• There are valid arguments both for and against trying to reverse the
decline of minority languages.
• On the one hand, all languages are intrinsically interesting, and
can provide valuable insights into the people who speak them. Therefore
the loss of any language is regrettable. Language is also one of the
chief ways in which people identify themselves, and so the decline of
a language must have a negative impact on those for whom it is their
mother tongue.
On the other hand, there are good reasons for not attempting to rescue
declining languages. Firstly, it is probably not possible to engineer
language use for any length of time. Change is natural. All social
and cultural behaviour is constantly changing, and language is no
exception. So at various times in history certain languages have briefly
gained the ascendancy, for social, economic and/or political reasons,
and others have similarly declined in importance. For example, the
government of a country might decree that a declining language variety
becomes the medium of education, and so briefly engineer its recovery.
But if a different language is perceived to have greater currency, then
those who can will find ways of acquiring it, such as choosing to study
abroad.
• Secondly, even if it were possible, the attempt to preserve a language
artificially may not be worthwhile. The attempt diverts resources,
which are usually scarce, for the sake of pursuing a goal which could be
regarded as an expensive luxury. In addition, proficiency in languages
which have wider currency, and are arguably more useful, may suffer as
a result.
• In conclusion, I disagree with interventions to prevent the decline of
languages, as such interventions are neither practical nor desirable.
• There are valid arguments both for and against trying to reverse the
decline
of minority
languages.
•
On the one hand, all
languages
are
intrinsically
interesting, and
can
provide valuable insights into the
people
who speak them.
Therefore
the
loss of any
language
is regrettable.
Language
is
also
one of
the
chief ways in which
people
identify themselves, and
so
the decline of
a
language
must
have a
negative
impact on those for whom it is their
mother
tongue.
On the other hand
, there are
good
reasons for not attempting to rescue
declining
languages
.
Firstly
, it is
probably
not possible to engineer
language
use
for any length of time.
Change
is natural. All
social
and cultural
behaviour
is
constantly
changing, and
language
is no
exception
.
So
at various times in history certain
languages
have
briefly
gained the ascendancy, for social, economic and/or political reasons,
and others
have
similarly
declined in importance.
For example
,
the
government
of a country might decree that a declining
language
variety
becomes
the medium of education, and
so
briefly
engineer its recovery.
But
if a
different
language
is perceived
to have greater currency, then
those
who can
will find ways of acquiring it, such as choosing to study
abroad
.
•
Secondly
, even if it were possible, the attempt to preserve a language
artificially
may not be worthwhile. The attempt diverts resources,
which are
usually
scarce, for the sake of pursuing a goal which could be
regarded
as an expensive luxury.
In addition
, proficiency in
languages
which have wider currency, and are
arguably
more useful, may suffer as
a
result.
•
In conclusion
, I disagree with interventions to
prevent
the decline of
languages
, as such interventions are neither practical nor desirable.