[Foundation-l] Klassical Chinese

[geni]

2008/9/11 Marcus Buck <me at marcusbuck.org>:
> Geni, if you speak about nationalism, you have to look at the sources of
> nationalism. There are some nationalist tendencies in Catalonia. Why?
> Cause the Spanish tried to erase the Catalan language and the Catalans
> were forced to defend their identity. There are nationalist tendencies
> in Spain. The sucessful fight for autonomy of the Catalans takes away
> regions which were formerly seen as integral parts of the Spanish
> language area. The Spanish feel a threat for their identity. There are
> nationalist tendencies in the USA. Why? Cause the number of Spanish
> speakers rises and rises in the South (and not only in the South).

You are confusing cause an effect. Catalan language was defended
because people saw it as a useful tool for their nationalism. Every
group (Italians Irish whatever) new to the US has had issues with
integrating language is just a way of expressing that.


> People become nationalist when they realize, that their
> language/culture* is threatened or on the downward path. Wanting to
> abolish all the languages of the world except one will lead to a massive
> rise in nationalist tendencies.

No. Existing nationalist tendencies will oppose something that will
weaken their cause.

> * Please be aware, that language is not merely a medium to transport
> information, it is information in itself. Language and culture are
> intertwined and cannot be separated. Shakespeare is popular in English
> speaking areas, Goethe in German speaking, Zola in French speaking,
> Groth in Low Saxon speaking and Si Mohand in Kabyl speaking areas. Their
> works can be translated and are translated, but translations rarely
> reach the depth of the original. They are out of their meaningful
> context. In a monolingual world there is no way for Germans to keep
> their German culture or Kabyls to keep their Kabyl culture. Goethe and
> Si Mohand are meaningless without the German and Kabyl language.

The languages that the Epic of Gilgamesh was written in have been dead
since about the time of Marcus Aurelius. We get by.

>There
> are 6000 languages in the world. Each of them has their own songs,
> traditions, tales etc. You would kill and make meaningless 99 % of that
> cultural production only to make it easier to write an encyclopedia?

You believe information exchange is limited to what appears in wikipedia?

By denying people access to a major language you deny them access to
much of the world's science, technology, engineering and culture.
Realistically we have no right to deny individuals the choice nor
should we be supporting groups that attempt to maintain language
barriers. Most of those 6000 lack a written form and have few
speakers. By comparison there are 100 million books in English.

Now we do not have the power to kill languages but I would argue we
should considered if we are artificially supporting a language.

> If
> you are worried about reduplication of effort, please first start
> lobbying for a ban on Britannica and Encarta.


Why? Market forces are likely to kill them off anyway and they are
adding to the easy to access information in a widely used language.
-- 
geni