Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014) • Hacker News Board

Re: Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014)

#141

Post by sp332 » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 5:32 AM UTC

Chris2048 wrote: post #25

jfaucett wrote: post #22

As much as I feel sad about losing so many amazing languages, these arguments are weak emotional appeals at best. The only legitimate argument you can make for keeping minority languages around is to basically reframe the context and say your goal as a society is to promote cultural and linguistic diversity because society needs it more than it does a highly effecient raw information processing system. As a programme…

> But why does society need diversity more than efficiency? Someone else can give that one a try :) You'll soon find yourself in dangerous territory here. The current mantra is diversity is not only morally good, but also actually beneficial - but the former shrinks to the latter whenever challenged, with an extra helping of bad-faith accusation...

The moral argument is simply one of valuing equality. You don't deserve to have your chosen language canonized, and I don't deserve to have mine relegated to a cultural dustbin.

Re: Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014)

#142

Post by ktRolster » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 5:35 AM UTC

Koshkin wrote: post #98

sargun wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that this is one of the best things that TV has given us - the homogenization, and adoption of the English language. It eases communication and trade across cultures. It also makes it cheaper to recruit people from all around the world with a given skill. Right now, there's a shortage in skilled welders. There's a massive number of skilled welders in Asia that make bit less money than the welders here do. W…

I love English language, but I don't like it, and I find it unfortunate that it is the English language that has acquired the status of the most important international language today. Even the "standard" pronunciation turns out to be extremely hard to do correctly for non-native speakers, for many even after years of speaking it. The distinction between some phonemes is way too subtle for them to get right; some wor…

There is too much reliance on the context in determining the exact meaning of a word

That is every language in the world

Re: Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014)

#143

Post by ktRolster » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 5:43 AM UTC

danieltillett wrote: post #126

technomancy wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have yet to come across any concept in any human language that can’t be expressed in English. And all turing-complete programming languages are technically equivalent; what's your point?

That there is no knowledge that can't be communicated in English. Actually not all languages are equivalent because many concepts can only be expressed in English as all other languages lack the vocabulary to express many scientific and technical concepts. Right now English really is the only language that can be used to express a lot of concepts.

Alan Perlis said, "A programming language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing."

Similarly, it might be said that a human language that doesn't affect your world-view is not worth learning. The language is the door to the culture.

Re: Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014)

#144

Post by khedoros » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 5:59 AM UTC

ggreer wrote: post #5

It's not a well-liked view, but I'm very glad that humanity is on the path to speaking only a few languages (or perhaps just one). If you disagree, consider this thought experiment: Imagine if the entire world spoke a single language. Would we ever want to invent new languages, making mutual communication harder? It would be silly. I do feel for the speakers of these dying tongues, but in the long run, this is a good…

> Do you feel stunted or unsatisfied because your ancestors didn't pass their native tongues down to you?

Yes, although I realize that I'm likely in the minority. That's why I started learning one of them at the first opportunity. I feel like it helped solidify one aspect of who I think I am.

Learn a few languages. Learn the variations in connotation that different grammars provide. Learn that the way you structure your thoughts in one language don't fit naturally into another language.

Language provides an imperfect conduit for communication, and every language is imperfect in a unique way. Knowing a few unrelated ones gives you a basis for comparison and contrast.

Re: Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014)

#145

Post by khedoros » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 6:10 AM UTC

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #93

coldtea wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you disagree, consider this thought experiment: Imagine if the entire world spoke a single language. Would we ever want to invent new languages, making mutual communication harder? It would be silly. We do something similar to that already. Kids make up their own lingo when playing, subgroups invent new slangs within a single language, areas make their own dialect, we invent new cultural languages (e.g. music ge…

>you really don't know what actual cultural diversity is // So a young nomadic Mongolian girl and I (UK, middle-age, male, working in craft/retail) don't represent different cultures because we can both speak English? Go on, explain, clearly I don't understand. Didn't you already explain that there were vastly different subcultures within the population of English language speakers? Don't you think there's more to cu…

> So a young nomadic Mongolian girl and I (UK, middle-age, male, working in craft/retail) don't represent different cultures because we can both speak English?

I think the person you responded to went too far in their argument. I would've said that speakers of the same language can have very different culture, but that (in your example) the English-speaking Mongolian girl wouldn't be part of the same culture that she would if she were a Mongolian-speaking Mongolian girl.

Language doesn't dictate patterns of thought, but it certainly shapes them. A concept that might be easy to formulate in Mongolian may be difficult to formulate in English, and the reverse applies. People naturally use the patterns that the language encourages. With different patterns, different group behaviors tend to emerge, because they're easy to think about.

Simultaneously, the culture shapes the language to fit its needs. Given time and isolation, it will become more and more distinctly different.

Re: Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014)

#146

Post by khedoros » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 6:13 AM UTC

xyzzyz wrote: post #140

douche wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes a few weeks of practice to be able to intelligbly understand someone from India, Kenya, England, the US, or Australia, if you're from one of the others. Cadences and idioms are all off.

English is not my native language, and I can barely tell the difference between Indian, Kenyan, British and American English. Cadence and idioms are all equally off. Certainly it's not "weeks of practice".

I think that the qualifier "if you're from one of the others" applies to your case.

Re: Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014)

#147

Post by khedoros » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 6:28 AM UTC

thaumasiotes wrote: post #123

douche wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes a few weeks of practice to be able to intelligbly understand someone from India, Kenya, England, the US, or Australia, if you're from one of the others. Cadences and idioms are all off.

This is dramatically overstated. It immediately predicts that British television would have no audience in the US and Australia.

Does it? I think it just means that there's a fair number of things to learn before the dialog makes complete sense. Context fills in many of the gaps, I know that I still miss some cultural references, rhyming slang, and such, even after watching a fair number of British shows.

Re: Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014)

#148

Post by khedoros » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 6:37 AM UTC

ufmace wrote: post #17

mrob wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We probably would invent new languages, or at least new dialects, to signal group membership. If somebody has made the effort to learn the language then they're probably serious about being part of the group. As a practical example, consider the revival of the Hebrew language, which happened mostly as an expression of Jewish identity. Strengthening group identity is the main motivation for preserving rare languages.

That's an interesting take on it. I wonder if there's much history of groups starting out with common languages, then groups separating and the languages evolving separately, either intentionally to demonstrate group membership, or just due to lack of communication between groups, and continuing to differentiate until they're effectively different languages. I only speak English, but I've heard several different acce…

My mother-in-law is from an island off the coast of Honduras. She's a native English speaker, but has a strong accent, and the dialect of English that they speak has grammatical differences, along with some different vocabulary. I suspect that some comes from Spanish and some from Garifuna.

Without modern communications, their dialect of English would've continued diverging, and eventually be considered different enough to be a new language, rather than just a dialect.

Re: Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014)

#149

Post by jugbandjames » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 6:44 AM UTC

Koshkin wrote: post #98

sargun wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that this is one of the best things that TV has given us - the homogenization, and adoption of the English language. It eases communication and trade across cultures. It also makes it cheaper to recruit people from all around the world with a given skill. Right now, there's a shortage in skilled welders. There's a massive number of skilled welders in Asia that make bit less money than the welders here do. W…

I love English language, but I don't like it, and I find it unfortunate that it is the English language that has acquired the status of the most important international language today. Even the "standard" pronunciation turns out to be extremely hard to do correctly for non-native speakers, for many even after years of speaking it. The distinction between some phonemes is way too subtle for them to get right; some wor…

Babies are born with the ability to distinguish between any two frequencies that are important for a phonetic distinction. Within the first year, they begin to lose that ability and only retain frequency distinctions necessary for whatever language they're exposed to. So, when an adult can't tell the difference between two phonemes or has difficulty articulating it, it's because they weren't exposed to it early enough. So, the difficulty you describe would apply to any lingua franca. In the bullshit, completely impossible scenario where everyone in the world speaks one language, this wouldn't be a problem because there would only be one set of phonemes.

Re: Languages: Why we must save dying tongues (2014)

#150

Post by khedoros » Mon, Jul 04, 2016, 7:02 AM UTC

danieltillett wrote: post #126

technomancy wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have yet to come across any concept in any human language that can’t be expressed in English. And all turing-complete programming languages are technically equivalent; what's your point?

That there is no knowledge that can't be communicated in English. Actually not all languages are equivalent because many concepts can only be expressed in English as all other languages lack the vocabulary to express many scientific and technical concepts. Right now English really is the only language that can be used to express a lot of concepts.

Where another language lacks the vocabulary, the concept could be expressed through explanation, or through assimilation of that word from English, construction of a new word that makes etymological sense, etc. There isn't anything extra that can be done in English that couldn't be done in another language to express new concepts.