NationStates Jolt Archive

and how do you suppose we stop languages from going extinct? some sort of mass breeding program (orgy) to replenish the numbers?

edit: my Пря́жа now!

Thousands of languages facing extinction


21 February 2008 - The International Year of Languages kicked off today with a warning from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) that more than half the world's 6,700 spoken languages are threatened with extinction and every two weeks on average one language disappears somewhere around the world.

In a message marking International Mother Language Day, which was also celebrated today, UNESCO Director-General Koïchiro Matsuura stressed the importance of all languages to everyday life.

"Far from being a field reserved for analysis by specialists, languages lie at the heart of all social, economic and cultural life," Mr. Matsuura said, explaining that 'Languages matter!' is the UNESCO slogan for the International Year.

The agency held a series of events - including a round table, a seminar, several presentations and an information workshop - at its Paris headquarters to mark the Day and launch the International Year.

International Mother Language Day has been celebrated on 21 February each year since 2000, and this year UNESCO said it had placed special emphasis on international instruments and standards that encourage multilingualism.

The agency warned that when a language fades, so does a part of the world's cultural tapestry, adding that globalization is placing many languages under ever greater threat. Today, experts estimate that 96 per cent of the world's languages are spoken by only 4 per cent of the total population.

"Opportunities, traditions, memory, unique modes of thinking and expression - valuable resources for ensuring a better future are also lost," UNESCO said in a statement.


(link (http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0802/S00293.htm))

The article says it all, really. Each language corresponds to a unique sum of knowledge, and a unique way of viewing and understanding the world. That's something which many people seem not to realise. There seems to be an assumption that each language is a mirror of every other, albeit with different vocabulary and grammar. That's not so. Every language is unique in its structure, in the way it both formats and expresses a people's understanding of reality, of society, of human interactions, and so on...

By the way, one of the languages of the United States, the Eyak language of Alaska, went extinct last month.

I don't rightly know what we can do to stop languages from going extinct, but we should really do our best to record these languages while there are still living speakers to explain them for us.

It's sad and regrettable, no doubt.
Yet, to be perfectly honest, the one thing worse than a language dying out is one that's being kept alive artificially.
Ireland is a prime example, Gaelic was forced "underground" by the English and survived as a native language only in remote corners of the island. After the Republic was founded, great efforts were (and still are) being made to reconstitute Gaelic as national language, with English as second language. Children are forced (many willingly, but a good few really grow to hate it during their school years) to learn Gaelic from the day they enter school, there's a Gaelic TV channel, the Gaeltacht (areas where people still speak Gaelic as first language) has massive restrictions as to who can buy property and live there, basically only allowing people who speak Gaelic into them, and recently the town of Dingle was renamed to its Gaelic name, which bears no resemblance to the English name, causing me and my BF ot get hopelessly lost on the way there as the road signs only showed the Gaelic, while our map only had the English. Thankfully, some clever soul who aparently realised that a town that lives of tourism will suffer if people are no longer able to find it re-painted the name on some of the signs...

Don't get me wrong, I like the sound of the language, and I'm planning on learning it myself at some point, however overall I don't think it will ever be turned into a national, living, spoken language again. People learn it, but have no need to speak among themselves. So the language is dying from disuse...

It happens. It happened to Latin, it happened to Old Norse, it happened at all times and everywhere. It's sad, but there's next to nothing that can be done to prevent it, really...

Ari,

As it happens, like you I feel passionately about the language loss issue (we'll leave aside for the moment the problem of distinguishing between language and dialect).

Call to Power - his pryaja steal notwithstanding - brings up the usual objection of 'but what do you suggest we do about it'.

And on a purely practical level, there's not much we can do to stop languages expiring as true spoken languages. The revival of modern Hebrew is essentially unique. Nor is language decline easy to reverse; in Europe, Welsh is a rare recent success story, but Irish proves that not all the government support in the world can save a language if people choose to stop speaking it.

Depressingly, we may have to resign ourselves to simply recording as much as possible of those languages that are in danger of extinction so that at least they're recorded and their unique worldview isn't entirely lost.

and recently the town of Dingle was renamed to its Gaelic name, which bears no resemblance to the English name,
An Deangain, for those who want a comparison. But yeah, Irish is about as useful as Latin these days.


Also, since you're trying to learn Irish, the Star will have an Irish for Beginners CD with it tomorrow.

If there are 6700 languages, and at least 6700 people that give a damn about whether they go extinct, why don't they each learn one? That solves the problem for another generation.

(Well ok, granted, one person is not enough to keep a language alive. But surely it shouldn't be that hard to find/pay a small group of people, for each language, to keep it alive; if it matters that much and isn't just something to complain about.)

If there are 6700 languages, and at least 6700 people that give a damn about whether they go extinct, why don't they each learn one? That solves the problem for another generation.

(Well ok, granted, one person is not enough to keep a language alive. But surely it shouldn't be that hard to find/pay a small group of people, for each language, to keep it alive; if it matters that much and isn't just something to complain about.)

A language isn't kept alive by people learning it. Otherwise both Latin and Gaelic would be thriving.
It's alive if people speak it day-to-day, and generally use it for communication. If that doesn't happen, a language will slowly lose all relevance as its words aren't being updated, and no longer function at all as a communication tool. It dies.

An Deangain, for those who want a comparison. But yeah, Irish is about as useful as Latin these days.

Though I know of at least one example where knowing the Welsh version of placenames is really useful.

I used to spend a lot of time working in north Pembrokeshire, near the small town of Newport, which has absolutely nothing to do with the large town of Newport in southeast Wales. Many was the time that one of our overseas volunteers would get off the train in big Newport, thereby missing one of the twice-daily trains to Fishguard (the closest station to little Newport).

Fortunately, the Welsh names are completely different... big Newport is Casnewydd, while little Newport is Trefdreath, so that sometimes helped.

I suppose the difference with Dingle, however, is that both the Welsh and English place names remain on the signs.

Also, since you're trying to learn Irish, the Star will have an Irish for Beginners CD with it tomorrow.

Good to know, thanks! :)
i've been trying for ages to find a beginner's course for adults, so I could take evening classes, but that doesn't seem to exist. So now I'm planning a language holiday somewhere in the West for this summer.

I suppose the difference with Dingle, however, is that both the Welsh and English place names remain on the signs.

Used to be the same for Dingle. The English name was on top, printed in bold white letters. The Gaelic name was underneath, printed in cursive white.
When they changed the name, they simply stuck green tape in the same shade as the background of the sign over the English name, you could clearly see that close-up on some signs...

and how do you suppose we stop languages from going extinct?

There's no easy or perfect solution.

One attempt that I'm aware of is in New Zealand. The government there has been supporting "language nest" schools, where children can be immersed in New Zealand Maori, Cook Islands Maori, Niuean or Tokelauan from a very young age. (Those being four of the five indigenous languages of territories under NZ sovereignty. The fifth, Moriori, is virtually extinct already.)

It's done on a voluntary basis. Maori parents are by no means forced to send their children to these schools. Nor are the schools exclusively for Maori (or for Cook Islanders, etc...); they're open to anyone. I once met a young Pakeha (white) New Zealand lady whose parents had sent her to school to learn Maori from a young age, believing that she should know the language of her country's indigenous people.

I don't know how effective the New Zealand solution is, but it might conceivably provide a model for other countries.

This is a good thing, the universalization of a common form of communication can only bring good to humanity and reduce the reasons for sectarianism.

maybe we could set up special camps like with the Amish? :p

I once met a young Pakeha (white) New Zealand lady whose parents had sent her to school to learn Maori from a young age, believing that she should know the language of her country's indigenous people.

problem that seems to point to though is why send your kids to native language centers when you could send them to say French school and have then learn a useful skill?

This is a good thing, the universalization of a common form of communication can only bring good to humanity and reduce the reasons for sectarianism.

in the same sense that having only one form of music would be good?

edit: bloody time warps

A language isn't kept alive by people learning it. Otherwise both Latin and Gaelic would be thriving.
It's alive if people speak it day-to-day, and generally use it for communication. If that doesn't happen, a language will slowly lose all relevance as its words aren't being updated, and no longer function at all as a communication tool. It dies.

You beat me to it.

As an example, the Gaagudju language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaagudju_language) of Australia was studied before it became extinct in 2002. There are, one assumes, scholars who know at least the basics of it. It's extinct because it has no native speakers, the last one having died six years ago. A language is not "alive" simply because it's partly preserved in writing by linguists and anthropologists.

I suppose the difference with Dingle, however, is that both the Welsh and English place names remain on the signs.
Indeed. I don't see what anyone hopes to achieve by removing the English names from gaeltacht towns.
Good to know, thanks! :)
i've been trying for ages to find a beginner's course for adults, so I could take evening classes, but that doesn't seem to exist. So now I'm planning a language holiday somewhere in the West for this summer.

I imagine some will start coming about now that we have so much immigration. Polish parents and the like wanting to be able to keep up with their kids and the like.

Also, remember to bring some happy pills with you if you go to the Burren. Most bleak depressing place evar.

A language isn't kept alive by people learning it. Otherwise both Latin and Gaelic would be thriving.
It's alive if people speak it day-to-day, and generally use it for communication. If that doesn't happen, a language will slowly lose all relevance as its words aren't being updated, and no longer function at all as a communication tool. It dies.Well, ok so that adds another condition; they'll still need to learn it, but then also use it in day-to-day use.
If nobody is willing to do that, not even the people lamenting the loss of languages, does it really matter?

I imagine some will start coming about now that we have so much immigration. Polish parents and the like wanting to be able to keep up with their kids and the like.

Also, remember to bring some happy pills with you if you go to the Burren. Most bleak depressing place evar.

They were going on about that on The Panel a while back... since Donegal apparently has the mosty Polish imigration per capita, they were speculationg what that would do to the already bad local accent there... and if Gaelic and Polish would form some sort of Pidgin language.

problem that seems to point to though is why send your kids to native language centers when you could send them to say French school and have then learn a useful skill?

*nods* That would depend on your priorities, I suppose. Although... Do they teach French in New Zealand pre-schools? If not, then sending your kid to a Maori pre-school would ensure that he/she was raised bilingual, thus enhancing his/her ability to learn further languages in later years. It would therefore have practical value too.

This is a good thing, the universalization of a common form of communication can only bring good to humanity and reduce the reasons for sectarianism.

By crippling our ability to broaden our understanding, and narrowing our potential awareness of other modes of thought, other ideas...

Besides, your "point" is a non sequitur. One can learn a "universal language" as a second language without that necessitating the eradication of all other languages. People do it all the time.

By the way, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_advantages_to_bilingualism

Well, ok so that adds another condition; they'll still need to learn it, but then also use it in day-to-day use.
If nobody is willing to do that, not even the people lamenting the loss of languages, does it really matter?

Do you realise what you're saying?

An outsider cannot simply become a native speaker of a dying language just by wanting to. For several reasons.

1) A language cannot be dissociated from the culture which defines it and is defined by it. You would have to become part of the moribund linguistic community. An endeavour which would virtually be a contradiction in terms and an exercise in the impossible. Individual efforts, even with heaps of good will, would amount more or less to nothing.

2) Even if it were possible, can you even begin to fathom the commitment this would require of the outsider? We live in reality, not in an ideal world where no-one has other commitments. Most people cannot simply ditch their job, drag their family abroad and devote their lives to immersing themselves in a dying language.

3) Assuming you wanted to learn and practice such a language without uprooting yourself, whom would you converse with?

and how do you suppose we stop languages from going extinct? some sort of mass breeding program (orgy) to replenish the numbers?

edit: my Пря́жа now!

I would say foment the study and use of these languages. And appeal to the government of your respective countries to protect them. Many provinces in Spain have passed laws that protect the regional dialects for posterity. In my province, for example, in 1998, the government passed a law called "Ley 1/1998, de 23 de marzo, de uso y promoción del bable/asturiano". This law protecs the use and study of our language.

For those interested in checking what this law has done for the dialects of Asturias, check the following link:
BABLE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asturian_language#_note-0)

Aridd darling, I appreciate your topic(s) and all, but haven't you started a thread on this already (http://www.forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=538681), and haven't we discussed this in all directions there already?


Just for the record, let me just add that I still hold that


I know and support the thesis that languages represent, contain and preserve a lot of the (cultural) identity and knowledge of a people, and that the loss of the language will result in the loss of a probably unique world view that could possibly have benefitted many other


Yet, I also believe that languages, just like any other cultures or aspects thereof, will inevitably die sooner or later to be replaced by others, and trying to artificially "keep it alive" is not only fruitless, but also without major "intrinsic moral value".


For educational purposes, I still would like to see all languages we can possibly get hold of to be recorded and the knowledge about them preserved for posterity, just as we do with/about the cultures long gone.

Well, ok so that adds another condition; they'll still need to learn it, but then also use it in day-to-day use.
If nobody is willing to do that, not even the people lamenting the loss of languages, does it really matter?

Well, it's still a loss in a way, as every language offers a unique and different view of the world, and would allow you to express things in a different way... it's a rather complex system. Think about it... how much can you think that doesn't rely on the language you use?

On the other hand, languages have been dying since they were invented. I think it's a natural process, languages die and other languages evolve. What might be different now is the rate at which they die out, with the world growing smaller and there being less and less independent communities to keep their own language alive..

Aridd darling, I appreciate your topic(s) and all, but haven't you started a thread on this already (http://www.forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=538681), and haven't we discussed this in all directions there already?


:eek: My mind must be crumbling... :(

Oh well. Can't really do anything about it.

I like yaks. :)

In pies?

and how do you suppose we stop languages from going extinct? some sort of mass breeding program (orgy) to replenish the numbers?

edit: my Пря́жа now!

THe only real solution is to destroy all forms of mass transit and instant comunication and go back to horses, yaks and camels.

I like yaks. :)

In pies?

Apparently there is such a thing called yak pie.

Any Tibetans out there care to share their recipe?

Apparently there is such a thing called yak pie.

Any Tibetans out there care to share their recipe?

It doesn't look very aerodynamic

http://www.flickr.com/photos/59827036@N00/311015343/

Apparently there is such a thing called yak pie.

Any Tibetans out there care to share their recipe?

Apparently, yak is one of the main dishes served in Mongolia.
YUM! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuisine_of_Mongolia)

It doesn't look very aerodynamic

http://www.flickr.com/photos/59827036@N00/311015343/

This one looks more hurlable: http://k43.pbase.com/o4/78/587478/1/53747115.day1CRW_7703.jpg

they're very smelly creatures. And cheese made from yak milk is just.....odd. Looks like congealed curdled milk Tastes like, well, yak.
And don't get me started on yak butter tea. ugh.

On the plus side, yak steaks are delish.

Yaks always look depressed and suicidal to me - standing around in the cold can't make them exactly full of joy.

I like yaks. :)
they're very smelly creatures. And cheese made from yak milk is just.....odd. Looks like congealed curdled milk Tastes like, well, yak.
And don't get me started on yak butter tea. ugh.

On the plus side, yak steaks are delish.

Well... if a language is going to die, then the people who are interested in it will have to keep it alive.

I should also note that, even if we were to end up with one universal language, the mere fact that the world is still quite large will result in a large number of dialects. Large numbers of dialects will eventually result in different languages.

For an example of this, see Danish and Norwegian - once more or less the same language two hundred years ago, they are growing farther and farther apart because, despite globalisation, neither is submitted to the same cultural changes.

The more speakers a language has, the more it will change and grow. Give English six billion speakers and it won't stay the same English for very long (I experienced this while living in Belgium, as the Danish speaking community would learn French, Dutch and English, but their Danish would be reminiscent of the 80s. However, just one person coming from Denmark was enough to influence it and update it. It was quite interesting, as it showed that the fewer people you have, the slower a language will change).

One attempt that I'm aware of is in New Zealand. The government there has been supporting "language nest" schools, where children can be immersed in New Zealand Maori, Cook Islands Maori, Niuean or Tokelauan from a very young age. (Those being four of the five indigenous languages of territories under NZ sovereignty. The fifth, Moriori, is virtually extinct already.)

I was told that there was a New Zealand town whose Maori name was
Waikikamukau (pronounced "Why kick a moo-cow").
As far as I'm concerned, that alone was a good reason to preserve the language. However, like a lot of great trivia, it's simply not true.

Damn.

Yaks always look depressed and suicidal to me - standing around in the cold can't make them exactly full of joy.
up close they're not so depressed looking. More a sort of ennui about them.

"Unique way of looking at the world"..."Great cultural loss"...

BULLSHIT.

We lose nothing when minor and unimportant languages die. A language has no mystical "cultural importance"; it's just a method of communication. Culture is what culture does, not what it talks about.

Encouraging these minor languages merely increases the probability of miscommunication, something we can afford less every day.

Let them die. If they can't survive in the face of competition, they're too weak to be worth keeping.

Bullshit.
We're only begining to understand the influence language, especially early language development, has on the way our mind works.
Languages, even dialects are unique in the way they allow people to express themselves. Losing a language is not just losing a set of vocab and grammar, it's losing ways of expression that exist nowhere else. If you place any value whatsoever in human diversity and culture, you must recognise the ultimate and basic improtance of language.

"Unique way of looking at the world"..."Great cultural loss"...

BULLSHIT.

We lose nothing when minor and unimportant languages die. A language has no mystical "cultural importance"; it's just a method of communication. Culture is what culture does, not what it talks about.

Encouraging these minor languages merely increases the probability of miscommunication, something we can afford less every day.

Let them die. If they can't survive in the face of competition, they're too weak to be worth keeping.

If the language is dying than the culture associated with that language is probably already dead. Keeping the language alive won't preserve the culture. I had to take Latin classes in high school, but that doesn't mean the ancient Greek way of life is still around or that I understand their perspective.

There are many cultures who speak the same language and yet each have a unique way of looking at the world. People from Montana don't see eye to eye with people from California or Scotland. There's something deeper than language at work here.

Languages change and die. That's progress. I've always believed English speakers are too reluctant to let go of the past. Many words in the English language reflect their heritage. Why is this important? I have no idea, but many people seem to think it's important. I'd like it if English was a phonetic language, like Spanish.

Um...

I think you should have payed more attention in said classes.Haha, yeah that was pretty stupid. But it kind of proves that the class didn't make me see the difference between ancient Romans and Greeks. I think they stole a lot of culture from each other anyways.

I had to take Latin classes in high school, but that doesn't mean the ancient Greek way of life is still around or that I understand their perspective.
Um...

I think you should have payed more attention in said classes.

Old news. I'm both upset at the loss of language, but happy that it sets the stage an proof that we will one day all speak one language (likely English) and then have World Unity and Peace.

Well... if a language is going to die, then the people who are interested in it will have to keep it alive.

I should also note that, even if we were to end up with one universal language, the mere fact that the world is still quite large will result in a large number of dialects. Large numbers of dialects will eventually result in different languages.

For an example of this, see Danish and Norwegian - once more or less the same language two hundred years ago, they are growing farther and farther apart because, despite globalisation, neither is submitted to the same cultural changes.

The more speakers a language has, the more it will change and grow. Give English six billion speakers and it won't stay the same English for very long (I experienced this while living in Belgium, as the Danish speaking community would learn French, Dutch and English, but their Danish would be reminiscent of the 80s. However, just one person coming from Denmark was enough to influence it and update it. It was quite interesting, as it showed that the fewer people you have, the slower a language will change).
The reason that happened is that Danes and Norse aren't comingling under one language or the other. When they want to speak to each other, they us English. English is supplanting national languages as THE international language. As we become more globalized, there will be less and less dialectism. Those two are growing apart because they have no reason to come back together.

"Unique way of looking at the world"..."Great cultural loss"...

BULLSHIT.

We lose nothing when minor and unimportant languages die. A language has no mystical "cultural importance"; it's just a method of communication. Culture is what culture does, not what it talks about.

Encouraging these minor languages merely increases the probability of miscommunication, something we can afford less every day.

Let them die. If they can't survive in the face of competition, they're too weak to be worth keeping.
Language is the foundation of culture, thought, and beliefs. Without it, we are nothing.

Used to be the same for Dingle. The English name was on top, printed in bold white letters. The Gaelic name was underneath, printed in cursive white.
When they changed the name, they simply stuck green tape in the same shade as the background of the sign over the English name, you could clearly see that close-up on some signs...

Speaking about slightly pointless ways to keep a minority language relevant, when I was doing gcses, one of the exams boards my school used was a welsh board. At the front of the paper, the titles and instructions were written in both english and welsh. Which seems a little needless but I suppose there might be a couple of places in wales which were still mostly welsh-speaking. However all the questions were just written in english. I wasn't aware that there are parts of wales where they speak mainly in welsh but use english for all their geology-related activities :p

:eek: My mind must be crumbling... :(

Quick, allow us entry and let us make copies of and preserve anything that's inside it, lest we lose your brilliant mind! ;P


Nah, seriously, you timed it perfectly because the thread I linked to has just sunk to the second-to-the-last spot still available in your thread-posting history (you really do make an assful of threads) and mysteriously, it didn't turn up when I searched your thread-titles for "language", so I basically rescued the evidence of it from the hands of obscurity before you could pretend you'd never have created it.. or something. :]

and how do you suppose we stop languages from going extinct? some sort of mass breeding program (orgy) to replenish the numbers?

step 1: stop forcibly relocating people and breaking up traditional cultural groupings.
step 2: stop forcing the people and particularly the children of those cultures to only speak the dominant culture in an area's language.
step 3: offer institutional support for schooling, newspapers, books, magazines, tv broadcasts, etc., done in those languages.
step 4: encourage multilingualism on general principle
step 5: ???
step 6: profit

Bullshit.
We're only begining to understand the influence language, especially early language development, has on the way our mind works.
Languages, even dialects are unique in the way they allow people to express themselves. Losing a language is not just losing a set of vocab and grammar, it's losing ways of expression that exist nowhere else. If you place any value whatsoever in human diversity and culture, you must recognise the ultimate and basic improtance of language.

I took a course in linguistics as an undergrad and have been an amateur linguistics student ever since, and I agree with this statement.

I would go further and argue that languages and cultures are not two separate things, but that cultures influence and even constrain languages, and languages affect the functions of cultures.

As an example of a language that is spoken by very few people, but which offers important insights into how cultures influence languages and indeed on how the human mind operates, I would cite the Piraha language. Piraha is spoken by about 150 or so Indians in the Amazon jungle in Brazil. It has a number of remarkable features that appear to be unique, or to occur in extremely few other languages, including the following: no grammatical number (singular, plural, etc.), no numerals, no concept of counting, no terms for quantification ("all", "each", "every," "most", etc.), no terms for colors (descriptive phrases are used instead, such as "blood-like" for "red"), no embedding of phrases, no perfect tense, extremely simple pronoun system, extremely simple kinship system; no creation myths, nor any stories that extend back beyond about two generations in the past. And interestingly, despite having been in contact with Brazilians for about 200 years, the Piraha community is still monolingual.

Daniel Everett, a British linguist who has studied the Piraha for decades, has proposed that these facts can be explained by a cultural constraint: the Piraha culture limits communication to immediate experience. The Piraha basically only talk about what they have personally seen, heard, or otherwise experienced, and only communicate information about such experiences among themselves.

In a fascinating incident, at one point the Piraha asked Everett to teach them how to count; they were afraid that Brazilian traders might have been cheating them. So for eight months they received nightly instruction in basic numeracy. At the end of eight months, they called the project off: not one Piraha had learned to count to ten, or to add three plus one, or even to add one plus one and get two every time. Everett concluded that the Piraha's inability to count was just one instance of their inability to form abstractions, and that their culture's limitation to discussions of immediate experiences could explain the inability. Piraha ways of thinking, in other words, were incommensurate with thought processes embodied in Portuguese, English and other languages.

The point Everett makes, and the point I'm raising, is that obscure or endangered languages, like Piraha, can offer important information. In the case of Piraha, for example, the apparent fact that some meanings, like colors, numbers or a perfect tense, can't even be expressed in the language, seems to undermine theories of universal grammar, or at least show that at least some "hard-wired" grammatical processes can be overriden by cultural developments.

So the preservation and study of endangered languages, I submit, is a worthwhile endeavor.

References:

Everett, Daniel 2005. Cultural Constraints on Grammar and Cognition in Pirahã: Another Look at the Design Features of Human Language. Current Anthropology 46:621-646; http://www.pnglanguages.org/americas/brasil/PUBLCNS/ANTHRO/PHGrCult.pdf
(my primary source)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirah%C3%A3_language (good summary and list of references, including Everett's publications)

I don't know-- I'm not too bothered by this. Multiple languages are a barrier to understanding and therefore peace, tolerance, and prosperity. Different languages have traditionally been the cause of much ethnic strife and warfare. Now that the number of languages is thinning, we can start to work towards true global unity.

I don't know-- I'm not too bothered by this. Multiple languages are a barrier to understanding and therefore peace, tolerance, and prosperity. Different languages have traditionally been the cause of much ethnic strife and warfare. Now that the number of languages is thinning, we can start to work towards true global unity.

I differ from you. The very nature of foreign languages is something that enriches us as humans, it gives us identity, it defines us as belonging to a group, to a country. And I don't think that speaking different languages is or has been the cause of much trouble. It's the human condition, the human spirit, the inherent human desire to rule over others that has caused problems. Granted, it has affected the outlook that some people has on others from different cultures, but to consider it the traditional element that has caused ethnic strife and warfare, is too much.

Even when I support some aspects of globalization, the thinning of languages, the disapperance of dialects, is a pity. That is an issue of globalization I truly dislike. As someone that uses a dialect that was threatened by General Francisco Franco and his regime, and that has been considered inappropiate by the local government in countless, I'm glad my country passed a law to protect it and promote the study of it in schools and at college level. It's utterly sad that several languages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Languages)have disappeared (Dalmatian, Latin, Old Church Slavonic, Avestan, Coptic, Old Tibetan and Ge'ez, among others). I don't consider it something to be happy about.

I'm glad some people have attempted to bring dead languages back, like Sanskrit. That it's a hard and, sometimes pointless act, perhaps. But it would be wonderful to see them flourish, even if for a time.:)

For reference on what I just wrote, check the following links:
http://www.academiadelallingua.com/
http://www.politicallinguistica.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Asturias
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=ast
http://www.exunta.org/

I differ from you. The very nature of foreign languages is something that enriches us as humans, it gives us identity, it defines us as belonging to a group, to a country. And I don't think that speaking different languages is or has been the cause of much trouble. It's the human condition, the human spirit, the inherent human desire to rule over others that has caused problems. Granted, it has affected the outlook that some people has on others from different cultures, but to consider it the traditional element that has caused ethnic strife and warfare, is too much.

Even when I support some aspects of globalization, the thinning of languages, the disapperance of dialects, is a pity. That is an issue of globalization I truly dislike. As someone that uses a dialect that was threatened by General Francisco Franco and his regime, and that has been considered inappropiate by the local government in countless, I'm glad my country passed a law to protect it and promote the study of it in schools and at college level. It's utterly sad that several languages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Languages)have disappeared (Dalmatian, Latin, Old Church Slavonic, Avestan, Coptic, Old Tibetan and Ge'ez, among others). I don't consider it something to be happy about.

I'm glad some people have attempted to bring dead languages back, like Sanskrit. That it's a hard and, sometimes pointless act, perhaps. But it would be wonderful to see them flourish, even if for a time.:)

For reference on what I just wrote, check the following links:
http://www.academiadelallingua.com/
http://www.politicallinguistica.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Asturias
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=ast
http://www.exunta.org/

The First World War and the Bosnian genocides seem to disprove that point. Or the breakup of the Austrian Empire, the Chencans in Russia, or the Basques within your own country. Language has been a major barrier to progess in human history. It provokes misunderstandings, distrust, suspicions, and at it's very worst, wars. Learning several languages certainly enriches the mind, but dividing the human race up into multiple, incommunicable languages is asking for trouble. I for one don't support retreating into a more archaic, primitive humanity, whose sole defense is "it's the human spirit".

Not that I don't support learning other languages, of course. Learning multiple languages has huge educational benefits.

Within my own country, the real reason behind the anti-illegal immigrant legislature is not racism, as many people love to claim, but the fact that the illegals speak a foreign language, which discomforts the natives.

I. It's utterly sad that several languages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Languages)have disappeared (Dalmatian, Latin, Old Church Slavonic, Avestan, Coptic, Old Tibetan and Ge'ez, among others). I don't consider it something to be happy about.

The cited languages, except for Dalmatian, haven't entirely disappeared, since they are still used as liturgical language. There are quite a few Coptic Orthodox chuches in Southern California where Coptic is used in services, for example, and Avestan is used by Parsees in India and elsewhere (http://www.avesta.org/#avinfo , http://www.avesta.org/ka/ka_part1.htm#ashem -- it's a rather mysterious-sounding language IMO http://www.avesta.org/mp3/001Ashem%20Vohu.mp3 ).

Languages that have really disappeared, like Etruscan or Hurrian or Aquitanian, are ones I wish were still around, or at least better documented.

*nods* That would depend on your priorities, I suppose. Although... Do they teach French in New Zealand pre-schools? If not, then sending your kid to a Maori pre-school would ensure that he/she was raised bilingual, thus enhancing his/her ability to learn further languages in later years. It would therefore have practical value too.



By crippling our ability to broaden our understanding, and narrowing our potential awareness of other modes of thought, other ideas...

Besides, your "point" is a non sequitur. One can learn a "universal language" as a second language without that necessitating the eradication of all other languages. People do it all the time.

By the way, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_advantages_to_bilingualism

Not really, English has naturally emerged as the most advanced language through the centuries because of it's ability to co-opt and assimilate other languages and their good ways, which explains why China will soon overtake the US as the largest English-speaking country. English is a literary thief, and we like it like that:)

"Unique way of looking at the world"..."Great cultural loss"...

BULLSHIT.

We lose nothing when minor and unimportant languages die. A language has no mystical "cultural importance"; it's just a method of communication. Culture is what culture does, not what it talks about.


Your ignorance... saddens me a little, but then when someone like you spouts some idiocy like that out of sheer ignorance, it's not really worth taking note of.

Quite frankly, you don't know what you're talking about. So show a little humility. I'm not an expert linguist, but I've studied both linguistics and cultural studies to an advanced level, and I'm also bilingual from birth. A language is not just "a method of communication" - as anyone who speaks several languages fluently and/or has researched the issue knows.

I would have explained it to you, but New Mitanni has already made the point very well (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13473860&postcount=47).

Quick, allow us entry and let us make copies of and preserve anything that's inside it, lest we lose your brilliant mind! ;P

Nah, seriously, you timed it perfectly because the thread I linked to has just sunk to the second-to-the-last spot still available in your thread-posting history (you really do make an assful of threads) and mysteriously, it didn't turn up when I searched your thread-titles for "language", so I basically rescued the evidence of it from the hands of obscurity before you could pretend you'd never have created it.. or something. :]

Heh. I'll take your word for it. :)

The First World War and the Bosnian genocides seem to disprove that point. Or the breakup of the Austrian Empire, the Chencans in Russia, or the Basques within your own country. Language has been a major barrier to progess in human history. It provokes misunderstandings, distrust, suspicions, and at it's very worst, wars. Learning several languages certainly enriches the mind, but dividing the human race up into multiple, incommunicable languages is asking for trouble.

Linguistic diversity is not automatically and universally a recipe for war. To argue in favour of universal cultural eradication (as you're doing) is drastic overkill.

Looking simply at France, we have a wide variety of indigenous regional languages -including Breton, Tahitian, Occitan and the dialects of Norman-, most of which provoke no violence whatsoever.


Not that I don't support learning other languages, of course. Learning multiple languages has huge educational benefits.

Indeed. People can -and do- learn English as a foreign language without abandoning their own. (Which essentially makes your first point moot.)


Within my own country, the real reason behind the anti-illegal immigrant legislature is not racism, as many people love to claim, but the fact that the illegals speak a foreign language, which discomforts the natives.

So instead of educating the host society, one should wish for the destruction of all foreign cultures?

Not really, English has naturally emerged as the most advanced language through the centuries because of it's ability to co-opt and assimilate other languages and their good ways, which explains why China will soon overtake the US as the largest English-speaking country. English is a literary thief, and we like it like that:)

What you say is interesting, but doesn't invalidate what I said. Mandarin isn't becoming a threatened language simply because of the impact of English, for example.

You know, I'm curious. What about Navajo? I remember vaguely reading something about how eventually they tried to create a written version of Navajo, but this was around the time when we were rounding up Native Americans and trying to force them to be like the white man or gtfo.

Of all the languages I'd love to learn, Irish is at the top, followed by Italian (yeah, I know that's not dead), then I think it'd be really cool to learn Navajo or another Native American language.

The First World War and the Bosnian genocides seem to disprove that point. Or the breakup of the Austrian Empire, the Chencans in Russia, or the Basques within your own country. Language has been a major barrier to progess in human history. It provokes misunderstandings, distrust, suspicions, and at it's very worst, wars. Learning several languages certainly enriches the mind, but dividing the human race up into multiple, incommunicable languages is asking for trouble. I for one don't support retreating into a more archaic, primitive humanity, whose sole defense is "it's the human spirit".

Not that I don't support learning other languages, of course. Learning multiple languages has huge educational benefits.

Within my own country, the real reason behind the anti-illegal immigrant legislature is not racism, as many people love to claim, but the fact that the illegals speak a foreign language, which discomforts the natives.

The Swiss, the Chinese, and India disprove your point there.
I think you might be confusing cause and effect on this issue : Languages define cultures. Cultures can clash, they tend to do so mostly for economical reasons. And in such a clash, languages, among with names, religion, national costume, skin colour can be used as a defining element of the "enemy".
It's not the languages that cause the conflicts, though.

So long, Farewell, Auf Weidersein Goodbyee!

And Good Riddance.

Fewer languages mean fewer translators.

And they can be preserved in Writing so that we can use them for secret messages.

So long, Farewell, Auf Weidersein Goodbyee!

And Good Riddance.

Fewer languages mean fewer translators.

That makes... absolutely no sense. Really none whatsoever.

The Swiss, the Chinese, and India disprove your point there.
I think you might be confusing cause and effect on this issue : Languages define cultures. Cultures can clash, they tend to do so mostly for economical reasons. And in such a clash, languages, among with names, religion, national costume, skin colour can be used as a defining element of the "enemy".
It's not the languages that cause the conflicts, though.

In fact, it's my opinion that a common language can CAUSE conflict. When you find out what that guy over there REALLY called you, you'll be pissed! ;)

That makes... absolutely no sense. Really none whatsoever.

Let me put it another way.

(to soon to be erased languages)

Auf weidersein

Abiento

BYE.

(runs)

But if a language is preserved on paper then it can provide codes etc.

Let me put it another way.

Auf weidersein

Abiento

BYE.

But if a language is preserved on paper then it can provide codes etc.

To me, it seems like you invented a code all of your own already. Let me put it another way.. you did not, by any chance, mean to say "Auf Wiedersehen" and " à bientôt", did you?

I'll be fine as long as English doesn't go.

That is why English should live on.

It's so widespread that'd be like trying to get rid of intelligence

Latin is still an official language for one Nation.

Celtic wasn't that widespread was it?

I remember a Greek historian remarking the Celtic was spoken from the Iberian penisula to the Black Sea, and from the Alps to Britain.
I'll have to look up the exact quote, but for a good while Celtic was the dominant language of Europe.

And Latin in the Vatican is a lot like Gaelic in Ireland... official language, but used only on official documents, for nostalgic reasons.

Edit : Wow, those time warps are getting REALLY weird now... I've posted this one before the other one?

It's so widespread that'd be like trying to get rid of intelligence

Well, so was Latin, once.
And Celtic.

Latin is still an official language for one Nation.

Celtic wasn't that widespread was it?

Celtic wasn't that widespread was it?
... which one of the ever so many Celtic languages and dialects?

Fewer languages mean fewer translators.

are translators some sort of inherently evil thing?

No, just a waste of Govt. Money.

Latin is still an official language for one Nation.

Celtic wasn't that widespread was it?
I remember a Greek historian remarking the Celtic was spoken from the Iberian penisula to the Black Sea, and from the Alps to Britain.
I'll have to look up the exact quote, but for a good while Celtic was the dominant language of Europe.

And Latin in the Vatican is a lot like Gaelic in Ireland... official language, but used only on official documents, for nostalgic reasons.

Edit : Wow, those time warps are getting REALLY weird now... I've posted this one before the other one?

Well, from Wikipedia
During the 1st millennium BC, they were spoken across Europe, from the Bay of Biscay and the North Sea, up the Rhine and down the Danube to the Black Sea and the Upper Balkan Peninsula, and into Asia Minor (Galatia). Today, Celtic languages are limited to a few areas in Great Britain, the Isle of Man, Ireland, Cape Breton Island, Patagonia, and on the peninsula of Brittany in France. The spread to Cape Breton and Patagonia occurred in modern times. In all areas the Celtic languages are now only spoken by minorities.

No, just a waste of Govt. Money.

and who do you expect to use and attempt to break these 'codes' and 'secret messages' you have the hots for?

They once tried to teach me the language of the Comanche, instead I taught them the language of a Comanche.:D

Let them die. It would be a great first step in the anit-Balkanizing of the world.

Let them die. It would be a great first step in the anit-Balkanizing of the world.


Huh? How are languages going to do away with ethnic tensions?

Huh? How are languages going to do away with ethnic tensions?

They aren't. Tiny enclaves of ethic grupos who refuse to intergrate into a society just increases ethnic tension. and one of the most obvious examples of that is a refusal to use the common language.

Tiny enclaves of ethic grupos who refuse to intergrate into a society just increases ethnic tension. and one of the most obvious examples of that is a refusal to use the common language.
Then why the hell aren’t you typing the above in Mandarin, you ethnic tensioner, you! :p

They aren't. Tiny enclaves of ethic grupos who refuse to intergrate into a society just increases ethnic tension. and one of the most obvious examples of that is a refusal to use the common language.

"Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated"?

and who do you expect to use and attempt to break these 'codes' and 'secret messages' you have the hots for?

Whomsoever they are sent to.

Whomsoever they are sent to.

Очевидно, В версии Дакеберишир действительности никто, но те, кто должен получить классифицированные документы, не собираются интересоваться содержанием тех документов.

Latin is still an official language for one Nation.

Celtic wasn't that widespread was it?

Latin is only used in the Catholic Church and for those who study Law and Medicine. It´s not spoken (actually, no one knows how did Latin truly sounded like) and neither it is the official language of any nation. As far as the Vatican City goes, Italian is the official language.

Gaelic is still spoken by several groups in Northern Ireland (I´m talking about the Donegal Gael-tacht), in Scoltland, the Isle of Man (Manx Gaelic), Brittany in France, Cornnish in Cornawall, England. Signs in both Scotland, Ireland and Brittany tend to be in the official language and in the spoken regional dialect too. So, to me, it´s quite widespread, at least in that region.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaelic#Gaelic_languages

Очевидно, В версии Дакеберишир действительности никто, но те, кто должен получить классифицированные документы, не собираются интересоваться содержанием тех документов.

I consider myself smart, but let me tell you, Russian is way beyond me. Slavonic languages and scripts are under my grasp. LOL! Care to tell us what you wanted to convey with this message?

As far as the Vatican City goes, Italian is the official language.

Fail

Vatican City, officially State of the Vatican City (Latin: Status Civitatis Vaticanae; Italian: Stato della Città del Vaticano), is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome. At approximately 44 hectares (108.7 acres), and with a population of around 900, it is the smallest independent state in the world by both population and area.

Vatican City is a sovereign nation, and its official language is Latin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_City

Очевидно, В версии Дакеберишир действительности никто, но те, кто должен получить классифицированные документы, не собираются интересоваться содержанием тех документов.

I consider myself smart, but let me tell you, Russian is way beyond me. Slavonic languages and scripts are under my grasp. LOL! Care to tell us what you wanted to convey with this message?

Obviously, In Dukeburyshire's version of reality no one but those who are supposed to receive classified documents are going to be interested in the contents of those documents.

Obviously, In Dukeburyshire's version of reality no one but those who are supposed to receive classified documents are going to be interested in the contents of those documents.

LOL! Understood.

Not the sort I write anyroad....:cool:

Then why the hell aren’t you typing the above in Mandarin, you ethnic tensioner, you! :p

Because English is the common language of my nation. Mandarin is not. If I were in China, perhaps I would learn Mandarin. I wouldn't try to hide inside of a population of english speakers and demand equal treatment for the gobierno.

That is self-defeating.

Because English is the common language of my nation. Mandarin is not. If I were in China, perhaps I would learn Mandarin. I wouldn't try to hide inside of a population of english speakers and demand equal treatment for the gobierno.

That is self-defeating.

Tell me about it.:(

Ein? Gobierno. How the heck did we get from Mandarin to Spanish in 1.2 seconds?! You people confuse me so!!!

Because English is the common language of my nation.
But arguably not of the world.

If you:
wouldn’t try to hide inside of a population of english speakers and demand equal treatment
then why would you want to continue speaking English?

I mean, according to your thesis, your just increasing ethnic tension.

But arguably not of the world.

If you:

then why would you want to continue speaking English?

I mean, according to your thesis, your just increasing ethnic tension.

Bingo!!

But arguably not of the world.





Never said it was.

However, if you follow along, I would go out of my way to learn the common language of the nation I choose to reside in, and not just live in a small community insisting that the government of the land speak my language.

I mean, according to your thesis, your just increasing ethnic tension.

How so, by having a common language within the establishged borders of a nation?
:rolleyes:

Is English one of them? No? Well then I will continue to go about my day.

Is English one of them? No? Well then I will continue to go about my day.

This makes me assume that if the languages were derived from English, then and only then you would worry? Wow...Soviestan... that´s... to say the least... disappointing. But I respect your opinion.

How so, by having a common language within the establishged borders of a nation?
:rolleyes:
Your argument is that multiple languages within a region create ethnic tension, and that languages other than the dominant one should be phased out. If this is true (I don’t see how it is, but for the sake of argument) then why would this not hold on a global scale?

Thus, having multiple languages on the Earth, by your view, seems to be causing ethnic tension. All other languages other than the most-spoken (which I believe to be Mandarin) should therefore be phased out.

Never said it was.

However, if you follow along, I would go out of my way to learn the common language of the nation I choose to reside in, and not just live in a small community insisting that the government of the land speak my language.

You do realise you're essentially off-topic? Unless you're seriously saying that indigenous minority languages should be eradicated.

On this issue:

UNESCO champions multilingualism throughout the world not only as a way to preserve our living heritage – but also as a powerful tool for peace and tolerance. Language co-existence as opposed to language conflict is our goal. Language co-existence policies are viewed in many multi-lingual and multi-racial nations as a necessity. However coherent language policies are also critical in nations like our own. Here in New Zealand, the monolingual and monocultural language policies of past governments have had a devastating impact on the health and status of te reo Maori.

Today I wish also to acknowledge the impact that the recent apology by the Australian government will have for the people of Australia, particularly its indigenous people, and for the retention of their languages. The apology reflects the growing international awareness and respect for indigenous people’s rights as well as the protection of basic human rights for all people.


(link (http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0802/S00273.htm))

Gaelic is still spoken by several groups in Northern Ireland (I´m talking about the Donegal Gael-tacht), in Scoltland, the Isle of Man (Manx Gaelic), Brittany in France, Cornnish in Cornawall, England. Signs in both Scotland, Ireland and Brittany tend to be in the official language and in the spoken regional dialect too. So, to me, it´s quite widespread, at least in that region.
Gaelic Languages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaelic#Gaelic_languages)

The term 'Northern Ireland' with an upper-case 'N' is normally used to denote the parts of Ulster that are still within the United Kingdom, which Donegal isn't. The county of Donegal, like the other counties that contain sections of the 'Gael-tacht', is actually in the Irish Republic instead.

And, according to all of the various sources that I've seen on this topic so far, both Manx and Cornish are only preserved by relatively small numbers of scholars -- and/or, for Cornish, "nationalists" -- who all use English instead in their everyday lives.
Edit: The article about Manx to which the url that you provided links mentions that there has been a slight revival of that language during the last decade or so, but even so the facts that only 02-03% of the island's population claim to know it to any extent (with that extent presumably varying) and that all of those people know English as well mean that it's still unlikely to be used for very much...

It's a hard one, part of me mourns for the lost history the knowledge, yet another part says meh, things change and evolve aand I dares that that in the fullness of time we shall all be speaking one language.

Used to be the same for Dingle. The English name was on top, printed in bold white letters. The Gaelic name was underneath, printed in cursive white.
When they changed the name, they simply stuck green tape in the same shade as the background of the sign over the English name, you could clearly see that close-up on some signs...

There are quite a few tri-lingual signs around my home. They're printed in English, Irish and Ulster-Scots