Should the diversity of language be preserved?

[mollypolly190]

Should "dying" languages be preserved and why?

Should nations stress language uniformity? I'd like to see your take on these questions.

I've been researching both sides of this never-ending debate and at first I found myself completely set on preserving dying languages. However after reading a few very well written articles I find that I don't feel as strongly that dying languages should be preserved. Any thoughts and opinions on the issue?

[Ezak]

Well, first off we need to come to the conclusion to why we should preserve dying languages. If people are still speaking the language, you could take the view that it is part of the cultural heritage and as everyone ( according to some ) have the right to their own culture, the language should be preserved.

I guess you could argue that languages need to be preserved due to the scientific value. I mostly mean linguistics, but this applies to many of the branches of social sciences.

I have heard from different sources that being bilingual helps you intellectually, but for this to have any effect, those who speak the language must learn another language as well, something that might not be the best if we are trying to preserve the language.

Personally, I don't really care. I see language as a means of communication and not so much as a heritage. I see the benefit in languages, but this probably have more to do with constructed languages that are without ambiguity, than with dying languages.

[CkyBlue]

I don't see why they should.

In a world where where governments are already faced with so many problems, preserving languages is the least of their worries. The value of preserving languages is minuscule because besides preserving culture, and having something to be proud of, there is little to no benefit associated with the act itself. One could argue that being proud is good enough, but from the way I see it, when you are pitted against a life where no one really has any kind of respect or understanding of what your culture is (let alone what you speak), it becomes difficult to maintain what pride you might have.

I'm not exactly sure what preserving a language actually means; from my perspective it could go from teaching the language to future generations, to forcing people out of the culture into learning it. Most people don't want to do that because the majority of the population do not speak it anyway, and it is a waste of their time if they are not able to apply it in aspects of their life, especially in a society where strong communication is a stressed to achieve effective relationships among people. This is one of the reasons I support, as you say, language uniformity. Even as of now there are problems with communication among people regarding the most basic ideas, because learning a language can be very difficult. This difficulty has partly to do with the aesthetics of the language, all its literary devices and all that jazz. However for most people, communicating clearly is the goal, not appreciating the language they are speaking.

When in the middle of learning a language, people run into a lot of things that frustrate them because the rules of the language could be made universally easier, if not easier to learn. It is not always convenient for someone to "keep using the language to become fluent", as they do not feel comfortable speaking it and do not have the opportunities to do so. This is why a uniform language would certainly encourage clear, easy, and effective communication for our society, because its sole purpose would likely be to communicate, not to be the start of beautiful literary literature

[Luka Petrovic]

The use of a language is proportional to the use/ popularity of the culture. Many of us can see the importance of learning culture along with language when we study a second language as part of the IB diploma. The two are greatly intertwined and unless the culture is preserved, there is no practical use for preserving the language (i.e have it spoken). That being said, its alphabet, literature and other written information would be invaluable for future study, and without question should be documented.

[flinquinnster]

Well, I think that language is a beautiful thing and should be preserved - however, it is really hard when few people speak it and it ceases to be useful. I guess IB is good in a way because it supports the second of a learning language, which is basically obligatory culture study. However, then you see languages like Latin. I recognise how beautiful it is, and the literature, art, culture, history etc. behind it - but is it such a tragedy that no one longer speaks it? Some would say it is, I guess. There is always something different between studying a language written by dead writers, and a living, evolving language that people communicate with in daily life. With the way our world is going today, it is inevitable that more and more pressures will come to encourage people to abandon small-number languages.

[SuperHaitian]

i think no matter how few the population that actively use the language is, it should be preserved. While I am an immigrant to the United States (born in Carrfour, Haiti) all four of my siblings were born and grew up in the United States. I am a witness to being among a group of your "people" where everyones speaking the native language, and then you be the only one to not know what is being said. To not have any inkling of what your cultural language is is in many respects to not know that culture.