Martinsburg statesman-democrat. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1906-1921, 1911-09-08
what Is Our Language.

J. Backes, of New York, who de-
scrbes bimself as ''compositoru IN a
letter TO Inter Ocean, raises question
which viii interest all who desire for
any reason to emphasize the political
and other separations Of the Americas
from Europe. The point at issue is
thus stated by Mr.. Backes:
"have Americans really national
language il their language in not
named the American the same as their
flag, heir army, their navy, them
selves are named? What greater de-
gree of preponderence Of American IN
fluence, what relatively greater diml-
| mutton OF oversee prestige must come
to pass before we are justified in call
ing ours the American language? Or
we are justified now?"
Mr.. Backes thinks we are. He points
out that about 1910 Spanish, untii then
The first language Of the Americas in
nnmeer OF speakers, sank to second
place, and now the speakers Of Span
isn, with which he appare thy in,Iud-
es Portuguese, IN the Americas are on
h about haif of those who speak the
language Of the Uuited States.
Furthermore, cut of about $50 ,000,-
90 people in all the world Speak ing
oar language fully two-thirds are un-
der our flag. Yet again, AYERS Mr..
b cbes, not only is by far the greater
part OF the writing, reading, and print
ing in our language done in the United
States, but also:
"Most of the cont ivances aud un-
dertakings which dignity our lang
uage and make it the language of light
and leading: which enlarge its vocabu
larry; which make knowledge of it
daily more imperative even where it is
not national; which fit it for its destin-
ed function as world-speech--suc b
insirumentalities, among hundreds of
others, as. tho telephone, telegraph
photograph, writing and typesetting
machines, airmanship, are either of
American origin or owe their develop
ment and greatest use mainly to
American enterprise and increase )"
All of which statistical facts move Mr..
Backes to these SON ewhat impatient
inquiries:
"If cataclysmal disaster should be-
fall EnglaLd, and finny creatures dis
port at the submarine tombs of CLau-
Ger, Shakespeare, and TeDnyson, would
the few survivors object to the Amer
lean name for our language? Is the
New World now in phrase, politely i,
but not wholly new in fact? Must the
name of our spoken or printed word
forever recall colonial. secondary, trib-
utary days? Or should it deGae, and
in that definition proclaim forged, the
missing link in the chain of American
nationalism?n
swell, we 10 not think there is any
"missing link" Americans are not
less American aud "national' because
their speech is, historically and con.
veniently called "English.n Did Mr..
Backes ever mistake an American for
an Englishman? We think not, Or if
he ever did, for a moment, was il not
merely because of certain aaec.at-
'ong in speech, which. " hen discover
ed, excited his contempt? We think
SO.
The trouble with Mr.. Backes is that
he mistakes mere names for the things
then selves. Our mother tongue is still
our mother, no matter by what named
/ called. British criticasters carp at
| what they call "Americanese." We
used to feel afflicted by these ceusures.
We are not now. Most of Us have out
grown Mr.. BacKes' feelings on that
| point. We go right ahead, making
our speech what we will.