| English-Zone.Com...the BEST English-Learner's site on the 'Net! |
| THE AWFUL
GERMAN LANGUAGE
by Mark Twain |
||||||||||||
|
"A little learning makes the whole world kin" -- Proverbs xxxii, 7.
If he had known what
it had cost me to acquire my art, he would also have known that it would
break any collector to buy it. Harris and I had been hard at work on our
German during several weeks at that time, and although we had made good
progress, it had been accomplished under great difficulty and annoyance,
for three of our teachers had died in the mean time. A person who has not
studied German can form no idea of what a perplexing language it is.
Surely there is not
another language that is so slipshod and systemless, and so slippery and
elusive to the grasp. One is washed about in it, hither and thither, in
the most helpless way; and when at last he thinks he has captured a rule
which offers firm ground to take a rest on amid the general rage and turmoil
of the ten parts of speech, he turns over the page and reads, "Let the
pupil make careful note of the following exceptions." He runs his
eye down and finds that there are more exceptions to the rule than instances
of it. So overboard he goes again, to hunt for another Ararat and find
another quicksand. Such has been, and continues to be, my experience. Every
time I think I have got one of these four confusing "cases" where I am
master of it, a seemingly insignificant preposition intrudes itself into
my sentence, clothed with an awful and unsuspected power, and crumbles
the ground from under me. For instance, my book inquires after a certain
bird -- (it is always inquiring after things which are of no sort of consequence
to anybody): "Where is the bird?" Now the answer to this question -- according
to the book -- is that the bird is waiting in the blacksmith shop on account
of the rain. Of course no bird would do that, but then you must stick to
the book. Very well, I begin to cipher out the German for that answer.
I begin at the wrong end, necessarily, for that is the German idea. I say
to myself, "Regen
(rain) is masculine -- or maybe it is feminine
-- or possibly neuter -- it is too much trouble to look now. Therefore,
it is either der (the) Regen, or die (the) Regen, or das
(the) Regen, according to which gender it may turn out to be when I look.
In the interest of science, I will cipher it out on the hypothesis that
it is masculine. Very well -- then the rain is der Regen,
if it is simply in the quiescent state of being mentioned, without
enlargement or discussion -- Nominative case; but if this rain is lying
around, in a kind of a general way on the ground, it is then definitely
located, it is doing something -- that is, resting (which
is one of the German grammar's ideas of doing something), and this throws
the rain into the Dative case, and makes it dem Regen. However, this rain
is not resting, but is doing something
actively, -- it is falling
-- to interfere with the bird, likely -- and this indicatesmovement,
which has the effect of sliding it into the Accusative case and changing
dem
Regen
into den Regen." Having completed the grammatical horoscope of this
matter, I answer up confidently and state in German that the bird is staying
in the blacksmith shop "wegen (on account of) den Regen." Then the teacher
lets me softly down with the remark that whenever the word "wegen" drops
into a sentence, it always throws that subject into the Genitive
case, regardless of consequences -- and that therefore this bird stayed
in the blacksmith shop "wegen des Regens."
N. B. -- I was informed,
later, by a higher authority, that there was an "exception" which permits
one to say "wegen den Regen" in certain peculiar and complex circumstances,
but that this exception is not extended to anything but rain.
There are ten parts
of speech, and they are all troublesome. An average sentence, in a German
newspaper, is a sublime and impressive curiosity; it occupies a quarter
of a column; it contains all the ten parts of speech -- not in regular
order, but mixed; it is built mainly of compound words constructed by the
writer on the spot, and not to be found in any dictionary -- six or seven
words compacted into one, without joint or seam -- that is, without hyphens;
it treats of fourteen or fifteen different subjects, each inclosed in a
parenthesis of its own, with here and there extra parentheses which reinclose
three or four of the minor parentheses, making pens within pens: finally,
all the parentheses and reparentheses are massed together between a couple
of king-parentheses, one of which is placed in the first line of the majestic
sentence and the other in the middle of the last line of it -- after
which comes the VERB, and you find out for the first time what the
man has been talking about; and after the verb -- merely by way of ornament,
as far as I can make out -- the writer shovels in "haben sind gewesen
gehabt haben geworden sein," or words to that effect, and the monument
is finished. I suppose that this closing hurrah is in the nature of the
flourish to a man's signature -- not necessary, but pretty. German books
are easy enough to read when you hold them before the looking-glass or
stand on your head -- so as to reverse the construction -- but I think
that to learn to read and understand a German newspaper is a thing which
must always remain an impossibility to a foreigner.
Yet even the German
books are not entirely free from attacks of the Parenthesis distemper --
though they are usually so mild as to cover only a few lines, and therefore
when you at last get down to the verb it carries some meaning to your mind
because you are able to remember a good deal of what has gone before. Now
here is a sentence from a popular and excellent German novel -- which a
slight parenthesis in it. I will make a perfectly literal translation,
and throw in the parenthesis-marks and some hyphens for the assistance
of the reader -- though in the original there are no parenthesis-marks
or hyphens, and the reader is left to flounder through to the remote verb
the best way he can:
"But when he, upon
the street, the (in-satin-and-silk-covered-now-very-unconstrained-after-the-
newest-fashioned-dressed) government counselor's wife met," etc.,
etc. [1]
[1]:
Wenn er aber auf der Strasse der in Sammt und Seide gehüllten jetz
sehr ungenirt nach der neusten mode gekleideten Regierungsrathin begegnet.
That is from The Old
Mamselle's Secret, by Mrs. Marlitt. And that sentence is constructed upon
the most approved German model. You observe how far that verb is from the
reader's base of operations; well, in a German newspaper they put their
verb away over on the next page; and I have heard that sometimes after
stringing along the exciting preliminaries and parentheses for a column
or two, they get in a hurry and have to go to press without getting to
the verb at all. Of course, then, the reader is left in a very exhausted
and ignorant state.
We have the Parenthesis
disease in our literature, too; and one may see cases of it every day in
our books and newspapers: but with us it is the mark and sign of an unpracticed
writer or a cloudy intellect, whereas with the Germans it is doubtless
the mark and sign of a practiced pen and of the presence of that sort of
luminous intellectual fog which stands for clearness among these people.
For surely it is not clearness -- it necessarily can't be clearness. Even
a jury would have penetration enough to discover that. A writer's ideas
must be a good deal confused, a good deal out of line and sequence, when
he starts out to say that a man met a counselor's wife in the street, and
then right in the midst of this so simple undertaking halts these approaching
people and makes them stand still until he jots down an inventory of the
woman's dress. That is manifestly absurd. It reminds a person of those
dentists who secure your instant and breathless interest in a tooth by
taking a grip on it with the forceps, and then stand there and drawl through
a tedious anecdote before they give the dreaded jerk. Parentheses in literature
and dentistry are in bad taste.
The Germans have another
kind of parenthesis, which they make by splitting a verb in two and putting
half of it at the beginning of an exciting chapter and the other half at
the end of it. Can any one conceive of anything more confusing than that?
These things are called "separable verbs." The German grammar is blistered
all over with separable verbs; and the wider the two portions of one of
them are spread apart, the better the author of the crime is pleased with
his performance. A favorite one is reiste ab -- which means departed. Here
is an example which I culled from a novel and reduced to English:
Now observe the Adjective.
Here was a case where simplicity would have been an advantage; therefore,
for no other reason, the inventor of this language complicated it all he
could. When we wish to speak of our "good friend or friends," in our enlightened
tongue, we stick to the one form and have no trouble or hard feeling about
it; but with the German tongue it is different. When a German gets his
hands on an adjective, he declines it, and keeps on declining it until
the common sense is all declined out of it. It is as bad as Latin. He says,
for instance:
Now let the candidate
for the asylum try to memorize those variations, and see how soon he will
be elected. One might better go without friends in Germany than take all
this trouble about them. I have shown what a bother it is to decline a
good (male) friend; well this is only a third of the work, for there is
a variety of new distortions of the adjective to be learned when the object
is feminine, and still another when the object is neuter. Now there are
more adjectives in this language than there are black cats in Switzerland,
and they must all be as elaborately declined as the examples above suggested.
Difficult? -- troublesome? -- these words cannot describe it. I heard a
Californian student in Heidelberg say, in one of his calmest moods, that
he would rather decline two drinks than one German adjective.
The inventor of the
language seems to have taken pleasure in complicating it in every way he
could think of. For instance, if one is casually referring to a house,
Haus,
or a horse, Pferd, or a dog, Hund, he spells these words
as I have indicated; but if he is referring to them in the Dative case,
he sticks on a foolish and unnecessary e and spells them Hause, Pferde,
Hunde. So, as an added e often signifies the plural, as the s does
with us, the new student is likely to go on for a month making twins out
of a Dative dog before he discovers his mistake; and on the other hand,
many a new student who could ill afford loss, has bought and paid for two
dogs and only got one of them, because he ignorantly bought that dog in
the Dative singular when he really supposed he was talking plural -- which
left the law on the seller's side, of course, by the strict rules of grammar,
and therefore a suit for recovery could not lie.
In German, all the
Nouns begin with a capital letter. Now that is a good idea; and a good
idea, in this language, is necessarily conspicuous from its lonesomeness.
I consider this capitalizing of nouns a good idea, because by reason of
it you are almost always able to tell a noun the minute you see it. You
fall into error occasionally, because you mistake the name of a person
for the name of a thing, and waste a good deal of time trying to dig a
meaning out of it. German names almost always do mean something, and this
helps to deceive the student. I translated a passage one day, which said
that "the infuriated tigress broke loose and utterly ate up the unfortunate
fir forest" (Tannenwald). When I was girding up my loins to doubt
this, I found out that Tannenwald in this instance was a man's name.
Every noun has a gender,
and there is no sense or system in the distribution; so the gender of each
must be learned separately and by heart. There is no other way. To do this
one has to have a memory like a memorandum-book. In German, a young lady
has no sex, while a turnip has. Think what overwrought reverence that shows
for the turnip, and what callous disrespect for the girl. See how it looks
in print -- I translate this from a conversation in one of the best of
the German Sunday-school books:
Now, by the above dissection,
the reader will see that in Germany a man may think he is a man,
but when he comes to look into the matter closely, he is bound to have
his doubts; he finds that in sober truth he is a most ridiculous mixture;
and if he ends by trying to comfort himself with the thought that he can
at least depend on a third of this mess as being manly and masculine, the
humiliating second thought will quickly remind him that in this respect
he is no better off than any woman or cow in the land.
In the German it is
true that by some oversight of the inventor of the language, a Woman is
a female; but a Wife (Weib) is not -- which is unfortunate. A Wife,
here, has no sex; she is neuter; so, according to the grammar, a fish is
he,
his scales are she, but a fishwife is neither. To describe a wife
as sexless may be called under-description; that is bad enough, but over-description
is surely worse. A German speaks of an Englishman as the Engländer;
to change the sex, he adds inn, and that stands for Englishwoman -- Engländerinn.
That seems descriptive enough, but still it is not exact enough for a German;
so he precedes the word with that article which indicates that the creature
to follow is feminine, and writes it down thus: "die Engländerinn,"
-- which means "the she-Englishwoman." I consider that that person
is over-described.
Well, after the student
has learned the sex of a great number of nouns, he is still in a difficulty,
because he finds it impossible to persuade his tongue to refer to things
as "he" and "she", and "him"
and "her", which
it has been always accustomed to refer to it as "it." When he even
frames a German sentence in his mind, with the hims and hers in the right
places, and then works up his courage to the utterance-point, it is no
use -- the moment he begins to speak his tongue flies the track and all
those labored males and females come out as "its." And even when
he is reading German to himself, he always calls those things "it",
where
as he ought to read in this way:
It is a bleak Day.
Hear the Rain, how he pours, and the Hail, how he rattles; and see the
Snow, how he drifts along, and of the Mud, how deep he is! Ah the poor
Fishwife, it is stuck fast in the Mire; it has dropped its Basket of Fishes;
and its Hands have been cut by the Scales as it seized some of the falling
Creatures; and one Scale has even got into its Eye. and it cannot get her
out. It opens its Mouth to cry for Help; but if any Sound comes out of
him, alas he is drowned by the raging of the Storm. And now a Tomcat has
got one of the Fishes and she will surely escape with him. No, she bites
off a Fin, she holds her in her Mouth -- will she swallow her? No, the
Fishwife's brave Mother-dog deserts his Puppies and rescues the Fin --
which he eats, himself, as his Reward. O, horror, the Lightning has struck
the Fish-basket; he sets him on Fire; see the Flame, how she licks the
doomed Utensil with her red and angry Tongue; now she attacks the helpless
Fishwife's Foot -- she burns him up, all but the big Toe, and even she
is
partly consumed; and still she spreads, still she waves her fiery Tongues;
she attacks the Fishwife's Leg and destroys
it; she attacks its
Hand and destroys her also; she attacks the Fishwife's Leg and destroys
her also; she attacks its Body and consumes him; she wreathes
herself about its Heart and it is consumed; next about its Breast, and
in a Moment she is a Cinder; now she reaches its Neck -- he goes;
now its Chin --
it goes; now its Nose -- she goes. In another
Moment, except Help come, the Fishwife will be no more. Time presses --
is there none to succor and save? Yes! Joy, joy, with flying Feet the she-Englishwoman
comes! But alas, the generous she-Female is too late: where now is the
fated Fishwife? It has ceased from its Sufferings, it has gone to a better
Land; all that is left of it for its loved Ones to lament over, is this
poor smoldering Ash-heap. Ah, woeful, woeful Ash-heap! Let us take him
up tenderly, reverently, upon the lowly Shovel, and bear him to his long
Rest, with the Prayer that when he rises again it will be a Realm where
he will have one good square responsible Sex, and have it all to himself,
instead of having a mangy lot of assorted Sexes scattered all over him
in Spots.
There, now, the reader
can see for himself that this pronoun business is a very awkward thing
for the unaccustomed tongue. I suppose that in all languages the similarities
of look and sound between words which have no similarity in meaning are
a fruitful source of perplexity to the foreigner. It is so in our tongue,
and it is notably the case in the German. Now there is that troublesome
word vermählt: to me it has so close a resemblance -- either
real or fancied -- to three or four other words, that I never know whether
it means despised, painted, suspected, or married; until I look in the
dictionary, and then I find it means the latter. There are lots of such
words and they are a great torment. To increase the difficulty there are
words which seem to resemble each other, and yet do not; but they
make just as much trouble as if they did. For instance, there is the word
vermiethen
(to let, to lease, to hire); and the word
verheirathen (another
way of saying to marry). I heard of an Englishman who knocked at a man's
door in Heidelberg and proposed, in the best German he could command, to
"verheirathen" that house. Then there are some words which mean one thing
when you emphasize the first syllable, but mean something very different
if you throw the emphasis on the last syllable. For instance, there is
a word which means a runaway, or the act of glancing through a book, according
to the placing of the emphasis; and another word which signifies to associate
with a man, or to avoid him, according to where you put the
emphasis -- and you can generally depend on putting it in the wrong place
and getting into trouble.
There are some exceedingly
useful words in this language. Schlag, for example; and Zug.
There are three-quarters of a column of Schlags
in the dictionary,
and a column and a half of Zugs. The word Schlag means Blow, Stroke,
Dash, Hit, Shock, Clap, Slap, Time, Bar, Coin, Stamp, Kind, Sort, Manner,
Way, Apoplexy, Wood-cutting, Enclosure, Field, Forest-clearing. This is
its simple and exact meaning -- that is to say, its restricted,
its fettered meaning; but there are ways by which you can set it free,
so that it can soar away, as on the wings of the morning, and never be
at rest. You can hang any word you please to its tail, and make it mean
anything you want to. You can begin with Schlag-ader, which means
artery, and you can hang on the whole dictionary, word by word, clear through
the alphabet to Schlag-wasser, which means bilge-water -- and including
Schlag-mutter, which means mother-in-law.
Just the same with
Zug. Strictly speaking,
Zug means Pull, Tug, Draught, Procession,
March, Progress, Flight, Direction, Expedition, Train, Caravan, Passage,
Stroke, Touch, Line, Flourish, Trait of Character, Feature, Lineament,
Chess-move, Organ-stop, Team, Whiff, Bias, Drawer, Propensity, Inhalation,
Disposition: but that thing which it does not mean -- when all its legitimate
pennants have been hung on, has not been discovered yet.
One cannot overestimate
the usefulness of Schlag and Zug. Armed just with these two,
and the word also, what cannot the foreigner on German soil accomplish?
The German word also is the equivalent of the English phrase "You know,"
and does not mean anything at all -- in talk, though it sometimes
does in print. Every time a German opens his mouth an also falls out; and
every time he shuts it he bites one in two that was trying to get
out.
Now, the foreigner,
equipped with these three noble words, is master of the situation. Let
him talk right along, fearlessly; let him pour his indifferent German forth,
and when he lacks for a word, let him heave a
Schlag into the vacuum;
all the chances are that it fits it like a plug, but if it doesn't let
him promptly heave a Zug after it; the two together can hardly fail
to bung the hole; but if, by a miracle, they should fail, let him
simply say also! and this will give him a moment's chance to think
of the needful word. In Germany, when you load your conversational gun
it is always best to throw in a Schlag or two and a Zug or
two, because it doesn't make any difference how much the rest of the charge
may scatter, you are bound to bag something with them. Then you
blandly say also, and load up again. Nothing gives such an air of grace
and elegance and unconstraint to a German or an English conversation as
to scatter it full of "Also's" or "You knows."
In my note-book I find
this entry:
These things are not
words, they are alphabetical processions. And they are not rare; one can
open a German newspaper at any time and see them marching majestically
across the page -- and if he has any imagination he can see the banners
and hear the music, too. They impart a martial thrill to the meekest subject.
I take a great interest in these curiosities. Whenever I come across a
good one, I stuff it and put it in my museum. In this way I have made quite
a valuable collection. When I get duplicates, I exchange with other collectors,
and thus increase the variety of my stock. Here rare some specimens which
I lately bought at an auction sale of the effects of a bankrupt bric-a-brac
hunter:
But in our newspapers
the compounding-disease lingers a little to the present day, but with the
hyphens left out, in the German fashion. This is the shape it takes: instead
of saying "Mr. Simmons, clerk of the county and district courts, was in
town yesterday," the new form put it thus: "Clerk of the County and District
Courts Simmons was in town yesterday." This saves neither time nor ink,
and has an awkward sound besides. One often sees a remark like this in
our papers: "Mrs. Assistant District Attorney Johnson returned to
her city residence yesterday for the season." That is a case of really
unjustifiable compounding; because it not only saves no time or trouble,
but confers a title on Mrs. Johnson which she has no right to. But these
little instances are trifles indeed, contrasted with the ponderous and
dismal German system of piling jumbled compounds together. I wish to submit
the following local item, from a Mannheim journal, by way of illustration:
"Also!" If I
had not shown that the German is a difficult language, I have at least
intended to do so. I have heard of an American student who was asked how
he was getting along with his German, and who answered promptly: "I am
not getting along at all. I have worked at it hard for three level months,
and all I have got to show for it is one solitary German phrase -- "Zwei
glas" (two glasses of beer). He paused for a moment, reflectively;
then added with feeling: "But I've got that solid!"
And if I have not also
shown that German is a harassing and infuriating study, my execution has
been at fault, and not my intent. I heard lately of a worn and sorely tried
American student who used to fly to a certain German word for relief when
he could bear up under his aggravations no longer -- the only word whose
sound was sweet and precious to his ear and healing to his lacerated spirit.
This was the word Damit. It was only the sound that helped him, not the
meaning; [3] and so, at last, when he learned that the emphasis was not
on the first syllable, his only stay and support was gone, and he faded
away and died.
[3]:
It merely means, in its general sense,"herewith."
I think that a description
of any loud, stirring, tumultuous episode must be tamer in German than
in English. Our descriptive words of this character have such a deep, strong,
resonant sound, while their German equivalents do seem so thin and mild
and energyless. Boom, burst, crash, roar, storm, bellow, blow, thunder,
explosion; howl, cry, shout, yell, groan; battle, hell. These are magnificent
words; the have a force and magnitude of sound befitting the things which
they describe. But their German equivalents would be ever so nice to sing
the children to sleep with, or else my awe-inspiring ears were made for
display and not for superior usefulness in analyzing sounds. Would any
man want to die in a battle which was called by so tame a term as a
Schlacht? Or would not a consumptive feel too much bundled up, who
was about to go out, in a shirt-collar and a seal-ring, into a storm which
the bird-song word Gewitter was employed to describe? And observe
the strongest of the several German equivalents for explosion -- Ausbruch.
Our word Toothbrush is more powerful than that. It seems to me that the
Germans could do worse than import it into their language to describe particularly
tremendous explosions with. The German word for hell -- Hölle --
sounds more like helly than anything else; therefore, how necessary
chipper, frivolous, and unimpressive it is. If a man were told in German
to go there, could he really rise to thee dignity of feeling insulted?
Having pointed out,
in detail, the several vices of this language, I now come to the brief
and pleasant task of pointing out its virtues. The capitalizing of the
nouns I have already mentioned. But far before this virtue stands another
-- that of spelling a word according to the sound of it. After one short
lesson in the alphabet, the student can tell how any German word is pronounced
without having to ask; whereas in our language if a student should inquire
of us, "What does B, O, W, spell?" we should be obliged to reply, "Nobody
can tell what it spells when you set if off by itself; you can only tell
by referring to the context and finding out what it signifies -- whether
it is a thing to shoot arrows with, or a nod of one's head, or the forward
end of a boat."
There are some German
words which are singularly and powerfully effective. For instance, those
which describe lowly, peaceful, and affectionate home life; those which
deal with love, in any and all forms, from mere kindly feeling and honest
good will toward the passing stranger, clear up to courtship; those which
deal with outdoor Nature, in its softest and loveliest aspects -- with
meadows and forests, and birds and flowers, the fragrance and sunshine
of summer, and the moonlight of peaceful winter nights; in a word, those
which deal with any and all forms of rest, repose, and peace; those also
which deal with the creatures and marvels of fairyland; and lastly and
chiefly, in those words which express pathos, is the language surpassingly
rich and affective. There are German songs which can make a stranger to
the language cry. That shows that the
sound
of the words is correct
-- it interprets the meanings with truth and with exactness; and so the
ear is informed, and through the ear, the heart.
The Germans do not
seem to be afraid to repeat a word when it is the right one. they repeat
it several times, if they choose. That is wise. But in English, when we
have used a word a couple of times in a paragraph, we imagine we are growing
tautological, and so we are weak enough to exchange it for some other word
which only approximates exactness, to escape what we wrongly fancy is a
greater blemish. Repetition may be bad, but surely inexactness is worse.
There are people in
the world who will take a great deal of trouble to point out the faults
in a religion or a language, and then go blandly about their business without
suggesting any remedy. I am not that kind of person. I have shown that
the German language needs reforming. Very well, I am ready to reform it.
At least I am ready to make the proper suggestions. Such a course as this
might be immodest in another; but I have devoted upward of nine full weeks,
first and last, to a careful and critical study of this tongue, and thus
have acquired a confidence in my ability to reform it which no mere superficial
culture could have conferred upon me.
In the first place,
I would leave out the Dative case. It confuses the plurals; and, besides,
nobody ever knows when he is in the Dative case, except he discover it
by accident -- and then he does not know when or where it was that he got
into it, or how long he has been in it, or how he is going to get out of
it again. The Dative case is but an ornamental folly -- it is better to
discard it.
In the next place,
I would move the Verb further up to the front. You may load up with ever
so good a Verb, but I notice that you never really bring down a subject
with it at the present German range -- you only cripple it. So I insist
that this important part of speech should be brought forward to a position
where it may be easily seen with the naked eye.
Thirdly, I would import
some strong words from the English tongue -- to swear with, and also to
use in describing all sorts of vigorous things in a vigorous ways. [4]
[4]:
"Verdammt," and its variations and enlargements, are words which have plenty
of meaning, but the sounds are so mild and ineffectual that German
ladies can use them without sin. German ladies who could not be induced
to commit a sin by any persuasion or compulsion, promptly rip out one of
these harmless little words when they tear their dresses or don't like
the soup. It sounds about as wicked as our "My gracious." German ladies
are constantly saying, "Ach! Gott!" "Mein Gott!" "Gott in Himmel!" "Herr
Gott" "Der Herr Jesus!" etc. They think our ladies have the same custom,
perhaps; for I once heard a gentle and lovely old German lady say to a
sweet young American girl: "The two languages are so alike -- how pleasant
that is; we say `Ach! Gott!' you say `Goddamn.'"
Fourthly, I would reorganizes
the sexes, and distribute them accordingly to the will of the creator.
This as a tribute of respect, if nothing else.
Fifthly, I would do
away with those great long compounded words; or require the speaker to
deliver them in sections, with intermissions for refreshments. To wholly
do away with them would be best, for ideas are more easily received and
digested when they come one at a time than when they come in bulk. Intellectual
food is like any other; it is pleasanter and more beneficial to take it
with a spoon than with a shovel.
Sixthly, I would require
a speaker to stop when he is done, and not hang a string of those useless
"haben sind gewesen gehabt haben geworden seins" to the end of his
oration. This sort of gewgaws undignify a speech, instead of adding a grace.
They are, therefore, an offense, and should be discarded.
Seventhly, I would
discard the Parenthesis. Also the reparenthesis, the re-reparenthesis,
and the re-re-re-re-re-reparentheses, and likewise the final wide-reaching
all-inclosing king-parenthesis. I would require every individual, be he
high or low, to unfold a plain straightforward tale, or else coil it and
sit on it and hold his peace. Infractions of this law should be punishable
with death.
And eighthly, and last,
I would retain Zug and Schlag, with their pendants, and discard
the rest of the vocabulary. This would simplify the language.
I have now named what
I regard as the most necessary and important changes. These are perhaps
all I could be expected to name for nothing; but there are other suggestions
which I can and will make in case my proposed application shall result
in my being formally employed by the government in the work of reforming
the language.
My philological studies
have satisfied me that a gifted person ought to learn English (barring
spelling and pronouncing) in thirty hours, French in thirty days, and German
in thirty years. It seems manifest, then, that the latter tongue ought
to be trimmed down and repaired. If it is to remain as it is, it ought
to be gently and reverently set aside among the dead languages, for only
the dead have time to learn it.
|
| Copyright (C) 1995-2004 by Kaye Mastin Mallory |