[PASSED] Repeal GA#243 "Language Preservation"

[Frisbeeteria]

Please take the time to review this newly drafted repeal of GA 243.

Description: WA General Assembly resolution #243: "Language Preservation" shall be struck out and rendered null and void

Argument
The World Assembly,

UNDERSTANDING the goal of resolution #243, which is to preserve languages,

NOTING that nations may have a large quantity of languages,

REALIZING such nations may be unable to record all languages,

SADDENED nations are required to interfere with languages lacking an alphabet, which may alter the language

CONVINCED that some cultures would not like their languages to be recorded, for it is sacred to them and any interference made by the government would go against their beliefs,

ACKNOWLEDGING that some languages have an overwhelming amount of notable works of literature which have yet to be recorded, and recording these works is a task which may take many years of research,

FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGING that the term "notable works" used in the resolution is a vague term, as the resolution does not clearly state what makes a work of literature "notable",

REALIZING that there are billions of languages used throughout all nations, and recording data for each one would be far too time-consuming and overwhelming for nations, and the International Language Research Center,

BELIEVING the International Language Research Center is not needed to record the billions of languages,

HEREBY repeals GA #243

Co-Authored by The Last Homely House

[Dellin]

Description: WA General Assembly resolution #243: "Language Preservation" shall be struck out and rendered null and void

Argument
The World Assembly,

UNDERSTANDS The goal of resolution #243,

NOTES That certain nations are made of non-speaking citizens, such as plants, and mandated language surveys will only cause trouble within the nation,

ACKNOWLEDGES
1. The fact that the "Various Proccesses" mentioned in the resolution, which cause languages to become extinct, are listed, and therefore this statement may cause confusion amongst membernations,
2. That some nations have an overwhelming amount of notable works of literature, and recording, these works as the survey mandates is a task which may take many years of research,
3. That certain languages are unable to provide an alphabet, which makes mandating the recording of an alphabet impossible in some cases,
4. The poor grammar in the resolution,

UNSURE of the purpose of recording EVERY language in existence, for languages can be made everyday

REPEALS GA #243

"UNDERSTANDS" what as the goal?

What "trouble within the nation"? If they have some form of government, and are a nation, they must have some form of communication, which is what this resolution is suggesting be documented.

1. I have no idea what you mean by number 1. I think you are missing a word perhaps?
2. I think you are misunderstanding what is being requested. The resolution seems to be mandated works that haven't been written to be recorded. Which might be difficult. Also, "notable works" is vague. So I sort of agree with you there, but not sure that's enough for a repeal.
3. The resolution mandates an alphabet OR some other recorded form of the language.
4. Poor grammar doesn't seem to be a reason to repeal. Also, this repeal also uses some poor grammar.

I kind of get where you are coming from, but this doesn't seem strong enough.

[Saveyou Island]

Description: WA General Assembly resolution #243: "Language Preservation" shall be struck out and rendered null and void

Argument
The World Assembly,

UNDERSTANDS The goal of resolution #243,

NOTES That certain nations are made of non-speaking citizens, such as plants, and mandated language surveys will only cause trouble within the nation,

ACKNOWLEDGES
1. The fact that the "Various Proccesses" mentioned in the resolution, which cause languages to become extinct, are listed, and therefore this statement may cause confusion amongst membernations,
2. That some nations have an overwhelming amount of notable works of literature, and recording, these works as the survey mandates is a task which may take many years of research,
3. That certain languages are unable to provide an alphabet, which makes mandating the recording of an alphabet impossible in some cases,
4. The poor grammar in the resolution,

UNSURE of the purpose of recording EVERY language in existence, for languages can be made everyday

REPEALS GA #243

"UNDERSTANDS" what as the goal?

What "trouble within the nation"? If they have some form of government, and are a nation, they must have some form of communication, which is what this resolution is suggesting be documented.

1. I have no idea what you mean by number 1. I think you are missing a word perhaps?
2. I think you are misunderstanding what is being requested. The resolution seems to be mandated works that haven't been written to be recorded. Which might be difficult. Also, "notable works" is vague. So I sort of agree with you there, but not sure that's enough for a repeal.
3. The resolution mandates an alphabet OR some other recorded form of the language.
4. Poor grammar doesn't seem to be a reason to repeal. Also, this repeal also uses some poor grammar.

I kind of get where you are coming from, but this doesn't seem strong enough.

1. I described the goal
2. I edited number 1, so please review it
3. I have edited #2 as you suggested
4. I see a recorded form of the language to also be a difficult task, so I added that.
5. I've decided to remove poor grammar as a reason, but please state where you found the poor grammar and I will address that right away

I see this as a strong enough argument because it notes the various troubles a nation could endure while following the requirements of this resolution, and the various mistakes made by the author themselves while making the resolution. All the reasons listed provide a good enough argument.

[Dellin]

1. I described the goal
2. I edited number 1, so please review it
3. I have edited #2 as you suggested
4. I see a recorded form of the language to also be a difficult task, so I added that.
5. I've decided to remove poor grammar as a reason, but please state where you found the poor grammar and I will address that right away

I see this as a strong enough argument because it notes the various troubles a nation could endure while following the requirements of this resolution, and the various mistakes made by the author themselves while making the resolution. All the reasons listed provide a good enough argument.

Number 1 is now even less grammatically correct, so I still can't understand what you are trying to say. I think you mean that, because the "various processes" aren't explicitly mentioned, that is confusing? I don't see why: it's referring to any process through which languages disappear.

I agree that the "works of literature" part of the resolution is strange and confusing, so maybe you want to make that a more prominent part of this and explain a little more. Overall I think this is currently a little weak, but I actually understand some of your points and see some potential here.

I might correct the grammar a bit later when I have more time.

[Saveyou Island]

1. I described the goal
2. I edited number 1, so please review it
3. I have edited #2 as you suggested
4. I see a recorded form of the language to also be a difficult task, so I added that.
5. I've decided to remove poor grammar as a reason, but please state where you found the poor grammar and I will address that right away

I see this as a strong enough argument because it notes the various troubles a nation could endure while following the requirements of this resolution, and the various mistakes made by the author themselves while making the resolution. All the reasons listed provide a good enough argument.

Number 1 is now even less grammatically correct, so I still can't understand what you are trying to say. I think you mean that, because the "various processes" aren't explicitly mentioned, that is confusing? I don't see why: it's referring to any process through which languages disappear.

I agree that the "works of literature" part of the resolution is strange and confusing, so maybe you want to make that a more prominent part of this and explain a little more. Overall I think this is currently a little weak, but I actually understand some of your points and see some potential here.

I might correct the grammar a bit later when I have more time.

What I'm trying to say is that the author never really gave us a definition for the various Proccesses, so it's unclear what he means by this.

As for the rest of your comment, I truly appreciate the constructive criticism and I will edit my draft ASAP.

[Dellin]

Description: WA General Assembly resolution #243: "Language Preservation" shall be struck out and rendered null and void

Argument
The World Assembly,

UNDERSTANDSI'd keep the standard "UNDERSTANDING....NOTING" format TheAlso, don't capitalize the first NOTALLCAPS word goal of resolution #243, which is to preserve languages used throughtoutthroughout history,"used throughout history" also suggests something that I don't think the resolution assumes

NOTES That certain nations are made of non-speaking citizens, such as plants, and mandated language surveys will only cause problems,this is vague

ACKNOWLEDGES
1. The fact that the "Various Proccesses"processes languages go through before they comebecome? extinct are not mentioned in the resolution, which cause languages to become extinctwhy exactly is this clause here?, are listed, and therefore this statement may cause confusion amongstamong member nations,I still don't understand what this "confusion" is
2. That some nations have an overwhelming amount of notable works of literature which have yet to be recorded, and recording these works as the survey mandates is a task which may take many years of research,
3. That the term "notable works" used in the resolution is a vague term,
4. That certain languages are unable to provide an alphabet/recorded form of the language, which makes mandating the recording of an alphabet and/or a recorded form of the language,no comma needed here impossible in some cases,

UNSURE of the purpose of recording EVERY language in existence, for languages can be made everyday ...What?

REPEALS GA #243

In re your "various processes": I don't think it needs a definition; it means ANY process that causes languages to go extinct. It's not legislating those various processes, so it doesn't need to define them.

[The Scientific States]

The Scientific States strongly dissaproves of this proposal.

[Saveyou Island]

The Scientific States strongly dissaproves of this proposal.

I respect your opinion, ambassador, but what exactly causes you to disagree with the repeal?

[Saveyou Island]

Description: WA General Assembly resolution #243: "Language Preservation" shall be struck out and rendered null and void

Argument
The World Assembly,

UNDERSTANDSI'd keep the standard "UNDERSTANDING....NOTING" format TheAlso, don't capitalize the first NOTALLCAPS word goal of resolution #243, which is to preserve languages used throughtoutthroughout history,"used throughout history" also suggests something that I don't think the resolution assumes

NOTES That certain nations are made of non-speaking citizens, such as plants, and mandated language surveys will only cause problems,this is vague

ACKNOWLEDGES
1. The fact that the "Various Proccesses"processes languages go through before they comebecome? extinct are not mentioned in the resolution, which cause languages to become extinctwhy exactly is this clause here?, are listed, and therefore this statement may cause confusion amongstamong member nations,I still don't understand what this "confusion" is
2. That some nations have an overwhelming amount of notable works of literature which have yet to be recorded, and recording these works as the survey mandates is a task which may take many years of research,
3. That the term "notable works" used in the resolution is a vague term,
4. That certain languages are unable to provide an alphabet/recorded form of the language, which makes mandating the recording of an alphabet and/or a recorded form of the language,no comma needed here impossible in some cases,

UNSURE of the purpose of recording EVERY language in existence, for languages can be made everyday ...What?

REPEALS GA #243

In re your "various processes": I don't think it needs a definition; it means ANY process that causes languages to go extinct. It's not legislating those various processes, so it doesn't need to define them.

I fixed the errors, and removed the "UNSURE" line. Also, I've removed the "Proccesses" line.

[The Scientific States]

The Scientific States strongly dissaproves of this proposal.

I respect your opinion, ambassador, but what exactly causes you to disagree with what the
Repeal is saying?

Like most I believe that we should preserve languages.

I realize there were one or two very minor flaws with the Language Preservation Act, but that does not make a repeal necessary.

[Saveyou Island]

I respect your opinion, ambassador, but what exactly causes you to disagree with what the
Repeal is saying?

Like most I believe that we should preserve languages.

I realize there were one or two very minor flaws with the Language Preservation Act, but that does not make a repeal necessary.

I understand that the preservation of languages is important, and I think that a replacement should be made, if passed. The thing is that resolution 243 has many errors, and should be properly replaced.

[Norway and Iceland]

I ask the Ambassador of Saveyou Island: does he have a replacement ready? May our delegation have a look at it?

[Saveyou Island]

I ask the Ambassador of Saveyou Island: does he have a replacement ready? May our delegation have a look at it?

Not yet, but if this bill gets support, I will make a new, better replacement.

[Capitalist Producers]

I don't see a reason to replace it. Clearly this is a purely local matter the WA had no business intruding into.

We will vote to repeal it.

[Saveyou Island]

I don't see a reason to replace it. Clearly this is a purely local matter the WA had no business intruding into.

We will vote to repeal it.

We thank you for your support, ambassador.

[Saveyou Island]

I guess I'll submit this, and see how it goes. If it fails to reach quorum, I'll leave the draft up for a week or so.

[Discoveria]

You need much better arguments.

Description: WA General Assembly resolution #243: "Language Preservation" shall be struck out and rendered null and void

Argument
The World Assembly,

UNDERSTANDING the goal of resolution #243, which is to preserve languages,

NOTING that certain nations are made of non-speaking citizens, such as plants, and mandated language surveys will only cause problems, Nations made of non-speaking citizens aren't exactly considered 'reasonable nations', and the convention in the General Assembly is that proposals do not have to be written to accommodate the bizarre and arbitrary features of such nations. Therefore, basing a repeal on the existence of an unreasonable nation is not going to work.

ACKNOWLEDGING
1. That some languages have an overwhelming amount of notable works of literature which have yet to be recorded, and recording these works as the survey mandates is a task which may take many years of research, Not really. Scientist buys book. Scientist takes book to WA archive. You make this task seem unrealistically difficult.
2. That the term "notable works" used in the resolution is a vague term, as the resolution does not clearly state what makes a work of literature "notable", All undefined terms in WA resolutions are by definition "vague". You have to show why allowing nations to interpret particular words in their own fashion is a bad thing. In this case, it doesn't matter much if some borderline works of literature are not considered 'notable' enough to be preserved. The WA is not aiming for perfection here.
3. That certain languages are unable to provide an alphabet/recorded form of the language, which makes mandating the recording of an alphabet and/or a recorded form of the language impossible in some cases, You've conveniently ignored the relevant part of the resolution, which clearly provides for this possibility: "record the alphabet of the language, or, if no written form of the language exists, to work with native speakers to create a standard transcription of the language,"

REPEALS GA #243

[Saveyou Island]

Bump.
I think this won't get through, but I do believe with some work, the next submission could succeed. So, any suggestions?

[Araraukar]

So, any suggestions?

Kill it with fire? GA#243 isn't perfect, no resolution is, but it's not really harming anyone (anymore - at time of passing it might've, but by now it's the prevailing law), so honestly, why try to repeal?

[Saveyou Island]

So, any suggestions?

Kill it with fire? GA#243 isn't perfect, no resolution is, but it's not really harming anyone (anymore - at time of passing it might've, but by now it's the prevailing law), so honestly, why try to repeal?

To be honest, GA243 Simply is something not worthy of WA importance. It has many flaws too.

[The Remean Lordship]

Let's go through this one at a time.

NOTING that certain nations are made of non-speaking citizens, such as plants, and mandated language surveys will only cause problems,

Then there is an absence of a language that will be preserved.

ACKNOWLEDGING
1. That some languages have an overwhelming amount of notable works of literature which have yet to be recorded, and recording these works as the survey mandates is a task which may take many years of research,

That's quitters talk. OF COURSE, it would take many years of research. People voted and took this into account. Plus, nations with written languages already have it cataloged in writing.

2. That the term "notable works" used in the resolution is a vague term, as the resolution does not clearly state what makes a work of literature "notable",

Notable = "Worthy of attention or notice" -The New Oxford American Dictionary

Therefore, if it pops out, it is notable. Easy.

3. That there are billions of languages used throughout all nations, and recording data for each one would be far too time-consuming and overwhelming for nations,

This sounds familiar..........oh yes! Clause I. You may have basically repeated it and yet I still think the WA knew that when they voted.

There is only one accurate part of this resolution:

UNDERSTANDING the goal of resolution #243, which is to preserve languages,

Yes....yes it was.

Besides that one preambulatory clause, this has no merit, let alone my vote. Why on earth would you want to repeal your own culture?

[Araraukar]

NOTING that certain nations are made of non-speaking citizens, such as plants, and mandated language surveys will only cause problems,

Then there is an absence of a language that will be preserved.

Also, one might argue it's forcing roleplay to make everyone believe there are sapient plants outside the WA headquarters setting. And I say this as the owner of one such nation.

[Saveyou Island]

Thank you, TLHH, for giving me a new, improved revision of this repeal. Please give us feedback on this!

[Valendia]

The Valendian delegate drums his fingers against the desk as he reads the draft, the ice in his fifth of scotch chinking against the glass lightly. He sucks on his teeth momentarily before speaking.

"While this draft of the resolution is vastly clearer than the first, unfortunately we cannot lend support to it as a number of problems are still exant.

Firstly, the inability of nations with many dialects to record all languages is an assumption - if the clause used "may" rather than "would", it would be more correct (though still an assumption).

Secondly, what is meant by "cultural boundaries" that would prevent a language from being recorded? Can your delegation provide some concrete examples of such boundaries that would preclude enforcement of GA #243?

Thirdly, the presumption of interference is, well...presumptive. Our delegation is confident enough in the competence of linguists to be able to transcribe a language or dialect without an existing script without "interfering" with it.

Finally, there is an inherent contradiction in saying that "some languages have an overwhelming amount of notable works of literature which have yet to be recorded" because if it is a work of literature then it is by definition recorded.

Ultimately, the present opinion of the Valendian delegation is that GA #243 serves its purpose as an impetus to preserve endangered languages and that the issues this proposal seeks to address are not significant enough to merit a repeal of the original act."

[Dellin]

NOTING that nations may have a large quantity of dialects.

REALIZING such nations would be unable to record all languages.

Am I reading this wrong, or is this suggesting that dialects are languages? Dialects are generally small variations of a given language; the target resolution also doesn't really have a policy on dialects, though recording small variations in a language isn't a very large task.

NOTING that nations may have cultural boundaries preventing languages to be recorded

I don't understand what they would mean; this is even less clear than the original version.

SADDENED that nations may have to interfere with a local dialect to create a written language.

Don't know what this means either. Interfere how? In the sense that "dialects" don't become part of the "official language"? If so, then that's not a problem, because this has nothing to do with creating official versions of language, but of recording language in its most prevalent form. And, as I said, recording small dialect variations wouldn't be difficult.

ACKNOWLEDGING that some languages have an overwhelming amount of notable works of literature which have yet to be recorded, and recording these works is a task which may take many years of research.

FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGING that the term "notable works" used in the resolution is a vague term, as the resolution does not clearly state what makes a work of literature "notable".

I still think this is the most valid point, especially since the target resolution is very unclear about any of this. However, I don't think this is grounds enough to repeal, and I honestly think any attempt to record some "notable works" is better than no attempt at all.