Today, we are living in a global community. Therefore, to address the needs of this globalization, people sometimes raise voice for the implementation of a globalized lingual system. This essay will discuss the pros and cons of the this popular belief by using the examples of Oxford University research and Times Magazine survey to demonstrate the points and support the claims.
On the one hand, becoming a monolingual has a couple of benefits. Firstly, it is easier to understand those cultures, which we are not aware of because of their complex foreign linguistic vocabulary. Secondly, it is convenient for the people to address each other in case of any need. For example, Oxford University in 2016 researched about the future outputs of a globalized speaking system and find out that it will burst all the psychological barriers of superiority, which arises because of bilingualism. So from this example, it is clear that a singular linguistic approach of the globe is the need of the day.
On the other hand, few problems will also arise if the unified mother tongue idea gets successful. As, most of the people are deeply influenced by their cultural roots and they don’t want to lose their ancestors’ mother tongue. Additionally, the mother tongue unification will affect the intelligence levels of the new generation as the bilinguals are supposed to be more intellectual. Similarly, a survey of Times Magazine will address the same issue and find out that 60% people agree that the bilingual people are more intelligent as compared to the monolinguals. So from this example, it is clear that it’s difficult to implement a unified lingual system because people are not willing for this change.
To conclude, the monolingual approach for the globe is a beneficial approach, but it’s difficult for the people to leave their cultural influences which are attached to that language. In the future, it’s better if the world will also honour the importance of cultural languages instead of uniting the world on a single speaking platform. 
 Today
, we are living in a global community.  
Therefore
, to address the needs of this globalization,  
people
  sometimes
 raise voice for the implementation of a globalized lingual system. This essay will discuss the pros and cons of  
the this
 popular belief by using the  
examples
 of Oxford University research and Times Magazine survey to demonstrate the points and support the claims.
On the one hand, becoming a monolingual has a couple of benefits.  
Firstly
, it is easier to understand those cultures, which we are not aware of  
because
 of their complex foreign linguistic vocabulary.  
Secondly
, it is convenient for the  
people
 to address each other in case of any need. For  
example
, Oxford University in 2016 researched about the future outputs of a globalized speaking system and find out that it will  
burst
 all the psychological barriers of superiority, which arises  
because
 of bilingualism.  
So
 from this  
example
, it is  
clear
 that a singular linguistic approach of the globe is the need of the day. 
On the other hand
, few problems will  
also
 arise if the unified mother tongue  
idea
  gets
 successful. As, most of the  
people
 are  
deeply
 influenced by their cultural  
roots and
 they don’t want to lose their ancestors’ mother tongue.  
Additionally
, the mother tongue unification will affect the intelligence levels of the new generation as the bilinguals  
are supposed
 to be more intellectual.  
Similarly
, a survey of Times Magazine will address the same issue and find out that 60%  
people
  agree
 that the bilingual  
people
 are more intelligent as compared to the monolinguals.  
So
 from this  
example
, it is  
clear
 that it’s difficult to implement a unified lingual system  
because
  people
 are not willing for this  
change
. 
To conclude
, the monolingual approach for the globe is a beneficial approach,  
but
 it’s difficult for the  
people
 to  
leave
 their cultural influences which  
are attached
 to that language. In the future, it’s better if the world will  
also
  honour
 the importance of cultural languages  
instead
 of uniting the world on a single speaking platform.