A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved? • Hacker News Board

Re: A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved?

#61

Post by Potando » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 10:13 PM UTC

bsho wrote: post #9

waqf wrote: post #4

Should a dying language be "saved"? Preserving cultural heritage is all very well, but expending a child's language-acquisitive resources on a language which won't connect them to the rest of contemporary humanity seems far too high a price.

“The older people are the only ones who can tell you what their youth stands to lose,” he said. “The young are the only ones who can articulate the loss of an identity rooted in a mother tongue that has become foreign to them.” I work in Navajo language education. Most insecurity in Navajo adults derives from this single disconnect. It seems later in life, in those that have connected "to the rest of contemporary hum…

This just means the last speakers are hoping to pass their insecurity problem on to another group of new "last speakers" to suffer it for them. Nothing against an individual having that desire, but for a 3rd party to help them, it's really doing any overall good. It's just moving the problem to somebody else.

Re: A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved?

#62

Post by Potando » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 10:28 PM UTC

These articles appear from time to time but they never give any sensible reason. Just take it as given that languages must be saved. This one has a long diversion into indigenous medicine - not something that needs a language, but rather needs knowledge, using any language. Here's the closest thing I found to a reason though I only read half way:

"But the loss of languages passed down for millennia, along with their unique arts and cosmologies, may have consequences that won’t be understood until it is too late to reverse them."

Re: A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved?

#63

Post by brc » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 10:30 PM UTC

japhyr wrote: post #31

DanAndersen wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you be able to provide some examples of these untranslatable concepts or ways of thinking? I suspect that the fact that you can provide them, in English, means that English is as capable as any other language to at absorbing that idea and making it expressible. If different languages contain unique ways of thinking that can't be expressed in other languages, then what benefit is there to the preservation of tha…

I'll try to share some examples in a bit. Short reason this approach is "lossy": it's a huge game of telephone. Translation retains most of the translated concept, but not all of the concept's subtleties. The farther removed we get from the original, the less faithful the translation. We see this most clearly where it takes a paragraph of English to start to communicate the meaning contained in one word from some lan…

English is an open source language. It gets extended as needed. Schadenfreude is a word with no equivalent in English, so a big number of English people use schadenfreude as a direct way of expressing the concept.

As long as the language is extensible then I don't see a major problem with translation losses, because they can just get incorporated into the language of the day.

I get that each language has ways of describing certain things better than others, and those superior language features are likely tied directly to the culture that originally created the language. I just think that the cost of maintaining a large amount of languages might. T be worth it.

Re: A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved?

#64

Post by pbhjpbhj » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 10:33 PM UTC

intopieces wrote: post #44

freehunter wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does have a foundation in science (or reality) is that the teaching of another language means a child won't have room in their daily schedule for other things. There's only so much time in the day. If a child is learning math and science and their main language and other skills for seven hours, sleeps for eight hours, and eats for two hours, that only leaves seven hours in the day to fit in everything else, incl…

>what other, more useful knowledge could they have gained otherwise? How does one rank the usefulness of knowledge? Language acquisition (and the acquisition of a particular language) is not a skill in isolation. It enhances other skills such as problem solving, logical inference, the ability to recognize patterns, knowledge synthesis... skills I daresay are useful in other fields, such as computer programming. I hea…

A partial case study: In Wales ~100% of the population speak English. In the last UK census the numbers who responded that they could _speak_ any old Welsh, Cymraeg, was Cymraeg is at such low demand by parents that there are no secondary schools that use it (except as a subject, like you'd learn a foreign language). Excepting a handful of Patagonians and some ex-pat Welsh there is nowhere outside the country to speak Cymraeg and there is nowhere in the country that it is needed.

However, all primary school children are forced to use "incidental Welsh" in every single subject lesson. In my kids school there are Urdu, Mandarin, Swedish, Spanish speaking kids .. but none that speak Cymraeg at home as a domestic language.

Most people who can speak some Cymraeg can't write in it and aren't fluent. Of those that are fluent the majority 75-80% use English for emails and texts and social media (per a recent study by the Office of the Welsh Language Commissioner).

Yet still, all subjects in primary school are hobbled by backward looking misguided nationalism - at present rates the only kids who will use Cymraeg in a job post-school are those in the Welsh Language Commission.

It serves no useful purpose for the kids but it's treated as more important than maths, science, English, ...

Now, I've nothing against languages. I find them fascinating but in mainstream education languages should be taught first as a means of communication. If people want to learn them later so they can hide away and not talk to people from other cultures that's fine - but that's not what compulsory schooling should be about.

Aside, how does language learning of itself improve problem solving?

Re: A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved?

#65

Post by robryan » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 11:00 PM UTC

DanAndersen wrote: post #25

lesu wrote: post #21

I'm wondering if the people who are railing against saving languages are equally against organizations such as the Internet Archive? My thinking is that, as tech-savvy computer whizzes, many folk on Hacker News are happier to preserve something that makes sense to _them_ (media or website snapshots) than things that don't (languages and foreign cultural history). It's difficult to say what is useful without the benef…

I see that as an apples to oranges comparison. When we say "saving languages," do we mean archiving them, backing them up, creating stores of references and recordings that can be easily recalled yet inexpensively preserved? If so, then I am definitely for that. If "saving languages" means accepting nothing less than the descendants of the speakers of a dying language needing to expend mental energy and time to remai…

Yes, I think most people would agree that creating a record of as many languages as possible before they die out is a good idea.

Re: A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved?

#66

Post by LesZedCB » Sat, Mar 28, 2015, 11:31 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #39

LesZedCB wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My girlfriend is a linguist with a particular passion for dying languages and cultures. I often find myself asking the same question every time she talks about it. I think the more important factor than usefulness in society is the fact that, like the article said, being the last of anything is lonely. For me, at least, that is a particularly hard position to empathize with because my culture is incredibly widespread…

> because my culture is incredibly widespread and probably isn't going anyway. Give it some time.

sure, I didn't mean to make it seem impossible, just that for now, it's not facing the same danger as other much smaller ones.

Re: A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved?

#67

Post by gurkendoktor » Sun, Mar 29, 2015, 12:54 AM UTC

bkurtz13 wrote: post #10

waqf wrote: post #4

Should a dying language be "saved"? Preserving cultural heritage is all very well, but expending a child's language-acquisitive resources on a language which won't connect them to the rest of contemporary humanity seems far too high a price.

There is a particularly human egotism with respect to "saving" things that have outlived their usefulness and purpose, or preserving things that should be changing. If language can be viewed through its evolutionary purpose, these dying languages are simply experiments that did not pan out, and should be allowed to become extinct.

When do songs and poetry written in a particular language outlive their usefulness and purpose? When I feel pity for an endangered language it's usually not because I want to read user manuals or order pizza, but because so many works of art will be lost.

Re: A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved?

#68

Post by Dewie » Sun, Mar 29, 2015, 1:22 AM UTC

67726e wrote: post #46

JulianMorrison wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of these cultures (including their language) were forcefully banned, obliterated by law, lynching, displacement. discriminatory treatment, and the stealing of children. I do not exaggerate. So don't pretend they are dying of natural causes when the knife is still sticking out of their back.

To play the devil's advocate, maybe they deserve to die out. If they would have innovated and conquered first, their language could have lived and ours could be the one on its deathbed. Survival of the fittest, if you will.

> To play the devil's advocate, maybe they deserve to die out.

In other words "let me present my genuine opinion by wrapping it in a more presentable delivery".

Re: A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved?

#69

Post by huherto » Sun, Mar 29, 2015, 1:25 AM UTC

monocasa wrote: post #17

waqf wrote: post #4

Should a dying language be "saved"? Preserving cultural heritage is all very well, but expending a child's language-acquisitive resources on a language which won't connect them to the rest of contemporary humanity seems far too high a price.

When you're a child, language acquisition isn't a zero sum game.

But you have finite time and resources. You have to decide which languages to learn

Re: A Loss for Words: Can a Dying Language Be Saved?

#70

Post by Dewie » Sun, Mar 29, 2015, 1:28 AM UTC

sumedh wrote: post #38

I just feel that the whole humanity should speak one common language. Now whether you like it or not that language is going to be English. I just dont understand why do we need multiple languages anymore. If anyone says we need them to preserve the culture, I dont understand that either. My native language is not English, just in case anyone feels I want to force English down your throat.

> My native language is not English, just in case anyone feels I want to force English down your throat.

But you speak fluent English, so it's basically the same thing if you don't care about preserving your own language for cultural reasons. You're just as much of a privileged, spoilt child that is demanding that the rest of the world should get in line with something you already know, as native English speakers with the same demand are.