When I hear the word "extinction," I generally think about animals, but thanks to "The Economist," I can now associate the idea with an entirely different concept: language. A significant percentage of the world's language may soon disappear, which begs the question: Why does it matter?
According to UNESCO, the organization within the UN that studies cultural matters, 2,500 of the world's 6,700 languages are now in danger of extinction. Accompanying the decline in "unimportant" languages is a rise in the popularity of English, Mandarin and Spanish, which are now spoken by about one-fourth of the world. The increase in the importance of these languages is a direct result of globalization. As the world shrinks, "the big three" have become the primary means of communication for many people, leaving many native tongues in the past.
On the surface, some might see a decline in the use of minor languages as a good thing. If the number of languages spoken in the world decreases, then language barriers could dissolve completely, leading to an enhanced expression of ideas among the world. Another way to look at the extinction of languages is in the Darwinian terms of natural selection: Nature "selects" the most useful languages, leading to the gradual dying out of rarer forms of communication.
Eventually, the world might even reach the point where there are only a few major languages in use. Of course, there is no way that the world would reach this point in our lifetimes, or even in the next millennium, but frequent interactions among different people could lead to an amalgamation of several languages into one. Closely related to this idea is the theory that over time, the world's population will become more homogenous because variations in the gene pool will fade away.
The disappearance of a third of the world's languages is not an event that will occur without repercussions. The disintegration of some cultures will likely follow as languages become extinct. Language and culture have a very intimate relationship with each other, which is why most countries have official languages. Governments realize language serves as an important tie to a particular culture, which is why, in an attempt to assimilate newcomers into their culture, they only conduct business in the official language. The logic makes sense: Only by learning the dominant language can an individual fully engage with a particular culture.
However, having an official language puts some cultures at risk. If people gradually forget the language associated with a specific culture, this culture could be lost in history forever. Thus, the real threat is not only the extinction of languages; it is the loss of the cultures associated with these languages, which will obviously lead to less diversity. A lessening of diversity is not a positive occurrence; after all, our school prides itself on its diversity, as does our own country.
What can be done to stop the extinction of languages? Going back to the animal analogy, the solution is to protect the "endangered" languages. Though it is important for people to learn the dominant language of their country, there is no reason for them to completely abandon their native language. Governments can encourage the preservation of little-known languages by offering incentives to individuals fluent in both the dominant language and their native tongue. Doing so could save a third of the world's languages - and the cultures and histories connected to them.
- Aimee Sobhani is a sophomore in the College of Arts and Science. She can be reached at aimee.f.sobhani@vanderbilt.edu.
