The times., 1901-03-24
WHY MEN USE PROFANITY.
Theories Set Forth by an Iowa Col
Iege Professor.
From the New York Tribune }

(from the New FORK Trlbune)
Prof. G. r. w. Patrick, of the Universe
ty of Iowa, recently read a paper on
Profanity before a scientific society in
Lincoln Neb. A good deal of it was
couched in technical language which can
not easily be translated into popular
phraseology. And some of the ideas which
he advanced will probably not receive
unanimous approval from those who have
studied human emotion and its expression
with care. Nevertheless, the topic IS one
in which great many people besides sci
entists are interested What Prof, Pa
trick set out to do was to answer TWO
questions: Why do men swear? ana
when they swear why do they use the
words they do2
In the. first place the variety Of cir
cumstances in which profanity is indulg-
ed in is pointed out. 1t is characteristic
of anger a failure to find adequate eX-
preston in ordinary language for an en-
phatic statement, and an effort to stltnu-
late workmen and horses to extra effort.
And the use of oaths is accompanied by a
pleasant feeling of relief from some pain
full stress. on this latter point Professor
Patrick quotes a sentence of }. IL camp
bell. concerning the physiology OF the
emotions: The shouting and gesticula-
tion which accompany an OutburSt OF pas
sion act phySiOlogiCally by relieving nerve
tension, and indeed, as Hughlings jack
son has suggested. swearing may not be
without it's physiological justification
The lecturer at Lincoln Celebrates the
idea still further by remarking that in the
whole muscular sytem comes into hVely
action. and any restraint that is put upon
this form of activity creates a necessity
for other outlets. Men In anger may
perhaps be obliged to repress every overt
act and every expression Of emotion eN-
cept facial movements or some form OF
vocalization. Profanity is therefore
safety valve. = II a man ana not swear
he would do something worse. II may pe
likened to the engine blowing off steam.
Prof Patrick insists however that this
. la cot fgsfsa Faf nv -
him He raises both psychological and
physiological objections to it. some Of
which will impress the average reader as
a trifle abstruse. But he also urges that
swearing is more than a mere expression
of emotion. 1t is designed to produce an
effect on somebody else. He traces its
origin back to the animal instinct to fight
or fly when attacked. In a primitive stage
of existence the creature would, in The
former instance, show it's teeth, get its
back up, and spit or growl. All Of this
behavior would be intended TO put the
enemy TO fight. says Prof. Patrick, who
adds: The human analogue Of the groWl
or roar of anger is the profane oath.
One can easily recall situations TO which
this explanation does not seem to apply.
When "A mans collar button rolls under
the bed or the bureau, for instance. and
he INDUCES in unparliamentaTy language,
il can hardly be imagined that he delib
erately aims to intimidate the elusivssbft
Of metal Still il may be that the iowa
professor is referring only TO the eVOiu-
tion Of the swearing instinct in man, and
does not intend that his theory shall eX-
plain each particular manifestation of 1t.
The hypothesis advanced TO account for
the habit of swearing leads naturally to
Prof. Patrick 3 explanation of the form
OF mems oaths, theHreckIess use of the
names of the Deity. the saints and sacred
things. Assuming that this motive is-or
was when the practice originated-to
shock or startle. il would be hard to find
a better way TO accomplish the object
than the practice which is forbidden by
the third commandment.
Here again, the theory fails to cover all
the observed facts, however accurately 1t
may ut a few. There are some oaths the
precise significance OF which is obscure
But on the other hand, there are many
which distinctly call down the curse OF
Heaven upon the person addressed ana
are meant TO do so And il is probable
that a good deal Of the swearing that
Prof Patrick has i'm mind is made up OF
contractions from what were originally
well defined maledicuons, the most en-
phatic form of expressing wish that
evil bodily or spiritual. might befali
somebody There is more in an oaih OF
this kind than shocking the sensiDiilties
OF the subject.