A factor of anthropology: The next claim I make may shock many persons, and many may clearly doubt whether I am on sure grounds. It can be summed up as: The very facial expression of a person who speaks only in a feudal vernacular would be different from the person who was brought up in English. Also, the physical development would be different. Both these factors would be of a negative factor for the vernacular speaker. And would be obvious to anybody who compares both.
This is a claim that can easily be checked. Just compare an Asian who has been brought up in England, and knows only the English language, and does not know his native tongue, and compare his demeanour and physical structure with those persons from his native land. One set of ready examples are the Blacks of U.S.A; compare their postures, expressions, and general facial structures, such as lips, cheeks, bone structure with those of the Blacks of Africa in comparable professions; that is compare a Black labourer in U.S.A, with a labourer in any free Black state in Africa. I am sure that my contention would be felt acceptable. An argument that it is due to the level of nutrition may seem to dent the argument. It can be faced by making the same comparison between a person of Japanese ancestry born and bred in U.S.A with a Japanese living in his native land. You see, Japan cannot claim any lack of nutrition, as of now. Even the physical growth of these persons with acknowledged small physique, may show a marked and statistically relevant difference.
The same thing has been noticed in India. We can take the case of the highly suppressed lower caste individuals, who have been at the butt end of the feudal languages for centuries, of India. Many of them have in recent times broken out of their ancient serfdom. They now experience a new mental freedom after acquiring higher professions including government jobs, and have made remarkable social advance. The children of these individuals have shown changes in their physical growth and expression, differing from slight to remarkable. It may noticed that as one goes up in the society, the lower indicant levels are shed and one enters the higher indicant levels, and the mind also changes from a feeling of subjugation to one of domination. Neither of these are English phenomena.
Taking the argument further, we may even see that just by observing a person's facial expression, one may get an idea of what type of language environment he is subjected to. If it is English, or some language, which has the same relevant qualities like English, then even the children would be having a special looks and features. It may be understood that this effect is entirely independent of race and colour, and pedigree. So that I can emphasise that if a child of English pedigree is brought up in Kerala, in Malayalam as the spoken language, the child would have Malayalee features; at the same time, a child of Malayalee pedigree brought up in England in a fully English environment would display an English poise and bearing.
Envisaging a behaviour
And on knowing a person's language, one may correctly envisage how he would behave in a given social context, if his social levels were also known. For, there are certain ways a language would force a man to behave and restrain himself, in communication and behaviour. For example, a Tamil-speaking worker would enact a particular pose of obsequiousness, to a senior person, if he is fully indoctrinated Tamil in only.
To go beyond all this, one may say that if one gets a skeleton of an ancient man, then if we were to diligently work out how this man's language was, one may understand his station in his society.
