English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

should goverment protect endangered language in its country? tell me what you think!

2007-03-31 03:55:00 · 9 answers · asked by Younger 1 in News & Events Current Events

9 answers

Yes because language carries culture. And, the extinction of a language means the end of a culture and a distinct way of thinking which could later be valuable to that society. It adds diversity to the society and having a range of diverse ideas makes a society more innovative and creative in its thinking.

2007-03-31 04:10:22 · answer #1 · answered by slinda 4 · 0 0

I think endangered languages (e.g. the language of a small native tribe) should be recorded for posterity. But if not many are speaking it, it seems of little use to promote it as a spoken language. I would not try to eliminate it, of course. But a country needs a common language.

2007-03-31 04:10:03 · answer #2 · answered by The First Dragon 7 · 0 0

No.

Not only is it a huge waste of money, but there is muc value for the people concerned in learning great, widespread languages in place of some obscure dialect.

Think of the harm to innocent people if, thanks to the misguided action of government officials, a group of people are effectively shut off from the currents of modern thought and relegated to a backwater by being denied access to the means to join the modern world.

Because that's what it is. The government officials make this unfortunate group into relics of a past that's long gone.

Thanks to the march of civilization, huge numbers of local dialects have disappeared over time. Nostalgia buffs might lament this, equating it to the extinction of species, but this is simply not a parallel. Those, say, who learn English in place of a dialect with 20 different words for snow, are indeed leaving the past, but it's a past that no longer exists.

All people should have a right to share the advances of modern thought. It's nothing less than criminal to deny this right to a luckless few.

2007-03-31 04:06:29 · answer #3 · answered by Anne Marie 6 · 0 0

I think that the whole world should get together and decide on one universal language. Taught in every country in every school. Even now they see the advantage of teaching a child two languages. He can keep his heritage language but he is required to learn and speak this universal language so that humans where ever they are on earth can talk to each other.
What language is the easiest to learn not the most people who speak it or it would be Chinese which is the hardest to learn of all the languages.
Really do reseach, what language is the easiest learned and to teach. The majority of people speak it. someone in every country has to speak this language.
Really decide by using all those geniuses in the world and then everyone is required to learn it.
I believe that if people knew that everyone was required to do it they would be anxious to learn it. When you learn English or French or German or Swedish or Spanish.
that does not open up to you everyone in the world.
But two languages does. First the one you won't get rid of then the Universal language.

2007-03-31 04:05:11 · answer #4 · answered by Ruth 6 · 0 1

Ok I'm game, what is the endangered language in this country?

2007-03-31 04:04:56 · answer #5 · answered by moonsister_98 6 · 0 1

in case you have a stagnation interior the international that's possibly that many, maybe maximum, species will develop into extinct which includes guy. the factor is that we are the only species that could take care of the earth and save substitute happening, and that's what's going to save the earth alive. we are smart sufficient to examine from our blunders and bypass it directly to the subsequent technology to proceed the artwork of protecting the only international all of us comprehend. via fact that we actually don't comprehend the effect of dropping species thoroughly, why no longer save some and attempt to comprehend extra suitable. that's a extensive getting to understand curve and a single existence of 70-80 years is in simple terms no longer long sufficient to comprehend a lot in any respect. nature isn't some separate entity working in parallel. we are all a factor of nature and we would desire to artwork jointly like a properly oiled device. (in my view besides)

2016-11-25 01:59:06 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

i think we should protect our own language.

2007-03-31 16:15:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

no es englisho?




(sarcasm)

2007-03-31 03:59:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

no

2007-03-31 04:03:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers