¿Por qué preservar la diversidad lingüística?

Why to preserve linguistic diversity?

The consequences of language loss (Antony Woodbury, Linguistic Society of America website)
  • “It is frequently seen as a loss of social identity or as a symbol of defeat by a colonial power—if not by those abandoning the language, then often by the next generation.
  • Much of the cultural, spiritual, and intellectual life of a people is experienced through language. This ranges from prayers, myths, ceremonies, poetry, oratory, and technical vocabulary, to everyday greetings, leave-takings, conversational styles, humour, ways of speaking to children, and unique terms for habits, behaviour, and emotions. => Abrupt loss of tradition.
  • Linguists are also well aware—and deeply concerned—that the impending loss of linguistic diversity will limit, or even place out of reach, the fundamental goals of linguistics and their contributions to science more broadly.
  • Linguists may work together with communities around the world wishing to preserve their languages, offering technical and other assistance in programs of language teaching, language maintenance, and even language revival. Or linguists' primary work—has been to document contemporary languages as fully as possible. Effective documentation includes extensive videotape, audiotape, and written records of actual language use, both formal and informal.”

Peter Trudgill, Sociolinguistics (2000)

Linguists believe that this is a very serious problem [Language death), and that the preservation of linguistic diversity in the world should have a high priority in the same way that the preservation of biological diversity does. It is obvious, for example, that the connection between languages and cultures is an intimate one, and that the disappearance of languages from the world could greatly speed up the process of cultural homogenization. A monocultural world not only be a very dull but probably also a very stagnant place. Languages as partial barriers to communication are probably also a good thing since they make it more difficult for the cultures of economically powerful and populous societies to penetrate and replace those of smaller communities.” (Emphasis added) (p.19