<h2> <SPAN name="Appendix_D" id="Appendix_D"></SPAN>APPENDIX D. </h2>
<h3> The Awful German Language </h3>
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>A little learning makes the whole world kin.—Proverbs xxxii, 7.</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p>I went often to look at the collection of curiosities in Heidelberg
Castle, and one day I surprised the keeper of it with my German. I spoke
entirely in that language. He was greatly interested; and after I had
talked a while he said my German was very rare, possibly a "unique"; and
wanted to add it to his museum.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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
<i>Exceptions</i>." 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,
"<i>regen</i> (rain) is masculine—or maybe it is feminine—or possibly
neuter—it is too much trouble to look now. Therefore, it is either
<i>der</i> (the) Regen, or <i>die</i> (the) Regen, or <i>das</i> (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 <i>the</i> rain is <i>der</i> Regen, if it is simply in the quiescent
state of being <i>mentioned</i>, 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 <i>doing something</i>—that
is, <i>resting</i> (which is one of the German grammar's ideas of doing
something), and this throws the rain into the Dative case, and makes it
<i>dem</i> Regen. However, this rain is not resting, but is doing something
<i>actively</i>,—it is falling—to interfere with the bird, likely—and
this indicates <i>movement</i>, which has the effect of sliding it into the
Accusative case and changing <i>dem</i> Regen into <i>den</i> 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) <i>den</i> Regen." Then the teacher lets me softly down with the
remark that whenever the word "wegen" drops into a sentence, it <i>always</i>
throws that subject into the <i>genitive</i> case, regardless of consequences—and
therefore this bird stayed in the blacksmith shop "wegen <i>des</i> Regens."</p>
<p>N.B.—I was informed, later, by a higher authority, that there was an
"exception" which permits one to say "wegen <i>den</i> Regen" in certain peculiar
and complex circumstances, but that this exception is not extended to
anything <i>but</i> rain.</p>
<p>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 enclosed in a parenthesis of its own, with here
and there extra 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—<i>after
which comes the verb</i>, 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 "<i>haben sind gewesen
gehabt haven geworden sein</i>," 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.</p>
<p>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—with 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:</p>
<p>"But when he, upon the street, the
(in-satin-and-silk-covered-now-very-unconstrained-after-the-newest-fashioned-dressed)
government counselor's wife <i>met</i>," etc., etc. [1]</p>
<p>1. Wenn er aber auf der Strasse der in Sammt und Seide gehuellten jetz
sehr ungenirt nach der neusten mode gekleideten Regierungsrathin begegnet.</p>
<p>That is from <i>The Old Mamselle's Secret</i>, 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.</p>
<p>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 <i>not</i> 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.</p>
<p>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 <i>other half</i> 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
<i>reiste ab</i>—which means departed. Here is an example which I culled
from a novel and reduced to English:</p>
<p>"The trunks being now ready, he <i>de-</i> after kissing his mother and sisters,
and once more pressing to his bosom his adored Gretchen, who, dressed in
simple white muslin, with a single tuberose in the ample folds of her rich
brown hair, had tottered feebly down the stairs, still pale from the
terror and excitement of the past evening, but longing to lay her poor
aching head yet once again upon the breast of him whom she loved more
dearly than life itself, <i>parted</i>."</p>
<p>However, it is not well to dwell too much on the separable verbs. One is
sure to lose his temper early; and if he sticks to the subject, and will
not be warned, it will at last either soften his brain or petrify it.
Personal pronouns and adjectives are a fruitful nuisance in this language,
and should have been left out. For instance, the same sound, <i>sie</i>, means
<i>you</i>, and it means <i>she</i>, and it means <i>her</i>, and it means <i>it</i>, and it means
<i>they</i>, and it means <i>them</i>. Think of the ragged poverty of a language which
has to make one word do the work of six—and a poor little weak thing
of only three letters at that. But mainly, think of the exasperation of
never knowing which of these meanings the speaker is trying to convey.
This explains why, whenever a person says <i>sie</i> to me, I generally try to
kill him, if a stranger.</p>
<p>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:</p>
<p>SINGULAR</p>
<p>Nominative—Mein gut<i>er</i> Freund, my good friend. Genitives—Mein<i>es</i>
Gut<i>en</i> Freund<i>es</i>, of my good friend. Dative—Mein<i>em</i> gut<i>en</i> Freund, to my
good friend. Accusative—Mein<i>en</i> gut<i>en</i> Freund, my good friend.</p>
<p>PLURAL</p>
<p>N.—Mein<i>e</i> gut<i>en</i> Freund<i>e</i>, my good friends. G.—Mein<i>er</i> gut<i>en</i>
Freund<i>e</i>, of my good friends. D.—Mein<i>en</i> gut<i>en</i> Freund<i>en</i>, to my good
friends. A.—Mein<i>e</i> gut<i>en</i> Freund<i>e</i>, my good friends.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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, <i>haus</i>, or a horse, <i>pferd</i>, or a dog, <i>hund</i>, 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
<i>hause, pferde, hunde</i>. 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.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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:</p>
<p>"Gretchen. Wilhelm, where is the turnip?</p>
<p>"Wilhelm. She has gone to the kitchen.</p>
<p>"Gretchen. Where is the accomplished and beautiful English maiden?</p>
<p>"Wilhelm. It has gone to the opera."</p>
<p>To continue with the German genders: a tree is male, its buds are female,
its leaves are neuter; horses are sexless, dogs are male, cats are female—tomcats
included, of course; a person's mouth, neck, bosom, elbows, fingers,
nails, feet, and body are of the male sex, and his head is male or neuter
according to the word selected to signify it, and <i>not</i> according to the sex
of the individual who wears it—for in Germany all the women wear
either male heads or sexless ones; a person's nose, lips, shoulders,
breast, hands, and toes are of the female sex; and his hair, ears, eyes,
chin, legs, knees, heart, and conscience haven't any sex at all. The
inventor of the language probably got what he knew about a conscience from
hearsay.</p>
<p>Now, by the above dissection, the reader will see that in Germany a man
may <i>think</i> 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.</p>
<p>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 <i>he</i>, his scales are <i>she</i>, 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 <i>Engl�nnder</i>; to change the sex, he adds INN, and
that stands for Englishwoman—<i>Engl�nderinn</i>. 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 Engl�nderinn,"—which
means "the she-Englishwoman." I consider that that person is
over-described.</p>
<p>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 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," whereas he ought to read in
this way:</p>
<p>TALE OF THE FISHWIFE AND ITS SAD FATE [2]</p>
<p>2. I capitalize the nouns, in the German (and ancient English) fashion.</p>
<p>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 <i>She</i> is partly consumed; and still she spreads, still
she waves her fiery Tongues; she attacks the Fishwife's Leg and destroys
<i>it</i>; she attacks its Hand and destroys <i>Her</i> also; she attacks the Fishwife's
Leg and destroys <i>Her</i> also; she attacks its Body and consumes <i>Him</i>; she
wreathes herself about its Heart and <i>it</i> is consumed; next about its
Breast, and in a Moment <i>She</i> is a Cinder; now she reaches its Neck—He
goes; now its Chin—<i>it</i> goes; now its Nose—<i>She</i> 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.</p>
<p>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 <i>verm�hlt</i>: 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 <i>seem</i> 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 <i>vermiethen</i> (to let, to lease, to
hire); and the word <i>verheirathen</i> (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 <i>associate</i> with a man, or to
<i>avoid</i> him, according to where you put the emphasis—and you can
generally depend on putting it in the wrong place and getting into
trouble.</p>
<p>There are some exceedingly useful words in this language. <i>Schlag</i>, for
example; and <i>zug</i>. There are three-quarters of a column of <i>schlags</i> in the
dictonary, and a column and a half of <i>zugs</i>. The word <i>schlag</i> 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 <i>exact</i> 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 <i>schlag-ader</i>, which means artery,
and you can hang on the whole dictionary, word by word, clear through the
alphabet to <i>schlag-wasser</i>, which means bilge-water—and including
<i>schlag-mutte</i>R, which means mother-in-law.</p>
<p>Just the same with <i>zug</i>. Strictly speaking, <i>zug</i> 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 <i>not</i> mean—when
all its legitimate pennants have been hung on, has not been discovered
yet.</p>
<p>One cannot overestimate the usefulness of <i>schlag</i> and <i>zug</i>. Armed just with
these two, and the word <i>also</i>, what cannot the foreigner on German soil
accomplish? The German word <i>also</i> is the equivalent of the English phrase
"You know," and does not mean anything at all—in <i>talk</i>, though it
sometimes does in print. Every time a German opens his mouth an <i>also</i> falls
out; and every time he shuts it he bites one in two that was trying to <i>get</i>
out.</p>
<p>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
<i>schlag</i> into the vacuum; all the chances are that it fits it like a plug,
but if it doesn't let him promptly heave a <i>zug</i> after it; the two together
can hardly fail to bung the hole; but if, by a miracle, they <i>should</i> fail,
let him simply say <i>also</i>! 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 <i>schlag</i> or two and a <i>zug</i> 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 <i>them</i>. Then you blandly say <i>also</i>, 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."</p>
<p>In my note-book I find this entry:</p>
<p>July 1.—In the hospital yesterday, a word of thirteen syllables was
successfully removed from a patient—a North German from near
Hamburg; but as most unfortunately the surgeons had opened him in the
wrong place, under the impression that he contained a panorama, he died.
The sad event has cast a gloom over the whole community.</p>
<p>That paragraph furnishes a text for a few remarks about one of the most
curious and notable features of my subject—the length of German
words. Some German words are so long that they have a perspective. Observe
these examples:</p>
<p>Freundschaftsbezeigungen.</p>
<p>Dilettantenaufdringlichkeiten.</p>
<p>Stadtverordnetenversammlungen.</p>
<p>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 are some specimens which I lately bought at an
auction sale of the effects of a bankrupt bric-a-brac hunter:</p>
<p>Generalstaatsverordnetenversammlungen.</p>
<p>Alterthumswissenschaften.</p>
<p>Kinderbewahrungsanstalten.</p>
<p>Unabhängigkeitserklärungen.</p>
<p>Wiedererstellungbestrebungen.</p>
<p>Waffenstillstandsunterhandlungen.<br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></p>
<p><SPAN name="p612" id="p612"></SPAN></p>
<div class="fig"> <ANTIMG alt="p612.jpg (24K)" src="images/p612.jpg" width-obs="100%" /><br/></div>
<p><br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></p>
<p>Of course when one of these grand mountain ranges goes stretching across
the printed page, it adorns and ennobles that literary landscape—but
at the same time it is a great distress to the new student, for it blocks
up his way; he cannot crawl under it, or climb over it, or tunnel through
it. So he resorts to the dictionary for help, but there is no help there.
The dictionary must draw the line somewhere—so it leaves this sort
of words out. And it is right, because these long things are hardly
legitimate words, but are rather combinations of words, and the inventor
of them ought to have been killed. They are compound words with the
hyphens left out. The various words used in building them are in the
dictionary, but in a very scattered condition; so you can hunt the
materials out, one by one, and get at the meaning at last, but it is a
tedious and harassing business. I have tried this process upon some of the
above examples. "Freundshaftsbezeigungen" seems to be "Friendship
demonstrations," which is only a foolish and clumsy way of saying
"demonstrations of friendship." "Unabhängigkeitserklärungen"
seems to be "Independencedeclarations," which is no improvement upon
"Declarations of Independence," so far as I can see.
"Generalstaatsverordnetenversammlungen" seems to be
"General-statesrepresentativesmeetings," as nearly as I can get at it—a
mere rhythmical, gushy euphemism for "meetings of the legislature," I
judge. We used to have a good deal of this sort of crime in our
literature, but it has gone out now. We used to speak of a thing as a
"never-to-be-forgotten" circumstance, instead of cramping it into the
simple and sufficient word "memorable" and then going calmly about our
business as if nothing had happened. In those days we were not content to
embalm the thing and bury it decently, we wanted to build a monument over
it.</p>
<p>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 puts 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: "<i>Mrs</i>. 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:</p>
<p>"In the daybeforeyesterdayshortlyaftereleveno'clock Night, the
inthistownstandingtavern called 'The Wagoner' was downburnt. When the fire
to the onthedownburninghouseresting Stork's Nest reached, flew the parent
Storks away. But when the bytheraging, firesurrounded Nest <i>itself</i> caught
Fire, straightway plunged the quickreturning Mother-Stork into the Flames
and died, her Wings over her young ones outspread."</p>
<p>Even the cumbersome German construction is not able to take the pathos out
of that picture—indeed, it somehow seems to strengthen it. This item
is dated away back yonder months ago. I could have used it sooner, but I
was waiting to hear from the Father-stork. I am still waiting.</p>
<p>"<i>Also</i>!" 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—'<i>zwei
glas</i>'" (two glasses of beer). He paused for a moment, reflectively; then
added with feeling: "But I've got that <i>solid</i>!"</p>
<p>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 <i>damit</i>. It was only
the <i>sound</i> 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.</p>
<p>3. It merely means, in its general sense, "herewith."</p>
<p>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 <i>schlacht</i>? Or would not a
comsumptive 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
<i>gewitter</i> was employed to describe? And observe the strongest of the
several German equivalents for explosion—<i>ausbruch</i>. 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—Hoelle—sounds
more like <i>helly</i> than anything else; therefore, how necessarily 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?</p>
<p>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."</p>
<p>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 <i>sound</i> 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.</p>
<p>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.<br/></p>
<hr />
<p><br/></p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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 ever going to get out of it again. The Dative case is but an ornamental
folly—it is better to discard it.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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 way. [4]</p>
<p>1. "Verdammt," and its variations and enlargements, are words which have
plenty of meaning, but the <i>sounds</i> 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.'"</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>Sixthly, I would require a speaker to stop when he is done, and not hang a
string of those useless "haven 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.</p>
<p>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-enclosing 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.</p>
<p>And eighthly, and last, I would retain <i>zug</i> and <i>schlag</i>, with their
pendants, and discard the rest of the vocabulary. This would simplify the
language.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>A FOURTH OF JULY ORATION IN THE GERMAN TONGUE, DELIVERED AT A BANQUET OF
THE ANGLO-AMERICAN CLUB OF STUDENTS BY THE AUTHOR OF THIS BOOK</p>
<p>Gentlemen: Since I arrived, a month ago, in this old wonderland, this vast
garden of Germany, my English tongue has so often proved a useless piece
of baggage to me, and so troublesome to carry around, in a country where
they haven't the checking system for luggage, that I finally set to work,
and learned the German language. Also! Es freut mich dass dies so ist,
denn es muss, in ein hauptsächlich degree, höflich sein, dass
man auf ein occasion like this, sein Rede in die Sprache des Landes worin
he boards, aussprechen soll. Dafuer habe ich, aus reinische Verlegenheit—no,
Vergangenheit—no, I mean Höflichkeit—aus reinishe Höflichkeit
habe ich resolved to tackle this business in the German language, um
Gottes willen! Also! Sie muessen so freundlich sein, und verzeih mich die
interlarding von ein oder zwei Englischer Worte, hie und da, denn ich
finde dass die deutsche is not a very copious language, and so when you've
really got anything to say, you've got to draw on a language that can
stand the strain.</p>
<p>Wenn haber man kann nicht meinem Rede Verstehen, so werde ich ihm später
dasselbe uebersetz, wenn er solche Dienst verlangen wollen haben werden
sollen sein hätte. (I don't know what wollen haben werden sollen sein
hätte means, but I notice they always put it at the end of a German
sentence—merely for general literary gorgeousness, I suppose.)</p>
<p>This is a great and justly honored day—a day which is worthy of the
veneration in which it is held by the true patriots of all climes and
nationalities—a day which offers a fruitful theme for thought and
speech; und meinem Freunde—no, mein<i>en</i> Freund<i>en</i>—mein<i>es</i> Freund<i>es</i>—well,
take your choice, they're all the same price; I don't know which one is
right—also! ich habe gehabt haben worden gewesen sein, as Goethe
says in his Paradise Lost—ich—ich—that is to say—ich—but
let us change cars.</p>
<p>Also! Die Anblich so viele Grossbrittanischer und Amerikanischer hier
zusammengetroffen in Bruderliche concord, ist zwar a welcome and
inspiriting spectacle. And what has moved you to it? Can the terse German
tongue rise to the expression of this impulse? Is it
Freundschaftsbezeigungenstadtverordnetenversammlungenfamilieneigenthümlichkeiten?
Nein, O nein! This is a crisp and noble word, but it fails to pierce the
marrow of the impulse which has gathered this friendly meeting and
produced diese Anblick—eine Anblich welche ist gut zu sehen—gut
fuer die Augen in a foreign land and a far country—eine Anblick
solche als in die gewöhnliche Heidelberger phrase nennt man ein "schönes
Aussicht!" Ja, freilich natürlich wahrscheinlich ebensowohl! Also!
Die Aussicht auf dem Koenigsstuhl mehr grösser ist, aber geistlische
sprechend nicht so schön, lob' Gott! Because sie sind hier
zusammengetroffen, in Bruderlichem concord, ein grossen Tag zu feirn,
whose high benefits were not for one land and one locality, but have
conferred a measure of good upon all lands that know liberty today, and
love it. Hundert Jahre vorueber, waren die Engländer und die
Amerikaner Feinde; aber heut sind sie herzlichen Freunde, Gott sei Dank!
May this good-fellowship endure; may these banners here blended in amity
so remain; may they never any more wave over opposing hosts, or be stained
with blood which was kindred, is kindred, and always will be kindred,
until a line drawn upon a map shall be able to say: "<i>This</i> bars the
ancestral blood from flowing in the veins of the descendant!"<br/> <br/>
<br/> <br/></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />