The Mother Tongue II-- a new antique!

[Beth in Mint Hill]

Just published!  The Mother Tongue II by Kittredge! 

Many of us have loved this antique grammar and composition text, originally published in the early 1900s --but struggled to use it because of its format. Well.....now it is adapted for ease of use and its beautiful!

 

http://www.amazon.com/Mother-Tongue-Adapted-Modern-Students/dp/099055290X

Here is their website:

https://blueskydaisies.wordpress.com/the-mother-tongue-books/

 

 

 

[prissygirls]

Is there a sample anywhere?

[stripe]

Is there a sample anywhere?

I saw a 42 p sample of the text, and a 17 p sample of workbook #1 (both PDFs) at https://blueskydaisies.wordpress.com/samples/

 

I wish they would have eliminated sentences such as this on page 15 of the text:

Many savage tribes (for example, the North 

American Indians) have a method of 

conversing in gestures without speaking at 

all. ....

Thus when we speak or write the English 

word dog, we are just as truly making a sign 

as an Indian is when he expresses the idea 

dog by his fingers. 

The inclusion of such statements does absolutely nothing helpful, particularly in the assertion that old books are useful, much less "just right for modern students."

 

Also, I am not sure I like the formatting, with the little boxes.

 

Ah well.

[BlessedMom]

Thank you for sharing!

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I saw a 42 p sample of the text, and a 17 p sample of workbook #1 (both PDFs) at https://blueskydaisies.wordpress.com/samples/

 

I wish they would have eliminated sentences such as this on page 15 of the text:

Many savage tribes (for example, the North 

American Indians) have a method of 

conversing in gestures without speaking at 

all. ....

Thus when we speak or write the English 

word dog, we are just as truly making a sign 

as an Indian is when he expresses the idea 

dog by his fingers. 

The inclusion of such statements does absolutely nothing helpful, particularly in the assertion that old books are useful, much less "just right for modern students."

 

Why in the world would somebody go the trouble of updating a book, with all the close scrutiny required to edit and format the text, and fail to update THAT?

[Beth in Mint Hill]

Why in the world would somebody go the trouble of updating a book, with all the close scrutiny required to edit and format the text, and fail to update THAT?

 

Why should we feel the need to "cleanse" all old books of ALL words that many people now feel are "insensitive."  I see nothing wrong with these sentences, in this context.  

 

In fact, it would bring a wonderful, teachable moment to explain the attitudes of people in other times. In 'modernizing' something like this I'm sure it was very difficult to decide how much it would be appropriate to change.  I don't know ...perhaps the editor decided to keep a 'hands off' policy to as much of the content as possible.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Why should we feel the need to "cleanse" all old books of ALL words that many people now feel are "insensitive."  I see nothing wrong with these sentences, in this context.  

 

In fact, it would bring a wonderful, teachable moment to explain the attitudes of people in other times. In 'modernizing' something like this I'm sure it was very difficult to decide how much it would be appropriate to change.  I don't know ...perhaps the editor decided to keep a 'hands off' policy to as much of the content as possible.

 

You see nothing wrong with these sentences and dismiss those who do as "insensitive." (What do the quotes mean?) I have a problem with these sentences because my family, who are Eastern Band Cherokee, are not and never have been savages. Humans are rarely savages. People are never to be called savages, if the term is being used as an equivalent for their racial or ethnic background. Savages happen one at a time, sometimes in small groups, but never wholesale by people group.

 

What does that quote from the book even mean? "Some savage tribes, for example, the North American Indians..." what? It's incorrect on every level, from grammar to geography to history, therefore inappropriate in a school book for children.

 

Not all talk about Native Americans is a long time ago, you know. We're still here.

 

The Native American is STILL here. Don't call us savages. Don't tell your children we are savages.

[maize]

You see nothing wrong with these sentences and dismiss those who do as "insensitive." (What do the quotes mean?) I have a problem with these sentences because my family, who are Eastern Band Cherokee, are not and never have been savages. Humans are rarely savages. People are never to be called savages, if the term is being used as an equivalent for their racial or ethnic background. Savages happen one at a time, sometimes in small groups, but never wholesale by people group.

 

What does that quote from the book even mean? "Some savage tribes, for example, the North American Indians..." what? It's incorrect on every level, from grammar to geography to history, therefore inappropriate in a school book for children.

 

Not all talk about Native Americans is a long time ago, you know. We're still here.

 

The Native American is STILL here. Don't call us savages. Don't tell your children we are savages.

 

 

I agree with your post on the whole, but this sentence: "Savages happen one at a time, sometimes in small groups, but never wholesale by people group." presumes a definition of savage that was not necessarily intended by the original. Savage was historically used often to mean uncivilized. Certainly civilization in any technical sense is not universally applicable to every human group. There still exist many groups who of people who live a lifestyle which which does not include civilization.

 

I would never choose the word savage to describe such groups because it carries with it a great many other connotations, but the term when used in the sense of "not living a civilized lifestyle" could in fact be an accurate description of certain groups--nomads, hunter-gatherers, etc.

 

ETA In case it is not clear, I am speaking of civilization here purely in the sense of a lifestyle and culture involving highly structured social organization with towns and cities (and yes, many Native American groups would fall under this definition of civilization at any period in time). I am not using civilized in the sense of courteous, orderly, etc. nor am I implying that this type of civilization is superior to other types of social organization. 

[stripe]

If I wanted to have a culturally sensitive discussion about sign language, I would discuss deaf people's use of signing. Not some claim about what the "savage Indians" supposedly do. I am just saying, for me, this product is not appropriate. I initially responded only to the request for samples; I went back once I'd actually read them to note that one. I think the authors of this revised work could have taken a tip from the revisions of Mary Poppins and other old favorites and removed the random racism without sacrificing their points about grammar!

 

We all make our own decisions about what's appropriate in our home. Some of what may have passed for appropriate when Mother Tongue was written, is not appropriate for my home. I feel the inclusion of material such as this, which is not culturally accurate, means that, for me, it does not live up to its billing as "just right for modern students.".... Particularly when I can download the original for free, if I enjoy having the opportunity to assault my children with vintage racial attitudes.

 

I strongly suspect that, if a book contained insulting comments about Christians, then most Christians on the board wouldn't be quick to discount it, and certainly wouldn't pay money to use it as a main subject curriculum in early years. 

 

For what it's worth, stereotype threat is real. Children in minority groups underperform when confronted with the suggestion that they are less intelligent. So the idea that I would just merrily wave my hands at my children and say, "Oh, well, isn't it interesting what people used to think?" in the middle of a grammar lesson for my elementary aged kids just doesn't seem appropriate to me and my children. For me, materials that don't present racist commentary in the middle of the academic lesson are more appropriate.

 

The whole premise of this project is that the authors of this thought Mother Tongue could use reworking to make it more suitable for today's students. All I am saying is that I wish they would have thought it through and included more than formatting concerns. I feel the same way about having a box to explain obsolete language. Why not just update it? Mother Tongue is not some holy book that needs to remain in its original form!

[Hunter]

At that price, I expect the updates to include more sensitive and politically correct language.

 

I have used some pretty insensitive texts because they are free or cheap or easy to obtain, and I have edited on the fly, or the student and I have used the experience as a life lesson.

 

I'm not going to pay that much money for such a lightly edited vintage book. It's overpriced for what it is.

 

 

[Hunter]

 

 

For what it's worth, stereotype threat is real. Children in minority groups underperform when confronted with the suggestion that they are less intelligent. So the idea that I would just merrily wave my hands at my children and say, "Oh, well, isn't it interesting what people used to think?" in the middle of a grammar lesson for my elementary aged kids just doesn't seem appropriate to me and my children. For me, materials that don't present racist commentary in the middle of the academic lesson are more appropriate.

 

 

 

My tolerance for racism in books is as high as my tolerance for other forms of human rights violations. But any human rights violation included in a grammar lesson, if it applies to that student is immediately damaging to their self-esteem. And even if it doesn't apply to THEM, most students realize that the author thinks SOME humans are less important that OTHER humans and once that line has been crossed, ALL students begin to doubt their own intrinsic worth and place within humanity.

 

Humans are both incredibly wonderful and incredibly awful. Almost all books are rife with human rights violations.

 

But really, for this price, the author is leaving in language that is obviously damaging at the very least to a large number of students. This isn't an author cleaning up an eBook to the best of their limited abilities,  and making it available as a low cost eBook. I cut people slack for that.

[jaderbee]

How to put this...

 

Savage doesn't bother me. Groups of people regardless of race can have a savage culture, uncivilized and/or vicious. But to just lump all North American tribes under one label is pretty silly. It's like the education I received 30 years ago: All Indians wore boxy fringed leather vests, feathers in their hair and papooses on their backs.

 

And I don't think the authors could have just substituted the deaf population's use of sign language either. Someone would be offended by that too.

[stripe]

And I don't think the authors could have just substituted the deaf population's use of sign language either. Someone would be offended by that too.

Just to clarify: I was proposing reworking that section to make some sort of point about differing language systems, not to suggest deaf people are unintelligent in their use of language. Examining how non-verbal languages assign meaning would be interesting, at least to me. I think it's interesting that (the original) Mother Tongue 1 says this about languages. Notice the difference:

 

One of the common things which serve you

every day is the English language. You have

used this language ever since you began to talk.

You have spoken it everywhere at home, at

school, at play. You are constantly using it.

It is your servant. Do you know what it does

for you ? How much do you know about it ?

 

Tell me this : Do all children speak the same

language? No. You say in English, " I go to

school." The German boy says, " Ich gehe in die

Schule." The French boy says, " Je vais a

1'ecole." You speak in the English language,

the German boy in the German language, the

French boy in the French language. Every

language has names of its own for all common

things. You often speak of your house. Were

you French, you would say " ma maison "; if you

were German, you would say " mem Haus "

instead.

 

Have you ever thought why your language is

called the English language, and why it is dif-

ferent from other languages ? Were you to think

about this, you would ask many questions, some

of which would be hard to answer. 

[jaderbee]

Just to clarify: I was proposing reworking that section to make some sort of point about differing language systems, not to suggest deaf people are unintelligent in their use of language. Examining how non-verbal languages assign meaning would be interesting, at least to me. I think it's interesting that (the original) Mother Tongue 1 says this about languages. Notice the difference:

 

 

One of the common things which serve you

every day is the English language. You have

used this language ever since you began to talk.

You have spoken it everywhere at home, at

school, at play. You are constantly using it.

It is your servant. Do you know what it does

for you ? How much do you know about it ?

 

Tell me this : Do all children speak the same

language? No. You say in English, " I go to

school." The German boy says, " Ich gehe in die

Schule." The French boy says, " Je vais a

1'ecole." You speak in the English language,

the German boy in the German language, the

French boy in the French language. Every

language has names of its own for all common

things. You often speak of your house. Were

you French, you would say " ma maison "; if you

were German, you would say " mem Haus "

instead.

 

Have you ever thought why your language is

called the English language, and why it is dif-

ferent from other languages ? Were you to think

about this, you would ask many questions, some

of which would be hard to answer.

Ok, I'm going to have to look up your link and the sample from Mother Tongue II again. Are these from the same section? This may have to wait until the kids go to bed. Oh and I didn't think you meant to keep the term savage and just plug in deaf people for North American tribes. I was being snarky. :)

[stripe]

Ok, I'm going to have to look up your link and the sample from Mother Tongue II again. Are these from the same section? This may have to wait until the kids go to bed. Oh and I didn't think you meant to keep the term savage and just plug in deaf people for North American tribes. I was being snarky. :)

This is from page 2 of Mother Tongue 1; the newly published book is a reworking of Mother Tongue 2. I think it's weird that the book for younger children handled the concept of language without being offensive.

[Hunter]

Some editing choices are based on nothing but fatigue or laziness or need to make a deadline. I know very little about this vintage book or the editing of it. I'm just talking in general about the glut of edited vintage books that are hitting the market.

[FO4UR]

Why should we feel the need to "cleanse" all old books of ALL words that many people now feel are "insensitive."  I see nothing wrong with these sentences, in this context.  

 

In fact, it would bring a wonderful, teachable moment to explain the attitudes of people in other times. In 'modernizing' something like this I'm sure it was very difficult to decide how much it would be appropriate to change.  I don't know ...perhaps the editor decided to keep a 'hands off' policy to as much of the content as possible.

 

 

The teachable moment, in a history or geography or literature lesson, ....OK. I have used books to talk about the bias and bigotry that pervades humanity.  (We just finished one of these as a read aloud. It was eye-opening...and a great way to set some context for history in the 20th Century.)

 

However, I need grammar materials to help me avoid derailment. There is nothing my dc would love more than to talk about the injustice of the word savage rather than the grammatical intricacies of the English language.

 

 

Besides, I think we all know that too many parents will NOT use this as a teachable moment, and those bigoted beliefs will be passed on...even skipping a generation (b/c many of my generation haven't seen the horrors, haven't read about the horrors, and live in naivety about it all, not seeing the danger in a little word like savage...that's not to mention the condescending tone in and of itself.)

[Hunter]

 

However, I need grammar materials to help me avoid derailment. There is nothing my dc would love more than to talk about the injustice of the word savage rather than the grammatical intricacies of the English language.

 

 

:thumbup:

[Beth in Mint Hill]

Might as well forget about using antique texts if you want to avoid "condescending tone." I just don't think that a student reading this sentence, while understanding the context / time of its writing, would pass on any "bigoted beliefs."  I guess i'm just a little tired of 'speech policing.' 

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Might as well forget about using antique texts if you want to avoid "condescending tone." I just don't think that a student reading this sentence, while understanding the context / time of its writing, would pass on any "bigoted beliefs."  I guess i'm just a little tired of 'speech policing.' 

 

It's probably easy to be tired of 'speech policing' when it's not your family and people being called savages, or when the children you are teaching are not minorities at risk of being harmed by value statements about people groups based solely on race or ethnicity.

[Hunter]

It's one thing to come across mess in a free or very low cost ebook I've downloaded for free onto my iPad, and say to a student, "Yes, these old books that we get for almost free are often racist, but we are poor, and this is what we have. Lets move on and make the best of what we have."

 

It's another to pay full price for a hardcopy that says it's been UPDATED for MODERN students.

 

Some "authors" are trying to have their cake and eat it, too. Well, we as customers can choose to boycott such products. And sometimes just click past what is dollar store merchandise trying to pass itself off as a premium product, the way we do when doing any other shopping.

 

Children of the people group beings slandered are the most immediately and blatantly affected by such writing, but ALL students are negatively affected. As soon as we cross the line that ANY humans can be slandered, then we open up a can of worms in the mind of the student about their own worth.

 

It's like how some people develop PTSD by watching someone ELSE get hurt. It doesn't have to happen to YOU to be hurt by it. Watching is enough to erode your sense of safety and faith.

[stripe]

 I guess i'm just a little tired of 'speech policing.' 

Hmm. That's an interesting interpretation. I never said the product shouldn't be sold; I said it wasn't appropriate for my children and that I wouldn't buy it. I never told anyone else not to buy it. I stated that it was available for free, noted the passage that the editors of the revised version included in the sample, and said that I'd decided it wasn't appropriate for me. For many reasons, including the fact that I have the PDFs of the originals and own way too many books. Including other vintage books that I discovered include random racist statements. I call that "voting with my pocketbook," and I was under the impression that I am allowed to have opinions about items for sale, and act on those beliefs.  :confused1:

 

I really had nothing more to say about this title, but I felt this comment needed to be addressed.

 

Those of us with children who belong to groups who are denigrated for their intellect now or have been in the past, or have been depicted as sub-human, may not want our children to read statements denigrating people's intellect, even if the people being insulted are not of the same background as theirs, and particularly if they are! In other words, you are assuming that racism is merely something that "we" teach our children not to do to others, rather than understanding that for some of us, we are also teaching our children how to reject the racism that may be directed their way. 

 

I downloaded the Mother Tongue books for free [on this day (!)] in 2011, and so I don't see why I would pay money for something that doesn't address the biggest problem with vintage texts, which is not, in my opinion, formatting.

 

My job is to protect and teach my children, not to buy someone's product.

 

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I think Hunter hit the nail on the head. It's one thing to stumble upon outdated materials and accept them for what they are, modifying or rejecting them with very little drama or concern about it because it's not like we can travel back in time to educate people! It was what it was. Everybody knows that. That vintage school book lying there on the shelf at the antique store is a relic.

 

But to publish it NOW without even addressing racism, slander, and incorrect facts is unconscionable. The publisher is saying, "Here, use these shiny new books that I have made available to you. They are ready to use and appropriate; I've edited them and re-published them and I am recommending them for you."

 

That deserves a what-the-heck at the least, and reasoned dialogue (which we're trying to have here) is...reasonable.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I finally looked at the website. They say it is "just right for modern students" AND on the cover you can plainly read that it has been "Adapted by Edwards & Mugglin."

 

So they considered whether the material was appropriate for children today, and they took the time to adapt something or other (they say so, themselves)...yet this passage survived editing. It wasn't an oversight, or an editorial commitment to leaving the original text intact. It was a decision to let it stand and call it both correct and appropriate.

 

https://blueskydaisies.wordpress.com/the-mother-tongue-books/

[Hunter]

 

 I never said the product shouldn't be sold; I said it wasn't appropriate for my children and that I wouldn't buy it. I never told anyone else not to buy it. 

 

 

I'm telling people not to buy it. :lol:

 

And that is coming from someone who has been criticized for her high tolerance of racism in vintage books.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I'm telling people not to buy it. :lol:

 

Me, too, but that's just more free speech! Edwards & Mugglin are free to sell books calling my family savages, and I'm free to tell people I think Edwards & Mugglin are selling books that are not "just right for modern children," because we all enjoy the right to speak our minds freely.

 

Speech policing (?) would be if I had any authority to censor a publisher or restrict book sales or even advertising, and I used that power punitively or arbitrarily when I didn't like printed materials. But I have no such power and I am abusing no such power. I don't have any authority or ability to do anything beyond speaking out against the books and company, and I DO have that right to speak.

[FO4UR]

Might as well forget about using antique texts if you want to avoid "condescending tone." I just don't think that a student reading this sentence, while understanding the context / time of its writing, would pass on any "bigoted beliefs."  I guess i'm just a little tired of 'speech policing.' 

 

 

I use antique books.  They have their place. The place for understanding the context and time in which these books are written is not during a grammar (or math) lesson. A little wink here and a little nod there, and that is how bigotry is passed on. It's rarely an overt process.

 

I'm not speech policing for anyone but my own family. This is a forum for discussing educational materials, and the excerpt quoted is relevant to parents who do wish to avoid lengthy explanations of outside topics in their grammar lessons.

[MicheleinMN]

For parents who have been wanting to use this resource, it is wonderful to have it updated and to have an answer key.  I own several old copies of MT II and wish the workbook and answer key had been available when my children were younger. 

 

They updated the grammar usage and terms, not every sentence/passage used in the book.