On Sunday 07 September 2008 08:54:06 Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 1:34 PM, geni
<geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Okey lets take a real world example then. Which
is going to take less
resources translating 2.5 million articles into the Fayu language or
teaching what's left of the Fayu English? Which is going to create
longer term benefits. Providing the Fayu with wikipedia in Fayu or a
teaching them to speak English which will allow them to access a
broader range of sources and knowledge.
Obscure language Wikipedias do not serve the purpose of educating
people in their native language. As you've pointed out, resource wise
it's better to teach the Fayu speakers some popular world languages. I
Fayu is an extreme example. But for even a small language such as Serbian (at
most around 10 million of speakers), it would be cheaper to translate entire
English Wikipedia to it than to educate all Serbian speakers in English; not
to mention that the former is actually doable, while the latter is not.
expect that most speakers of less popular languages
also reach the
same conclusion, so we find most of the speakers of less popular
languages busily editing away on English, practising their English
skills for personal benefit, rather than spending their time on a
I hope you don't think that people are contirbuting to English Wikipedia
solely so that they could practice their English.
Of course, there are many groups who profit greatly
from the
artificial barriers created by language incompatibility (linguists,
(Most) human languages arose spontaneously, without conscious effort, and so
barriers among them are natural and not artificial.