American Language

by H. L. Mencken

  79 An inadequate one is in Stage Terms, by Percy W. White, American Speech, May, 1926, and an even more scanty one is in Theatrical Lingo, by Ottilie Amend, the same, Oct., 1927. Neither of these lexicographers shows any sign of having had personal experience in the theater. Rather better ones are in The Language of the Theatre, by B. Sobel, Bookman, April, 1929, and A Primer of Broadway Slang, by Walter Winchell, Vanity Fair, Nov., 1927. The latter includes some attempts at etymologies. The peculiar vocabulary of the theatrical weekly, Variety, which has supplied Broadway with many neologisms, is described in The Language of Lobster Alley, by Hiram Motherwell, Bookman, Dec., 1930, and Variety, by Hugh Kent, American Mercury, Dec., 1926. Variety was edited until his death in 1933 by Sime Silverman. In an obituary of him by Epes W. Sargent, printed in his paper on Sept. 26, 1933, it was stated that at the start Variety was “written in the English language,” but that it “never really bit into the business until Sime changed his policy and wrote as a majority of the actors of that day spoke.… It was not that he could not write English, but that most variety actors of that day did not speak it.” Here is a specimen heading from Variety, reprinted in the Manchester Guardian, Jan. 30, 1930:

  Pash Flaps M. C.

  Fan Clubs Rated

  Worthless to Theatres

  As B. O. Gag.

  The Guardian explained to its English readers that the intention here was “to convey the assurance that impassioned young women (flaps, flappers) organized into clubs because of their admiration for the master of ceremonies (usually the leader of the orchestra), have been found useless as a device for increasing box-office receipts.” Some recent specimens from Variety: to air (to go on the air), crix (pi. of critic), outstander (one who is outstanding), builder-upper, juve (juvenile), to guest (to appear as a guest), to ready (to make ready).

  80 Los Angeles, 1935. A shorter word-list is in Movie Talk, by Albert Parry, American Speech, June, 1928. There is a very brief list of radio terms in Radio Slang, by Hilda Cole, Radioland, March, 1935. For the usage in England, which differs considerably from that in this country, see A Dictionary of Wireless Terms, by R. Stranger; London, 1933.

  81 I must content myself with references to only a small part of the literature: Auctioneers: Jewelry Auction Jargon, by Fred Witman, American Speech, June, 1928. Aviators: Aviation Lingo, by P. R. Beath, American Speech, April, 1930; The Speech of the American Airmen, by Chalmers K. Stewart; Akron, O., 1933 (a master’s dissertation, still in MS). Beauticians: Beauty Shoppe Jargon, by N. R. L., the same, April, 1928. Cattlemen: Cow Country Lingo, Chicago Daily News, Aug. 14, 1922; Nebraska Cow Talk, by Melvin Van Denbark, American Speech, Oct., 1929; The Idiom of the Sheep Range, by Charles Lindsay, the same, June, 1931; Ranch Diction of the Texas Panhandle, by Mary Dale Buckner, the same, Feb., 1933. Firemen: Firemen Invent Their Own Slang, New York Sun, March 16, 1932; The Word Potsy, the same, March 26, 1932. Fishermen: Schoonerisms: Some Speech-Peculiarities of the North-Atlantic Fishermen, by David W. Maurer, American Speech, June, 1930. Furniture salesmen: Furniture Lingo, by Charles Miller, the same, Dec., 1930. Lumbermen: Logger Talk, by Guy Williams; Seattle, 1930; Logger Talk, by James Stevens, American Speech, Dec., 1925; Sawmill Talk, by Edward Herry, the same, Oct., 1927; Lumberjack Lingo, by J. W. Clark, the same, Oct., 1931; It Ain’t English, But It’s Hiyu Skookum, by Stewart H. Holbrook, Portland Sunday Oregonian, Nov. 11, 1934. Lunch-wagon attendants: Lunch-Wagon Slanguage, World’s Work, Feb., 1932. Miners: The Lingo of the Mining Camp, American Speech, Nov., 1926; Mining Town Terms, by Joseph and Michael Lopushansky, the same, June, 1929; Mining Expressions Used in Colorado, by L. J. Davidson, the same, Dec., 1929; California Gold-Rush English, by Marian Hamilton, the same, Aug., 1932. Musicians: Radio Bandmen Speak a Strange Language at Their Labors, by Louise Reid, New York American, June 22, 1935; Hot Jazz Jargon, by E. J. Nichols and W. L. Werner, Vanity Fair, Nov., 1935; Jazzing Up Our Musical Terms, by A. C. E. Schonemann, American Speech, June, 1926. Newspaper reporters: Newspaper Nomenclature, by Dorothy Colburn, the same, Feb., 1927; Going to Press, the same, Dec., 1928. Oilfield workers: The Language of the Oil Wells, by Clark S. Northup, Dialect Notes, Vol. II, Pts. V and VI, 1903–4; Oil Field Diction, by A. R. McTee, Publications of the Texas Folk-Lore Society, No. IV, 1925; Language of the California Oil Fields, by F. R. Pond, American Speech, April, 1932. Postoffice workers: Speech in the Post Office, the same, April, 1932. Sailors: Navy Slang, by B. T. Harvey, Dialect Notes, Vol. IV, Pt. II, 1914; Navy Terms, American Speech, March, 1926; Sailor Words, by E. J. Croucher, Word-Lore, April, 1928; Fo’c’sle Lingo, by Jack Healy, American Speech, April, 1928; Elegy for a Dying Tongue, by C. B. W. Richardson, Scribnefs, Aug., 1935. Shoe salesmen: Lingo of the Shoe Salesman, the same, Dec., 1934. Sugar-beet workers: Sugar Beet Language, the same, Oct., 1930. Taxi-Drivers: The Taxi Talk, by George Mil-burn, Folk-Say, Vol. I, 1929. Telegraphers and linemen: Some Telegraphers’ Terms, by Hervey Brack-bill, American Speech, April, 1929; Lineman’s English, by C. P. Loo-mis, the same, Sept., 1926. Undertakers: Mortuary Nomenclature, Hygeia, Nov., 1925. The general terminology of the American labor movement is dealt with in Bulletin No. 25, Bureau of Business Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1921.

  82 For an extensive glossary see The Terminology of Social Workers, by LeRoy E. Bowman, American Speech, June, 1926.

  83 For the librarians see Library Language, by Nellie Jane Compton, American Speech, Nov., 1926. For the nurses see Hospital Talk, by Dorothy Barkley, the same, April, 1927. For the fire insurance brethren see Fire Insurance Terminology, by H. B. Bernstein, the same, July, 1926.

  84 For the benefit of students who wish to travel further down this lane I append a brief bibliography of oddities: Aquarium English, by Ida Mellen, American Speech, Aug., 1928; The Language of the Saints [i.e., Mormons], by Dorothy N. Lindsay, the same, April, 1933; The Speech of Plain Friends [i.e., Quakers], by Kate W. Tibbals, the same, Jan., 1926; Some Peculiarities of Quaker Speech, by Anne W. Comfort, the same, Feb., 1933; The Catholic Language, by Benjamin Musser, Ecclesiastical Review, Dec., 1926; The Book Reviewer’s Vocabulary, by W. O. Clough, American Speech, Feb., 1931; Auto-Tourist Talk, by L. J. Davidson, the same, April, 1934; Legal Lingo, by Reuben Oppenheimer, the same, Dec., 1926; A Dictionary of American Politics, by Edward Conrad Smith; New York, 1924; Twisting the Dictionary to Pad Political Vocabulary, New York Times, Dec 16, 1923; American Political Cant, by Lowry Charles Wimberly, American Speech, Dec., 1926; and More Political Lingo, by the same, the same, July, 1927.

  XII

  THE FUTURE OF THE LANGUAGE

  I. THE SPREAD OF ENGLISH

  The English tongue is of small reach, stretching no further than this island of ours, nay not there over all.

  This was written in 1582. The writer was Richard Mulcaster, headmaster of the Merchant Taylors’ School, teacher of prosody to Edmund Spenser, and one of the earliest of English grammarians. At the time he wrote, English was spoken by between four and five millions of people, and stood fifth among the European languages, with French, German, Italian and Spanish ahead of it in that order, and Russian following. Two hundred years later Italian had dropped behind but Russian had gone ahead, so that English was still in fifth place. But by the end of the Eighteenth Century it began to move forward, and by the middle of the Nineteenth it had forced its way into first place. Today it is so far in the lead that it is probably spoken by as many people as the next two European languages — Russian and German — combined.

  It is not only the first — and, in large part, the only — language of both of the world’s mightiest empires; it is also the second language of large and populous regions beyond their bounds. Its teaching is obligatory in the secondary schools of countries as diverse as Germany and Argentina, Turkey and Denmark, Portugal and Rumania, Estonia and Japan. Three-fourths of all the world’s mail is now written in it, it is used in printing more than half the world’s newspapers, and it is the language of three-fifths of the world’s radio stati
ons.1 No ship captain can trade upon the oceans without some knowledge of it; it is the common tongue of all the great ports, and likewise of all the maritime Bad Lands, from the South Sea Islands and the China Coast to the West Coast of Africa and the Persian Gulf.2 Every language that still resists its advance outside Europe — for example, Spanish and Portuguese in Latin-America, Italian and French in the Levant, and Japanese, Chinese and Hindi in the Far East — holds out against it only by making large concessions to it. Spanish is under heavy assault from English, and especially from American, in Cuba, Puerto Rico, Mexico and the Isthmian region, and everywhere in South and Central America it has taken in many English and American words.3 Japanese has gone even further. Professor Sanki Ichikawa, of the University of Tokyo, reports that in a few months’ reading of Japanese newspapers and magazines he encountered 1400 English words,4 and Dr. Sawbay Arakawa lists nearly 5000 in his “Japanized English.”5 “Of the various European languages which have left a mark on the Japanese vocabulary,” says Professor Ichikawa, “English is by far the most important, and its future influence will probably be such that not only words and expressions will continue to be borrowed in greater numbers, but even the structure and grammar of the Japanese language will be considerably modified.” Chinese, at least along the coast, seems destined to go the same way. According to Professor Tsung-tse Yeh, of Tsing Hua University, Peking,6 its stock of English loan-words has been greatly reinforced since the revolution of 1911, and it is now fashionable for journalists and other vernacular, writers to make a large show of them. Dr. Tsung-tse presents only a meager list, but in it I find four Americanisms — p’u-k’e for poker, fan-shih-ling for vaseline, te-lu-feng for telephone, and ch’ueh-erh-ssu-teng for Charleston (dance). According to another Chinese, Dr. W. W. Yen,

  the study and employment of the English language by thousands of our students, many of whom adopt the literary and teaching professions, and the translation of books from English into Chinese, bound to retain some of the original mode of expression, have unconsciously and inevitably affected our modes of thought and the expression thereof, so that slowly but surely Chinese diction, grammar and style will adopt to a certain extent the English.7

  How many people speak English today? It is hard to answer with any precision, but an approximation is nevertheless possible. First, let us list those to whom English is their native tongue. They run to about 112,000,000 in the continental United States, to 42,000,000 in the United Kingdom, to 6,000,000 in Canada, 6,000,000 in Australia, 3,000,000 in Ireland, 2,000,000 in South Africa, and probably 3,000,000 in the remaining British colonies and in the possessions of the United States. All these figures are very conservative, but they foot up to 174,000,000. Now add the people who, though born to some other language, live in English-speaking communities and speak English themselves in their daily business, and whose children are being brought up to it — say 13,000,000 for the United States, 1,000,000 for Canada, 1,000,000 for the United Kingdom and Ireland, and 2,000,000 for the rest of the world — and you have a grand total of 191,000,000. Obviously, no other language is the everyday tongue of so many people. Spanish, it has been claimed, is spoken by more than 100,000,000,8 but that is little more than half the toll of English. Whether German or Russian comes next is in some doubt, but in any case it is certain that both lie below Spanish. The census of December 17, 1926, indicated that but 80,000,000 of the 150,000,000 citizens of the U.S.S.R. used Russian as their first language; the number has increased since, but probably by no more than 10,000,000.9 German is spoken by 65,000,000 Germans in the Reich, by perhaps 7,000,000 in Austria, by a scant 3,000,000 in German Switzerland, by perhaps 5,000,000 in the lost German and Austrian territories, and by another 5,000,000 in the German-speaking colonies in Russia, the Balkan and Baltic states, and South America. This makes 85,000,000 altogether. Italian and Portuguese10 are the runners-up, and the rest of the European languages are nowhere. Nor is there any rival to English in Asia, for though Chinese is ostensibly the native tongue of more than 300,000,000 people, it is split into so many mutually unintelligible dialects that it must be thought of less as a language than as a group of languages. The same may be said of Hindi.11 As for Japanese, it is spoken by no more than 70,000,000 persons, and thus lags behind not only English, but also Spanish, Russian and German. As for Arabic, it probably falls below even Italian.12

  Thus English is far ahead of any competitor. Moreover, it promises to increase its lead hereafter, for no other language is spreading so fast or into such remote areas. There was a time when French was the acknowledged second language of all Christendom, as Latin had been before it, and even to this day, according to Dr. Frank E. Vizetelly, the number of persons who have acquired it is larger than the number of those who have it by birth. But the advantages of knowing it tend to diminish as English conquers the world, and it is now studied as an accomplishment far more often than as a utility. In Czarist Russia, according to a recent observer,13 “the educated classes spoke chiefly two foreign languages, French and German. French was the language of diplomacy, society, and fashion; German was utilized in the more prosaic fields of business and commerce. However, with the staggering efforts now made at industrialization, at attempts, as Stalin puts it, ‘to overreach and outstrip all capitalist countries,’ including America, German is of first importance, with English running a very close second.” In our own high-schools and colleges French is retained in the curriculum, but it is hardly likely that more than 5% of the students ever acquire any facility at speaking it, or even at reading it. In the schools of Germany, Scandinavia and Japan, however, English is taught with relentless earnestness, and a great deal of it sticks. Indeed, even the French begin to learn it.

  How far it has thus gone as a second language I do not know, but a few facts and figures taken at random may throw some light on the question. In February, 1929, the Stockholm newspaper, Nya Dagligt Allehanda, undertook to find out what proportion of the population of Stockholm had acquired it. All sorts of persons were interviewed, from bankers and business men to taxi-drivers and policemen. It was discovered that every fourth person had enough of the language for all ordinary purposes. This inquiry also showed that 65% of all the foreign business of Sweden was carried on in English. In writing to German correspondents the Swedish firms used German, but for all other foreign correspondence they used English. At the same time the Public Library of Stockholm reported “an incredible inquiry” for English and American books — classical English and modern American. The place thus held by English was formerly held by German and French; the change has come since 1900. In Norway and Denmark there has been a similar movement and in Finland “suggestions have been made that English should replace Swedish as the second official language.” In Estonia, since 1920, “English has been the second language taught to the native-born, and the third to those minorities (Germans, Swedes, Russians, Jews) who use their own tongue first and learn the native language at school.… A hundred thousand boys and girls in Estonia want to learn English.”14 Its position in Portugal is the same, with no minorities to challenge it, and “a very large proportion of the educated inhabitants [already] have a working knowledge of it.”15 In Turkey, before 1923, the second language was French, but since the proclamation of the Republic “the tendency has entirely changed,… and almost everybody,… not only in Constantinople but throughout Anatolia, is learning English as hard as he can go.… The Ministry of Public Instruction has introduced English as a regular part of the school routine in all the secondary schools throughout the country.… On all sides, and every day, one hears such expressions as ‘I want to learn English’ and ‘How long will it take me to learn English?’ ” All this on the authority of Herbert M. Thompson, professor of English at the Galata Saray Lycée, “the Eton of Turkey.”16 Mr. Thompson says that in the commercial section of the school, “where pupils have the option of learning either English or German,” all save one chose English both in 1928 and in 1929. In the evening classes the number of
pupils taking English averages 150–200 a year, whereas the number taking German is but six or eight.

  But perhaps the largest advances of English have been made in Latin-America. Half a century ago English was little used in the lands and islands settled by the Spaniards and Portuguese; the second language in all of them, in so far as they had a second language, was French. But the impact of the Spanish-American War has forced French to share its hegemony, as the English occupation of Egypt has pitted English against it in that country, and indeed throughout the Levant. The Latin-Americans still prefer French on cultural counts, for they continue to regard France as the beacon-light of Latin civilization, but they turn to English for the hard reasons of every day. This movement is naturally most marked in the areas that have come under direct American influence — above all, in Puerto Rico, where about a fourth of the people now speak English17 — but it is also visible everywhere below the Rio Grande. In the Philippines a survey of tenant rice-farmers’ families, made so long ago as 1921–22, showed that 34% of the children were literate in English, as against only 2% literate in Spanish. Among the older people twice as many were literate in English as in Spanish. English is now widely used in the courts, executive offices and Legislative Assembly of the islands, and is frequently employed by political orators.18 Under the Constitution of the new Philippine Commonwealth, Art. XIII, Section 3, “the Legislative Assembly shall take steps toward the development and adoption of a common national language based on one of the existing native languages,” but there is not much likelihood that any such artificial tongue will be perfected in the near future, or that it will be used by the generality of Filipinos when it is. Meanwhile, “until otherwise provided by law, English and Spanish shall continue as official languages” — with English, it will be observed, put first.