Tuesday, September 22, 2009
When to Save a Language
When deciding whether to save a language or to let it die, there are many factors to consider. First of all, there must be a significant number of speakers of the language – at least 20,000 or so. If there are not many speakers, then it would be very difficult to preserve the language and have it passed down to future generations. Another important condition is the presence of a written form of the language. If the language has a written form, it is a good indicator that the language is worth trying to save. If there is no written form, however, there is much less incentive to attempt to save it. Without a written form, there are no books, poems, dictionaries, documents, etc., that give a complete picture of the culture of the language group. In order to fully understand a language and its culture, linguists really need the language to be written down so they can immerse themselves in the culture and thereby figure out the best techniques to save the language. One more condition that is essential to deciding whether or not to save a language is the attitude toward it by its speakers. If the speakers really want to preserve the language, then there’s a good chance that they will focus on learning/maintaining their language throughout future generations. If the speakers feel it is just better to give in to the more dominant languages of society and forget about their own language, an attempt to save it would be futile since the natives would have no motivation to keep it alive.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that the number of speakers of the language is a critical factor in deciding whether or not a language is worth saving. Attitude towards a language, as you pointed out, is also an influential determining factor of a language's survival. However, I have to disagree with you on what you said about languages without written forms. Many languages thrive without written forms and still carry cultural and historical significance as well as literature. For example,the dialect Taiwanese has no written form but is still recorded through the Chinese writing system. (Taiwanese and Chinese are not mutually intelligible.)
ReplyDeleteI think that you make a very good argument, especially in reference to the attitudes of speakers towards the language. Unfortunately, although colonization and globalization have caused a lot of these languages to become endangered or go extinct, there still is some degree of responsibility in regards to the native speakers. For instance, it is their duty to pass the language down to the future generations, or at least give them the opportunity to learn. However, since many older speakers did not do that, they themselves are a part of the problem.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Elisha that it is the somewhat the responsibility of the speakers of the language to preserve the language as best as they can. But I'm going to have to disagree with the number of speakers being important in saving a language(as I explained on Brenda's Blog).
ReplyDeleteI think that the amount of speakers matters but I think it is more important how those speakers interact with each other than how many there are. If you have a lot of speakers spread out around the world it is going to be much harder to preserve the language than if you have a smaller group of speakers living together in a community with less outside cultural influence. I strongly agree with your point about trying to save the language is futile if the people themselves don't want to save their own language.
ReplyDelete