ROTATION OF CENTRIPETAL AND CENTRIFUGAL ACTION

Speaking of centripetal and centrifugal motion as separate actions, there must, of course, be a rotation of these actions to produce a complete action of any kind. We, however, speak of the one which prevails over the other, as the action under consideration. Thus when I say a German's mode of eating is centripetal, I say so because the action of his jaws being direct, it is first centrifugal, then centripetal, then centrifugal, then again centripetal. When I say an Anglo-Saxon's mode is centrifugal, I say so because the action of his jaws being indirect, it is first centripetal, then centrifugal, then centripetal, then again centrifugal, and finally once more centripetal. This, with a German, of course, means: Open, close, open, close. With an Anglo-Saxon it means: Close, open, close, open, close. This, however, only gives the main features of an act of eating, etc., as well as uttering sounds; any of these acts, in reality, requiring eight movements to carry on one complete act. When centrifugal prevails centripetal follows, and when centripetal prevails centrifugal follows. It stands to reason that an action which is composed of open, close, open, close, or close, open, close, open, close, cannot continue in the same rotation indefinitely, but must be complemented by a motion of the opposite nature; such complementary action, however, always being executed inwardly and not outwardly. While the action of the jaws just now described precedes mastication, the inner action complementary thereof is accompanied by the act of swallowing.

Thus with a German there are four movements preceding mastication and four for swallowing; with an Anglo-Saxon there are five movements for the former and three for the latter; while the act of mastication proper with both nations consists of eight movements which are repeated as often as is necessary for the act of swallowing.

The respective manner in which knives and forks are handled in eating by Germans and Anglo-Saxons, as well as the different manner in which they dance, and the characters they use in writing, might be cited as results of the different modes in which centripetal and centrifugal actions prevail with them. The characters Germans use in writing being centrifugal in their nature and those Anglo-Saxons use centripetal, this can only be accounted for by assuming that the muscular action preparatory to the act of writing in both instances is of the opposite nature.

In consequence of the centrifugal movements of their jaws and lips, the teeth, with English-speaking persons, are always on exhibition; while the centripetal movement prevailing with Germans conceals them. The consequence is that English-speaking people pay the utmost attention to the care and perfection of their teeth, while Germans, in the highest ranks even, frequently neglect them to an almost shameful degree. The direct outcome of this state of affairs is the great advancement which the practice of dentistry has made in this country and in England, while it is one to which, on the continent of Europe, but comparatively little attention is being paid.

With English-speaking people, especially the women, whose lips are more flexible than men's, the teeth of the upper jaw are more frequently exposed than those of the lower, for this reason: The œsophagus being the main instrument for English speech, its sounds, in coming to the surface from beneath the tongue, require the latter to remain in a semi-raised position most of the time; the upper lip, being in the way of these sounds coming to the surface, must be raised for the same reason; in so doing it exposes the upper row of teeth. The lower lip is lowered for the sounds of the trachea for the same reason that the upper is raised for those of the œsophagus. Whenever the upper lip is raised the lower must be immediately lowered, and vice versa. With Anglo-Saxons the main movement is with the upper, with Germans it is with the lower lip. Owing to the centripetal action with Germans, these movements are less pronounced than they are with English-speaking people.

The act of smiling being produced in the same order as that of speaking, the same conditions prevail in relation to the same.

In speaking English you can "feel" that the upper lip is the main vehicle; it has all the life in it. In speaking German you can "feel" it is the lower, which for that language possesses the life. If you make the former rigid you cannot speak English; if you make the latter rigid you cannot speak German.

In connection with the movements of the lips it will be noticed that while the upper jaw and the roof of the mouth are dominated by the trachea and the thorax, and the lower jaw and the bottom of the mouth by the œsophagus and the abdomen, the upper lip is dominated by the sounds of the œsophagus, and the lower by those of the trachea. This, however, is owing to mechanical reasons only, as explained, and not to vital causes.

The foreigner who learns to speak the English language ever so well, though he may reside here almost a lifetime, if he does not learn to speak it idiomatically correct, will not be influenced by it to any great extent in any of the various manners of which I have made mention, either as regards his features, character, habits, motions, thoughts, etc.; but, in spite of his "English," he will still be a foreigner. This foreigner's children, however, provided he does not influence them to the contrary through pride of his native tongue, and if reared under native influences, will become thorough Americans.

There need be no fear, therefore, that immigration might bring to this country a permanent foreign element. Such elements, when they do come, are of a passing nature. Their offspring, in passing the crucial test of the English tongue, sink the foreigner into the all-absorbing element of the English idiom; and in so doing are merged into and become an integral part of the people of this country. They may come of whatever nation, from whatever land; no matter how they may appear, act, or speak, the English idiom will continue to make them Americans, in their children at least, in the future as it has in the past. There is thus in the centrifugal force which dominates the speech of Anglo-Saxons that which is a safeguard to the homogeneity as well as the institutions of this nation.

An Anglo-Saxon cannot be a bondsman; his language forbids it. The centrifugal force which prevails with him does not permit fetters. The children of all foreigners born here and speaking the English language come under its spell. If language did not have this supreme influence, there is no other influence that would have prevented this country long ago from having become inhabited in special districts with permanent groups of people foreign to its aims and institutions, and alien to its genius, its character, and its customs. In districts where German is spoken as the principal language, as in some parts of Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, it is not, with the native-born at least, the pure German language, but its idiomatic expression is that of the English tongue.

People say, "It is the climate." We have every climate under the sun; yet in all that is essential the man from Maine is as thoroughly American as the one from Texas; the gold-digger in the frozen regions of the Yukon as the man of the orange-groves of Florida or California; the American fisherman on the Banks of Newfoundland as those on the Gulf of Mexico; the man who battles on the plains against the Indians as he who serves under the banner of the Republic and upholds its glory in foreign lands and seas. You can tell an American the moment you look at him. Yet if you ask some of them where their parents were born, you will hear strange tales of lands and peoples across the sea and far away.

Language does not work every wonder, of course. The influence of heredity perpetuates that of language; but the latter is the primary influence. Nor can it be denied that every foreigner living here for some time, whether he has learned to speak English or not, will, to some extent at least, be influenced by the habits, customs, institutions, climate, and language of this country. This does not detract, however, from the force of my argument regarding language and its influence as the most vital force in shaping a people's characteristic traits, physically as well as spiritually.

There has been of late a great deal of talk and enthusiasm even regarding the desirability of a closer alliance between the two great English-speaking nations; their natural affinity and kinship. This affinity, this belonging together, this being of one family and one stock, is commonly expressed by this term, "English-speaking peoples." That which I have endeavored to explain at length is thus tacitly acknowledged to be correct through the use of this term, which implies that it is the English tongue which makes these peoples one in sentiment, in feeling, in their aims and purposes, as it makes them one in their physical appearance, their motions, the exercise of their faculties and functions, etc.