Is your language becoming extinct?

It seems that around the world many languages are dying out, and many already have.

Is the world ending up with only 10 or so super languages?

So my questions to ATS members, is your language becoming extinct?

Half of all human languages will have disappeared by the end of the century, as smaller societies are assimilated into national and global cultures, scientists have warned.

www.newscientist.com...

Of the estimated 7,000 languages spoken in the world today, linguists say, nearly half are in danger of extinction and are likely to disappear in this century. In fact, they are now falling out of use at a rate of about one every two weeks.

www.nytimes.com...

Twenty languages spoken in the UK - including Old Kentish Sign Language - have become extinct or are in danger of dying out within a generation according to academics who are attempting to halt their disappearance.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

AYAPAN, Mexico — Only two people on Earth are known to speak the Ayapanec language, Manuel Segovia and Isidro Velasquez, old men of few words who are somewhat indifferent to each other's company.

www.mcclatchydc.com...

It is an unquestionable fact that some languages are dying out and that is an incredibly sad fact indeed. Language binds communities and embeds cultural heritage. I applaud those who who still speak their own dying languages and will continue to do so. I'm English and when I go abroad - no matter where - I try to speak to them in their language. I speak basic French, Spanish, Portugese and Italian (which I appreciate are not in danger of dying out), and it saddens me that when I speak in their language and they notice the British accent they will start to speak to me in English most of the time. This even happens in Paris - which amazes me given the nature of most Parisians. Paris is actually my favourite city in the world, but that's an aside.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate that they do it out of courtesy or to develop their own language skills, but I feel that they should stick to their native tongues and allow me to struggle along. After all, I am their guest. I also try to speak a little bit of languages like Welsh when I go there. I respect other cultures and their languages is a vital part of that to me.

I don't want English - or any other language to dominate. I want diversity. I need diversity. It makes our planet a richer place. Let's keep that.

Cado

My langwige is... like.. SO not dyin out, woteva. Da kidz round ere speek perfict english. literuly.

reply to post by FOXMULDER147


It's still English, Fox. It just uses non-standard spelling. English has always evolved. Any attempt to standardise it will always fail. Just ask Samuel Johnson. He gave up in the end.

It grates, but is probably the future of English.

I'm Ok with it. I see no harm in out with the old, in with the new.

It would make communication and collaboration much easier.

Originally posted by AngryAlien
It would make communication and collaboration much easier.

So would putting 100,000 people on a small island. Doesn't mean it's a good thing.

Yes .

Unfortunately , my language is becoming extinct .

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147

It would make communication and collaboration much easier.

So would putting 100,000 people on a small island. Doesn't mean it's a good thing.

With you all the way there, Fox. It certainly doesn't mean it's a good thing. A common language is one step closer to the NWO.

Anyone remember Esperanto?

That was just wierd...

edit to add: in my opinion anyway. Just don't agree with artificial languages when we have many existing ones.

Originally posted by FOXMULDER147
So would putting 100,000 people on a small island. Doesn't mean it's a good thing.

I don't understand your analogy. We already have millions of people on islands that all speak a common language. This ensures we can all communicate and understand.

As for the NWO comment posted by someone

If you are worried about it, start learning all of the languages to keep them alive. Many languages have come and gone throughout history. Some ancient languages still exist, but are inferior for modern day communication.

Inferior for modern day communication? I disagree. If enough people speak them they are still more than capable of carrying out modern communication.

And as for my NWO comment - if you disagree, please feel free to do so but an eyes up face is hardly constructive debate now, is it?

I'm not a linguist. I'd love to learn all the dying out languages but in reality, it's not going to happen is it?

Let's encourage the speakers to use them. I'm sure a Welsh speaker can discuss anything we discuss in English to an equal level. all it takes is new words and while some of these may be 'borrowed' from other languages that's nothing new and in no way invalidates a language's ability to be relevant.

Have you ever eaten a baguette, felt angry or gone to the ballet?

Cado.

Originally posted by cado angelus
reply to post by FOXMULDER147

 

It's still English, Fox. It just uses non-standard spelling. English has always evolved. Any attempt to standardise it will always fail. Just ask Samuel Johnson. He gave up in the end.

It grates, but is probably the future of English.

There is a HUGE difference between the shift from middle English to modern English and the shift between modern English and the horrific atrocities committed against it in the present day. The current shift is all about pure laziness. Acronyms are used to save a couple of keystrokes, capitalization and punctuation are rarely used correctly (if at all), the poor apostrophe is abused to unacceptable levels, homophones are grossly misused, and spelling is a lost art. Sure, one may be able to, with a healthy dose of whiskey, understand what someone means when they say: "There sign's are rediculous i thought their morans." However, why SHOULD anyone have to spend the extra time to parse that nonsense? Is it really that difficult to stop for 2 seconds and realize: "Hey! 'There' means a direction and of course there should be no apostrophe in 'clothes'. Not to mention I look ridiculous when I spell it 'rediculous' and am certainly a moron when I write 'moran' "?

I know many people will jump out of the woodwork and defend such horrific use of the English language by saying things like "Is it really that big of a deal" or "Not everyone is a native speaker" or "Some people have a learning disability".

Yes, it is a big deal. Writing your native tongue in that manner is as offensive as if I started saying a foot was 14 inches and a pound was 8.3 oz. If you are going to communicate an idea to others you need to use the same nomenclature as everyone else.

No, not everyone is a native speaker. Non-native English speakers tend to actually care about the grammar and syntax of the languages they learn.

Yes, some people do have a learning disability that makes it harder for them to correctly put down in words what is in their brain. I get that and give props to those that struggle with it. HOWEVER, just because something is difficult for you does not mean that you get a free pass to do whatever you want. I can't claim to be an astrophysicist and when called to the mat because I can't determine the elliptical pathway of a heavenly body say: "But math is hard for me!"

Everyone makes mistakes, but blindly allowing the pure trashing of the English language WILL bring its demise.

There is a HUGE difference between the shift from middle English to modern English and the shift between modern English and the horrific atrocities committed against it in the present day.

Horrific atrocities is just your opinion. Why be so prescriptive?

The current shift is all about pure laziness.

Is it? I thought is was about change in communication methods. If we look at SMS and Twitter for example: SMS were originally limited in terms of characters and Twitter still is. Brevity is key in social media terms. I cannot argue that this is creeping into the writing of youngsters but they are taught to understand form and context. Some struggle, but that will always be the case. At least they can get their point across.

Acronyms are used to save a couple of keystrokes

Aren’t acronyms a common aspect of life these days? Ofsted for example?

Capitalization and punctuation are rarely used correctly (if at all).

I agree with this and it bugs me, but do we really need a capital letter to designate a proper noun or to indicate the start of a new sentence if we already have the full stop. What concerns me more is the lack of ability to form a proper sentence.

The poor apostrophe is abused to unacceptable levels, homophones are grossly misused, and spelling is a lost art. Sure, one may be able to, with a healthy dose of whiskey, understand what someone means when they say: "There sign's are rediculous i thought their morans." However, why SHOULD anyone have to spend the extra time to parse that nonsense?

Is it nonsense? You can understand it so it’s not nonsense at all. It offends you because you think that everything should be done right, but things aren’t. If people can’t spell standardly and are able to communicate in writing, good on ‘em for trying. It takes a lot of guts to know that and do it anyway.
Just look at how many official notices have stray apostrophes. I would argue that we don’t actually need them any more because it’s clear from the context what’s going on. Some pedants may argue otherwise and that’s their choice but we all know what’s meant most of the time.

Is it really that difficult to stop for 2 seconds and realize: "Hey! 'There' means a direction and of course there should be no apostrophe in 'clothes'. Not to mention I look ridiculous when I spell it 'rediculous' and am certainly a moron when I write 'moran' "?

Not really. To me, you could be an idiot because you use a ‘z’ instead of an ‘s’ in spelling. Some may argue that American English uses this because Americans are too stupid to realise that an ‘s’ can have a ‘z’ sound. I’m not arguing that – just making a point. Also, 'moron' and 'moran' have totally different sounds. most 'misspellings' are phonetically plausible.

tbc...

I know many people will jump out of the woodwork and defend such horrific use of the English language by saying things like "Is it really that big of a deal"

…Language evolves. It always will. To resist it is futile and we should embrace it. People, on the whole, know when to write formally and when not to. Some may not be able to. Blame their education. Not them. They do the best with the tools they have been given.

"Not everyone is a native speaker"

This is a fact.

"Some people have a learning disability".

Again, this is a fact.

Yes, it is a big deal. Writing your native tongue in that manner is as offensive as if I started saying a foot was 14 inches and a pound was 8.3 oz. If you are going to communicate an idea to others you need to use the same nomenclature as everyone else.

It’s offensive to you? Get over yourself. Is it going to kill you? If you are going to communicate an idea to anyone else you use the best means you have available to you. End of story. If it’s in non-standard English; sorry, I am.

No, not everyone is a native speaker. Non-native English speakers tend to actually care about the grammar and syntax of the languages they learn.

Which is why it often sounds artificial. Matter not, syntax. Meaning important, it is.

Yes, some people do have a learning disability that makes it harder for them to correctly put down in words what is in their brain. I get that and give props to those that struggle with it. HOWEVER, just because something is difficult for you does not mean that you get a free pass to do whatever you want.

But what if they JUST CAN’T DO IT? who said anything about free passes?

I can't claim to be an astrophysicist and when called to the mat because I can't determine the elliptical pathway of a heavenly body say: "But math is hard for me!"

What is your point here? Are you saying that dyslexic people compile the OED?

Everyone makes mistakes, but blindly allowing the pure trashing of the English language WILL bring its demise.

Absolute rubbish. The English language will not die. It will change. It will have different forms. It will not die.

Please just get a grip and worry about something important instead. Prescriptivism is pointless and certainly will kill a language as it stops it evolving along with the rest of the world.

It makes me sad that people worry about these things when there are for more important things to worry about.

Im gonna have a nother gls of wine and c what the nite brings.

Please don’t take offence at anything I’ve said. I just feel that if one studies language, one will see it constantly changes. It’s a living thing and it’s good that it does.

Cado

You make good counter points but let's just say that I am a born pedant and leave it at that. The one thing that truly bothers me about current communication is that it just seems LAZY. Alas, I let my cockles raise up in the midst of an actually very interesting thread.

I don't see the problem with losing variety in languages. The internet was opened a massive gateway to information from many places and people around the world for example, we all see that as great. Different languages is another barrier, and I think it'll connect us further to open that up and eliminate the hassle of communicating between others.

How's this an Origins and Creationism?

Everything evolves and changes from societies to languages. So stop being so conservative and accept the truth, we are not a static species, we evolve...

So quit whining ...

reply to post by dagobert


Sorry for the slow response. Wife is in hospital. I love a good debate, and understand pedantry. I just love arguing. I understand why you feel what you feel and I will always rant when I see a rogue apostrophe somewhere or - as has just happened in hospital - the nurse spells 'penicillin' wrong on an allergy bracelet.

I suppose I've just realised that worrying about this is futile.

Thank you for the discussion. :-)

Cado

Originally posted by xxsomexpersonxx
I don't see the problem with losing variety in languages. The internet was[/] opened a massive gateway to information from many places and people around the world for example, we all see that as great. Different languages is another barrier, and I think it'll connect us further to open that up and eliminate the hassle of communicating between others.

How's this an Origins and Creationism?

I think you'll find that the Internet HAS opened a massive gateway. Language is not a barrier. It is a blessing.

That said, despite your grammatical errors I can understand your point so I can't complain. I still think that all languages should be fostered, cherished and developed and to let some die out would be unfathomable, or is that unfathonable ot unfathinible.

;-)