Slashdot Mirror


Dying Languages, Fading Formats

utopyr writes "A story on BBC News looks briefly at the problems in preserving human languages in digital formats. The scope of the problem? Of the world's roughly 6,500 languages (of which, fewer than 500 are listed here), half will be extinct within the century, as the last speakers die. However, formats are proving even more ephemeral than human memory."

74 of 355 comments (clear)

  1. This is a bit harsh... by FortKnox · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... but why?
    If no one is going to speak it again, and it isn't written anywhere, why should it be preserved?

    Reminds me of people that are 'pack rats.' Why must you feel compelled to keep something you don't use?

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    1. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Randolpho · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I both agree and disagree. I don't care about dying languages -- good riddance, IMO. Differing languages are too divisive. Everyone should speak Structured English. :D

      However, I think older languages should be preserved if only to make sure that archeologists and historians have a way of understanding what they're reading.

      --
      "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
      -Marilyn Manson
    2. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Psion · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have to agree with this...the only loss will be cultural, but cultures aren't static things frozen in amber in the first place. I wish folks who view the world as rigid and unchanging would learn that reality is dynamic. Nothing lasts forever. Clean out your old baggage and move on.

    3. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How can you say that?

      Latin isn't being spoken anymore, and not written anymore, but it's not a dead language...

      People learn it to enjoy great literature such as Virgilius' Aeneas in the language it was originally written in! Or Catulus his poems, translations aren't even half as good. It also is the foundation of current languages, consult an etymological dictionary and you'll see!

      Losing these languages is a very sad thing IMHO.

    4. Re:This is a bit harsh... by FortKnox · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, archeologists and historians would study the "used in writings" category.
      Sure, sandscrit isn't spoken, but its still important to the study of ancient texts.

      A tribal dialect of swahili used by a tribal village of canabals that died off by eating themselves and never had any texts, OTOH, should not be something worth keeping and studying...

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    5. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Gortbusters.org · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, the problem is that a highly US-driven mono-culture is sweeping the world. This mono-culture is best described by Daniel Quinn as Takers/Leavers, or if you will gorts and gortbusters.

      Fundamentally, Life is killing. There are only two pathways from that statement: blasphemy and sanctity. You destroy a culture to implement english, Mc Donald's, Ford, and Victoria's Secret... much difference than expressing tolerance, preserving that culture to be remembered, and holding the people of that culture as equals.

      --
      --------
      Free your mind.
    6. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Randolpho · · Score: 2, Flamebait
      A tribal dialect of swahili used by a tribal village of canabals that died off by eating themselves and never had any texts, OTOH, should not be something worth keeping and studying...


      Agreed.
      --
      "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
      -Marilyn Manson
    7. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Psion · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nonsense. No one is actively destroying any culture. Is Victoria's Secret out there plotting against traditional grass skirts? Is McDonalds trying to overwhelm the pita? Sorry, Gort, but here's a piece of Klatu Barada Nikto for you: rather than outsiders trampling old customs, it's the insiders who are foresaking them. People aren't eating McDonald's hamburgers because they've been forced to under an imperialistic dictum...they're eating them because they like a cheap, easy meal better than they like roasted caterpillers in banana leaves. And when something better comes along, poor Ronald McDonald will get dumped in the same landfill of history that some of these languages are finding themselves in.

    8. Re:This is a bit harsh... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, the loss will be scientific, as well.

      As I explain in another post: Capturing different languages helps to capture different cultures, and differences in culture help to teach us how different and similar people are, and how the brain works.

      We will be losing anthropological information, something we will want 1000 years from now, and something we *know* we will want. Think of all the old lost civilizations we study, and think of the fact that we are watching the same thing happen in front of our very eyes.

    9. Re:This is a bit harsh... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That is entirely why differing languages are important. Different languages capture *differences* in culture, and differences in mindset.

      These differences explore the breadth and depth of what it is to be human.

      So different people having different opinions are good, and therefore having different cultures with different worldviews are good; language is just one part of that equation.

    10. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Psion · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And how much anthropological information are we losing because languages change anyway? How many people know or understand the roots of a phrase like "the devil's in the details" now, let alone 1000 years from now? And that's in a language that is active and growing and studied by tens of thousands of people every day. Sure, it's a scientific loss when a tribe shrugs its shoulders and wanders out of the brush and into suburbia, but it's a scientific loss every time I scratch an itch and a few mutated DNA strands get stranded in the foresaken purgatory beneath my fingernails. And what would have folks do about this? Forbid tribal members from seeking what they see as a better life elsewhere? Force some of us to learn a tongue that fewer speak than Innuit? I'm sorry, but there are bigger things for most of us to be concerned about, but if it concerns you, then pick a dying culture and dedicate your life to its preservation, because that's the only fair and rational solution that I can see.

    11. Re:This is a bit harsh... by coke_dite · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What makes one classic language more important than another? Why is Sanskrit more important than Basque? Why are heiroglyphs more important than Sumerian? Who decides? There are those of us who would like to study obscure dying/dead languages, but if you have your way, it's tough titty for us. ALL knowledge should be preserved. It's not like we don't have the digital space for it. It's the knowledge you try to suppress or destroy that comes back to bite you in the ass later on, and hey, if somebody gets a kick out of writing love letters in a dead language "code", then let them have their fun :)

      --
      Visit us at http://www.iblist.com!
    12. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nothing lasts forever. Clean out your old baggage and move on.

      I agree wholeheartedly. In fact, if they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population .

      And if we end up losing the unique cultural histories of thousands of peoples in the process, we can always console ourselves with the fact that they weren't static anyway. I'm sure future generations will understand.

      It's just like that rainforest thing. Anyone who thinks we need more than a couple dozen kinds of trees could probably use a good attitude adjustment, anyway.

      *sigh*

    13. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Psion · · Score: 2, Insightful

      [chuckles]I guess you think you've pushed a button, but in fact I agree with your example. If cheaper labor can be found somewhere else, then let employers go elsewhere and folks around here will learn to tighten their belts and adjust to change. Eventually, the Indian programmers will become just as fat and greedy as their American counterparts and the need for employers to go there will diminish. In the meantime, not every job will dry up here, and I am smart enough to adapt.

      I'd prefer it that way than having some bureaucrat at central planning deciding whats good for us all!

    14. Re:This is a bit harsh... by bot · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sanskrit you ignorant maggot :-)
      And yes, it is spoken and in active use. Every Hindu religious ceremony is in Sanskrit, and every priest and read/write and speak it. Given that there are 800 millions plus Hindus, that's a lot of Sanskrit out there.

    15. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Swahili isn't a tribal language; it's a trade language developed mostly in coastal towns and contains bits and pieces of a lot of other languages. Also, cannibalism is virtually unknown in sub-Saharan Africa. At least know something about a language (and culture) you deride.

    16. Re:This is a bit harsh... by hazem · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, but who is to decide what is important and what is crap? What makes it classic?

      Some people think this is important, so I think it's great that they want to try and preserve these langauges.

      Even if I were Emporer of the Word, God forbid that only those things I deemed important were preserved. I'm neither wise enough nor worldly enough to make such decisions, and I don't trust that anyone is.

      I for one don't care much for professional sports, so I consider it a great waste of time, effort, and resources that we have these silly halls of fames and sports museums. Will anyone in 1000 years care who was inducted into the 2002 Baseball Hall of Fame? But, it's important to somebody and if they're willing to do it, then that's cool. If somebody actually finds some meaning in life from it, then it might actually be worthwhile.

    17. Re:This is a bit harsh... by lux55 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      History, as they say, bears repeating until you learn from it. Ignorance towards its preservation, study, and understanding is one of the greatest problems of our time. History helps people understand what is going on in the world *today* and how that will shape the future.

      I'm working on a project right now called the Omushkego Oral History Project for the University of Winnipeg and Canadian Heritage, whose goal is to preserve the Cree language spoken around Northern Manitoba and Ontario. It has opened my eyes to a really large tragedy in North America.

      We have a chance to learn about the history of North America from another perspective than the "winners", something you currently don't learn about in high school history class. This is important for Canada as a country because it allows us to understand our history more fully, and to understand how prior actions have resulted in social issues, including racism, that exist today. This helps us improve our decision making process by being more aware of what the results of our decisions might be. It is also necessary to help us solve the problems we have today, which is necessary in order to move forward. History and cultural preservation, or at least documentation and understanding, is a necessary part of this.

      In Star Trek Nemesis, Picard stated that to be human was to seek to improve oneself. One of the crucial ways of doing that is by learning about our history. Without that, we're a lost cause.

      I agree that culture is both moving and unique, and is not shared just as a society or community, but cultural differences exist between individuals as well. In order to build a more effective culture and sense of morality for yourself, you need more than just your own perspective, or your potential for growth cannot be realized.

    18. Re:This is a bit harsh... by efflux · · Score: 2, Informative

      Latin isn't being spoken anymore, and not written anymore, but it's not a dead language...

      I would be more careful with the phrase "dead language" if I were you. It has a particular meaning. Latin is definately: "no longer used as the primary language of any indigenous human community." Latin is very much a "dead language".

      --
      Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes. -- Walt Whitman
    19. Re:This is a bit harsh... by nano2nd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Call this flamebait but... I think you guys don't appreciate the value of language diversity. When languages die, stuff dies with them. Beyond just cultural reference points. You couldn't possibly take a language spoken by some isolated tribe and convert it word-for-word into English. Things would be lost. Just like there's stuff you can do in COBOL but not in C and vice versa.

      It's only through knowing these rare, dying languages that scientists have been able to talk to indigenous people and discover so-called wonder drugs in remote jungles etc.

      IANAL (that's L for Linguist) but I know that diversity is a good thing. If we all spoke English, well, damn that would be like if we all used Windows.

    20. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Nick+Number · · Score: 2

      Modded Flamebait? I conceded a point to the person I was arguing with. That's good debate.

      It was probably your sig that did it. It looks like part of the message at first glance.

      --
      Promote proofreading. Don't mod up sloppy posts.
    21. Re:This is a bit harsh... by error0x100 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People aren't eating McDonald's hamburgers because they've been forced to under an imperialistic dictum...they're eating them because they like a cheap, easy meal

      Indeed. This for me seems to be the "trap" of "modern" western culture. The technology and conveniences are powerfully alluring, and ultimately any non-isolated culture is going to voluntarily gravitate towards it, seeking its benefits (and perceived status). You can't stop it. Most kids of other cultures will pick Playstations over traditional toys. People like things like cellphones. Not to mention the benefits of western medicine and medical technologies.

      Some people of other cultures (e.g. here in South Africa) would like to see their people return to a "traditional" lifestyle, but it can never happen as long as new generations are exposed to "our" (western) culture - its like a Pandora's box, it cannot be closed again. Its unstoppable, because no rational person can argue against the obvious benefits of the technologies our culture has produced. None of this is really a bad thing, as such, because people are ultimately just choosing what they believe is best for them, and surprise surprise, they like cellphones, cars, Playstations etc. So this isn't necessarily a bad thing. But it can be. Language and culture form an important part of how people define themselves, of their identity. This shouldn't be underestimated. Many people are attracted by all the "shiny things" our culture has to offer in terms of material wealth and 'fancy gadgets' and nice houses, nice cars etc, and in many cases choose to give up (either partially or entirely) their own language and culture. And once its too late, they may find out just how empty, unfulfilling and alienating our culture can be (not saying it inherently is, but it clearly can be).

      But on the whole, people nowadays are making their own choices, and they are voluntarily choosing things like McDonalds.

      In a certain sense though, people don't really have a "choice", as such: people have to choose our culture, because it is really the only option available that makes sense in today's society. You need to make money to pay rent and buy food, you need a job to make money, you need an education to get a job, better education = better job, you need a car to get around, etc etc. So in a certain sense people are, very loosely speaking, "forced" to choose this culture.

      All the same reasons apply to why its difficult as a "westerner" to choose another cultural lifestyle even if you want to. Sure I would like to go live in the middle of nowhere somewhere or in some central Amazonian rainforest, catching and/or growing my own food etc. But some obvious questions arise, apart from luxuries ("give up Internet?"), but more practically, "where would I get my contact lenses / glasses from?", "what happens if I get sick or break a leg?" etc.

    22. Re:This is a bit harsh... by jejones · · Score: 2
      Yeah, the problem is that a highly US-driven mono-culture is sweeping the world.

      Baloney. The flow of culture isn't one-way. Japanese food, cars, electronics, and pop culture have invaded the US just as much as American food and pop culture have invaded Japan. Twenty years ago, in central Oklahoma, I counted myself as extremely lucky to find one album of Persian chants and love songs--now I can walk three blocks and spend far more than I can afford on "world music" CDs. (No, I haven't moved to the coast; I live in central Iowa.) Do you think that the rest of the world is a museum full of quaint natives that should be preserved in their natural state? That strikes me as vastly greater "cultural imperialism" than what you attribute to the US.

    23. Re:This is a bit harsh... by etcpasswd · · Score: 2, Informative
      Every Hindu religious ceremony is in Sanskrit, and every priest and read/write and speak it. Given that there are 800 millions plus Hindus, that's a lot of Sanskrit out there.

      Wrong. Not many "know" Sanskrit. Yes, religious ceremonies are in Sanskrit but not many understand it. And majority of those who understand don't write in Sanskrit. But Sanskrit still prevails as an optional language to study at school - and is never seen in common speech. However, many Indian languages originated from Sanskrit, and borrow vocabulary from it.

    24. Re:This is a bit harsh... by shilly · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But even if you aren't interested in a particular dead language and culture, other people might be. Especially future generations. Linguistic diversity was one of the great wonders of the human mind for the past 5000 years or more -- and now it's dying out. Anyone who's learnt a foreign language, especially one that is fairly unrelated to their native tongue, will vouch for the value and power that learning a different way of thinking provides. Words that are not directly translatable between languages remind us sharply that the little part of the world we grew up in is a tiny part of a much bigger place.

      And this is ignoring all the value to be gained for both soft and hard sciences, and indeed other fields of thinking, in understanding other cultures. To take only an obvious example, if we can't translate readily between different dead human languages, we'll find it much more difficult to translate any non-human language we might encounter in a SETI search.

    25. Re:This is a bit harsh... by Randolpho · · Score: 2

      Makes sense. I went ahead and changed it.

      I suppose accidentally switching to extrans with my stupid scroll-mouse didn't help either. ;)

      --
      "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
      -Marilyn Manson
  2. Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An interesting problem. Many laymen think a language can be reduced to raw data simply and easily, as if it were computer code. The problem is that we quite simply don't have any tool that can ecapsulate an entire language. According to modern linguistics, the only real version of a human language is that which comes with a human being who speaks it. That's why we distinguish "dead" languages from the others: We may know how to read and understand Ancient Egyptian to some degree, but there is a vast amount of information about that language that is now irretrievable, because there are no living speakers to demonstrate it.

    Of course, the flip side of the coin is that there are no living native speakers of Old English either. That is, languages are born and they die just as species do, and this is a natural process. Trying to preserve them all completely intact is simply not possible, any more than freezing a few condor embryos is going to teach us what ecological role the animal played during its heyday.

    Libraries, grammars, lexicons are all the genetic information of a language. But there is so much besides that will be lost...

    1. Re:Interesting by TheOneEyedMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is similar to observing animals in zoos versus the wild. Preserving and observing charismatic macrofauna in zoos is a far cry from the understanding and marvel of observing them in their natural habitat. Somethings you may never understand until you see them in the wild. Take flamingos, they eat a crustatian that eventually makes them pink (they are born white.) If we feed them bird food we would never know what they really look like.

      --
      Reality is that which refuses to go away when I stop believing in it. --Phillip K. Dick (remove SPAM to email)
    2. Re:Interesting by thogard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If we collect enough info on a language, we can find out odd thigns about it. For example there are many old english poems that rhyme which allows us to understand how some words were pronoucned a very long time ago. Words such as oregano have vastly different pronunciations in the US than in Australia but the word is very old having started in North Africa with a few changes in greek and then into Spanish. Potato and tomato also started in South America as first Aztec and then Inca names before the word (and the plants) where taken to Span where the word found its way into English.

  3. Languages by termos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When speaking of dying languages, you can look on the english language for example. More and more kids use expressions like "U" for "you", and "tnx" for "thanks". In my home country we have the the same problem, and we start to look on it as a serious threat to the language.
    I think this will somehow make a change to future languages.

    --
    Note to self: get smarter troll to guard door.
    1. Re:Languages by igrek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good point, but I'd say it proves the opposite. Your example just shows that the english language is evolving, which is a clear sign that it's alive and far from dying.

    2. Re:Languages by solarrhino · · Score: 2, Funny

      U rilly tnk it'z a prob? Y?

      --
      "Lord, grant that I may always be right, for Thou knowest that I am hard to turn" -- A Scots-Irish prayer
    3. Re:Languages by DustMagnet · · Score: 2, Interesting
      A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling
      by Mark Twain

      For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all. Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" -- bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez -- tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivli. Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.

      --
      'SBEMAIL!' is better than a goat!!
    4. Re:Languages by error0x100 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      More and more kids use expressions like "U" for "you"

      I always find this a somewhat weird example/argument for the "degradation" of English, because a number of languages already use "u" to mean "you". In South Africa: "u" means "you" in Afrikaans (pronounced a little like "e" but shorter, isiZulu "u" means "you" (*) (pronounced like "oo" in book), Sesotho uses "o" which is anyway pronounced very much like the isiZulu "u". And none of this has ever been seen as a bad thing. Its perfectly normal. What exactly makes it bad if English people use "u" for "you"? Different, yes. Bad? What is the harm?

      There are far more serious threats to "complex English" going on in this world; there seems to be a global trend towards speaking a highly simplified and reduced version of English, like, you know?. It seems to have become culturally frowned upon to try to speak proper English. If you want to talk about English being 'under threat', I'm sure there are many better arguments than a spelling shift for a common word like "you". There is an interesting piece on this here: "Linda Hall - coolspeak"

      (*) Its a little more complex than this, but this is still accurate

  4. Re:Who cares? by sporty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You do realize, that even if there was one world language, that everyone understood by tomorrow, given enough time, dialects would sprout, then entire new languages?

    --

    -
    ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

  5. Re:Rosetta Stone by Mister+Black · · Score: 5, Funny

    Translating the bible? And here I've been thinking that it helped in translating Egyptian hieroglyphs. Boy is my face red.

    --

    You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a boarded front door. There is a small mailbox here.
  6. Isn't FORTH endangered too? Only Yoda speaks it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yoda is the only known speaker of FORTH.

    (or in FORTHese:
    FORTH known speaker yoda only is.
    )

    Unfortunately, it is a dying language.

    (or in FORTHese:
    language dying unfortunately it is
    )

    It must be preserved.

    (or in FORTHese:
    Perserved, it must be.
    )

  7. Re:Rosetta Stone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most of the languages that are slated for extinction probably don't have any documents that need to be preserved in their language only. Lots of them never developed writing on their own, so there's nothing to worry about translating in the future. The British Celts, for example, had this problem. No writing means you have to have a class of scholars (or something like it) to preserve and pass on knowledge. In the case of the Celts, kill the druids, as Julius Caesar did, and their wisdom is destroyed forever.

  8. Digital amnesia by beefguts · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is all part and parcel of the so called "digital amnesia" that is taking place. What memories will people have twenty years down the road if everything was comunicated via email. Digital cameras are great for the present but again, how are they preserved over long time periods. Burning stuff onto CDs will work, but most CDs are quite unstable (Verbatim excepted, they use a AZO dye but are more expensive). Even the first video disks made in the 80's aren't playable by anything today, what's to guarantee that CDs will be playable in 20 - 30 years. Printing out digital pictures is no more archival than CDs, most people will print it out on paper which typically is not acid-free and will yellow quickly. Compare this to Kodachromes which look great 50 years later. Cibachromes will last centuries. There's nothing in our new digital media arsenal that can compare. Enjoy your memories now, cause they won't last...

  9. Free Databases help by retostamm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    By storing the Data in open formats, and link them with recordings, it should be possible to preserve the languages and their unique history.

    I am working right now with LingoTeach and a US university to add a Native American language that is almost extinct to the Free LingoTeach Database, so that future generations have the choice to revive it. Can't say more here, because we are still working out details.

    Any help is of course welcome. http://www.lingoteach.org

  10. Re:Is this really a big deal? by Iguanaphobic · · Score: 4, Funny

    I agree. Let's start by retraining the 275 million people in the United States to all use the metric system like the other 5.8 billion people on the planet do. Then we'll move on to language.

    --
    Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.
  11. Vanishing Voices by Captain+Chad · · Score: 2, Informative
    I recently read a book on this topic, Vanishing Voices : The Extinction of the World's Languages . It was a fairly easy read and quite informative, although the authors had a difficult time explaining why it was a really bad thing to lose so many languages.

    The basic argument was that preserving linguistic diversity would have the corollary effect of preserving cultural diversity (which is good). I found this indirect logic to be somewhat weak. After finishing the book, I did not feel that the authors had given me a good reason to be concerned about the loss of so many languages.

    Note that the book focused more on the problem of preserving the languages in society. The authors considered an archive to be a poor substitute for a living, breathing language, much like a recording is a poor substitute for a concert.

    --
    Check out Chad's News
  12. BABEL II by Thud457 · · Score: 5, Funny
    There's several criteria for picking the one world language. Lessee:

    • English : used by the (currently) richest/most powerful/most technologically advanced country
    • Chinese : used by the most people
    • French :once was in line to be the "linga franca" as you would say
    • Welsh : we could then speak to our alien overlords in their own language
    • Spanish : Most of the Western hemisphere speaks this
    • Japaneese : they were going own the world for a couple of years in the 80's
    • German : another outrageous accent, suitable for ranting
    • Esperanto : cripes, no!
    • Klingon : I wasn't aware there were nerdwarriors
    • Cetain: How many wars do dolphins get into?
    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:BABEL II by DustMagnet · · Score: 2, Funny
      How about:

      • Latin : we could speak with our doctors
      --
      'SBEMAIL!' is better than a goat!!
  13. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The world does have a common language. English. Just ask any English speaking person. If you're talking to someone that doesn't appear to understand english you just have to speak slower and louder.

    All Space Aliens also speak english.

  14. Extinguished languages by Mazzaroth · · Score: 4, Informative
    Writing and reading is almost a given today. But humanity developped many languages and writing systems and most of them are now lost. Actually, every two weeks, a language dies - within the next century, half of the six thousand eight hundred languages on this planet will be dead. When a language dies which has never been recorded in some way, it is as if it has never been. (for more on language death, read this)

    There are still many ancient texts, from dead languages, that have never been deciphered, and some, not from such a distant past. Maybe you would like to give your best shot at some of them. Here is a list of texts and writing systems awaiting to be understood:

    Rongorongo, the hieroglyphic script of Easter Island

    The Voynich Manuscript, 200 pages, probably written in the 13 century

    Indus Valley scripts from Mohenjo-daro in Pakistan, 4000 years ago

    Etruscan

    The Disc of Phaistos, from Crete, 3700 years ago

    Meroitic hieroglyphs of ancient Nubia

    Zapotec script
    Have fun!

  15. No No No! by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Funny

    Everyone should speak Klingon! Why should any one group of people have it any easier than any other group? To be completely fair to everyone, the language we unify on should be Klingon.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:No No No! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      As someone wo has lost their virginity, I find learning Klingon unfair.

    2. Re:No No No! by CableModemSniper · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do we? DO WE?

      --
      Why not fork?
  16. Is it just me... by gillbates · · Score: 2, Funny

    Or did anyone else expect to see COBOL on the list?

    Oh, wait. Human languages...sorry.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
  17. Re:Metric? Not worth it. by Iguanaphobic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Here is the answer. When the issue came up, the US decided to go it alone and do things their own way. Now that it is twenty five years later, the need to change over is greater than ever and the expense involved is exponentially higher than it was then. The money that the USA wastes now on converting all incoming and outgoing products is considerable. Far more than the costs of conversion.

    --
    Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power.
  18. Re:Is this really a big deal? by goliard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OK, I'll feed the troll.

    Personally I think everyone should learn English. A lot of problems will be solved if everyone uses the same language. It will be a lot cheaper in the long run and remove many of the problems inherent in international commerce.

    The issue of what language people should speak was never at hand; your comment is a total non-sequetur, and is off topic.

    The issue is the preservation of languages which are fast becoming historical. The reason it is a big deal is that we lose part of history if we do not. The language itself is of significance to historians, but futhermore, all of the literature and linguistic art of that culture is lost to us if the language in which they exist is lost to the knowledge of human kind.

    Let me give you a little example. You almost certainly are familiar with the word "troubador". You may have a vague sense that is refers to a sort of medieval minstrel.

    What it refers to is an elite of songwriters, "trobadors", in the 12th and 13th centuries, famed for the quality of their lyrics, and for the fact that, unlike the "serious" artists of the rest of Europe at that time who wrote in Latin, they wrote in their vernacular. We now call that language "Old Occitan", though they did not call it that.

    For some eight centuries -- right through to the present day -- their fame as lyricists was so great that the word for them has become a common noun. Their craft was legendary for centuries after their home land was conquered in the Albigensian Crusade, and their worldly, sensuous art repressed by the Church.

    I'm willing to bet you have never heard a single word of trobador verse, neither in the original nor in translation. This is the single most famous body of literature in the history of Europe, and you have never heard a single word of it.

    The reason why is that the trobadors loved word play -- e.g. double-entrendres, extremely tight rhymes -- and invented complicated poetic forms (you have a trobador to thank or curse for the sestina). The result is that while the sense of a troubador song may be translated, translating the form, bringing all the witty word play which was the point of their craft, into another language is pretty close to impossible. They even managed to invent a kind of rhyme (rims derivatatius) which is close to impossible to execute in English, requiring, as it does, a syllable's length difference in congugation of verbs or declention of nouns.

    So if you want to appreciate the most famous poetry in the history of Europe, you have to learn Old Occitan and read it in the original.

    And that is one example of why it is so important to preserve dead and dying languages. So that, should some weirdo in the future actually care about the bounty of the human artistic acheivement through time, the door to the libraries of the past may yet be unlocked by those crazy enough to learn the keys.

    We preserve languages for the same reason we don't burn libraries.

    --
    -*- Any technology indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced -*-
  19. My own language is in serious risk by dsfd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My own mother language is in serious risk in the mid term. Most of you are native English speakers, so I think that you can not imagine what does this situation mean for us. It is good that there are "large" languages like English that are used arround the world, but the "small" languages are as rich and respectable as English or Spanish or Chinese, and it is important to protect and preserve them as they are part of the cultural heritage of humanity.

    I don't want to say the name of my language because I would like to speak in the name of all the speakers of "small" languages. Every word of my son, who is 16 months now, makes me feel very proud. I hope that the sons of my son will one day learn and be proud of our language (and also learn English to be able to read slashdot !)

  20. not really... by Doctor+Fishboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The thousandth sequential copy of a data CD will be identical to the original, assuming you're verifying the copies each time. You keep copying to new media every few years, which is annoying, but the data will be identical to the original.

    The same cannot be said for any analog based data system such as film. If the original is damaged, you're left with an imperfect copy. Of course, pay enough money and your analog copy will be a close reproduction of the original, but it won't be identical.

    Dr Fish

  21. Interesting Language Links... by PipianJ · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Summer Institute in Linguistics has a much more comprehensive list of languages in their compendium entitled the Ethnologue (Available for perusing online.

    UNESCO, an agency of the United Nations has compiled The Redbook of Endangered Languages listing many endangered languages around the world.

    Another source for those interested in endangered languages is The Foundation For Endangered Languages.

    For those more interested in creating languages of their own, or "conlangs" like Tolkien created, might I suggest Langmaker, Mark Rosenfelder's excellent Virtual Verduria (including his Language Construction Kit), and for those interested in Tolkiens' tongues (such as Quenya, almost unanimously considered the most beautiful conlang created) there is the very informational Ardalambion.

    Hope those links will help people interested in the topics of endangered and model languages.

  22. forget France, think Iceland. by doug · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yes, there is L'Acadamie Francais, but it isn't like most of 'em really care. They will happily steal words like "le hot dog", and "le weekend", because even they understand that "la fin du semaine" is just too long.

    And German has the same thing. They publish the Duden and make the schools teach Hoch Deutsch.

    But if you want serious linguistic hardasses, look no further than Iceland. They can still read texts from the 13th century. I met an American who was trying to move there (his wife is Icelandic) and the government was requiring that he adopt a traditional Icelandic name so his name wouldn't polute the language.

  23. Re:Is this really a big deal? by ninewands · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Quoth the poster:
    ... Let's start by retraining the 275 million people in the United States to all use the metric system like the other 5.8 billion people on the planet do. ...

    I imagine that if you polled the American populace in general, you might find more support for this than you think exists. I think you would find that the only group strongly opposed would be the very old and the poorly educated.

    Now, try polling the populace in ... say ... France ... about converting their "official" language to English and see how much support you get.
  24. The Value of Preserving Dying Languages by Vilk · · Score: 5, Informative

    Before starting, I should mention that the given estimate for the number of languages spoken today is just that: an estimate. There are areas in the world such as Cameroon, Papua New Guinea, the Congo basian, and the Amazon basin that are constantly yielding new languages. Compounding the problem of an accurate number is the fact that, unfortunately, records and data are not available for all spoken languages and counting all of them is quite difficult. I have personally seen figures in the range of four thousand to fifteen thousand currently spoken languages so don't take that number as gold. (It is, however, as close to being accepted as any other estimate can be.)

    OK. Why should a dying language be preserved? People have pointed out the parallel to preserving endangered animal species through environmental efforts or the scramble scientists made to save Mesopotamian artifacts from Iraq before the war broke out and these are both excellent analogies: just because a language is not a physical thing does not mean it is not worth the time, money, and effort to preserve. Wildlife activists fight for the rights of endangered species because they are unique and part of the natural environment of this world. Archeologists do the same for artifacts of human eras long gone and disappeared. Why shouldn't the same be made for languages? A language and the culture surrounding it are inseparable; a language is a living thing, a product of the unbelievable mechanism of the human mind. Chimpanzees can use basic tools to scrape termites out of their mounds but they are unable to communicate using spontaneous, creative language. Ultimately this is what lifts the human race above the rest of this planet's fauna. Preserve a dying language because it is part of the heritage of the entirety of mankind.

    Of course, saving a language for its aesthetic value is not the only reason. Linguists (notably Noam Chomsky and Joseph Greenberg) have been trying for at least decades to document and discover the underlying reasons for the existence of language universals. Using simple examples, every language has the concept of a noun and a verb. Why is that? Is it just to facilitate the processing of communication in the human mind or is it innate? Every language that has evolved naturally is complex in its own manner and can express any concept found in any other language; no language is inferior or superior to any other language in facilitating communication. Is this natural? Are there languages out there that are simply empirically inferior to others and die out as its native speakers learn the value of another, superior tongue? Has every language ever spoken been this way?

    There are still untold numbers of questions that cannot or have not been answered by contemporary linguistics. Joseph Greenberg is the father of the movement to uncover linguistic universals by studying large sets of data representative of the distribution of the genetic makeup of the world's languages. This approach has yielded many valuable insights into the human creation of language. If a universal is absolute, then perhaps it reveals part of the inner workings of our own minds. The sad truth, however, is that so many languages have been lost before the advent of the written language and since that no universal can ever be proven to be 100% absolute. Does this mean linguists should give up? No, of course not! Perhaps some unique language in the valleys of Papua New Guinea will manifest some exception to an absolute universal, forever changing our views on the human mind. For instance, the language Hixkaryana, spoken by less than 400 natives in the Amazon basin, has a default word order of Object-Verb-Subject. Before the discovery and documentation of Hixkaryana it was thought this word order was so counter to normal human thinking that it probably did not exist. What would have happened if no efforts had been made to document Hixkaryana? Linguists would have been unknowingly deprived of a valuable insight into language typology.

    --
    Vilk, from the ranks of the freaks
  25. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd much rather have one lanuguage with many dialects than the current state of many languages with many dialects. For example, if necessary, even the most uneducated speakers of two dialects of English (take Cockney and Ebonics) could find a common vocabulary on which to build a conversation. They might have to dial it back to the 2nd grade but they'd still find a way to communicate.

  26. I hate to say it but I'll be harsher... by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You seem to think English is the end all language of all things. Honestly, that's what others thought of Latin and yet look at how many languages outlived it!! Don't bother counting, the list is huge.

    Do your homework... storing these languages will be a way for some with some interest to research how and possibly WHAT factors influenced the language development of various groups through history. For example, Latin may be dead, but it influenced many languages, and in some cases you could trace invasions via accents borrowed from Latin. (Romania is in the middle of the slavic/gallic area yet their language is based on Latin, quite significantly at that.Hungaria is right west of Romania and they speek a completely different language than all those around them (Huns settled there.) All in all at least some study will at least keep track of where we are coming from.)

    It is almost like taking family pictures or writing a family tree, only this time with languages. It may not seem like much to the consumerist point of view prevalent now, especially among those of us here in the USA that have NOT been outside the country...

    Destroy variety and you'll be left eating hot dogs for the rest of your life. They're not bad, but if it was all you had you'd soon understand why many seek the unusual and the break from the status quo. Preserving some cultures or parts of cultures other than our own might even count as being civilized. (remember our ancestors commiting genocide of entire peoples when they landed here? you should. it is our heritage and forgetting it will let those in power commit those crimes again)

    Plus our studies of evolution have barely begun... we need to record some things that aren't fossilized such as art and language. Even if just to leave to future civilizations digging out our leftovers from the ashes of our own stupidity. (ala A.I.)

    -DaedalusHKX

    PS - parts of this post were not related completely to the article but more to your rants of "its better if everyone spoke english" but I guess many would also say "its better if everyone agreed with the status quo, even if GW threatens to smash all our rights into the gutter so the RIAA and the rest of the corporate world can fatten its portfolio).
    PPS - mod as you see fit :-)

    --
    " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
    1. Re:I hate to say it but I'll be harsher... by DaedalusHKX · · Score: 2, Funny

      I stand corrected... you are right.
      Latin still lives on at the Vatican. But do they really speak it fluently and everyday? Otherwise it is exactly as we meant. It is not a daily language but it was preserved and it certainly did help out with some things didn't it?
      As for medicine, yes it is the neutral medical and scientific naming schema.
      And by the way, my lengthy replies were angry responses to the first post on the main thread. All the warmongering and the way they're treating it like its a game of command and conquer or team fortress it makes me sick!! FUCK the mainstream media!! (there, now I feel much better, lemme go make a cup of coffee... anyone for FRENCH roast :)?
      -DaedalusHKX

      --
      " What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
  27. Languages may hold the key... by Baracus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I agree that if a language is dying then it should not be saved to perpetuate its use. If the language is dying then it has essentially shown itself to be an inadequate means of expression for the modern world and that it is unable to adapt itself to express new ideas.


    That said, I do believe that languages ought to be preserved for academic study since every language is a reflection of its culture and expresses ideas and concepts that are not easily expressed in other languages. For instance, you'll find in a language like Arabic, spoken by desert dwellers and nomads, figures of speech, proverbs, and other expressions depicting the importance of water which would not be found, for instance, in languages spoken by populations in lush, agricultural societies. Something similar could be said regarding regions that experience an abundance of water like South East Asia which has the monsoon season. Although the preceding example is mundane, what I'm getting at is that letting a language disappear is depriving oneself of novel modes of thought and expression.


    I think every language has rich concepts to offer other languages. If we don't preserve the languages we do have, we may very well be shielding ourselves from potentially revolutionary ideas.

  28. Everyone learning and speaking in uniform English? by The+Cydonian · · Score: 4, Informative

    Counterpoint: Singlish
    Singapore, like most former British colonies, has an education policy to teach its school-kids primarily in English. Curiously enough, it's produced a generation that needs a campaign to speak proper English and another campaign to speak Mandarin, the mother-tongue of more than 70% of Singaporeans. One naive, probably superficial, comment we'd make is that young Singaporeans are neither here nor there; they insist on mixing Mandarin grammar and Hokkien words to produce English sentences. The government, apparently, is so worried that Singapore might lose its "natural advantage", that it has a set of "approved" words to be used in locally-produced English-language television shows.

    Clearly, it has been very difficult to teach and sustain a standard, uniform, international language for 30 years in a population of 4 million. Now consider the challenges involved in doing this for the entire world.

    Let's face it; even if everyone learns and speaks in English, there will still be geographical differences in dialect. The differences will lead to new languages. Just as it has been happening over the last few millenia.

  29. Language determines what you read online. by Vegan+Pagan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Language is probably a bigger barrier on the internet than any firewall or censorware. You can only search Google with words you know. If there are web sites written in a language no one knows anymore, they are effectively lost.

  30. From what I heard, a group of punk bastards... by HungWeiLo · · Score: 2, Informative

    destroyed the last remnants of the Klamath language. (The Klamath is a tribe of native Americans along the border of Oregon and California). There was a project to document the entire language on a set of CD-ROM's, since the only person left alive did not have too many days left. After the CD-ROM's were recorded, 3 teens from the tribe stole the CD's and destroyed them for whatever reason. As a result, the Klamath language is now lost forever.

    --
    There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
  31. Re:Vive La France by yintercept · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "the problem is that a highly US-driven mono-culture is sweeping the world."

    Now, if it were French that was the basis of the the mono-culture, then the development of a common language would be considered giving culture to to world...not taking culture from the world.

    The really funny thing about what is happening now is that the US is not as actively trying to create a mono-culture as the French, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Russian and other imperialist nations did in the past.

    When the Europeans were the great imperialist powers, you would find great and glorious writings about bringing culture to the backwards people of the world. Even in Bush's war with Iraq, there is a rhetoric of giving back the country to the Iraqis...the war lacks the imperialist overtones of most historic military excursions.

    I suspect that the main reason we hear so much yapping about the issue now is that much of the "mono-culture" is being influenced by a country (the USA) that the French and other Europeans consider to be filled with lesser people. If the world were learning French, the development of a monoculture would likely be considered an enlightenment.

  32. Neat Quote by Geburah · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Language is a city to the building of which every human being brought a stone. --Ralph Waldo Emerson

  33. We're trying by Malcs · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well we're trying at towerofbabel.com

    --
    My name is Carlos Montoya. You share files of my music. Prepare to die.
  34. Spelling by Ugmo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    After reading the posts, has anyone noticed that the grammar, diction and spelling of those who are pro-preservation of dying languages, is, for the most part, better than the grammar, diction and spelling of those who wouldn't mind languages dying off?

    1. Re:Spelling by oojah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I guess it's hardly suprising really. People interested in languages, dying or not, are much more likely to have studied languages at some point because of their interest. Although obviously everybody learns grammar at the intuitive level, being taught grammar from a text book appears to be a lot less common - in England for instance we are not taught english grammar at all in most schools. The only place we have exposure to grammar rules is in learning foreign languages. Although this won't necessarily improve your knowledge of your native grammar, the sheer thought you have to apply to writing in another language could make you consider the structure of your own.

      I speak reasonable German and have studied French, Russian and Spanish to varying degrees. I always type out text messages in full words and sentances , it vexes me when I receive "c u l8r" type messages.

      It might be interesting to know the educational background with respect to languages of the various GrammarNazi people who at least used to prowl slashdot.

      Cheers,

      Roger

      --
      Do you have any better hostages?
  35. Re:Is this really a big deal? by rolfwind · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ah! The metric system is really superior. Do you know how many feet in a yard, how many feet in a mile, how many yards in a mile? 12 inches in a foot. Have you ever measured something in thought, is that 3/8 of an inch or 5/6. Which is smaller. 2 cups in a pint, 8 pints in a gallon, but how many teaspoons in a cup? How many ounces in a pound? 16. How many pounds in a ton? 2000. All seems arbitrary to me.

    The US system is stupid and as an American I'd love to see that switch. Then I'd know the answer to mostly everything measurement wise is a factor of ten! 10 millimeters to a centimeter. 100 centimeters to a meter. How many millimeters to a meter? Easy! Is there an in between? I think it's a decameter but I could be wrong. Anyway divide by 10. How many meters in a kilometer? 1000! Easy. How many grams in a kilogram? Read the last question stupid! ^.^

    The canadians way back when (I think 20's or 30's) switched driving from the left handed side (like the brits) over to the right handed side. How did they do it? Overnight they had their army switch the road signs while not allowing anyone to drive and voila, it was done.

    How did the Europeans switch from their currencies to the Euro? Several years planning and public discussion, but when it came time, overnight (I think) they made it official and the actual conversion took place over the course of several months.

    That is how metric conversion should be done. Everything from now on is labeled metrically. No ands, ifs, or buts. People will complain, but if forced to use it, they will, and this standard nonsense will be forgotten in less than a generation. Metric education as it is now is stupid, a waste of money, and worthless on my 'use it or lose it' principle on how human minds work.

  36. And what about computer languages? by Wench · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Some people here say that disused human langauges are better off forgotten. And yet I bet the same people would prize every new computer languages ever invented. Even Intercal. And Parrot.

    --
    No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up.
  37. Another angle. by PotatoHead · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is exactly why we do not know our past. The percentage of us who care about it is always just low enough that it does not get done well enough in the end.

    Not that we are bad, it's that we have other more pressing matters like survival.

    Those languages combined tell us a story we will have a much harder time understanding without many of them.

    I have often wondered about religion and why it exists. This question is always tied up with our lost roots.

    Since each of us always asks these questions at some point, work done to save these languages makes sense. It also makes their loss real once you think past the purely practical matters.

  38. On the plus side by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 2, Funny

    We have invented SMS txt msgs and l33t-sp34k!

    --
    When I am king, you will be first against the wall.