Language preservation has been highlighted as an emerging issue, capturing significant public attention due to its implications on societies. Despite some advantages associated could be pronounced, more financial resources should be poured into other practical public sectors.
On the one hand, saving endangered languages could bestow cultural benefits. Languages are proved to be the representation of speakers’ cultures. If a language dies, the transmission of original customs and oral traditions among native speakers is non-existent, making the reduction in cultural diversity and data sources in linguistics, anthropology, prehistory inevitable products, thereby hampering scientific research endeavours into human development in the long-term.
On the other hand, more expenditures should be earmarked for other practical sectors. First, official authorities should increase budget allocation on the advancement of agricultural technologies and innovations. For example, the betterment of irrigation and genetically modified crops, allowing plants’ stronger resistance to pesticides and arid soils would guarantee higher productivity, feeding into food securities for the population. In addition, because medical facilities and institutions in many nations, especially the third-world ones are severely underfunded and understaffed, higher injection of funds into facilities procurement and medical practitioners training could be associated with more reliable healthcare systems. This means that patients with hazardous medical conditions could be treated effectively without concerns about financial burdens, under-qualified doctors and outdated medical techniques, decreasing the nations’ mortality rates in the long terms.
In conclusion, I firmly believe that budget distributions should be prioritized for other underfunded sectors such as agriculture and healthcare rather than linguistics preservation irrespective of its cultural impacts. Should governments’ investments into such aforementioned public areas increase, the possibilities of improved living standards and citizens’ well-beings are enormously promising in the long term.
Language
preservation has
been highlighted
as an emerging issue, capturing significant public attention due to its implications on societies. Despite
some
advantages associated could
be pronounced
, more financial resources should
be poured
into
other
practical public sectors.
On the one hand, saving endangered
languages
could bestow cultural benefits.
Languages
are proved
to be the representation of speakers’ cultures. If a
language
dies
, the transmission of original customs and oral traditions among native speakers is non-existent, making the reduction in cultural diversity and data sources in linguistics, anthropology, prehistory inevitable products, thereby hampering scientific research
endeavours
into human development in the long-term.
On the
other
hand, more expenditures should
be earmarked
for
other
practical sectors.
First
, official authorities should increase budget allocation on the advancement of agricultural technologies and innovations.
For example
, the betterment of irrigation and
genetically
modified crops, allowing plants’ stronger resistance to pesticides and arid soils would guarantee higher productivity, feeding into food securities for the population.
In addition
,
because
medical
facilities and institutions in
many
nations,
especially
the third-world ones are
severely
underfunded and understaffed, higher injection of funds into facilities procurement and
medical
practitioners training could
be associated
with more reliable healthcare systems. This means that patients with hazardous
medical
conditions could
be treated
effectively
without concerns about financial burdens, under-qualified doctors and outdated
medical
techniques, decreasing the nations’ mortality rates in the long terms.
In conclusion
, I
firmly
believe that budget distributions should
be prioritized
for
other
underfunded sectors such as agriculture and healthcare
rather
than linguistics preservation irrespective of its cultural impacts. Should
governments
’ investments into such aforementioned public areas increase, the possibilities of
improved
living standards and citizens’ well-beings are
enormously
promising in the long term.