[PASSED] Protecting Minority Languages

[The New California Republic]

OOC: These records would be useful if descendants of a "dead" language's dead speakers wanted to revive its use again, perhaps as part of a general revival of interest in their ancestral culture or perhaps as a way of asserting their identity as a distinct group.
In RL, in recent times, we've seen this with [at least] Cornish and Wampanoag...

OOC: Having archived records of the language is one thing, but this draft proposal goes far beyond that. I wouldn't be against this if it was merely the case that some kind of record (such as written and audio records) was being preserved for cultural purposes, but the latter clauses seem intent on trying to resuscitate the dying language.

[Imperium Anglorum]

There is a position in between spending money to promote some language and not doing anything. Classification and study of languages is probably an interesting ethnographic, anthropological, and linguistic endeavour. But the main reasons for languages being lost, at least in the areas I am familiar with in East Asia and South America, is due to a lack of utility from knowing those languages. If the local language of commerce and the street is, say, Mandarin, and everyone knows Mandarin, one simply won't learn Bumblefuckese simply because there is no need to know it.

It's the same thing with immigrants and keeping their own languages, just without movement per se. A Polish speaking family immigrating to the United States will soon lose their ability to speak Polish without explicitly sending people to school to keep it alive. The children will speak English because that is what they think in and speak with everyone else. Since they will know little Polish, or, if their parents speak Polish to them, they will really only know how to understand it but not speak it. Then, to their children, they will speak English and those children will not acquire Polish at all.

It seems that this draft would basically just throw into peoples' faces 'Learn Polish!' pamphlets and little else, doing nothing to actually keep it around. Although, one should also consider the case of Hebrew. The formation of Israel and the knowledge of Hebrew amongst many American Jews has a lot to do with religious tradition and state support. However it is, it further supports the idea that it is structure which determines whether a language lives or dies, not the act of spreading some pamphlets about.

---

Prohibits member nations from forcefully enacting measures which aims to deliberately eradicate a spoken native language through forced assimilation, language discrimination, or any other efforts to shatter cultural identity for the purpose of causing language death,

ELSIE MORTIMER WELLESLEY: So, would this include requiring government forms be in Latin? Most government officials only know that languages and having multiple other ones would be prohibitively expensive. And we have a compelling interest in teaching everyone the language, since if everyone spoke their own local dialect, it would be impossible for them to across to the next town over, let alone the empire. Not educating people in the language would be a grave disservice to their economic opportunities.

[Stoskavanya]

First of all, sorry for the quote tree, I know you dislike it but somehow I got caught up with all these things on this forum.

It's the same thing with immigrants and keeping their own languages, just without movement per se. A Polish speaking family immigrating to the United States will soon lose their ability to speak Polish without explicitly sending people to school to keep it alive. The children will speak English because that is what they think in and speak with everyone else. Since they will know little Polish, or, if their parents speak Polish to them, they will really only know how to understand it but not speak it. Then, to their children, they will speak English and those children will not acquire Polish at all.

Thats an interesting story, but that family learning Polish wouldn't result in Polish being destroyed.

It seems that this draft would basically just throw into peoples' faces 'Learn Polish!' pamphlets and little else, doing nothing to actually keep it around. Although, one should also consider the case of Hebrew. The formation of Israel and the knowledge of Hebrew amongst many American Jews has a lot to do with religious tradition and state support. However it is, it further supports the idea that it is structure which determines whether a language lives or dies, not the act of spreading some pamphlets about.

I don't know how you think of this proposal as just sending "pamphlets." If you read my committee duties and still think thats all it does, than you should really get more creative. The whole point of the resolution is a. Making sure the structure of a state isn't facilitating language loss faster than it needs to be, and b. Providing the tools should the desire of the local populace be to keep their language.

---

ELSIE MORTIMER WELLESLEY: So, would this include requiring government forms be in Latin? Most government officials only know that languages and having multiple other ones would be prohibitively expensive. And we have a compelling interest in teaching everyone the language, since if everyone spoke their own local dialect, it would be impossible for them to across to the next town over, let alone the empire. Not educating people in the language would be a grave disservice to their economic opportunities.

Ms. Wellesley, I have no idea where you got that from. The provision simply protects against active malice against a language, it doesn't force the state to pander to every language in their borders. As directly quoted from my proposal;

Notes that nothing in this resolution should be construed as to prevent persons from becoming polylingual, or prevent member nations from establishing a national language, instituting compulsory language education, or any other unreasonable interpretation,

Notes that nothing in this resolution should be construed as to combat natural language change, or to punish member nations for policies which unintentionally and passively cause language death or erosion.

[New Doltania]

OOC: After some thought, I think that if a language is truly dying, then let it. Any measures to prop it up artificially is merely delaying the inevitable, piling money into something that is already in the process of dying is a pointless exercise. Languages rise, evolve, and fall. It is just part of the nature of the existence of languages that they eventually die, so let them. So on that basis I am against.

What this motion would do is stop the killing of languages through law and attempt to record languages that are dying for future reference. The idea of a language society for the WA is a strong one, I think.

[Imperium Anglorum]

First, my 'story' doesn't talk about Polish being eradicated from the Earth. It talks about the structural mechanisms by which languages die out. It is micro-level forces acting in tandem which lead to languages no longer being spoken. That's why I conclude with the statement 'it is structure which determines whether a language lives or dies'. And even if you say your proposal does a lot more in providing tools, that does not change that it is structure which determines whether a language lives or dies and not other forms of action.

Second, just answer my ambassador with 'No, it wouldn't do that'.

[The New California Republic]

OOC: After some thought, I think that if a language is truly dying, then let it. Any measures to prop it up artificially is merely delaying the inevitable, piling money into something that is already in the process of dying is a pointless exercise. Languages rise, evolve, and fall. It is just part of the nature of the existence of languages that they eventually die, so let them. So on that basis I am against.

What this motion would do is stop the killing of languages through law and attempt to record languages that are dying for future reference. The idea of a language society for the WA is a strong one, I think.

OOC: It also covers languages that are dying from other causes, it says that here:

Acknowledging that growing globalization is hastening the loss of many living native languages,

Recognizing that loss of a native language is not only an erosion of cultural diversity but a loss for academic fields such as linguistics, history, anthropology, and other pursuits of knowledge,

OOC: So it isn't just targeting the killing of languages through law, it is intended to save languages from dying from practically any cause. The purpose of the entire thing is to prop up all dying languages, not just to prevent "killing of languages through law". If a language is dying, then let it, and just keep the records of the language in an archive for posterity.

[Stoskavanya]

OOC: Having archived records of the language is one thing, but this draft proposal goes far beyond that. I wouldn't be against this if it was merely the case that some kind of record (such as written and audio records) was being preserved for cultural purposes, but the latter clauses seem intent on trying to resuscitate the dying language.

Nothing in this proposal resuscitates dead languages, hence the title "preservation" and "resurrection". Its clearly obviously that I am not punishing nations for nature language death.

[The New California Republic]

OOC: Having archived records of the language is one thing, but this draft proposal goes far beyond that. I wouldn't be against this if it was merely the case that some kind of record (such as written and audio records) was being preserved for cultural purposes, but the latter clauses seem intent on trying to resuscitate the dying language.

Nothing in this proposal resuscitates dead languages, hence the title "preservation" and "resurrection". Its clearly obviously that I am not punishing nations for nature language death.

OOC: I never said that. I said "resuscitate dying language", not "resuscitating dead language"...

[Stoskavanya]

OOC: So it isn't just targeting the killing of languages through law, it is intended to save languages from dying from practically any cause. The purpose of the entire thing is to prop up all dying languages, not just to prevent "killing of languages through law".

It covers killing of languages through law, and it provides tools for natives who wish to combat their language loss. I don't know how you can infer that quoting a preamble clause that acknowledges globalization.

Edit;: My mistake about the 'dying' 'dead' confusion, this thread is moving really fast.

If you mean I am seeking to preserve dying languages, than yes, thats the point.

What this proposal does NOT do:
1. Force a nation to cater to speakers of a specific language
2. 'Prop' up dying languages unreasonably
3. Force natives to retain their old language
4. Punish anyone for the death of a language

[The New California Republic]

It covers killing of languages through law, and it provides tools for natives who wish to combat their language loss. I don't know how you can infer that quoting a preamble clause that acknowledges globalization.

OOC: But if you outlaw the "killing of languages through law", then there is no need to attempt to preserve the language, as the thing that was causing the language to die has been outlawed. So what is the purpose of the latter clauses to counter the effects of "killing of languages through law", if the "killing of languages through law" has been outlawed? It would be the equivalent of banning the destruction of monuments, and then setting up a construction program to counter the destruction of monuments (which aren't being destroyed anymore anyway)...

[Stoskavanya]

It covers killing of languages through law, and it provides tools for natives who wish to combat their language loss. I don't know how you can infer that quoting a preamble clause that acknowledges globalization.

OOC: But if you outlaw the "killing of languages through law", then there is no need to attempt to preserve the language, as the thing that was causing the language to die has been outlawed. So what is the purpose of the latter clauses to counter the effects of "killing of languages through law", if the "killing of languages through law" has been outlawed? It would be the equivalent of banning the destruction of monuments, and then setting up a construction program to counter the destruction of monuments (which aren't being destroyed anymore anyway)...

Because the language is still at risk of bring loss, so I provide a committee of tools for native speakers.

There is this false equivalency that dying languages are somehow like a dying business, that need to be cleared. Language death is not always welcome by native persons, and I think it is fair for the World Assembly to use it powers to help preserve culture when asked.

[The New California Republic]

OOC: But if you outlaw the "killing of languages through law", then there is no need to attempt to preserve the language, as the thing that was causing the language to die has been outlawed. So what is the purpose of the latter clauses to counter the effects of "killing of languages through law", if the "killing of languages through law" has been outlawed? It would be the equivalent of banning the destruction of monuments, and then setting up a construction program to counter the destruction of monuments (which aren't being destroyed anymore anyway)...

Because the language is still at risk of bring loss, so I provide a committee of tools for native speakers.

OOC: At risk from what? What other causes of language loss are you trying to counter?

There is this false equivalency that dying languages are somehow like a dying business, that need to be cleared. Language death is not always welcome by native persons, and I think it is fair for the World Assembly to use it powers to help preserve culture when asked.

OOC: Nope, I myself am not comparing it to a business, I am seeing language as what it is: something that is born, changes and evolves, and eventually dies. Postponing that inevitable death just seems a bit arbitrary, as if a language is truly dying, then there are probably very few people left with experience in the language to care about it anyway...

[Stoskavanya]

OOC: Nope, I myself am not comparing it to a business, I am seeing language as what it is: something that is born, changes and evolves, and eventually dies. Postponing that inevitable death just seems a bit arbitrary, as if a language is truly dying, then there are probably very few people left with experience in the language to care about it anyway...

And I think this is a typical appeal to nature fallacy. Just because in your opinion language death is something natural, doesn't mean the effects of language loss are necessary or desirable.

Though I question this whole "this is what languages do" line of argument. This isn't old languages changing and new languages being created as in ancient times, this is massive unnatural die-off on the diversity of languages in the present day. If you cannot see any value to preserving this part of the human sapient condition, than let it be.

[The New California Republic]

OOC: Nope, I myself am not comparing it to a business, I am seeing language as what it is: something that is born, changes and evolves, and eventually dies. Postponing that inevitable death just seems a bit arbitrary, as if a language is truly dying, then there are probably very few people left with experience in the language to care about it anyway...

And I think this is a typical appeal to nature fallacy. Just because in your opinion language death is something natural, doesn't mean the effects of language loss are necessary or desirable.

OOC: Nope, I am not appealing to nature at all, so that is complete nonsense. I am simply describing how languages exist. There is a lot of evidence showing the birth of languages, the changes and evolution of languages, and the death of languages. So no, I am not appealing to nature, I am appealing to empirical evidence.

[Araraukar]

this is massive unnatural die-off on the diversity of languages in the present day.

OOC: I think it's fairly natural for a language to die off when the last people who speak it, die. If you're talking about something else, you're clearly not spelling it out properly. Which is ironic, considering we're talking about language death in English, which is one of the biggest reasons for many other languages growing poorer and less commonly used... (EDIT: And even more ironically I'm currently struggling to find the right words to use in English, because if I used my more fluent Finnish, none of you would understand it...)

[Stoskavanya]

Slightly updated the draft; I may of lost track of the larger debate in my replies earlier, and misunderstood some of your arguments, and I apologize. Just wanted to remind everyone that the goal of this draft is

1. Not to force a people to retain a dying language; the society in this regard is simply meant to provide tool for native persons who wish to revitalize their language. If a group of native persons have no desire to reclaim their language, and the state is not being malignant towards their certain language, than except for that language's classification, nothing in this resolution is affecting it.

2. To protect against active malice against language by law. The state, however, is not punished for having and teaching its national language, nor does it have to cater to the special needs of a native language beyond what is reasonable and required by existing resolutions.

If anyone has an criticism of the proposal with those two premises in mind please offer them.

OOC: I think it's fairly natural for a language to die off when the last people who speak it, die. If you're talking about something else, you're clearly not spelling it out properly.)

The point that I am trying to make is that, as opposed to most of history, where the number of existing languages were generally the same, the present day has brought about the loss of diversity on an unprecedented scale. Perhaps "natural" wasn't the right choice of word.

[Baizou]

Slightly updated the draft; I may of lost track in my replies earlier, just want to remind everyone that the goal of this draft is

1. Not to force a people to retain a dying language; the society in this regard is simply meant to provide tool for native persons who wish to revitalize their language. If a group of native persons have no desire to reclaim their language, and the state is not being malignant towards their certain language, than except for that language's classification, nothing in this resolution is affecting it.

2. To protect active malice against language by law. The state, however, is not punished for having and teaching its national religion, nor does it have to cater to the special needs of a native language beyond what is reasonable and required by existing resolutions.

"As the Baizoan representative, I believe these goals to be reasonably evident within the text of the proposal," Mizushima says with an approving nod. "This subject is, in fact, rather close to Baizou due to the historical native languages of its island that could benefit. There do exist parties interested in preserving these languages, and program's resources would be much appreciated, in addition to its mandate preventing other factions from intentionally destroying the languages. That this proposal also has the good sense to be flexible to the realities of shifting and evolving languages is a bonus, and I can see no reason at this time to not cast Baizou's vote in favor."

The VCR whirs, and CARRIE intones, "Ah, languages. Someday we'll all just be speaking binary."

"Hm, maybe I left your humor setting on too high..."

[New Doltania]

"As ambassador to the WA for New Doltania, I believe this should be submitted."

[Stoskavanya]

I have thought a lot about IA and NCR's well-founded concerns about the effectiveness of the Society's programs; I am reluctant to expand the duties of the society because of the above mentioned risk of little results if the language is without a support structure in society. Ultimately I've decided there is realistically little the educational part of the proposal can do if the state is not cooperative with revitalization efforts, which i'm going to have to accept. The Society's educational component will have coincide with native or governmental efforts.

With that in mind i've added to section ii.) that the Society should work with member state's governments. I have also changed a. and b. in section i.) to clarify that the goal is reach out to interested individuals in the community with instructional material to foster active speakership, not just handing out to random persons. The creation and promotion of education programs will also be aimed for students. I have added the collection and promotion of written works in the language to the Society's support role, to facilitate higher comprehension and interest.

"As the Baizoan representative, ...

Thank you for your support, I am indeed trying to be realistic with this proposal while simultaneously stressing revitalization.

"As ambassador to the WA for New Doltania, I believe this should be submitted."

Thank you ambassador, but I am in no rush to submit this proposal!

[Arotania]

How would this proposal relate to sign languages that are the native languages of many persons? Currently the proposal seems to mention spoken languages only.

[The New California Republic]

How would this proposal relate to sign languages that are the native languages of many persons? Currently the proposal seems to mention spoken languages only.

OOC: Well the draft does briefly mention written languages, but only very briefly in passing. But you are right, there is no reference to languages based around sign.

[Grays Harbor]

Why is this restricted to only “native” languages?

[Stoskavanya]

How would this proposal relate to sign languages that are the native languages of many persons? Currently the proposal seems to mention spoken languages only.

Thats a good point; i'll remove the qualifier 'spoken' so that the proposal covers all native languages.

Why is this restricted to only “native” languages?

Native language refers to a person's or their community's first language.

Edit: I changed "World Assembly Language Revitalization Society" to World Assembly Language Society" so that its name is less restrictive to later authors who wish to have a committee related to language.

[Fauxia]

"Instead of language death, use linguicide.”

[Imperium Anglorum]

I think it should be a League, not a Society.