LANGUAGE: A NAME FOR DIVERSITY
Why do I care that language dies?
Since we have started living, all the people around us including our teachers have deeply internalized in us the value of saving diversity. We have learned that anything that surrounds us is a creature and, as so, we should protect them as much as we protect ourselves. In school, specifically in Science, we were taught that everything, even the smallest creature is connected with one another. Just like a chair with a missing leg, the world wouldn’t stand because everything is independent with each other’s’ life. And we cannot afford to lose one string, one treasure and one life. Diversity in all cases has always been a crucial topic. I never thought that having considered endangered …show more content…
This may not seem important to you, but to a lot of cultures and peoples, it makes them happy to not assimilate 100% to the dominant culture.
Lastly, Benefits of bilingualism, this is not directly related, but would definitely be a result, but not preserving dying languages would result in less bilingualism, whereas bilingualism has been shown to have tremendous cognitive benefits. Bilinguals get Alzheimer's later in life, the have better ability to block out irrelevant stimulus and are better at task management-type …show more content…
***** There is nothing abnormal about a language dying out. Languages have been dying throughout history. (Crytal 2010:21; Hale 1992:1; Mufwene 2004:212) They have come and gone. The problem is that right now there are just too many languages going and a lot less coming. “What is different about the modern situation, however, is the speed and the extent of language shift which (…) is leading to complete language death, the total disappearance of languages from the world” (Trudgill 2000:192) We have already seen that 50% of the world’s languages are due to be dead by 2100, which means that a language is dying every two weeks. These numbers are quite alarming. Even so, there are people that would argue that a monolingual world would be actually better. These advocates of the monoglot millennium base their opinion in the idea that multilingualism was a curse brought down by God and they believe that a monolingual world would mean peace and less misunderstandings. Crystal argues that this view is quite wrong if we take into account that many monolingual countries have had their share of civil wars, such as Cambodia, Vietnam, Rwanda and Burundi. As Crystal stated in his interview to New Routes, “If people want to kill each other they’ll do so regardless of the number of languages they speak”. Peace is not possible through a unique world language but through mutual
Why do I care that language dies?
Since we have started living, all the people around us including our teachers have deeply internalized in us the value of saving diversity. We have learned that anything that surrounds us is a creature and, as so, we should protect them as much as we protect ourselves. In school, specifically in Science, we were taught that everything, even the smallest creature is connected with one another. Just like a chair with a missing leg, the world wouldn’t stand because everything is independent with each other’s’ life. And we cannot afford to lose one string, one treasure and one life. Diversity in all cases has always been a crucial topic. I never thought that having considered endangered …show more content…
This may not seem important to you, but to a lot of cultures and peoples, it makes them happy to not assimilate 100% to the dominant culture.
Lastly, Benefits of bilingualism, this is not directly related, but would definitely be a result, but not preserving dying languages would result in less bilingualism, whereas bilingualism has been shown to have tremendous cognitive benefits. Bilinguals get Alzheimer's later in life, the have better ability to block out irrelevant stimulus and are better at task management-type …show more content…
***** There is nothing abnormal about a language dying out. Languages have been dying throughout history. (Crytal 2010:21; Hale 1992:1; Mufwene 2004:212) They have come and gone. The problem is that right now there are just too many languages going and a lot less coming. “What is different about the modern situation, however, is the speed and the extent of language shift which (…) is leading to complete language death, the total disappearance of languages from the world” (Trudgill 2000:192) We have already seen that 50% of the world’s languages are due to be dead by 2100, which means that a language is dying every two weeks. These numbers are quite alarming. Even so, there are people that would argue that a monolingual world would be actually better. These advocates of the monoglot millennium base their opinion in the idea that multilingualism was a curse brought down by God and they believe that a monolingual world would mean peace and less misunderstandings. Crystal argues that this view is quite wrong if we take into account that many monolingual countries have had their share of civil wars, such as Cambodia, Vietnam, Rwanda and Burundi. As Crystal stated in his interview to New Routes, “If people want to kill each other they’ll do so regardless of the number of languages they speak”. Peace is not possible through a unique world language but through mutual