Cultural anthropology is more and more rapidly getting to realize itself as a strictly historical science.

It would, of course, be hopeless to attempt to crowd into an international language all those local overtones of meaning which are so dear to the heart of the nationalist.

Nonverbal communication is an elaborate secret code that is written nowhere, known by none, and understood by all.

Both French and Latin are involved with nationalistic and religious implications which could not be entirely shaken off, and so, while they seemed for a long time to have solved the international language problem up to a certain point, they did not really do so in spirit.

The spirit of logical analysis should in practice blend with the practical pressure for the adoption of some form of international language, but it should not allow itself to be stampeded by it.

We see and hear and otherwise experience very largely as we do because the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation.

English, once accepted as an international language, is no more secure than French has proved to be as the one and only accepted language of diplomacy or as Latin has proved to be as the international language of science.