|
|
Debate: Should everyone in the world speak the same language?
From Debatepedia
[  ] [  ] [  ] [  ] Should everyone in the world speak the same language?
|
Background and context
Fifty to ninety percent of the world's languages will disappear in the next century, according to the The Rosetta Project. Clearly, a consolidation in languages in the 21st century is predicted. [1] People have often been thinking about how difficult it is to have different countries speaking different languages. Some people think it would just be easier to have one universal language, the classic comeback being that this would not be practical nor realistic. There is also a saying stating
- How many languages you know - that many times you are a person.
But is this really the case? Does the knowledge of more than one language really develop an individual personally? Does the fact that there exist more than one language even bring something positive? Should measures be taken to slow down the already happening consolidation of languages? Should ancient languages, for example, be preserved?
|
[  ] [  ] [  ] [  ] Communication: Would a universal language improve communication between people?
|
[  ] Yes
- Universal language would eliminate translation error. If everyone in the world spoke the same language, communication among us would be much easier and we all could express ourselves much clearer. Misunderstanding between languages would be prevented. Sometimes translators can be wrong as some word cannot be translated directly.
|
[ ] No
- Language serves many purposes being simple communication. While the major function of a language is arguably a precise communication, i.e. conveying of strict information, it's not its only function. Language also forms a basis of various art forms, and there are vast differences in suitability for this purpose among languages. Some are better suited for poetry or singing than the others - since they are more workable, more melodic than others; on the other hand, they may not be so well utilized for technical or scientific writings. It is hardly imaginable there could be one, universal language that could serve both poetry and science without a compromise (albeit science can be poetry - to some extent).
- Languages inspire each other, enrich each other. The mutual interaction between languages is essential for the necessary process of evolution of a language. As a matter of fact, English does have a lot of words from other languages. But it's not only words, i.e. syntactical differences. Languages do differ also semantically, in the logic of building the sentences and conveying the information. Universal language would hamper this diversity. In short, "When two do the same thing, it is not the same thing after all" applies to languages very well.
|
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [  ] Culture: Would an universal language be beneficial culturally?
|
[ ] Yes
- Universal language could exist alongside other languages. Everyone in the world has the right to speak their native and cultural language but they should also have a 2nd language that could be used internationally. Therefore a person should keep his birth language but learn another language that is known throughout the world for better communication globally.
|
[ ] No
- Language is an integral part of personal identity. Most languages have been spoken by generations of people for many hundreds of years. Getting rid of all except one would be really tough and cultures would be destroyed. By eliminating the basic language a person has been using since birth, we are deleting a substantial part of his/her background.
- Extinction or integration If people start to speak a universal language, it's highly possible that their native language might be wiped out. A perfect example is several, forgotten Native American languages. These languages ceased to exist because the U.S government imposed a law forbidding these languages and imposing English on the Native Americans. It's the same case. If there's a universal language, several already endangered languages could be wiped out. Also, many people would prefer their own languages and would have a hard time speaking the new language.
|
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Would choice of universal language be an easy one?
|
[ ] Yes
- Most spoken language should be adopted as the universal language. It would be simple deciding which language to get everyone to learn; the most spoken one. This is, only somewhat arguably, English. More people in more countries speak and are taught English.
|
[ ] No
- Developing criteria for one universal language is implausible. Actually what criterion should one use for choosing the language? While mandarin chinese is the most spoken language (measured by the number of living speakers), English is arguably the language of most scientific (maybe even literary) work is written in.
- Countries will not settle on a single language. Looking at the European union as an example, where there are as many languages that can be used on the European level as there are the member countries, it's hardly imaginable that countries would be able to even negotiate about an universal language, at least not in the near future. Many languages and cultures would argue over which language should be the universal one. But this would not be just a cultural problem; the country (or countries) which would already had the chosen language as an official one would clearly had an advantage over the others.
|
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Would the adoption of an universal language be simple and quick?
|
[ ] Yes
- Practical benefits would compel adoption of universal language. It may take a while for everyone to get used to the change, but after a few years, everyone would get used to it. It is to be expected that the prospect of being able to communicate with anyone in the world through one language would be so attractive, that people would immediately begin to learn it on a mass scale.
|
[ ] No
- Not everybody would be able to learn a new language. It would be far too complicated to get every single person on this planet to speak just the one language. There are people who have substantial problems how to express themselves even in their first language (mother tongue), and learning new language is simply not an option for them.
- Esperanto is an example of a failure to introduce an universal language. There have been attempts to establish an universal language in the past - the Esperanto language. It has e.g. a regular inflection and conjugation, so in theory, it should be very easy to learn, being an ideal candidate for widespread adoption. Yet, in reality, very few people actually speak Esperanto and it is nowhere near even a rudimentary use, remaining nothing more than just an academic invention.
|
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Economy: Would the universal language be beneficial economically?
|
[ ] Yes
- Universal language ends constraint to free trade and workforce movement. In order to accomplish this, an organization should be able to liason with its environment to expand its market. For a successful implementation it is required to understand the customer better. Through communication, the link between the product and customer is enabled, thus allowing greater attainability of profit. Through a common language organizations will be able to reach out and sell the product globally. Speaking the same language all over the world would promote more liberal trade among nations and also spur workforce movement, since it will be far easier to understand each other, which would eventually result in equality, and hence peaceful world.
- Universal language would remove cost of translation services. Every benefits come with some sacrifices. If we don't carry out the "global language" just for the sake of the linguists and language teachers, the world will never be able to develop. Also, good linguists and good language teachers are expected to be rather intelligent people, they would arguably adapt quickly to some other activities.
|
[ ] No
- Implementing one universal language would lead to a job loss. The introduction of one, universal language would arguably make the job of many people like linguists, language teachers and students expandable.
|
See also
External links
|
|
