Dear Everyone,
I recommend the following article for another view on the language/thought issue:
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/2009%20-%20Fall/full-McWhorter-Fall-2009.html
What would be lost if English became the only language in the world?
If you were listening to Mrs. Trumper's presentation on Friday, you will remember that she reminded us that learning a language is not just about finding translations for words (that would be a "robotic" activity!); she suggested that languages carry something of the cultures in which they are embedded with them. Remember also that Sapir and Whorf took a much more extreme position - namely that languages have a profound effect on how we think (linguistic relativism), or even lock us into particular ways of thinking (linguistic determinism).
Many people subscribe to the view that language extinction is a bad thing - because it results in the loss of these other ways of thinking; reduction in language diversity means reduction in thinking diversity. However, McWhorter in this article thinks that this argument is exaggerated. He suggests that language loss is more a matter of aesthetics - we would lose the beauty of being able to explore languages (something most people don't really care about), but this would be more than compensated by the advantages of everyone being able to communicate easily.
What do you think?
What i think is that the diversity of languages helps us understand things well in way we can easily do though it makes us not understand things that can not be expressed in our languages. just limimting ourselves to our language will make us blind on important issues in the worl that are expressed in other languages and this will make it seem like we live in different worlds as was an issue in hand in wy last TOK class with Kamau. to have a wide span of thought language diversity is needed. moreover having just one language will end the misunderstandings we have in the world. we will live in the same world in the sense that we will begin to see things in the same way.....................bwalya c paul
ReplyDeleteI have always been fascinated by the ability of people to communicate with totallky different sounds, syntaxes - in a whole new world known as a LANGUAGE!!!...Yes, that's exactly how I would describe it - a whole new world! I have come to realize and appreciate the fact that each language opens your mind up to looking at the world from a different perspective it normally makes you more appreciative of the very things that exist around us, we dont even realize!!! Yes, it is indeed ironical how the widespread of English makes this world mmore of a global village, but I refuse strongly with the claim that our ability to communicate perfectly, would suffice for all these other languages we have lost. No! In fact, the death of these languages indirectly pose a threat to our quest for true knowledge...for we will never know until we know right? All in all, we talk about bridging the communication gap so much that we forget that irrespective of whether we speak one language or not, some things can never be said. As George Bernard Shaw puts it, "The single biggest problem with COMMUNICATION is the assumption that it has taken place!" - Mehitabel Tori Markwei.
ReplyDeleteMcWhorter raises interesting arguments. Certainly,while a language dies when a culture dies, the reverse is not necessarily true. I think it would be a sad thing to have just one language for the whole world if only for aesthetic reasons. 6000 being reduced to 600 is about alright.
ReplyDeleteLanguage as has already been stated influences the way in which people think. imagine if we all spoke English. Imagine a world full of people viewing things in the same way. imagine a world without diversity. that will definitely be a boring world. However, if you think about it, language doesn't have a really huge effect on thinking. Culture in my opinion has a far greater effect on thinking.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Eleazar on the fact that, language dies when a culture dies and the reverse is not necessarily true. Culture brings about language, but language, in my opinion, doesn't bring about culture.Without culture, there is no language.
Well, if English were to be made the only language in the world, I think that we will be forced to accept ideas or things limited to only the English language and culture. I agree with Stella in the sense that culture affects our way of thinking, and language, so if we only have one point of view for our thoughts, it would make us quite narrow minded. The availability of many languages in our world gives us the freedom to be able to think outside of our comfort zones ie our languages, without being afraid to feel that what you are thinking is wrong. Or even, not correct in your particular culture. That is my opinion.
ReplyDeletei beleive that language create diversity and as we learnt in class not everything in one language can be directly translated into another because they would lose their original meaning. one may also consider religion and the tower of babel. i think that every language has a specific purpose and changing the world into a monoliguistic society causes language to lose it flare also cosidering it's ethical implications (loss of jobs for translators,linguists.etc.)
ReplyDeleteClementine Sraha
Every language has its own dynamics in terms of it thoughts,ideas and others sometimes it even depends on their cultures history.Thats why most often when studying languages most teachers tell us to avoid direct translation,or we will loose its true meaning.
ReplyDeleteSharon Melomey
i disagree with eleazor on the point that the death of a language does not mean the death of its respective culture. I personally believe that, to an extent it does.
ReplyDelete'Language is culture in motion'.
Think of the African languages. Most of the aspects of our culture; our tradition, are oral. The stories we tell and therefore our history, will all be lost should the languages in which we tell them die.
I also believe that language can exist after culture.
Think of it this way: some cultures like the ancient Egyptian way of life, are no more yet we know they existed because of hierloglyphics. This serves as a language since it performs the function of expression.
Although the culture is 'dead' it 'lives on' through the language which exists after it.
To conclude:
"A different language is a different vision of life." - Federico Fellini,
Therefore should a language be lost its speakers's 'vision of life', their culture, dies along with it.
First of all, language does create diversity in our world just like Asantewaa, Stella(Ewurabena D) and Clementine have already stated. Also, like Mrs. Trumper was saying, languages carry something of their cultures. So how will the world be without all these languages that we speak today...quite boring, isn't it? Culture is a really important factor to consider when talking about languages because it has a great impact on the way we see or perceive things around us and also the way we think. Taking a look at Carl Albrecht's quote, "Change your language and you change your thoughts", we can see that the languages we speak (looking at the cultures embedded in them, in my opinion) can affect our thinking, not necessarily the language in which we think, but HOW we think and the things we think about. Having just one language will really limit the way we see things and convey or communicate them to the people around us or the world for that matter.
ReplyDeleteThis is a quote by Dave Barry I want to leave you with: "Americans who travel abroad for the first time are often shocked to discover that, despite all the progress that has been made in the last 30 years, many foreign people still speak in foreign languages."
If English was to be the only language so many attributes/abilities unique to certain cultures would be lost. For example if you can recall from our previous homework it talked about a certain being able to keep track and stay oriented in all landscapes(familiar and unfamiliar) due to the definition of space in cardinal terms in their language. Also I stumbled across another example about the Inuit people being able to differentiate different kinds of snow around them due to their language. if you think about many things/abilities unique to certain cultures will be lost,as demonstrated in my examples above. Also having another language around just brings about diversity, in Ghana alone all the different languages have different ideas, sayings, proverbs which most of the time when translated does not make any sense. Therefore if English was the only language certain abilities will be lost and the variety of many different cultures will be lost.
ReplyDeleteSEFAKOR TSEGAH
From our present position we may not really realize the intensity of English taking over as the only language, well not until it actually starts happening.It is true that the whole idea of poor communication would be minimized but what will be lost along with those languages cannot be overlooked.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I believe that knowledge can be embedded in language. The world is a large place and we need each other in our quest of understanding it; we each know different areas of nature and to different extents depending which part of it and how much of it we are physically exposed to. For eg. The people in Alaska,as we can see from John McWhoter's article would from their experiences have certain words in their language that describe certain interesting phenomena about ice which may not have direct translations in other languages. If this language died out, this knowledge and other interesting information would probably die out with them. We would then have to start over again gaining this knowledge that we would have unknowingly discarded.
A mono-linguistic world would also make things quite boring, seeing as language has an effect on our intepretations of nature. Our perceptions and thoughts may be limited and steered only in one direction i.e. where our language allows it to go.
Hi Guys!
hi guys! :)
ReplyDeletei think limiting ourselves to one language (english) is like studying ONE subject your entire life. this would make us highly intelligent in English but we would not know anything about any other language and hence narrows our scope of knowledge. i also think life would be very boring if we had only one language.
also i'd like to state the fact that certain words and phrases from one language are sometimes used in another language without being translated. take "deja vu" (french) for example. sometimes we say "this is deja vu" which means somehting you feel has happened before. on the other hand, picture someone saying "i've seen this before". for me,it does not bring about the same effect as when you say "this is deja vu". eventhough when translated into english it actually means something you have seen before.
sometimes translations are not necessary since they do not bring about the same effect they would have had if they were in their language of origin.
another example is with proverbs. when certain proverbs are translated from one language to another, they lose their meaning.
i believe this shows how important having different languages is because it helps us to understand other aspects of things better.
in sum other languages should not die so we can have access to their culture
Mz.Appiah-Korang
Nice quote from Wilhelmina!
ReplyDelete"Culture" is one of those slippery words that is difficult to pin down, and we are using it a lot in this discussion. What do we mean by "culture", and would we do better to break it down into components so that we can examine them individually and explore how they interact? What do you think? What are the components of culture and how do they engage with one another?
Ewurabena D said:
"...if you think about it, language doesn't have a really huge effect on thinking. Culture in my opinion has a far greater effect on thinking... language dies when a culture dies and the reverse is not necessarily true. Culture brings about language, but language, in my opinion, doesn't bring about culture."
If we equate "culture" with "thought", then we are back to the position that language is internalized thought. Is this an acceptable move?
Wilhelmina said:
"Taking a look at Carl Albrecht's quote, "Change your language and you change your thoughts", we can see that the languages we speak (looking at the cultures embedded in them, in my opinion) can affect our thinking, not necessarily the language in which we think, but HOW we think and the things we think about."
First of all, is this not tantamount to saying that thought is internalized language, and thus the opposite of what Ewurabena D claims?
Secondly, I think Wilhelmina raises a very crucial distinction when she says "...how we think and the things we think about". Isn't this the key issue here? If language just affects WHAT we think ABOUT, then this is a fairly weak form of linguistic relativism. If it affects HOW we think, then this is a much stronger claim that pushes us toward linguistic determinism - that our cognitive classifications depend on the language that we use (to paraphrase the wording that Kobina used in his homework exercise!). Do you see the difference?
In the homework readings, which position did you get the impression that Lera Boroditsky supports?
well, i believe language has no effect on the way we view the world. maybe only the first langauge but it is because the language has been affected by our culture. culture strongly affects the way we view the world based on what is morally acceptable in society . language diversity is wonderful but imagine the child living in an isolated village who only knows of the existence of one language. i don't think he will find the world to be weird so if english was the only languge spoken, the world will not be weird.we only think it will be weird having one language becuase that is what we have grown to know suonds right.culture will be there definitely to control the way we view the world if only english was spoken. the first langauge affects our learning of other languages but not the way we view the world.
ReplyDeleteTIMAH
I would like to disagree with Eleazar. In my opinion, language is embedded with a lot apart from just giving off information; it is a melange of culture and aesthetic. For this reason, it’s safe to suggest that the emergence of English as the only surviving language spoken worldwide, is the death of a culture; a death of art. If one really thinks about it, the language just learnt for learning sake for example,is not evocative and representative enough of the aesthetic of the culture; and eventually the language is soon forgotten. To refer to real life circumstances, in the Ghanaian LANGUAGE known as Twi, different shades of red would just be called “red”; and this can assume that that culture is not one very interested in colours or another example can be cited with respects to the language Finnish, where one word is used to describe both genders; showing that culture's indifference to gender. These instances show that language is deeper than what is heard or what it communicates to others; it shows the interests and the perceptions of different cultures.
ReplyDeleteI presume that many would agree that learning new languages actually open up different dimensions of thought; gives us the chance to see culture at another angle. English becoming the only language would result in a world full of monotony. Yes we will all be able to communicate with someone on the other side of the globe, but eventually where is the fun in that? Everyone will think the same way and do the same things, and human as we are, we love to drift in thought and think more about things. I, for one, adore diversity in people. So why the indifference in English being the only spoken language; it’s an indirect way of the restriction of diversifying thoughts.
The Czechs say;
You live a new life for every new language you speak. If you know only one language, you live only once.
Think about it.
After reading what everyone has said so far i really liked what Maame said. i qoute 'limiting ourselves to one language (english) is like studying ONE subject your entire life. this would make us highly intelligent in English but we would not know anything about any other language and hence narrows our scope of knowledge.' Actually this is true because it is language that brings about diversity in the world. It is the language that makes us understand other people even though our beliefs might affect the way we see and think in particular . On the other hand i think if there was only english as an language, there won't be any complications or misundersatndings in terms of what we see (sense perception),the way we reason and the way we think. If we all spoke one language then there is a possibility that we might think the same way and see almost the same things but this would have been beneficial to a lesser extent because having one language like Maame said will be boring. it will be really boring to go somewhere and it's the same language that you hear and the people there think the same as you the same way we reason. i'm sure you will all agree with me how boring it will be. also i liked Clementines line that every language has a special purpose in the world so having only english means we wont have any special purpose. I don't know what you guys think but i think if english was to be the only language then the world would be boring.-Linda Ndlela
ReplyDeleteCulture: is a shared, learned, symbolic system of values, beliefs and attitudes that shapes and influences perception and behavior -- an abstract "mental blueprint" or "mental code." as provided in the following link: http://www2.eou.edu/~kdahl/cultdef.html
ReplyDeleteThe different beliefs, attitudes, behaviours and to crown it all, the languages, are the things that make it possible for different cultures to exist. If only one language was to exist, this means we would all live monotonous lives. The different cultures are the spices of life because each one of them has something unique that the other lacks so if we are all to switch to only the English language, so much would be lost. That is, different cultures will be lost in the process.
I would like to point out to Nnenna that I argued that the death of a language does not necesarily mean the death of the culture. Her arguments have failed to consider that a culture comprises far more than a language. The main thing that is lost in the death of a language is really, the subtle connotationns of certain words in that original language that are difficult to translate. Other aspects of culture may survive even after the death of a language. A culture's attitude towards men,women and children, its way of dressing, its style of building may outlast the death of the language. Consider, an Ewe Ghanaian, who cannot speak Ewe. To the person, the ewe language is dead in his life. This does not mean however that all of Ewe culture is dead to him. He can still appreciate Ewe food, dance, architecture etc.
ReplyDeleteA bit of culture is lost in the death of a langauge, but a culture can outlast the death of just its language.
Eliminating all the languages besides English to encourage the ease of communication is absolutely absurd. Though it is very difficult to communicate with a person who does not speak the same language as you, language has a great effect on the diversity of reasoning thus by eliminating languages, we will in turn be eliminating the different ways in which people think, the different cultures associated with their way of thinking and the array of ideas and creations which come with the diversity of language. The lack of different cultures and diversity in our world will make the world monotonous and extremely boring to live in.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your clarification, Kioko. "Shared, learned, symbolic system" - that part sounds just like language, doesn't it? The trouble is that "values, beliefs, attitudes" - wow, that's a pretty huge monster to unravel!
ReplyDeleteI will pose one of my questions again - do people that speak different languages (a) think the same, (b) differ in WHAT they think about, (c) differ is HOW they think? A lot of contributors here are supporting the idea that language diversity allows diversity in thinking, but what exactly is the nature of this difference? For example, we use language to reason - would the NATURE of reasoning itself some how be different if we all spoke Finnish? Or would this shift in language merely result in some changes in what we think and reason ABOUT? We must maintain the distinction between the form and the content - once again, do different languages affect the form of our thought or just its content (or neither)?
I think that people who speak different languages don't actually think the same way and also they dont differ in 'what' they think about. The difference is in 'How' they think about 'What' they are thinking about.
ReplyDeleteFor example, take thee or four people who speak different languages and put them all in one situation. They will all be thinking about that 'Situation' but each will be thinking about it in a different way and while they will be thinking, their the contents of their thoughts will be limited only to the words and structures that their respective languages can offer.
This means that the different languages affect both the form and content of our thoughts.
The ff. links lead to (1):an article on the results of an experiment favoring the primacy of thought over language, and (2):an article with an opposing view (Personally, I think this article's basis is weaker than that of the first article).
ReplyDeleteRead and draw conclusions for yourself
(1):http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/07.22/21-think.html
(2): http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6303
From my personal point of view, having only one language is like having a single story about a place. language either impedes or extents our knowledge and thoughts; the more languages there are, the more our knowledge is extended, and the fewer language there are, the more our knowledge is limited. I think that if there was only one language we would not perceive things that we already know and life would have been boring, though communicating would have been made a lot easier. Language is a variety of life! The more languages, the more variety!
ReplyDelete“There are a thousand thoughts lying within a man that he does not know till he takes up a pen to write.”
ReplyDeleteWilliam Makepeace Thackeray
How can you interpret this quote?
To kind of elaborate on the quote Ezekiel put up yesterday: Thackeray is probably trying to say that until you put your mind to it to reproduce your thoughts most of them lie dormant in your mind or that even if you are aware of them on any level, you are not aware of their magnitude or importance. He is basically saying that unless we are conscious of the process of thought and the thoughts produced by this process we are wholly unaware of a lot of the thoughts that pass through our minds.
ReplyDelete“Language shapes the way we think, and determines what we can think about.” by Benjamin Lee Whorf
ReplyDeleteI would like to begin by answering the last question that Mr Kitching posed; whether different languages affect the form of our thoughts or its content, or neither. I would like to know what Mr Kitching means by form of thought. Is it the structure of our thoughts or something else? Well, in my opinion, different languages affect the content of our thoughts. This brings me back to culture. As I have already said, culture affects language. Thus if we link it up, culture affects language which affects the content of our thoughts. Thus, culture affects the content of our thoughts. (This is a very poor conclusion that I have drawn….deductive reasoning?) . If we think about it, in most cases, what a 17 year old girl in Paris is thinking about is not the same thing that I am thinking about. Although some aspects may coincide, it still won’t be the same. If we think narrowly, we will think that, language doesn’t affect the content of the thoughts. However, if you look deeper, you find out that, it is culture that is actually affecting the contents of our thoughts. Thus, different languages affect the contents of our thoughts indirectly.
We can also talk about the fact that, since there are some words in Chinese which when translated into English will be a phrase but not a single word, language affects thought. This is because, the Chinese think about certain things which we don’t think about. This is because of their culture. Thus, they will have names for them, and we won’t. If there are no such words in English, why bother about them? Thus, things like these will not even form part of the things you think about. (The content of your thoughts)
I just realized that I’m getting confused in thinking about this. Language affects our thoughts because it restricts us in a way. Thus, language decides what we can think about….( but not in all cases…since Steven Pinker thinks that, “physical scientists are even more adamant that their thinking is geometrical, not verbal”. However, even though it is geometrical, it’s still in a language!!!!) I will stop here and think more about this issue…its quite freaky…..
Back to the first question. People who speak different languages do not think in the same way, but in terms of what they think about, there may be some things that they both think about. Back to my culture issue…..culture actually overlaps. Thus, there may be something that will be common to different cultures. Thus, the people may tend to think about some things which affect them both. (Almost like emotions in TOK class…people may feel the same thing)…will return..
I think English being the only language in the world would limit our thoughts and the things we know. I agree with Asantwaa’s point that “The availability of many languages in our world gives us the freedom to be able to think outside of our comfort zones” meaning once we are opened up to many languages our way of thinking widen. Surprisingly, I kept on pondering whether we will ever recognize our culture and traditions with English being the only language. This would impact greatly on our culture and tradition.And at the same time English being the only spoken language make communication easy..
ReplyDeleteEven though everyone speaking one language, in this case English, would make communication easier in some ways, I don't think it would make it easier altogether. If you think about it, there are some thoughts that can be expressed in other languages that can't be translated into english without losing some of their meaning. So, the elimination of those languages would mean that some of those thoughts counld not be communicated in their entirety. This, however only holds, if you agree with me that the purpose of communication is to express ideas to people and have them understand you. However, one question I would like to ask is, As in our various classes we have agreed that for language to exist all we basically need to do is agree on the convention, (i.e the word or phrase that is accepted as referring to a particular idea) if we have had experience of a language other than english, although we may not be able to speak that language anymore, would it not be possible to create new words in English that would carry their meaning since we would understand the sentiment and idea behind the words we choose?
ReplyDeleteWhat a stale and uninspiring world we'll find ourselves with in the event of the insitution of English as a global language and the attendant death of other languages. I must say, I agree with a lot of aforestated points that diversity will be lost and differences in perspective will be sacrificed on the altar of universal communication. These points assume that language indeed influences the thoughts we CAN have; That speakers of different languages think in different ways. But is that really the case? Or do we all as one species think in a universally shared way but show different sensitivities to different aspects of our perception. As I ponder the power of language on our thoughts,I come to think more and more that language is a filter through which an objective reality and mental proceesing is interpreted. I realise that the only difference is what we focus on or are sensitive to as native speakers of a language, in line with the syntax of our language and culture. As Dr. Samuel Johnson said, "language is the dress of thought". I am of the view that language does shape our response to our thoughts or language determines the relevant attention we pay to our thoughts, but not the essence of our thoughts themselves. Do you remember how as a child you noticed subtle differences in things you saw, you made links between objects and people and blurted out what you saw with no further thought given it; how you associated certain things with masculinity and others with femininity. But as you grew older, probably those same thoughts coursed through your mind, but this time, you ignored them "knowing" they were childlike or irrelevant to getting a point across to another person intelligibly. Continual ignoring of those things have relegated them to the background of our thoughts like the way background noise becomes part and parcel of the natural ambience to the extent that we are not cognizant of it and are deprived of true dead silence. I believe that concepts for everything around us are present in our thoughts, but the human frame has evolved in a way of allowing us to survive and to thrive by unconsciously focusing on the few essential things for us, the people around us and our culture at a given moment until we make a conscious decision to think of a specific thing. For example, the way our brain processes all the visual stimuli around us but in the end gives us simplified, easily understandable and holistic images and perspectives till a conscious decision is made to override the unconscious processing and to perceive a specific thing. I believe language is powerful and is a beautiful and creative human invention, but it shouldn't be given more credit than it is due. That's how I see things now, but I'm open to any alternative viewpoints. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteS.N.S.
SAM SARP
If English were to become the only language on earth..well I honestly do not think that we would lose anything at all. Looking at the fact that most of us have learnt other ways of expressing our thoughts and our feelings ,by the language of the body but still using English, I don't think that by making English the only language would be a bad idea.Though some of my brothers say that it wouldlimit our thoughts and the things we know.' I would really like to know how a language limits our thoughts and the things we know? Looking at the situations in Asia were English is not spoken as much as it is in Africa and other parts of the world , I think making English the only available language would encourage people to become more communicative in terms of sharing ideas around the world. I got this from http://www.worldandi.com/newhome/public/2003/december/cipub2.asp. They "Children need to learn English to succeed in the world today." I totally agree with this statement as it shows the importance of making English the only available language.
ReplyDeleteWell good day once again,
ReplyDeleteLanguage, is a gift for humans to communicate (i.e. to express ideas and thoughts). However, as one may know, learning a new language is not an easy task.
Everybody as at now knows at least one language. This person, may have learned the language from his childhood. This therefore, becomes part of him as he grows and expresses ideas to others.
I strongly believe that language is indeed more than JUST communicating. And by this, i mean that expressing various thoughts in different languages are different. Thus conclusive that language is not something we can learn in a short period of time.
For instance, I will use myself as an example. I speak Korean, English and a little bit of French. Korean as a language i spoke with my parents and friends from my childhood is now part of me. English, as my second language, is also part of me since i also lived in a surrounding where english was the native language of that country. However, French, is something i am still not comfortable with. Expressing my idea in english or korean just flows without any reasoning. (or should i say that the speed at which i use to reason these languages are so fast that they are negligible?)However, for french, i first need to know what i want to say then, reasoning from my past experiences in my french lessons i try to put them in the right phrase for it to be said.
Does that mean that since i did not learn french in a french environment, it is not as fluent as my other languages? If then, it implies that culture in the background of a language is extremely crucial.
Ultimately, in my opinion, if language was to be only one, apart from the fact that it will make communication easier, there will be a massive loss in culture and other existing factors which will mend perceptions of humans. Thus I strongly believe that language needs diversity. (i mean, can you imagine if there is only one language in the world? HOW BORING!!)
English as the only subject will help a great deal in eliminating the language barrier that exists between many countries. It will be easier to communicate with everyone in the world both educated and illiterate people. People will no more have the chance to gossip or insult you in their language in your presence.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the variety of life will be lost. As the saying goes, “Variety is the spice of life.” The beauty of language and the culture embedded in it will be lost. The world will become monotonous. Tourism will drop to its lowest as there will be no need to travel to let’s say Africa to appreciate their cultural differences because then everybody’s culture will be the same.
To disagree with Mcwhorter, language is not only about aesthetics, but most importantly it influences our perception of the world. An example from one of our assignments extract says that a certain group of people refer to space in cardinal points so instead of saying there is an ant on your left leg, i would say there is an ant on your west leg. This group of people are more oriented when compared to English speakers so there is a lesser change of them getting lost.
The bible has been translated into different languages and by different people and to some extend it has lost its unique effect. So because of this can we say that the bible has lost it meaning.
ReplyDeleteLanguage is a distinctive human gift given to as by God, central to our experience of being human. According to Steven Pinker language is distinct piece of the biological makeup of our brain. It is a complex , specialized skill, which develops in the child spontaneously , which I think it continues all through his adulthood. Hence language can be influenced by culture, physical and social environment.
ReplyDeleteHave you ever imagined a world without language? How would the world be like? Were we going to be where we are today? But for me, something stands out for sour, Language is a unique human gift given to as by God.
ReplyDeleteThe loss of all other languages save for the English language will be a most unfortunate thing in my opinion. A language carries the thought processes of the native speakers and from language, etymologists can actually derive the occupation of a people, their leisure activities, something that plays a very strong role in their lives, etc. For example, I am not too sure which group of people it is but these people live close to the North Pole and experience a lot of snow and thus have a host of words for it because it plays such an important role in their lives. Losing all these languages will mean the loss of their thought concepts and will just leave us trapped in a boring world of English where we will have to re-experience all the experiences of the people whose language will be lost. This will make the single language in use so complex and difficult to learn.
ReplyDeleteAgain if we were all all using the same language and we could all understand each other, apart from the fact that we will all be able to understand each other easily, there will be no privacy whatsoever and soldiers in battle will get commands that will be clearly understood by the enemy and attacks will be preempted. Mathematics problems will be solved by writing English essays because they will not be translated to short form mathematical representation and programmers will have to program in English language and computers that understand English will have to be created. Evidently one language is just not enough.
We all know that language barriers pose a lot of problems in communication seeing as people who speak completely different languages (i.e. languages that do not share similar roots and do not have any similarities between them- an example could be Kiswahili and Portugese) would find it difficult to communicate. We should , however, consider the fact that during the time of the slave trade and the time of the legitimate trans-atlantic trade the traders from the various European countries found ways to communicate with the Coastal and Interior Africans in order to carry out their various trading tasks. If they were able to do it then we must ask ourselves why we deem it impossible or near-impossible to communicate across language barriers in our world whilst our ancestors suceeded in achieving this. Has there been some evolution of our capacity to communicate as a specie which limits our ability to communicate non-verbally but possibly allows us to communicate more effectively through the use of language by employing body language more during verbal communication than when verbal communication is not present (and it would therefore be more necessary and thus more effective)?
ReplyDeletePersonally, i view the prospect of English being the only dominant world language, as rather interesting. This is because an effective means of communication would be put in place, in which people from all over the planet to commune, without any confusion and misunderstandings, which could bring about drastic consequences. For instance in the case of the Hiroshima bombing, had English been the global language at that time, the would have been no need for the Americans to misinterpret the Japanese telegram, which led to the unfortunate loss of many Japanese lives.
ReplyDeleteHowever as many have previously stated, the eradication of languages, leaving English as the only global language, would indeed lead to a loss in culural multiplicity. This is due to the fact that diverse cultures are ingrained are in the very languages people speak. The usage of different languages, speaks multitudes about an individual's customs and heritage. Loss of this gift would make the world a monotonous and bland place to live in! Perhaps, a compromise could be arrived at, to inculcate this idea of a global language.
Before we even start to delve into this matter, we must all agree that our language affects the way we think. I personally think that if English is made as the global language a part of the world will be lost. In that in different parts of the world we have people who relate and think differently so if we are restricted to only English we will become narrow minded as Asantewaa has also clearly pointed out. But let us look at it in another direction. Language is known to be ambiguous and might I say inconsistent. In the world where we have so many languages and cultures, there would just be miscommunication in that there is so much ambiguity in the system. But let us compare to this situation of having English as the global language. This brings all the ambiguity in the system to a lesser amount since there is only one language. Besides this I still think this lessened ambiguity should not go to the detriment of the different ways in which we can explore thought
ReplyDeleteWhat i think is that the diversity of languages helps us understand things well in way we can easily do though it makes us not understand things that can not be expressed in our languages. just limimting ourselves to our language will make us blind on important issues in the worl that are expressed in other languages and this will make it seem like we live in different worlds as was an issue in hand in wy last TOK class with Kamau. to have a wide span of thought language diversity is needed. moreover having just one language will end the misunderstandings we have in the world. we will live in the same world in the sense that we will begin to see things in the same way....................
ReplyDeleteThe solution of miscommunication is not guaranteed by restricting humans to only one language. I believe more harm will be done because there will be limitations placed on perception and expression. Think about it, atimes you abruptly switch from english to another language simply because english cannot express that idea or the expression does not have the same effect in english. I agree with Ken when he says that if all humans speak only english we would lose part of our world. The interest and variety in our world today will be no more if we restrict ourselves to speaking language only. Language is a pillar in the expression of culture and taking away the language of a people will cause their culture to come crashing down.
ReplyDeleteI think speak a different language does not mean we think differently. language is helped to reflect our thought but the language is not sufficient because of the limited words in our language. people often say "i mean" because their thought is not fully addressed or reflected due to the limited words available in the language. Therefore thought is independent of language.
ReplyDeleteSamuel Mekonnen
I think that if everybody spoke the same language it will eliminate language barrier as mama has stated. Moreover, people will be able to understand each other to a greater extent and this could not have result to conflict that could pose a threat to the world using misinterpretation which was the case that happen between America and Japan by using the word “mokutsatsu” contributed to the outbreak of world war 2.
ReplyDeleteThinking of the world without variety and diversity brings or depicts a boring picture of the world and limits people to ideas that are common to everybody. Looking at the world as it is with diverse languages as a result of culture brings out variety which spices up life and makes it interesting for everybody. If we had the same language we will express ourselves alright but what we think as individuals will not be brought out alright. There will be no need for people to come or visit different areas of the world to appreciate their culture since we will both have the same or linked cultures
Language has also evolved since it was first discovered. Looking back during Shakespeare’s time the English was different and that’s the language he used to write the plays. At that time ,the people could understand the English but as time went on up to our time ,the English has evolved in that what they spoke will not make a lot of sense to us and in our case maybe 50years later language would not be as it is today. This may affect the interpretation of the generations to come.
to start with language is important in our world becuz it helps us to express our thoughts and share them with others.It is also important in shaping thought and in helping us to acquire knowledge from defferent cultures and beliefs.
ReplyDeletetherefore i think that if engish was to be the only language in the world knowledge will be lost because some things such as emotions do not have words in english.For example if am a scientist and i come up with the cure for Aids if i can not communicate this knowledge in eglish it will be knowledge lost becz i can only share it with people who understand my language.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletelike some people's comments, language is a system of means of communicating thoughts,ideas and feelings.If we all speak the same language,communication and understanding will be made easier hence reducing the possibility of conflicts. However, our thoughts will be different from the way we would have thought if we were speaking different languages. I think it will be uninteresting to speak and listen to the same language every time. Speaking only English wil eliminate the beauty of other languages.
ReplyDeleteAfrica is one continent with a lot of language and this is what makes it unique compared to others. If English became the global language it would affect some cultures, Africa today is mainly influenced by the western world making English the global language will just diminish the little culture we have left in our languages. Some proverbs will lose their meaning and so will the world to some people because language plays a major role in our thinking and minds. Because our minds to an extent are influenced by the language and it is through them that we are able to view the world as it is.
ReplyDeleteI believe firstly, the world will lose a huge chunk of culture because people who follow a particular culture think in a similar way. And language affects thought. With that, the diversity in language is lost, causing everyone to think in the same way and eliminate all varieties in culture because we will all act the same way. This therefore will take away most cultures. Also, there will be an issue with privacy as there will be no means of concealing information that you would want to hide from people who don't understand your language for example in a community like ours, if i don't want a Kenyan to understand what i want to say to a ghanaian, i can feel free to say it in twi or ga if i happen to be in the company of the Kenyan and the ghanaian and don't want to leave the premises in order to send a small message across
ReplyDeletealthough the is going to be effectiveness in communication a lot will be lost if english is made the global language , we are going to loose the literature of certain languages and the diversity of culture. starting with the literature of other languages as we all know we cannot express some emotions in certain languages the effect of the expression of certain emotions in some languages is going to be lost . the diversity of cultures incooperated in different cultures will be lost and it will take a while for people to adopt the english ways . because when english is globalized it will take more than a lot than just changing the language as it may seem.
ReplyDeleteIf you really think about maybe one language is what this world needs. As people know the language that you speak has this effect of bringing people together to be one unified people (probably in the perfect world though!) However, really if there way just one language there may be less wars, as there will be no language barriers. I think that one language may also eliminate language barriers and think of the ease with which one could settle in a foreign country. That one language need not be English though if that is were the controversy lies.
ReplyDeletehowever looking at it from another perspective, one language may indeed eliminate cultural diversity which makes each nation unique.
But i still think that one language could work. Think about it!
please ignore all typing errors...sorry!
ReplyDeleteInstilling one language will simply destroy the beauty of diversity in this world. It will prevent people from expressing themselves in different ways, thus making the world monotonous. It will also be extremely difficult to instill one language since the world is too diverse effectively achieve it. It will also make the people who speak the other languages which will be dropped feel cheated against. This may lead to an outcry which can impede the world’s progress to global peace. I think a universal language can be adopted where everyone will be able to speak their individual languages but should be able to speak and understand this universal language. This will be a good way to reduce the problems caused by the language barrier whiles allowing different people to speak in their different languages and express their cultures through their languages.
ReplyDeletePeople who speak different languages perceive the world differently because they pay attention to different things therefore if English is made the global language it is going to limit one's thought.
ReplyDeletestrongly dislike the idea of English being the only language if it were to happen diversity would be nonexistent. By limiting ourselves only to one language there would be a limit to the way we perceive and react to the world as we would not be able to express in a unique way. English as any other language is very one sided it is typical of the English to have certain ways of thinking and critical analysis it would be unjust to discard every other type of language. On the positive side there would be hardly any language barriers but where would cultural diversity be? Precisely we would not have that we would live an inadequate world .There would be lack of expression and emotion as not every individual would be able to cope with English being the only language. There are limits to every type of language spoken however if we shut down every other factor that determines how the mind thinks e.g. culture we block out diversity. However, the advantage about English as an only language would reduce the amount of mis-communications the world suffers from there would not be as much conflict as there is today. To agree with English as an only language would make the world too cordially and monotonous. People’s sense perceptions may be different however their interpretation may lead to the same point of view as if the initial thoughts were. One language looses all sense of uniqueness and we might as well be clones if we limit ourselves to one language.
ReplyDeleteIf I may briefly join you guys on this one, below are two links that Mr. Kitching sent me earlier on in the semester. The links lead to very interesting articles on the "Nicaraguan Sign language", a language which is believed to have arisen naturally.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.columbia.edu/~as1038/L02-sign-language.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaraguan_Sign_Language
Although Nicaragua is a Central American Spanish-speaking country, the structure of the Nicaraguan sign language is entirely different from spanish or any other language. Its structure primarily comes from the young deaf children who reorganized certain common gestures into a complex language, capable of expressing complex ideas such as antimatter. Hope you find the articles somewhat useful to your discussion on what would be lost if English became the only language in the world.