Dying Languages

[Vestr-Norig]

You are vastly over-estimating how long there has been anything that could be realistically called "Scottishness".

Indeed, considering that "Scottishness" is a pretty mixed idea that borrows from several different sources. Celtic, Germanic (Anglo-Saxon, Norman, Viking, and I think Norwegian), and Roman. Perhaps others.

Norwegians were Vikings...

[SD_Film Artists]

You are vastly over-estimating how long there has been anything that could be realistically called "Scottishness".

Indeed, considering that "Scottishness" is a pretty mixed idea that borrows from several different sources. Celtic, Germanic (Anglo-Saxon, Norman, Viking, and I think Norwegian), and Roman. Perhaps others.

I'd guess that it comes from the American myth of Scotireland, where all white Americans come from!

[Varazhdin]

But shouldn't something be prevented from becoming just a museum exhibit in the first place?

People tend to look at old obsolete things with misty rose-tinted eyes. Windmills are being replaced by wind-turbines (albeit not directly). Should windmills be preserved? Yes; should they still be used; no.

That's not the point. My point is that a language is a sign of diversity through which its speakers distinguish themselves from speakers of other languages. In the same way, I wouldn't have anything against wind-turbines replacing windmills, but it would be preferable if wind-turbines would distinctivelly represent the group that uses them just as much as the windmills did.

[Der Teutoniker]

Norwegians were Vikings...

Some vikings were from "Norway". Not all Norwegians are, or have been vikings. In fact, the nation of "Norway" was founded in the post-viking era. They are an heir to the viking mantle, for sure, but to call them vikings is such oversimplification (and inaccuracy) as to be wrong.

By that logic, all modern Danes are vikings. It is equally untrue.

[SD_Film Artists]

I'm really on two thoughts about this.

Basic darwinism tells us that things die out because they fail to adapt. It could be said that if the language or culture is dying out, it isn't needed by it's speakers anymore, it has lived past it's usefullness.
A died out language is far less tragic than a died out species in my opinion, but the paralel is there: if the species/language fails to adapt to the environment/the lives of it's speakers... it dies out.

But darwinism gives no moral judgements at all. Do the facts above mean we should not try to prevent species on the brink of extinction from actually going extinct? No! I think we we should try to save the tiger, or the whale, even though we have no 'use' for them. I read somewhere that 96% of all vertebrates over 5 kg are humans or domesticated animals... so few wild ones left. But they have value on their own, without the value we assign them when going on safari.

In the same way, languages have value on their own. Not for amusement in a theme-parky way ('come look at the strange locals with interesting clothes and weird language'), but by themself on themself.

Screw linguistic Darwinism, I'd just kill most of them on principle. ^^

[Soviet Commu-Facism]

Every year, all around the world, languages are dying out while cultures are being forgotten. On the list of Endangered Languages of 2005 182 American languages, 152 Pacific languages, 84 Asian languages, 46 African languages and 9 European languages are at risk of dying out... That's 473 languages around the world at risk of dying out. Some of the languages have 30 speakers or less!

My question is do you think it is important to try to prevent languages from dying out?

Personally, I believe it is important to prevent languages from dying out because when a language dies out an culture dies out. Languages allow stories, songs, and beliefs to live on and while stories and languages can be translated they often loose meaning or do not have as deep of an meaning as in the original language.

I totally support and would endorse (if I had tons of money) protecting, or at least recording, these languages. This is part of human history. It needs to be remembered as much as the pyramids, or the Great Wall need to be remembered. Honestly, people spend who knows how much money on trying to prove that humans came from monkeys, but they won't even bother considering protecting and recording what we actually KNOW and have? This is history alive, and we would allow to die? As a lover of history, I am really quite appalled that we don't try and save it, yet we will do whatever we can to try (and continually fail) to prove a theory.

[SD_Film Artists]

People tend to look at old obsolete things with misty rose-tinted eyes. Windmills are being replaced by wind-turbines (albeit not directly). Should windmills be preserved? Yes; should they still be used; no.

That's not the point. My point is that a language is a sign of diversity through which its speakers distinguish themselves from speakers of other languages. In the same way, I wouldn't have anything against wind-turbines replacing windmills, but it would be preferable if wind-turbines would distinctivelly represent the group that uses them just as much as the windmills did.

But why keep diversity? It only leads it an 'us and them' mentality.

[Vestr-Norig]

Norwegians were Vikings...

Some vikings were from "Norway". Not all Norwegians are, or have been vikings. In fact, the nation of "Norway" was founded in the post-viking era. They are an heir to the viking mantle, for sure, but to call them vikings is such oversimplification (and inaccuracy) as to be wrong.

By that logic, all modern Danes are vikings. It is equally untrue.

Actually, it is wrong to say that the Peoples of Scandinavia were Vikings. The therm Viking comesd from "to go Viking", or to travel with ships across the sea to raid, plunder, settle, trade, etc.

[Varazhdin]

That's not the point. My point is that a language is a sign of diversity through which its speakers distinguish themselves from speakers of other languages. In the same way, I wouldn't have anything against wind-turbines replacing windmills, but it would be preferable if wind-turbines would distinctivelly represent the group that uses them just as much as the windmills did.

But why keep diversity? It only leads it an 'us and them' mentality.

So? You say it like it's a bad thing.

[Free Libria]

Eventually I hope every language dies out, and that only english prevails. So that everyone could atleast Understand what youre saying.

[Der Teutoniker]

Actually, it is wrong to say that the Peoples of Scandinavia were Vikings. The therm Viking comesd from "to go Viking", or to travel with ships across the sea to raid, plunder, settle, trade, etc.

Actually, it is correct to call a viking a viking. "American" comes from some Italian dudes name. Does this mean that all people who live in the "America's" are residents of this dude? Obviously not. It is still an accurate term for a people/culture/time period - regardless of it's much more vague etymology.

[Vestr-Norig]

Eventually I hope every language dies out, and that only english prevails. So that everyone could atleast Understand what youre saying.

And you are English? American? If so, you are extremely arrogant

[Vestr-Norig]

Actually, it is wrong to say that the Peoples of Scandinavia were Vikings. The therm Viking comesd from "to go Viking", or to travel with ships across the sea to raid, plunder, settle, trade, etc.

Actually, it is correct to call a viking a viking. "American" comes from some Italian dudes name. Does this mean that all people who live in the "America's" are residents of this dude? Obviously not. It is still an accurate term for a people/culture/time period - regardless of it's much more vague etymology.

Yes, but the only ones that were Vikings were those who traveled across the sea from Scandinavia

[Cartfartium]

Every year, all around the world, languages are dying out while cultures are being forgotten. On the list of Endangered Languages of 2005 182 American languages, 152 Pacific languages, 84 Asian languages, 46 African languages and 9 European languages are at risk of dying out... That's 473 languages around the world at risk of dying out. Some of the languages have 30 speakers or less!

My question is do you think it is important to try to prevent languages from dying out?

Personally, I believe it is important to prevent languages from dying out because when a language dies out an culture dies out. Languages allow stories, songs, and beliefs to live on and while stories and languages can be translated they often loose meaning or do not have as deep of an meaning as in the original language.

I totally support and would endorse (if I had tons of money) protecting, or at least recording, these languages. This is part of human history. It needs to be remembered as much as the pyramids, or the Great Wall need to be remembered. Honestly, people spend who knows how much money on trying to prove that humans came from monkeys, but they won't even bother considering protecting and recording what we actually KNOW and have? This is history alive, and we would allow to die? As a lover of history, I am really quite appalled that we don't try and save it, yet we will do whatever we can to try (and continually fail) to prove a theory.

I am in total agreement. Although proving new things is important, we should master what we already know before we try to figure something else out. I would definately support the recording of languages. i imagine it as an international databaser of all known languages, and words in the language. Kinda like a giant Google Translate.

[The Blaatschapen]

Eventually I hope every language dies out, and that only english prevails. So that everyone could atleast Understand what youre saying.

Why only English?

Also, it's hard to understand certain native english speakers (Geordies, Dixies, I'm looking at you) so we still won't understand everyone

[Conscentia]

Nope...languages should be left to die...most of those dying languages are obsolete anyway.
I demand Quenya; Latin; or English become the international language of all humans.

We can start by making every government in the world enforce English/Latin/Quenya teaching alongside their country's main language in their education system...soon all shall speak English/Latin/Quenya. All that will remain are the illiterates and un-educated and those isolated from the national education system.

Over time English/Latin/Quenya shall take over.

Latin will never return to its old splendour. For one, it's useless in terms of vocabulary.

For example, they don't have a Latin word for 'the being' or 'eos' in Ancient greek (IIRC), used in philosophy.

We could add those words from Ancient Greek and fill in the other missing words with Italian*; to fill in the gaps. There is no reason it can't evolve like the other modern languages did, perhaps this evolved Latin won't be as splendiferous as Latin was in the old times but at least it would have returned so that we can at least enjoy some of it's old "splendour" as you described it.

*Or we could substitute Italian for English or Quenya. Though Quenya also lacks a some words if what I know is correct. English might not sound the part combined with Latin.

As a proud Sindarin speaker, you have both offended me.

Dwarves < Elves.

Corrected; t'was an easy mistake to make so don't feel bad.

Not Khuzdul? Interesting.

As a proud Sindarin speaker, you have both offended me.

The Elven languages are superior to Khuzdul.

It's not that I don't like Sindarin...it's just that it doesn't contain words from Valarin.
Of the elven languages, Sindarin is my second choice, Quenya is my first. Telerin third. Silvan fourth.
(Although technically not elven, the black speech fifth. It evolved from the elvish languages and even contains words from Valarin. It's only in fifth because it's evil and it's not actually elvish.)

[Free Libria]

Eventually I hope every language dies out, and that only english prevails. So that everyone could atleast Understand what youre saying.

And you are English? American? If so, you are extremely arrogant

Beside the point that im from the UK. It's not arrogant at all considering English is the 1st international language of the world. And in so many foreign country's they teach them english as second language sir.

[Der Teutoniker]

Eventually I hope every language dies out, and that only english prevails. So that everyone could atleast Understand what youre saying.

Correct. Everyone will understand the universal English.

[Angleter]

Rubbish. British heritage was created organically over the years of the British Empire as the British nations, which share genetics and an island separated from the rest of Europe in the first place, achieved great things together and made the UK the strongest on Earth, exporting the composite British culture across the seas to the Old Commonwealth, and influencing the cultures of the New Commonwealth and beyond. Indeed, with the spread of popular culture, this unity has become even more profound. Scottish nationalism at least intends to get rid of 300 years of history and cultural development.

Well, they don't share genetics, for a start. And Scottish nationalism wants to get rid of those 300 years because over 10,000 years were lost in favour of "Britishness".

Oh, yes, we do. Saxon and Goidelic migration to Great Britain wasn't all that great, and so provided that the Picts were of Brythonic stock (which they most likely were), then Great Britain is pretty much entirely Brythonic. Of course, this excludes recent immigrants.

And 10,000 years is utterly laughable. Firstly, as I said, GB was near-homogenously Briton and Pict (ie. Brythonic) prior to the 3rd century, so that's chopped it down to 1,400 years for a start. Then we have the 'Dark Ages', out of which Scotland emerged part-Goidelic (Alba), part-Brythonic (Strathclyde), and part-Saxon (Lothian/Northumbria), so for the union of Scotland we have to look to 1124. So we're down to 583 years of united Scottish history, and that was itself marked by severe cultural differences between the then-dominant Gaelic-speakers and the English-speakers (the Brythonic-speakers having died out soon after Strathclyde's incorporation- but then we could also consider the Norn of Shetland in particular), with Scots English becoming dominant in the 1400s. Thus Scotland had its own nation and the Gaelic language for about 300 years in the Later Middle Ages, and the Lowland and Highland Scots really have only really stopped loathing each other since the 19th century and Sir Walter Scott. So there we go.

Not to mention that it's equally utterly laughable that Scottish culture has been somehow 'lost in favour of "Britishness"'. Are the bagpipes played at royal occasions English now, for example? Scottish culture could even be said, what with Robert Burns and Sir Walter Scott and the like, to have flourished under the Union.

[Der Teutoniker]

Yes, but the only ones that were Vikings were those who traveled across the sea from Scandinavia

Yep.

And?

[Cartfartium]

Eventually I hope every language dies out, and that only english prevails. So that everyone could atleast Understand what youre saying.

Umm, there is this little thing called dialect. Good luck with that. And I bet the Chinese would wnat everyone on earth to learn Chinese. Unless an English - speaking country conquers the entire world, then I doubt we would all speak English.

[Der Teutoniker]

Beside the point that im from the UK. It's not arrogant at all considering English is the 1st international language of the world. And in so many foreign country's they teach them english as second language sir.

The "lingua franca" wouldn't you say?

A term originally used to describe the international fame of the French language.

[Conscentia]

Eventually I hope every language dies out, and that only english prevails. So that everyone could atleast Understand what youre saying.

Correct. Everyone will understand the universal English.

At least everyone will understand what you are typing...as long as you use a spell checker.

Different Dialects is better than entirely different languages with their own characters, grammar systems and words.

[Fronceirnonia]

Why?

And only if we start with the bastard language of English. Really, germanic structure with romance words, ugh.

At least we don't have genders!

"mon for ange? Ahh...well I guess Gabriel was a guy so....."

And yeux (eyes) is male, yet I think you still say 'mon' rather than 'ma' if they are girl's eyes. *head asplodes*

Wrong! in French it is gender and number of the noun not the possesor that determines whether it is mon, ma or mes. ange starts with a vowel so it would be mon regardless of gender

[Vestr-Norig]

And you are English? American? If so, you are extremely arrogant

Beside the point that im from the UK. It's not arrogant at all considering English is the 1st international language of the world. And in so many foreign country's they teach them english as second language sir.

Well, actually it is very arrogant to expect the entire world to speak your language. I am not expecting the entire world to write Nynorsk and speak Norwegian, just Norwegians