As I was getting too big for Mr. Wopsle's great-aunt's room, my education under
     that preposterous female terminated. Not, however, until Biddy had imparted to me
     everything she knew, from the little catalogues of prices, to a comic song she had
     once brought for a halfpenny. Although the only coherent part of the latter piece of
     literature were the opening lines,

          When I went to Lunnon town sirs,
          Too rul loo rul
          Too rul loo rul
          Wasn't I done very brown sirs?
          Too rul loo rul
          Too rul loo rul

     -- still, in my desire to be wiser, I got this composition by heart with the utmost
     gravity; not do I recollect that I questioned its merit, except that I thought (as I still
     do) the amount of Too rul somewhat in excess of the poetry. (Dickens, 100)

Carroll's Alice and Dickens's Pip both struggle as children to decode the language of adults. Both
children memorize tracts of poetry that serve some purpose (of which they're not sure), and when
someone tampers with linguistic truths (as happens in Alice in Wonderland quite often) the world
seems to lose its entire shape and logic. Pip feels that the poem Biddy brings him as an excess of
"Too rul," but dismisses this criticism as deficiency on his own part, therefore accepting the
nonsense phrases as a higher language of a higher class. Contrarily, Alice receives constant
prodding from the members of Wonderland to reevaluate the words she says, as everyone guards
themselves like Humpty Dumpty, who warns her "If I'd meant that, I'd have said it." The
difference between Pip's struggle and Alice's, then revolves around the fact that Pip tires to learn
the nonsensical forms of language while Alice tries to accommodate how nonsensical forms
intrude upon her language. Dickens, therefore, characterizes Pip as a determined student, hungry
"for information," whereas Carroll presents Alice as a constantly foiled student whose lessons do
not hold when tested.