears this elaborate method applied the novelty of the principle of it might make an impression; but, after that, the method would probably fail from its lengthy exposition; because it is difficult to retain the _steps of an argument_ in a weak Memory and therefore such a method cannot certainly act as a _Means for Aiding_ the Memory. How do I manage this case? By correlating Posterior to Sensory, thus: _Posterior_ ... Post-Mortem ... Insensible ... _Sensory_; or Anterior to Motor, thus: _Anterior_ ... Ant ... disturbed anthill ... commotion ... _Motor_; or _Anterior_ ... antediluvian ... rush of water ... water-power ... _Motor_. In uniting the two unconnected "Extremes" together by means of a _developed Analysis memorised_, the Natural Memory is aided in a very high degree.

1. What is every correlation?
2. Does Analysis ever make a correlation?
3. Why would not "A" make a good In. by sound with "Anchor" on
preceding page?
4. Is the method of remembering by accidental coincidences always
reliable?
5. If not, why?
6. Are there cases where it cannot be used?
7. Make an original correlation between "Mitral valves" and "left."
8. How does the accidental coincidence in connection with the
University crews compare with Synthesis?
9. Does this method make an impression on the novice at first?
10. Does the novice adhere to it?
11. Why?

BY MEMORISING a Correlation, you so unite the two EXTREMES in memory, that you need not afterwards _recall the intermediates_. The intermediates drop out of the memory by what Prof. E. W. Scripture, Psychologist, of Yale University, calls the Law of Obliteration.

1. Why does the method fail?
2. Is it difficult to retain the steps of an argument in the
natural memory?
3. Can you give any instances in your own experience where Analysis
has helped you to cement Extremes together?
4. Can such a method act as a means for aiding the memory?
5. How would I manage the case spoken of?

HOW TO MEMORISE A CORRELATION.

To memorise a Correlation you must _at first_, if your _Natural Memory be weak_, repeat from _memory_ the intermediates forwards and backwards, as:--ANCHOR ... _sheet-anchor_ ... _sheet_ ... _bed_ ... BOLSTER--BOLSTER ... _bed_ ... _sheet_ ... _sheet-anchor_ ... ANCHOR, at least three times each way. These six repetitions from memory, three forward and three back, are only required _at first_. In a short time you will infallibly remember every Correlation _you make_; at last, the memory will become so strong, that you will no longer have to make Correlations at all. After you have repeated the Correlation, then repeat the two extremes, thus--"Anchor" ... "Bolster." "Bolster" ... "Anchor." "Bolster" ... "Anchor." "Anchor" ... "Bolster."

Nothing else is so easy to memorise as a Correlation, for a Correlation is not a "mental picture" or "story"--it is neither a proposition, sentence or phrase. It has no rhetorical, grammatical, argumentative or _imaginative_ character. It is simply an elemental primordial Psychological Sequence of Ideas in which one includes another, excludes another, or in which one idea has been so often or so vividly united with another in past experience that the two are inseparably connected in memory--and a little practice in making and _memorising_ these Correlations soon makes it _impossible_ to forget them.

1. What is the result of uniting two unconnected "Extremes" by
means of a developed Analysis?
2. What are the first steps in memorising a correlation?
3. How long are these repetitions required?
4. What will be the result in a short time?
5. What will be the final result?
6. Are correlations easy to remember?
7. What is the result of making and memorising them?
8. When does the most vivid concurrence take place?

ASSIMILATIVE ASSOCIATION AND MEMORY.

Probably no psychological mistake was ever fraught with greater injury to the cause of public or self-education than the too prevalent opinion amongst teachers generally that "physiological retentiveness" is the memory's sole reliance _in all stages of life_. It is nearly the sole reliance in infancy, and a partial reliance in youth. But when an accumulation of experiences and a fair command of language have been gained, new acquisitions are henceforward principally made by _the affiliation_ of one idea upon or with another or _the making of associations between ideas already established_.

And, if this be so, then memory must be very greatly improvable, since no mental power is susceptible of so much improvement as assimilative association.

A good memory, whether natural or acquired, belongs to quick and vivid _associability_ and _revivability_ rather than to mere inherent and perpetual physiological _record making_.

After a certain number of experiences the child learns the appearance of a square. All his future experiences, however varied, of squares become affiliated upon, or connected with the record of this original square. If each new square had to be separately impressed on the brain as a distinct and independent physiological record, it would take as much time and trouble to learn every new square as it did to learn the first square. But the _instant_ recognition of every square after learning the first one shows that the old brain record is used in the case of each new experience of squares or that the new square is interpreted by the old or original record through the Laws of Association. Again: Taking the prefixes _com._, _de._, _im._, _op._, _re._, _sup._, &c., which are used in thousands of cases, and the suffixes _ment_, _sion_, _ible_, _ibility_, &c., also used in thousands of words, and using these in connexion with the root word "Press" we have compress, depress, impress, oppress, repress, suppress, and also compressible, depression, re-impress, suppression, impressment, &c.

Must a new physiological record be made for each form of the sixty or more words of which Press constitutes the base, and must a new record be also made for each of the prefixes and suffixes in the thousands of combinations in which they occur? No one believes any such absurdity.

If space permitted it would be easy to offer additional considerations tending to show that after infancy and early youth new acquisitions are mainly made by combinations and recombinations of ideas already possessed, and not by new and independent records physiologically reimpressed on each occasion.

RULES FOR MAKING CORRELATIONS.

1. Never make a correlation except in conformity to In., Ex., and Con. Carelessness here is fatal to success.

2. When the pupil reads a correlation of mine, he should indicate the relations between the words by writing in the figures 1, 2, or 3, and he should pursue the same course with his own correlations.

3. Ofttimes "extremes" are in different planes of thought, so occasionally three intermediates are necessary to cement them; two are often required; but after considerable practice in making correlations one usually suffices.

1. What is fatal to success in making correlations?
2. What do the figures 1, 2, and 3 indicate in Rule 2?
3. How many intermediates should there be?

4. A correlation is a _successive advance_, and an intermediate must not refer back to any except its _immediate_ antecedent, never to its second or third antecedent. A pupil wrote:--_Short steps_ ... stepson ... real son ... more a son ... _Morrison_. Here, "more a son" refers to the comparison between "real son" and "stepson," but the latter is the second antecedent so the correlation is a defective one. He might have said: _Short steps_ ... _stepson_ ... _Morrison_.

5. A word may be used twice but never three times. _Pen_ ... pensive ... gay ... nosegay ... _Nose_. Here "gay" is properly used twice, and after that, it is dropped and you can go on with the rest of the word, to wit, _nose_.

6. A compound phrase including a verb is rarely allowable, since the intermediates must be the simplest elements, either sensations or perceptions [relations among sensations] or abstractions [relations among relations], or one of these with either of the others, always exemplifying either In., Ex., or Con.

7. My correlations are good for me, but they may not be so vivid to others, especially where the concurrences are used. To fix the date of Magna Charta (1215), the pupil could memorise this Correlation--MAGNA CHARTA ... King John ... Jew's teeth ... DENTAL. But if the pupil did not know _before_ that King John had granted that charter, and if he did not also know the story about the extraction of the Jew's teeth to make him pay the royal exaction, there would be no concurrence as to the first word and second, or second and third, and if he learned the Correlation it would be by mere repetition without aid from Analysis. In such a case he would make and memorise his own Correlation, perhaps thus: MAGNA CHARTA ... magnify ... diminish ... DWINDLE. When a pupil makes his own Correlations, every concurrence he uses is a _real_ concurrence to him, and so with his Ins. and Exs. This is a decisive reason why the Pupil should merely look upon my Correlations as models, but make and memorise his _own_ Correlations in all cases, as being more vivid to _him_ and, therefore, more certainly remembered, as well as more effectively strengthening the Memory in both its Stages.

8. Vivid Ins. by _meaning_ are better than Ins. by S. (the latter when used, should be as perfect as possible). EAR ... EEL makes a weak In. by S. to some persons, but it would make a much more vivid first impression to most persons to deal with them in this way: EAR ... (w)ring ... twist ... wriggle ... EEL. But "Bivou_ac_ ... _aq_ueduct" is a perfect In. by S. as to the last syllable of the former and the first syllable of the latter, since those syllables are pronounced exactly alike. We may connect Bivouac to Rain thus: "_Bivouac_ ... aqueduct ... flowing water ... falling water ... RAIN."

9. _Never_--in the early stages of the study of the System--make a _second_ Correlation until you have _memorised the first_.

10. Although _making_ and _memorising_ Correlations serves the useful purpose of fixing specific facts in the memory, yet the MAIN OBJECT in making and memorising Correlations is to develop the latent power of the Natural Memory to such a degree that all facts are hereafter remembered without the aid of conscious Correlations.

11. Never try to find _analytic_ date or number words until you _know the material facts connected with the date or number_ before you. The student wishes to fix the date of Voltaire's birth, in 1694. "The Shaper" and "The Giber" occur to him. If he is ignorant of the facts of Voltaire's life, he will correlate thus: "_Vol_taire ... (1) ... volatile ... (2) ... 'fixed' ... (1) ... 'The Shaper' {Th}e {Sh}a{p}e{r} (1694);" or "Vol_taire_ ... (1) ... tear to pieces ... (1) ... mocking dissector ... (1) ... {Th}e {G}i{b}e{r} (1694)." If he had known that Voltaire was a born writer, he would have found the analytic relation in "Voltaire ... {Th}e {Sh}a{p}e{r} (1694)" or if he had known that he was a terrible mocker, he would have said: "Voltaire ... {Th}e {G}i{b}e{r} (1694)." If he wished to fix the date of the discovery of America, he might think of "{T}e{r}ra{p}i{n}" (a large tide-water turtle, abounding in Maryland), and correlate thus: "Discovery of America ... (1) ... Maryland ... (3) ... {T}e{r}ra{p}i{n} (1492)." But if he remembers that Con. covers all cases of Cause and Effect, Instrument or Means to End, Person by whom, &c., and if he reflects that this discovery has been a blessing to the Old as well as the New World, he would say: "Discovery of America ... (3) {T}{r}ue {B}oo{n} (1492)." Or, if he considers that the moment America was made known to Europe the whole of the Western Continent was open to every new-comer, he would find analytic date-words thus: "Discovery of America ... (3) ... {D}oo{r} o{p}e{n} (1492)." If he merely wants to fix the fraction 92, he could use the first two consonants of the name of one of his ships, and say: "Discovery of America ... {P}i{n}ta (1492)."

ISOLATED FACTS.

Correlate an _Isolated Fact_ to something (to some fact in its environment or _entourage_ that is BEST KNOWN and) which you are sure to THINK OF when you wish to recall the Isolated Fact.

HOW TO REMEMBER PROPER NAMES WHEN INTRODUCED.

An infallible method of remembering proper names is (1) Get the name when introduced. If not quite sure, ask for it. (2) _Pronounce_ the _name aloud_ whilst _looking at_ the person. Do this several times, if possible. The object is to produce a concurrence or connection between the _sight-image of the Person_ and a _sound-image of his Name_. (3) To help the ear for sound, always pronounce everyone's name aloud whenever you meet him. This helps nature. These directions carried out never fail to make a pupil perfect in remembering proper names.

To remember PROPER NAMES in the absence of the person, correlate the Person's Name to the name of some Peculiarity of the Person (as the BEST KNOWN and) which you are sure to THINK of whenever you think of the Person. If you _memorise_ the Correlation, you will recall the Name whenever you think of this Peculiarity (whatever struck you about him).

To remember a proper name, Mnemonists resort to In., by S. But this _alone_ gives no starting point, no "Best Known" which you are certain to think of, and which will enable you to recall the name, _provided_ you cement by a memorised Correlation the "Best Known" to the name itself; in fact, a similarity of sound _alone_ and _by itself_ is likely to mislead you into reviving itself instead of the name. A celebrated Member of Parliament (who in the days of his youth, before he had greatly tested Mnemonics, gave a high opinion of its value) was to deliver an address at the Birkbeck Institution, some years ago. Having difficulty in remembering proper names, he thought he would _fix_ the name of its founder in his memory by the Mnemonical device of finding a word that sounded like it; he said to himself, "It reminds me of 'Pinchbeck.'" He commenced as follows: "Before coming to the subject on which I am to speak this evening, I desire to pay a deserved tribute of praise to the founder of this great Institution, the celebrated Mr. PINCHBECK." A shout of laughter revealed to him that Mnemonics may get us into trouble, and fail to help us out: he could not remember the real name, Birkbeck, until it was told him. If he had mastered this System, his NEW memory-power would have enabled him to remember the true name _without any device_; or, if he was but a beginner at my System he could have remembered the name Birkbeck--which he was afraid he would forget--by correlating it to the word--"Founder," which he did remember, thus:--FOUNDER ... lost way ... hark-back ... Birkbeck; or, FOUNDER ... foundered horse ... chestnut horse ... chestnut ... bur ... BIRKBECK. If he had memorised either of these Correlations, or one of his own, by repeating the intermediates forwards and backwards two or three times, and then recalled the two extremes, "Founder," "Birkbeck," several times, the moment he thought of Founder, he would instantly have recalled Birkbeck, one extreme recalling the other without the intermediates being recalled. When one has received only a third of the benefit of this System as a Memory-TRAINER, the mere _making_ of a Correlation ensures remembering two extremes together without thinking of intermediates.

1. To what must we correlate a person's name?
2. What will be the result if we memorise the correlation?
3. To what do Mnemonists resort to remember proper names?
4. Does this _alone_ give a starting point?
5. What is a similarity of sound alone likely to do?

[Dr. Johnson, when introduced to a stranger repeated his name several times aloud and sometimes _spelled_ it. This produced a vivid first impression of the man's _name_; but it did not _connect_ the name to the man who bore it. People who have adopted the Johnsonian Method sometimes remember the name but apply it to the wrong person, because they did not establish any relation between the name and the man to whom it belonged.]

EXERCISES IN CORRELATING.

Make 20 of your own Correlations between faces and names (or between words and meanings), using some of the extremes given by me, and, as other extremes (words, &c., of your own selection, or) names and faces of your own acquaintances.

_Peculiarity._ _Correlation._ _Proper Names._

Cross-eyed Cross-bow ... bowman Mr. Archer
Wavy hair dancing wave ... Morris dance Mr. Morrison
Black eyes white ... snow ... pure as snow Mr. Virtue
Retreating chin retiring ... home-bird Mr. Holmes
High instep high boots ... mud ... peat Mr. Peat
Crooked legs broken legs ... crushed Mr. Crushton
Apprehension suspension ... gallows Mr. Galloway
Sombre sad ... mourning ... hat-band Mr. Hatton
Music stave ... bar Mr. Barcroft
Violinist violin ... high note ... whistle Mr. Birtwistle
Painter paint ... colored cards ... whist Mr. Hoyle
Plumber plum-pudding ... victuals Mr. Whittles
Joiner wood ... ash Mr. Ashworth

1. Is it ever possible to remember two extremes without thinking of
the intermediates?
2. In what cases?
3. What did Dr. Johnson sometimes do when introduced to a stranger?
4. What sometimes occurs with people who have adopted the
Johnsonian Method?
5. Why is this?
6. As Max Mueller names mental acts in this order: Sensation,
Perception, Conception, Naming, and Memory, would he hold that
failure to remember names implies weakness of naming power? No!
Remembering a name is an act wholly unlike imposing a name in
the first instance. Such failure arises from weakness of the
auditory function, or of the perception of individual
peculiarities or failure of the sight-image to become cemented
to the sound image.

=A CONTRAST.=--When unconnected ideas have to be united in the memory so that hereafter one will recall the other, the teachers of other Memory Systems say: "What can I invent to tie them together--what story can I contrive--what foreign extraneous matter can I introduce--what mental picture can I imagine, no matter how unnatural or false the juxtaposition may be, or what argument or comparison can I originate--no matter how far-fetched and fanciful it may be, to help hold these 'Extremes' together?" They do not reflect that all these mnemonical outside and imported schemes must _also_ be remembered, and that being in the form of sentences expressing loose relation of mere physical juxtapositions or the complex relations invented by constructive imagination or subtle intellect, they are, to most, more difficult to recollect than the extremes would be without these ponderous aids. Hence, in their professed attempt to aid the memory, they really impose a _new_ and _additional burden_ upon it.

1. Are you required to make any original correlations?
2. How many?
3. Between what extremes?
4. Do you find it difficult?
5. Have you any evidence given here that others have experienced
any difficulty in making them?
6. Did they finally succeed?
7. What question is frequently asked by other memory teachers?

On the other hand, I simply ask the memory what it _already knows_ about the "Extremes." The first intermediate of a correlation is _directly_ connected through In., Ex., or Con., with the first "Extreme," and the last intermediate with the last "Extreme," and the intervening intermediate (if there be one) with the other two, and thus, the _intermediates being already in the memory_, and not the result of invention or ingenuity, my Method of Correlation is purely and solely a MEMORY process. In this way, I use the MEMORY TO HELP THE MEMORY, I use the _reviving_ power of the memory to make a vivid FIRST IMPRESSION between two hitherto unconnected "Extremes." I add nothing to the "Extremes," import nothing from abroad in regard to them, invent nothing. I simply _arouse_, _re-waken_ to consciousness, _what is already stored away_ in the memory in regard to those "Extremes," and, by reciting the Correlation a few times forwards and backwards, cement the "Extremes" themselves so vividly together, that henceforth one "Extreme" revives the other "Extreme" without the recall of the intermediates.

And in the chapter on Recollective Analysis, and also in the previous part of this chapter, I have given the attentive student such a familiarity with the Memory Laws of In., Ex., and Con., that he can make Correlations as easily as he breathes.

When learning prose or poetry by means of endless repetitions to acquire, and endless views to retain, the mind soon wanders, and thus discontinuity is promoted; but, in reciting a Correlation forwards _and backwards_ from memory, the mind cannot wander, and thus the continuity is greatly strengthened. Again, memory is improved by exercise, and _improved in the highest degree_ by _making_ and _memorising_ correlations, because in _making_ them the _reviving_ power of the memory is exercised in conformity to Memory's own laws; and in _memorising_ the Correlations both stages of memory are most vividly impressed. Thus, making and memorising the Correlations TRAINS both Memory and Continuity. And if to this training process there be added the habit of Assimilation which the use of the Analytic-Synthetic and Interrogative Analysis Methods of learning Prose and Poetry by heart imparts, as well as my other training methods, then the NEW memory thus acquired _will not demand the further use of the System any more than the adult swimmer will need the plank by which as a boy he learned to swim_.

1. What new burden do they impose on the memory?
2. What do I require from my pupils?
3. To what is the first intermediate connected?
4. Through what?
5. How do I deal with the other intermediates?
6. What is a memory process?
7. Is the memory used to help the memory in any way?
8. Do I add anything to the extremes?
9. Is memory improved by exercise?
10. When is the System laid aside?

LEARNING FOREIGN WORDS.

"The Guide to Memory, or a New and Complete Treatise of Analogy between the French and English Languages," compiled by Charles Turrell, Professor of Languages, and published in 1828, contains the words which are the _same_ in each language (alphabet, banquet, couplet, &c.), and those almost the same--"Letters necessary in English, and superfluous in French, are included in a parenthesis, thus Bag(g)age. Letters necessary in French, and superfluous in English are printed in Italics, thus Hom_m_age." At first sight it seems as if this plan were a good one (and some still recommend it[H]). But of the words which are the same in both languages, some of them have meanings one rarely if ever needs to express, while others are seldom seen except in Dictionaries, so the student who uses this method does not make much _useful_ progress. The Rev. W. Healy, of Johnstown (Kilkenny), long before he had finished my course of lessons, stated: "_I wrote out the French words that correspond to the English of everything around us and that are in common use, and found that by the aid of Rec. Syn. I could commit them much faster than the time taken to write them out._"

[H] The "New Memory-Aiding French Vocabulary" by Albert Tondu, published by Hachett et Cie, London, in 1881, is a somewhat similar work to Charles Turrell's.

The words he had made himself familiar with were those most frequently met with in reading, and useful in speaking and writing.

Mr. D. Nasmith employed a clerk in finding the number of occurrences of the same word in three books. Some words occurred thousands of times, and others only five, or fewer. The words which frequently occurred he arranged in order, the commonest first, and compiled exercises to suit them. His "Linguists" (German and French) are published by Mr. D. Nutt, of 270, Strand, London, and by the aid of them, and of my System, a useful knowledge of German (or French) can be rapidly acquired.

A pupil who had a very slight acquaintance with French learned an Analytic Series of French words, asking a French friend the meaning and pronunciation of the words unfamiliar to him. By doing this he in about an hour learned the spelling, pronunciation, and meaning of nearly 100 French words. Since then he has been extending the exercise, and in that way he has learned 1,000 French words. In doing so he is strengthening his memory by exercising it in accordance with its own laws, increasing the control his will has over his attention, and extending his French vocabulary.

1. Do we ever see words spelt differently but with the same
pronunciation?
2. Is the use of the Dictionary required?
3. What examples have we here of the benefits derived from
Rec.-Synthesis?
4. With what words did he make himself familiar?
5. Does the same word frequently occur in a book?
6. What proof can you mention?
7. What task was accomplished in about one hour by one of my
pupils?
8. What language was he studying?

To remember Unfamiliar English Words or FOREIGN WORDS, correlate the Definition as the BEST KNOWN to the Unfamiliar or Foreign Word, and memorise the Correlation. In the case of Foreign Words, the last Intermediate is necessarily a case of Inclusion by sound. Sometimes there is In. by sight or by sound between a part or the whole of the English word, and a part or the whole of its Foreign equivalent, as _Ap_ple--_ap_fel [German]. Of course, the pupil will not need the aid of a correlation in such cases if he notice the analytic relation. The French word _Anachorete_ might have for its equivalent by sound either "_Anna_," or "_Core_," or "_Ate_," or "_Anna goes late_," or "_Ann a core ate_," or "_Anna's cold hate_," and perhaps to some of my readers it would seem like something else. _Cravache_ might sound like "_Crack of lash_." Pupils often disagree as to what is good Inclusion by sound; let each use what suits himself, and not trouble about other people's ears. _In. by sound, or by sense, or by spelling_, is sufficient even if it refers to _only one syllable_.

ENGLISH. INTERMEDIATES. GREEK.
Merchant ... market ... emporium ... emporos
Move ... move on ... next stage ... next-of-kin ... kineo
True ... naked truth ... pith of the matter ... pithy ... pithanos
Course ... coarse hair ... camel hair ... dromedary ... dromos
Servant ... light fare ... dole out
[maid ... bride ... dowry] ... doulos
Tanner ... leather ... leather purse ... disburse ... burseus
Cup ... tea-cup ... tea-pot ... poterion
Fetters ... criminal ... desperate ... desmos
Fragile ... thin ... rapier ... "thrust us" ... thraustos
---- glass houses ... "throw stones" ----
Fruit ... fruit-knife ... fish-knife ... carp ... karpos
Round ... fat ... stout ... strong ... strongylos
Bride ... fair ... fairy ... forest nymph ... nymphe
Pearl ... Necklace ... sweetheart ... Sweet Margery ... margarites
Bread ... baker ... baker's art ... artos
Marry ... lottery of life ... risky game ... gameo
Join ... engaged--[suited ... apt] ... apt to disagree ...apto
Culprit ... cull ... select a few ... few gone ... pheugon
Milk ... milky way ... galaxy ... gala
Drink ... water ... small leak ... pinhole ... pino
Suffer
hunger ... ng of hunger ... pining away ... peinao
Time ... watch ... chronometer ... chronos
---- Father Time ... old age ... old crony ----
Deliver ... capture ... lasso ... apalasso
Spread ... Christmas feast ... deck a church ...
dye a spire ... diaspeiro
Uncover ... bare ... bare foot ... a Kaliph's toe ... ekkalypto
Shut ... shut out ... severe weather ... bad climate ... kleio
I judge ... condemn ... refute ... refuse ... cry "no" ... krino
Found ... establish ... fix ... fasten thus ... tie so ... ktizo
Soldier ... art of war ... strategy ... stratiotes

1. In the case of Foreign words, what must the last intermediate
necessarily be a case of?
2. Do pupils always agree on a good In. by S.?
3. What is sufficient, if it refers to one syllable only?
4. What are you never to do in getting at an English word?
5. What may you do in getting at a Foreign word?
6. Could you not omit "camel hair"?
7. Could you not omit "leather," which follows "tanner"?
8. Could you not omit after "cup" the word "tea-cup"?
9. Is not "tea-pot" connected by Con. with "cup"?
10. After "bread" could you not omit "baker"?
11. Are not "bread" and "baker's art" connected?
12. Could you not omit "watch," after "Time"?

ENGLISH. INTERMEDIATES. LATIN.
Heart ... heart-sick ... fainting ... cordial ... cor
Wickedness ... dishonesty ... blackmail ... malum
Book ... printed thoughts ... freedom of thought ...
liberty ... liber
---- ... books ... library ... ----
Breast ... front ... front view ... aspect ... pectus
Spear ... thrust ... quick motion ... hasty ... hasta
Suitor ... princely suitor ... married by proxy ... procus
Ask ... borrow ... swindle ... rogue ... rogare
Marrow ... Old English arrow ... victory ... medal ... medulla
Captain ... head of hundred ... century ... centurio
Surveyor ... measure ... dimension ... agrimensor
Furniture ... bent-wood chairs ... bent legs ... supple
legs ... supellex
Vine ... wine ... luxury ... pampered ... pampinus
Liar ... false pretence ... mendicant ... mendax
Cow ... cow-pox ... vaccination ... vacca
Sing ... boatman's song ... canoe ... cano
Kill ... kill by hanging ... broken neck ... necare
Redden ... blush ... kissing ... ruby lips ... rubesco
---- red ... ruby ... ----
Dry ... dry mouth ... feverish ... sick ... siccus
Man ... married man ... home ... homo
War ... victory ... rejoicings ... bells rung ... bellum
Rob ... robber ... hue-and-cry ... policeman's rap ... rapto
Tanner ... russet leather ... russet apple ... apple
core ... coriarius
Dove ... married love ... United States ... Columbia ... columba
Bench ... table ... shop counter ... selling ... subsellium
Oar ... Roman galley ... Rome ... Romulus and Remus ... Remus
Garret ... unhealthy ... medicine ... salts and senna ... cenaculum
Garret ... store-room ... grain store ... granaria
Horse ... race ... dead heat ... equal ... equus
Cock ... spurring ... goading ... galling ... gallus
Lazy ... tramp ... knave ... ignavus
Make heavy ... rich food ... gravy ... gravo
Sign ... musical signs ... notes ... nota
Poverty ... drafty garret ... sleeping draught ...
opium ... inopia
Messenger ... news ... false news ... nonsense ... nuntius
Top ... high perch ... hen's perch ... cackle ... cacumen
Face ... bare face ... bare headed bird ... vulture ... vultus
Useless ... needless impatience ... irritation ... irritus
Dark ... dark staircase ... insecure ... obscurus
Writer ... bad writer ... scribbler ... scriba
Harvest ... harvest home ... "Mrs. at home?" ... messis
Dog ... dog's tail ... tin can ...
[cane carrier ... cane[I]] ... canis
Egg ... boiled egg ... boiled hard ... over boiled ... ovum
Fox ... jackall ... carcass ... vulture ... vulpes
Bread ... sweat of brow ... labour ... pain ...
[bread-pan ... pan[I]] ... panis
Table ... figures ... calculation ... mensuration ... mensa
Master ... schoolboard ... fines ... magistrate ... magister
Tree ... mast ... ship ... harbour ... arbor
Mother ... wife ... helpmeet ... help-mate ... mater

[I] In some English schools the first syllable in "panis" sounds "pan," in others "pain." If an English word derived from a foreign word (or from the same root) occurs to you, use it; but do not spend time hunting for derivations. Unfamiliar words are no help; do not think the word "panification" will help you to "panis," because it is an English word meaning "bread-making," and you are an Englishman. You would be much wiser to try to remember the English "panification" by the aid of the Latin "panis," than _vice-versa_, that is, if any mortal ever does want to remember that pedantic dictionary word.

1. If "mendicants" are known to be liars, why could not "false
pretences" be omitted?
2. If "vaccination" means inoculating with "cowpox," why could not
"cowpox" be omitted?
3. If "broken" neck means a violent death, why not omit "kill by
hanging"?
4. Ought not "billing and cooing" to be inserted after "Dove"?
5. What relation is there between "married love" and "United
States"?
6. If "musical" be added to "notes," why could not "musical signs"
be omitted?
7. If "scribbler" is a writer, why could not "bad writer" be
omitted?