The problem I have with this article is that it fails to recognize that language also is an anchor in a negative way. Yes, Hebrew can help form a stronger Jewis

The problem I have with this article is that it fails to recognize that language also is an anchor in a negative way. Yes, Hebrew can help form a stronger Jewish community, but a language spoken by 3000 people in the middle of the Amazon can only serve to keep those people hostage forever. What is wrong with teaching those people's kids to speak Hebrew or Spanish or English and let them join a broader, stronger community or nation? The alternative is that those people's children will not be able to prosper because, to highlight the obvious, many of these obscure languages are correlated with impoverished environments. Yes, it helps some academic in some fancy University in the northeast of the United States have "intellectual debates" about the issue while sipping on a starbucks latte, but it certainly does not help those people. The second point is that the nuances that the author has observed don't have to be lost. If there was value in knowing that an object was "on" another object horizontally, or vertically, or slanted (using the example in the article), we could always incorporate those notions into any major language.