| |
|
Before reading,
or presenting the Horn and Fishman articles to students, the teacher
might pose the question: If the United States, and its American
English dominates the global economy (and its major communication
tool:the Internet) today, what impact might you think that would
have on both the world, and the influence of the United States
in world affairs? How might you think many of the rest of the
world might view that? Refer students to the Horn article and
his vision of the "world." Can they identify Horn's
political and economic bias? What impact on local or regional
languages and cultures? (Remind students that French was once
the only diplomatic language in the last several centuries, at
least into the mid-20th century, and has largely been replaced
by multilingual translators, and by American English.) How powerful,
for example, do students feel that American music is on world
music, and values and attitudes? Can music be equated to language?
to the internet? The recent rise in a Latino influence on music;
does this impact on your attitudes and values? on your knowledge
of Spanish?
Develop a
debate condition: Some have described the 20th Century as the
"American Century" (and might suggest that it will continue
into the 21st), it is only right that American English should
dominate the world economy and information systems.
Saving
Endangered Languages
Editor's
Note: Can this language and cultural loss be prevented,
and possibly remedied? In a very sensitive and informative article,
James Crawford suggests that we (all of us) should care about
the continuing loss of languages, but he sees the remedy as being
a political one. Political in the sense that people/nations have
to make the preservation of languages, and the restoration where
possible, a priority and provide adequate budget for the effort.
In the following excerpt from that article, he carefully spells
out the rationales for such action, and ends in the final argument,
as you will read, for the raising of a social conscience that
all peoples, whoever and wherever they are, have a fundamental
right to their culture and their language. It should be noted
that Crawford is specifically concerned with Native American languages,
but his arguments are applicable across all geographic and national
areas. In the excerpt that follows Crawford, there is a statement
of objectives taken from a United Nations effort to bring into
being a "Declaration of Linguistic Rights" which supports
that argument: regardless of where people are located, and under
what regime, their language should be protected, and thus, their
culture sustained.
Why Should
We Care?
Endangered
Native American Languages: What Is To Be Done, and Why?
by James Crawford
...Why concern
ourselves with the problem of endangered Native American languages,
to the extent of investing the considerable time, effort, and
resources that would be needed to save even a handful of them?
Posing the question in this way may seem callous, considering
the shameful history of cultural genocide practiced against indigenous
peoples in this country. But, for many non-Indians, who tend to
view linguistic diversity as a liability rather than an asset,
the value of these languages is not self-evident. Knowledge about
Native American issues in general is limited. Mean- while assimilationist
biases remain strong; hence the sym- bolic opposition these days
to any kind of public expen diture aimed at preserving "ethnic"
cultures (Crawford, 1992b). Until such attitudes are changed -
by effectively answering the question, "Why should we care
about preserving Native American languages?" - there will
be limited progress in conservation and renewal.
Advocates
have advanced a variety of answers. Let us consider them on their
scientific merits and on their political appeal.
-
Linguists, who are increasingly vocal on this issue, have warned
that the death of any natural language represents an incalculable
loss to their science. "Suppose English were the only language
available as a basis for the study of general human grammatical
competence," writes Hale (1992, p. 35). While "we
could learn a great deal ... we also know enough about linguistic
diversity to know that we would miss an enormous amount."
No doubt few who are acquainted with this problem would disagree:
from a scientific standpoint, the destruction of data is always
regrettable. Losing a language means losing a rare window on
the human mind. But from the perspective of the public and policymakers,
this argument smacks of professional self-interest; it is hardly
a compelling justification for new spending in times of fiscal
austerity.
-
Others have argued that the loss of linguistic diversity represents
a loss of intellectual diversity. Each language is a unique
tool for analyzing and synthesizing the world, incorporating
the knowledge and values of a speech community. Linguistic "categories
[including] number, gender, case, tense, mode, voice, 'aspect,'
and a host of others ... are not so much discovered in experience
as imposed upon it." (Sapir, 1931). Thus to lose such a
tool is to "forget" a way of constructing reality,
to blot out a perspective evolved over many generations. The
less variety in language, the less variety in ideas. Again,
a Darwinian analogy:
Evolutionary biologists recognize the great advantage held by
species that maintain the greatest possible diversity. Disasters
occur when only one strain of wheat or corn, a "monoculture"
is planted everywhere. With no variation, there is no potential
to meet changing conditions. In the development of new science
concepts, a 'monolanguage' holds the same dangers as a monoculture.
Because languages partition reality differently, they offer different
models of how the world works. There is absolutely no reason why
the metaphors provided in English are superior to those of other
languages. [Schrock, 1986.]
Theoretically this sounds plausible; yet such effects are impossible
to quantify. Who can say whether a concept that evolved in one
language would never have evolved in another? The extreme version
of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis - that perception and cognition
are determined by the structure of whatever language one happens
to speak - has been demolished by Chomskyan linguistics (see,
e.g., Pinker, 1994). Its more flexible version, "linguistic
relativity" is another matter. Few would dispute that culture,
influenced by language, influences thought. Yet the impact remains
too elusive, too speculative, to rally public concern about language
loss.
- Then there
is the cultural pluralist approach: language loss is "part
of the more general loss being suffered by the world, the loss
of diversity in all things" (Hale, 1992, p. 3). While this
argument is politically potent - with lots of cosmopolitan appeal
- it is scientifically dubious. For at least one linguist working
to save endangered languages, such "statements ... are appeals
to our emotions, not to our reason" (Ladefoged, 1992, p.
810). Again the biological analogy breaks down. From the loss
of natural species scientists are continually documenting ripple
effects that harm our global ecosystem. No such evidence is available
for the loss of linguistic species, which are not physically interdependent
and which "evolve" in very different ways. No doubt
it would be interesting to know more about extinct languages like
Sumerian, Hittite, Etruscan, and even Anglo-Saxon. But how can
we regard their disappearance as a global "catastrophe"?
As for the threat to human diversity in general, the world is
remarkably resilient ...; different cultures are always dying
while new ones arise." (Ladefoged, 1992, p. 810). Indeed,
this resilience is the basis for linguistic diversity itself.
-
A final
- and, in my view, the most effective - line of argument appeals
to the nation's broader interest in social justice. We should
care about preventing the extinction of languages because of
the human costs to those most directly affected. "The destruction
of a language is the destruction of a rooted identity"
(Fishman, 1991, p. 4) for both groups and individuals. Along
with the accompanying loss of culture, language loss can destroy
a sense of self-worth, limiting human potential and complicating
efforts to solve other problems, such as poverty, family breakdown,
school failure, and substance abuse. After all, language death
does not happen in privileged communities. It happens to the
dispossessed and the disempowered, peoples who most need their
cultural resources to survive.
In this
context, indigenous language renewal takes on an added significance.
It becomes something of value not merely to academic researchers,
but to native speakers themselves. This is true even in extreme
cases where a language seems beyond repair. As one linguist
sums up a project to revive Adnyamathanha, an Australian Aboriginal
tongue that had declined to about 20 native speakers:
It was
not the success in reviving the language - although in some
small ways [the program] did that. It was success in reviving
something far deeper than the language itself - that sense of
worth in being Adnyamathanha, and in having something unique
and infinitely worth hanging onto. [D. Tunbridge, quoted in
Schmidt, 1990, p. 106.]
References
Crawford,
J. (1992b). Hold your tongue: Bilingualism and the politics of
"English Only."Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fishman,
J. A. (1991). Reversing language shift: Theoretical and empirical
foundations of assistance to threatened languages. Clevedon, England:
Multilingual Matters.
Hale, K.,
(Ed.). (1992). Endangered languages. Language, 68. 1-42.
Ladefoged,
P. (1992). Another view of endangered languages. Language, 68,
809-11.
Pinker, S.
(1994). The language instinct: How the mind creates language.
New York: Morrow.
Sapir, E.
(1931). Conceptual categories in primitive languages. Science,
74, 578.
Schmidt,
A. (1990). The loss of Australia's Aboriginal language heritage.
Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Schrock,
J. R. (1986). The science teacher and foreign languages. Kansas
Science Teacher, 3, 12-15.
Source
Adapted from Crawford, James. "Endangered Native American Languages:
What Is To Be Done, and Why?" (1998). http://www.ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jwcrawford/brj.htm(
20 Aug 1999)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
The disappearance
of languages is most prominent among Native Americans. Additional
Research into this area can be made by consulting:
Crawford, James.
"Seven Hypotheses on Language Loss: Causes and Cure." http://www.ncbe.gwu.edu/miscpubs/stabilize/ii-policy/hypotheses.htm
|