BRITICISMS VERSUS AMERICANISMS 325 



country. But the transplanted tongue, having a new and different 

 habitat, began at once to adapt itself, however imperceptibly, to its 

 changed environ and new conditions. Nor was the connection with 

 the parent stock a sufficiently close and vital bond of union to prevent 

 the English speech on American lips from undergoing at least some 

 slight modification in the course of time, as a natural consequence of 

 the altered conditions in the new world. 



It is a well-established linguistic principle that a language in- 

 evitably undergoes a slight change, determined by the varying condi- 

 tions, as long as it is spoken. When a tongue ceases to be spoken, then 

 and only then does it cease to change and become a dead language, as, 

 for instance, Latin and Greek. This fact of the gradual change in a 

 living language is demonstrated through the difficulty one experiences 

 in understanding the English of Chaucer, or even of Shakespeare, for 

 the matter of that, although he is not so far removed from the present 

 age. If a living tongue underwent no alteration with the lapse of 

 years, then why should not Anglo-Saxon be as readily intelligible to 

 us as modern English? 



Furthermore, a language is affected in its development by contact 

 with a foreign tongue and by outside influences, such as the climate. 

 The first of these reasons is so apparent to all that it hardly deserves 

 comment. But not so the second. Yet the influence of climate on a 

 living language is very fruitful of change. Keady proof of this is 

 furnished in our own country in the soft, musical utterance of the 

 south in contrast with the rather shrill and forceful habits of enuncia- 

 tion characteristic of the north. In Europe, for example, the vast pre- 

 ponderance of the harsh, guttural character of the German tongue 

 offers a glaring contrast to the smooth, liquid notes of the pure Tuscan 

 speech. This is the reason why Italian appeals so strongly to music 

 lovers and to all who have an ear trained to be especially sensitive to 

 sound. Now, this difference between German and Italian, as respects 

 the musical character of the two languages, is doubtless to be explained 

 in large measure as the result of climate conditions extending through 

 many long centuries. If by some violent political upheaval the Italians 

 were transported to the extreme northern part of Europe, it is alto- 

 gether probable that their speech in the course of centuries would lose 

 much of its native vocalic development, much of its melody, and become 

 harsh and strident, somewhat like the Eussian language. It follows, 

 therefore, that the English speech on American soil has undergone 

 some slight modification, in consequence of climatic influence. Per- 

 haps this explains the variation of the American pronunciation of the 

 long o-sound as in ' stone ' and ' bone ' from the British norm. But 

 the difference in climate between the two countries is not sufficiently 

 marked to produce any very radical departure. 



