From all this one great lesson may be learned: no matter by what divergent means nature may work its ends, similar results are obtained, though often arrived at by opposite means and from opposite directions. Thus life ever presents to us new forms and features, and ever infuses new interest into what otherwise might become unbearable in its monotony. A better insight into these facts ought to make us feel more lenient towards what appear to us as other people's "idiosyncrasies." It should also have a tendency to prevent us from attempting to enforce to their full extent laws made in conformity with our own desires and inclinations but in direct opposition to those of others (foreigners living among us), whose character and disposition lead them in diametrically opposite directions.
Unless otherwise mentioned, I wish the reader to remember that I am always speaking not only from the standpoint of an American, but as an American. The fact of my long residence in this country, where I have spent the best part of my life, in itself would not entitle me to do this, having shown, as I have endeavored to do, that this is not sufficient to change a person from one nationality into another. During my earnest endeavor at fathoming these differences, however, I have been led into assuming the forms which distinguish the Anglo-Saxon from the German. Unless I am with Germans and speak the German language, in my thoughts and otherwise I lead the life of an American.
That my English speech, however (though my friends in their indulgence would lead me to believe otherwise), is not as perfect as it might be, is largely due to the fact of my constantly having recourse to the German language, and that I am thus as constantly led back into these other forms of existence which cannot be indulged in without some detriment and abstraction from either the one or the other. There was a time, in fact, when the transformation I have spoken of was taking place (the disturbance being so great) that I could not speak well either the one language or the other.
I am well convinced, on the other hand, that through perseverance perfection in the utterance of both of these languages, for speech as well as for song, and possibly of some other languages besides, may be attained in the course of time; nature being so pliable that, when the required actions are once fully understood and complied with, a perfect change may be made instantly in passing from one language on to another. Such changes, in fact, are naturally made by persons who, in their infancy, have been educated in and taught to speak several languages at one and the same time; the material during infancy being so pliable that it can be readily formed into any shape and transformed into any other. All of the preceding also shows that, for every separate idiom, the entire instrument must be "tuned" for its production in a given order, and that only when so tuned can such idiom be produced in its entire purity. It also shows that, unless so tuned, the vocal cords of the larynx and replica cease to be instrumental in the production of sound.
An instrument tuned for the production of the English language, consequently, cannot produce German sounds, nor can it produce Romanic, Slavonic, or the sounds of any other language. Sounds, apparently the same, of either the singing or speaking voice of various languages are, therefore, not the same and are certainly not produced in the same manner. For a German, consequently, or an Italian to attempt to teach an English-speaking person the art of singing is an anomaly. A foreigner might, with the same show of reason, attempt to teach persons of another nationality the correct pronunciation of their own language. It would be equally false, of course, for an English-speaking person to attempt to teach a German, Italian, etc., the art of singing, unless he had first mastered his pupil's idiomatic expression, or the pupil had mastered that of his teacher.
Many persons are under the erroneous impression that song and speech are performances separate and apart from each other, while they are in reality of precisely the same, though inverse, order. They are of the same order, for instance, as the back and palm of the hand: the former representing speech, the latter song; the external and the internal, or the anterior and the posterior. As the back of the hand, such must and will be its palm; or, as its palm, such must and will be its back.
Conversing with a teacher some time since, she scorned such propositions, saying a person's language had nothing to do with his or her song; the mode of production of the latter being the same with ALL nationalities; besides, she had studied the larynx, and knew all about it. This, of course, settled it, and I had not anything further to say.
DIFFERENCE IN THEIR MODE OF BREATHING AS BETWEEN ANGLO-SAXONS AND GERMANS
Anglo-Saxons inspire first into the thorax and then into the abdomen. Germans inspire first into the abdomen and then into the thorax. The former expire first from the abdomen and then from the thorax; the latter expire first from the abdomen and then from the thorax. This, however, gives but a partial account of the process of breathing, and I must postpone a more explicit one to a later period.