<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0020" id="link2H_4_0020"></SPAN></p>
<br/>
<h2> ON SPEAKING FRENCH 1919. </h2>
<p>Wherever two Englishmen are speaking French to a Frenchman you may safely
diagnose in the breast of one of the two humiliation, envy, ill-will,
impotent rage, and a dull yearning for vengeance; and you can take it that
the degree of these emotions is in exact ratio to the superiority of the
other man’s performance. In the breast of this other are contempt,
malicious amusement, conceit, vanity, pity, and joy in ostentation; these,
also, exactly commensurable with his advantage. Strange and sad that this
should be so; but so it is. French brings out the worst in all of us—all,
I mean, but the few, the lamentably far too few, who cannot aspire to
stammer some colloquial phrases of it.</p>
<p>Even in Victorian days, when England was more than geographically, was
psychologically an island, French made mischief among us, and was one of
the Devil’s favourite ways of setting brother against brother. But in
those days the bitterness of the weaker brother was a little sweetened
with disapproval of the stronger. To speak French fluently and
idiomatically and with a good accent—or with an idiom and accent
which to other rough islanders seemed good—was a rather suspect
accomplishment, being somehow deemed incompatible with civic worth. Thus
the weaker ones had not to drain the last lees of their shame, and the
stronger could not wholly rejoice in their strength. But the old saving
prejudice has now died out (greatly to the delight of the Devil), and
there seems no chance that it will be revived.</p>
<p>Of other languages no harm comes. None of us—none, at any rate,
outside the diplomatic service—has a feeling that he ought to be
master of them. In every recent generation a few men have learned Italian
because of the Divina Commedia; and a very few others have tried Spanish,
with a view to Cervantes; and German has pestered not always vainly the
consciences of young men gravitating to philosophy or to science. But not
for social, not for any oral purposes were these languages essayed. If an
Italian or a Spanish or a German came among us he was expected to converse
in English or spend his time in visiting the sights silently and alone. No
language except French has ever—but stay! There was, at the outbreak
of the War, a great impulse towards Russian. All sorts of people wanted
their children to be taught Russian without a moment’s delay. I do not
remember that they wanted to learn it themselves; but they felt an extreme
need that their offspring should hereafter be able to converse with
moujiks about ikons and the Little Father and anything else—if there
were anything else—that moujiks cared about. This need, however, is
not felt now. When, so soon after his de’but in high politics, M. Kerensky
was superseded by M. Lenin, Russian was forthwith deemed a not quite nice
language, even for children. Russia’s alphabet was withdrawn from the
nurseries as abruptly as it had been brought in, and le chapeau de la
cousine du jardinier was re-indued with its old importance.</p>
<p>I doubt whether Russian would for more than a little while have seemed to
be a likely rival of French, even if M. Kerensky had been the strong man
we hoped he was. The language that succeeded to Latin as the official mode
of intercourse between nations, and as the usual means of talk between the
well-educated people of any one land and those of any other, had an
initial advantage not quite counterbalanced by the fact that there are in
Russia myriads of people who speak Russian, and a few who can also read
and write it. Russian may, for aught I know, be a very beautiful language;
it may be as lucid and firm in its constructions as French is, and as
musical in sound; I know nothing at all about it. Nor do I claim for
French that it was by its own virtues predestined to the primacy that it
holds in Europe. Had Italy, not France, been an united and powerful nation
when Latin became desuete, that primacy would of course have been taken by
Italian. And I cannot help wishing that this had happened. Italian, though
less elegant, is, for the purpose of writing, a richer language than
French, and an even subtler; and the sound of it spoken is as superior to
the sound of French as a violin’s is to a flute’s. Still, French does, by
reason of its exquisite concision and clarity, fill its post of honour
very worthily, and will not in any near future, I think, be thrust down.
Many people, having regard to the very numerous population of the British
Empire and the United States, cherish a belief that English will presently
be cock of the world’s walk. But we have to consider that English is an
immensely odd and irregular language, that it is accounted very difficult
by even the best foreign linguists, and that even among native writers
there are few who can so wield it as to make their meaning clear without
prolixity—and among these few none who has not been well-grounded in
Latin. By its very looseness, by its way of evoking rather than defining,
suggesting rather than saying, English is a magnificent vehicle for
emotional poetry. But foreigners don’t much want to say beautiful haunting
things to us; they want to be told what limits there are, if any, to the
power of the Lord Mayor; and our rambling endeavours to explain do but
bemuse and annoy them. They find that the rewards of learning English are
as slight as its difficulties are great, and they warn their fellows to
this effect. Nor does the oral sound of English allay the prejudice thus
created. Soothing and dear and charming that sound is to English ears. But
no nation can judge the sound of its own language. This can be judged only
from without, only by ears to which it is unfamiliar. And alas, much as we
like listening to French or Italian, for example, Italians and Frenchmen
(if we insist on having their opinion) will confess that English has for
them a rather harsh sound. Altogether, it seems to me unlikely that the
world will let English supplant French for international purposes, and
likely that French will be ousted only when the world shall have been so
internationalised that the children of every land will have to learn,
besides their own traditional language, some kind of horrible universal
lingo begotten on Volapuk by a congress of the world’s worst pedants.</p>
<p>Almost I could wish I had been postponed to that era, so much have I
suffered through speaking French to Frenchmen in the presence of
Englishmen. Left alone with a Frenchman, I can stumble along, slowly
indeed, but still along, and without acute sense of ignominy. Especially
is this so if I am in France. There is in the atmosphere something that
braces one for the language. I don’t say I am not sorry, even so, for my
Frenchman. But I am sorrier for him in England. And if any Englishmen be
included in the scene my sympathy with him is like to be lost in my agony
for myself.</p>
<p>Would that I had made some such confession years ago! O folly of pride! I
liked the delusion that I spoke French well, a delusion common enough
among those who had never heard me. Somehow I seemed likely to possess
that accomplishment. I cannot charge myself with having ever claimed to
possess it; but I am afraid that when any one said to me ‘I suppose you
speak French perfectly?’ I allowed the tone of my denial to carry with it
a hint of mock-modesty. ‘Oh no,’ I would say, ‘my French is wretched,’
rather as though I meant that a member of the French Academy would detect
lapses from pure classicism in it; or ‘No, no, mine is French pour rire,’
to imply that I was practically bilingual. Thus, during the years when I
lived in London, I very often received letters from hostesses asking me to
dine on the night when Mme. Chose or M. Tel was coming. And always I
excused myself—not on the plea that I should be useless. This method
of mine would have been well enough, from any but the moral standpoint,
had not Nemesis, taking her stand on that point, sometimes ordained that a
Gaul should be sprung on me. It was not well with me then. It was downfall
and disaster.</p>
<p>Strange, how one will trifle with even the most imminent doom. On being
presented to the Gaul, I always hastened to say that I spoke his or her
language only ‘un tout petit peu’—knowing well that this poor spark
of slang would kindle within the breast of M. Tel or the bosom of Mme.
Chose hopes that must so quickly be quenched in the puddle of my
incompetence. I offer no excuse for so foolish a proceeding. I do but say
it is characteristic of all who are duffers at speaking a foreign tongue.
Great is the pride they all take in airing some little bit of idiom. I
recall, among many other pathetic exemplifiers of the foible, an elderly
and rather eminent Greek, who, when I was introduced to him, said ‘I am
jolly glad to meet you, Sir!’ and, having said that, had nothing whatever
else to say, and was moreover unable to grasp the meaning of anything said
by me, though I said the simplest things, and said them very slowly and
clearly. It is to my credit that in speaking English to a foreigner I do
always try to be helpful. I bear witness against Mme. Chose and M. Tel
that for me they have never made a like effort in their French. It is said
that French people do not really speak faster than we, and that their
seeming to do so is merely because of their lighter stress on syllables.
If this is true, I wish that for my sake they would stress their syllables
a little more heavily. By their omission of this kindness I am so often
baffled as to their meaning. To be shamed as a talker is bad enough; it is
even worse to be shamed in the humble refuge of listener. To listen and
from time to time murmur ‘C’est vrai’ may seem safe enough; yet there is
danger even here. I wish I could forget a certain luncheon in the course
of which Mme. Chose (that brilliant woman) leaned suddenly across the
table to me, and, with great animation, amidst a general hush, launched at
me a particularly swift flight of winged words. With pensively narrowed
eyes, I uttered my formula when she ceased. This formula she repeated, in
a tone even more pensive than mine. ‘Mais je ne le connais pas,’ she then
loudly exclaimed. ‘Je ne connais pas même le nom. Dites-moi de ce jeune
homme.’ She had, as it presently turned out, been asking me which of the
younger French novelists was most highly thought of by English critics; so
that her surprise at never having heard of the gifted young Sevre’ was
natural enough.</p>
<p>We all—but no, I must not say that we all have painful memories of
this kind. Some of us can understand every word that flies from the lips
of Mme. Chose or from the mouth of M. Tel. Some of us can also talk
quickly and well to either of these pilgrims; and others can do the trick
passably. But the duffers are in a great grim majority; and the mischief
that French causes among us is mainly manifest, not (I would say) by
weaker brethren hating the stronger, but by weak ones hating the less
weak.</p>
<p>As French is a subject on which we all feel so keenly, a point of honour
on which we are all so sensitive, how comes it that our general
achievement is so slight? There was no lack of hopes, of plans, that we
should excel. In many cases Time was taken for us by the forelock, and a
French nurse installed. But alas! little children are wax to receive and
to retain. They will be charmingly fluent speakers of French within six
weeks of Mariette’s arrival, and will have forgotten every word of it
within as brief an interval after her departure. Later, their minds become
more retentive, though less absorbent; and then, by all means, let French
be taught. Taught it is. At the school where I was reared there were four
French masters; four; but to what purpose? Their class-rooms were scenes
of eternal and incredible pandemonium, filled with whoops and catcalls,
with devil’s-tattoos on desks, and shrill inquiries for the exact date of
the battle of Waterloo. Nor was the lot of those four men exceptional in
its horror. From the accounts given to me by ‘old boys’ of other schools I
have gathered that it was the common lot of French masters on our shores;
and I have often wondered how much of the Anglophobia recurrent among
Frenchmen in the nineteenth century was due to the tragic tales told by
those of them who had returned from our seminaries to die on their own
soil. Since 1914, doubtless, French masters have had a very good time in
England. But, even so, I doubt whether they have been achieving much in
the way of tutelage. With the best will in the world, a boy will profit
but little by three or four lessons a week (which are the utmost that our
system allows him). What he wants, or at any rate will want, is to be able
to cope with Mme. Chose. A smattering of the irregular verbs will not much
avail him in that emprise. Not in the dark by-ways of conjugation, but on
the sunny field of frank social intercourse, must he prove his knighthood.
I would recommend that every boy, on reaching the age of sixteen, should
be hurled across the Channel into the midst of some French family and kept
there for six months. At the end of that time let him be returned to his
school, there to make up for lost time. Time well lost, though: for the
boy will have become fluent in French, and will ever remain so.</p>
<p>Fluency is all. If the boy has a good ear, he will speak with a good
accent; but his accent is a point about which really he needn’t care a
jot. So is his syntax. Not with these will he win the heart of Mme. Chose,
not with these the esteem of M. Tel, not with these anything but a more
acrid rancour in the silly hostility of his competitors. If a foreigner
speaks English to us easily and quickly, we demand no more of him; we are
satisfied, we are delighted, and any mistakes of grammar or pronunciation
do but increase the charm, investing with more than its intrinsic quality
any good thing said—making us marvel at it and exchange fatuous
glances over it, as we do when a little child says something sensible. But
heaven protect us from the foreigner who pauses, searches, fumbles,
revises, comes to standstills, has recourse to dumb-show! Away with him,
by the first train to Dover! And this, we may be sure, is the very train
M. Tel and Mme. Chose would like to catch whenever they meet me—or
you?</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />