5 ms·

> Unpopular opinion: I never understood this drive to save or revitalize dying languages. What's so difficult to understand? It's preserving human knowledge, h

by disown 6y ago

> Unpopular opinion: I never understood this drive to save or revitalize dying languages. What's so difficult to understand? It's preserving human knowledge, human history, human development, etc. Language is a form of a unwritten historical document. We can infer a lot of our past from language. > Language is not equivalent to culture Nobody said it is. But language is tied to culture and vice versa. > I'll be thrilled if every language in the world disappears except for one, and we all communicate in it. What a simplistic world view. So what do we get rid of? English literature? French literature? Chinese literature? Indian literature? Persian? Now which music do we get rid of? Do we just stick to classical? > People who want to still do learn latin or Ancient Greek or Sanskrit. And even if they couldn't, the trade-off is still worth it times a thousand. What? In what world does getting rid of latin, ancient greek or sanskrit provide any benefit? Let alone a 1000X benefit? Latin and ancient greek is the foundation of western civilization. One of the reasons for modern society is the preservation of latin and ancient greek. We don't have modern science without latin or ancient greek. > But there's no reason your other languages have to be from a particular culture or can't be constructed languages. Actually it does. Language informs on culture and vice versa. I'd rather keep american literature, history, culture, music, movies, etc and forgo everyone speaking indonesian and writing in hangul. Not to mention keeping french, german, chinese, russian, arabic, etc literature/culture/religion/history/etc. If the price is that we all don't speak the same language, so be it. I can't believe your comment is the most upvoted one here. It's strange that the same people screaming about diversity are the ones so desperately trying to erase it.

newsbinator 6y ago
You haven't understood my comment. The principle of charity would be useful here. I'm not suggesting we burn books. I'm suggesting we let all languages die except for whichever singular global language. Whoever wants to study latin can. Whoever wants to study ancient 20th century American English literature in 1000 years can. You can keep all the movies and music you currently enjoy. The difference is that a kid born in Penang and a kid born in Pennsylvania and a kid born in Perm will all be speaking the same language and growing up to make movies and music in the same language, for everyone in the world to enjoy in the same language.
- rexpop 6y ago
  > let all languages die Languages do not die on their own. They're killed. Most "charitably," by environmental circumstance. Less "charitably," they are killed by Colonialism.
  - joe5150 6y ago
    exactly. "every language but one dying" is not something that could (much less should) happen all by itself.
- disown 6y ago
  > You haven't understood my comment. No I understood your point perfectly. You are not understanding mine. Throughout history, people have posited your idea. A "universal" language - latin, french, esparanto, etc. Now go back 1000 years ago and imagine you were in charge and we made everyone speak/use latin. We wouldn't have english, french, italian, etc. No shakespeare, no voltaire, no twain, no modernity. > You can keep all the movies and music you currently enjoy. Right I understand that. But you are ignoring the future movies/music/etc that will be lost because of the languages that never existed? > The difference is that a kid born in Penang and a kid born in Pennsylvania and a kid born in Perm will all be speaking the same language and growing up to make movies and music in the same language Once again, I get the simplistic logic. Right, we all get to listen to the same music and watch the same movies. The point is all the music and movies that will be lost. There was a time I thought the same thing. Now I realize how silly it was and I suppose you'll come to the same conclusion one day. > for everyone in the world to enjoy in the same language. I guess you never heard of subtitles or that you can enjoy music without understanding the words. And if we wiped out all languages except vietnamese, how will I enjoy all the nonexistent music that won't be produced in english, french, etc? If you took a minute to examine your own assertion, you'd realize how absurd it is. Certainly, you understand that there is a different sound to vietnamese, american, french, etc languages. These languages produce different sounds which produce different music? You don't seem to be clued to the fact that different languages/cultures/etc produce different kinds of music/movies/etc. For example, the type of poetry in the english languages is directly informed by language. As opposed to say italian and its extraordinarily rhythmic language. There are pros and cons to languages. Just like it would be naive to say we should all program in the same language or we should use the same OS or use the same database, it's even more naive to say that about human languages.

by disown 6y ago

newsbinator 6y ago

You haven't understood my comment. The principle of charity would be useful here. I'm not suggesting we burn books. I'm suggesting we let all languages die except for whichever singular global language. Whoever wants to study latin can. Whoever wants to study ancient 20th century American English literature in 1000 years can. You can keep all the movies and music you currently enjoy. The difference is that a kid born in Penang and a kid born in Pennsylvania and a kid born in Perm will all be speaking the same language and growing up to make movies and music in the same language, for everyone in the world to enjoy in the same language.

rexpop 6y ago
> let all languages die Languages do not die on their own. They're killed. Most "charitably," by environmental circumstance. Less "charitably," they are killed by Colonialism.
- joe5150 6y ago
  exactly. "every language but one dying" is not something that could (much less should) happen all by itself.
disown 6y ago
> You haven't understood my comment. No I understood your point perfectly. You are not understanding mine. Throughout history, people have posited your idea. A "universal" language - latin, french, esparanto, etc. Now go back 1000 years ago and imagine you were in charge and we made everyone speak/use latin. We wouldn't have english, french, italian, etc. No shakespeare, no voltaire, no twain, no modernity. > You can keep all the movies and music you currently enjoy. Right I understand that. But you are ignoring the future movies/music/etc that will be lost because of the languages that never existed? > The difference is that a kid born in Penang and a kid born in Pennsylvania and a kid born in Perm will all be speaking the same language and growing up to make movies and music in the same language Once again, I get the simplistic logic. Right, we all get to listen to the same music and watch the same movies. The point is all the music and movies that will be lost. There was a time I thought the same thing. Now I realize how silly it was and I suppose you'll come to the same conclusion one day. > for everyone in the world to enjoy in the same language. I guess you never heard of subtitles or that you can enjoy music without understanding the words. And if we wiped out all languages except vietnamese, how will I enjoy all the nonexistent music that won't be produced in english, french, etc? If you took a minute to examine your own assertion, you'd realize how absurd it is. Certainly, you understand that there is a different sound to vietnamese, american, french, etc languages. These languages produce different sounds which produce different music? You don't seem to be clued to the fact that different languages/cultures/etc produce different kinds of music/movies/etc. For example, the type of poetry in the english languages is directly informed by language. As opposed to say italian and its extraordinarily rhythmic language. There are pros and cons to languages. Just like it would be naive to say we should all program in the same language or we should use the same OS or use the same database, it's even more naive to say that about human languages.