Switzerland's mysterious fourth language(bbc.com)
bbc.com
Switzerland's mysterious fourth language
http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20180627-switzerlands-mysterious-fourth-language
125 comments
It'd be funny if the borderguard would insist on you showing the wine bottle or glass to prove it's you.
could you please give some sort of source? i could not find anything online
Makes sense - I just made this up. I originally saw the image on reddit and made up the backstory. I think the original origin is relating to this man needing a passport for medical care and them only having on hand this image of him.
What I found interesting is that there are 5 strong dialects of Romansh with no single one dominating. In 1982 a unified version was produced and is used in some administrative offices (and makes having "Romansh" an official language of Switzerland less of a headache), but the people speaking the different dialects don't want to change to the new version. Makes sense that these small Alpine valley cultures want to speak the language their ancestors have evolved over the millennia, not some newfangled mashup.
> Makes sense that these small Alpine valley cultures want to speak the language their ancestors have evolved over the millennia, not some newfangled mashup.
That sounds reasonable, except for the fact that many, if not most, of the modern European national languages are in fact, newfangled mashups. National language standards are by and large the invention of the past few hundred years, where they either took a single regional language and called it the language language (such as French) or they kind of "mashed up", artificial standard (such as German). And yet somehow, these languages eventually took hold.
If Romansch doesn't die out in the next century, it's highly likely that a single standard will emerge.
That sounds reasonable, except for the fact that many, if not most, of the modern European national languages are in fact, newfangled mashups. National language standards are by and large the invention of the past few hundred years, where they either took a single regional language and called it the language language (such as French) or they kind of "mashed up", artificial standard (such as German). And yet somehow, these languages eventually took hold.
If Romansch doesn't die out in the next century, it's highly likely that a single standard will emerge.
They took hold because of education standardization and active governmental campaigns to suppress variant dialects.
Portugal did exactly the contrary.
We have put activities in place to try to save Mirandese.
In Spain likewise, after the civil war, regions got active to ensure their local languages strive alongside Spanish.
In Germany some states have the option of children having after school activities in the regional dialects.
We have put activities in place to try to save Mirandese.
In Spain likewise, after the civil war, regions got active to ensure their local languages strive alongside Spanish.
In Germany some states have the option of children having after school activities in the regional dialects.
Which German state does offer "regional dialect" school activities? Is this something that is done by public bodies?
Some info about learning Cologne dialect.
https://www.sk-kultur.de/inhalte/themen/akademie-foer-uns-ko...
An initiative to teach Bavarian in the schools
http://m.spiegel.de/lebenundlernen/schule/bayerisch-lehrer-i...
There are similar initiatives for other dialects.
Sorry they are in German, just wanted to provide direct links, instead of Google translate.
https://www.sk-kultur.de/inhalte/themen/akademie-foer-uns-ko...
An initiative to teach Bavarian in the schools
http://m.spiegel.de/lebenundlernen/schule/bayerisch-lehrer-i...
There are similar initiatives for other dialects.
Sorry they are in German, just wanted to provide direct links, instead of Google translate.
I'm not sure it was ever the goal that everyone would _speak_ Rumantsch Grischun, as it is called, but the hope was that at least it would be used in writing (e.g. in school books) [1]. The resistance there is arguably more surprising.
[1] This is not too different from the situation with High German being used in education even though everyone speaks in dialects.
[1] This is not too different from the situation with High German being used in education even though everyone speaks in dialects.
Is the goal perhaps more that this merged dialect could be intelligible to the speakers of all the dialects, such that it could be used to issue copies of laws that they could read, etc.?
Interestingly, that situation resembles the one of the bigger German speaking population.
The people are speaking their own dialects which differ that much that you can easily locate from which part of the country the speaker is from.
The native German Swiss only speak their Swiss German dialects among each other, with no single one dominating. In writing OTOH, standard German is used, although of course the usage of standard German has a much longer history than in the case of Romansh.
The people are speaking their own dialects which differ that much that you can easily locate from which part of the country the speaker is from.
The native German Swiss only speak their Swiss German dialects among each other, with no single one dominating. In writing OTOH, standard German is used, although of course the usage of standard German has a much longer history than in the case of Romansh.
Dialects are often more the rule than not.
Italian German, French, an yea, e'en English, have mutually all-but-unintelligible variants.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=e34M6P1NXYM
Italian German, French, an yea, e'en English, have mutually all-but-unintelligible variants.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=e34M6P1NXYM
"mutually all-but-unintelligible" doesn't make any sense. Should read "all-but-mutually unintelligible".
It's almost as if it were all unintelligible, but mutually.
I don't get it. Do you?
> but the people speaking the different dialects don't want to change to the new version. Makes sense that these small Alpine valley cultures want to speak the language their ancestors have evolved over the millennia, not some newfangled mashup.
Well heck, the same thing can almost be said of German.
Well heck, the same thing can almost be said of German.
I speak Romansch (although poorly, by now), AMA. (Or even better, out yourself as a fellow speaker!)
Romansch music? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtMP7Nw0E3g is the only Romansh song I've ever encountered in my American existence.
MX3 is a platform curated by the national radio stations in all four languages. The playlist by Radio Rumantsch would be a good start: https://mx3.ch/p/2ev (not all the songs are in romansch in there, though).
This sounds very familiar. Do you know any other variants of this song?
Here is the english version: https://youtu.be/-w2m-TeLi6I
Do you foresee an enlargement in the total number of speakers? Why?
Also, if I got it correctly, Romansh is one of Switzerland's national languages, so theoretically one could move to Graubünden and acquire Swiss citizenship through Romansh, and not French, German, or Italian?
Also, if I got it correctly, Romansh is one of Switzerland's national languages, so theoretically one could move to Graubünden and acquire Swiss citizenship through Romansh, and not French, German, or Italian?
> Do you foresee an enlargement in the total number of speakers? Why?
In total number of speakers, it's possible, and I think it's been the case historically (just by general population growth). In relative numbers (fraction of the population), it's been shrinking and I don't see this changing. Main reasons are that:
> national language
It has a slightly different status than the other 3 languages, Wikipedia explains it well [1]. I don't know if you could get citizenship that way but you'd definitely be on the news.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romansh_language#Official_stat...
In total number of speakers, it's possible, and I think it's been the case historically (just by general population growth). In relative numbers (fraction of the population), it's been shrinking and I don't see this changing. Main reasons are that:
a) as mentioned in the BBC article, people move, and it's very difficult to keep the language after one or two generations if you don't live in that region,
b) even if you were to move to a Romansh-speaking area (as a Swiss national or as an immigrant), the incentive to learn is low because almost everyone also speaks (Swiss-)German.
> national language
It has a slightly different status than the other 3 languages, Wikipedia explains it well [1]. I don't know if you could get citizenship that way but you'd definitely be on the news.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romansh_language#Official_stat...
Here's the hip-hop group referenced in the article:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRvM2KKDeGA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRvM2KKDeGA
I never would have thought that one day I'd see a link to Liricas Analas on HN.
Wikipedia link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romansh_language.
Sample (from The Fox And The Crow):
Sample (from The Fox And The Crow):
La vulp era puspè ina giada fomentada.
Qua ha ella vis sin in pign in corv che
tegneva in toc chaschiel en ses pichel.
Quai ma gustass, ha ella pensà, ed ha clamà
al corv: «Tge bel che ti es! Sche tes chant
è uschè bel sco tia parita, lur es ti il
pli bel utschè da tuts».> Romansh is believed to have originated around 15BC when the Romans conquered Rhaetia, which is now Graubünden. Romansh is the result of the combination of the Vulgar Latin spoken by soldiers and colonists, and Rhaetian, the language of the native people.
Be interesting to hear more about that.
Similar languages exist in Italy, by the way:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladin_language
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friulian_language
And there are also Germanic dialects that are isolated within Italy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Italy#Non-Romance...
Fascinating stuff!
Be interesting to hear more about that.
Similar languages exist in Italy, by the way:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladin_language
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friulian_language
And there are also Germanic dialects that are isolated within Italy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Italy#Non-Romance...
Fascinating stuff!
And don’t forget in south Italy ancient Albanian (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbëresh_language)
And Ancient Greek (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calabrian_Greek)
I share the same fascination you have. I'm always interested in how our brains collectively developed ways to communicate through spoken languages, it makes wonder how things will change a thousand years from now. I'm sure some developing patterns could arise.
I was once standing in the tower on top of Castle Montebello in Bellinzona, looking out at Castlegrande. There was a group of schoolchildren up there with me. As I listened to them speak, I heard some speaking German and some speaking Italian. After a bit I realized they were coming from the same kids, and I surmised it might be Romansh. Always sad to think of unique cultures disappearing into the ether of history.
That's what some bilingual kids do when they talk to each other. They switch between languages flawlessly and mid-sentence. Drives me nuts when I'm listening to them. Similar effect you get when you live abroad for a while, there's certain idioms you can easily express in another language/culture but you won't find the words in your native language.
Not only that, sometimes we do forget how sonething used to be called, or we only learned the expressions in the context of the foreign language.
So when speaking with others that share the same language knowledge, it is just less effort to do so than pause while trying to remember.
So when speaking with others that share the same language knowledge, it is just less effort to do so than pause while trying to remember.
> ... said Johannes Just, a member of Liricas Analas (Ass Lyrics)
Never change, rappers, never change...
Never change, rappers, never change...
Announcements in the trains crossing Romansch areas are primary in Romansch. It's nice to hear them.
You can use Google search in Romansch and they was a translation of Windows 7 and Office.
You can use Google search in Romansch and they was a translation of Windows 7 and Office.
Switzerland is an interesting country. Its a nicer version of all of its neighboring countries except germany.
Western half speak french as a primary language and visiting cities there reminds me of france, except there werent any ghetto train stations. Northeastern parts speak german. Going down south the primary language was italian. Once you move to the outskirts of italy the infrastructure looked like it hadnt been maintained in ages.
Western half speak french as a primary language and visiting cities there reminds me of france, except there werent any ghetto train stations. Northeastern parts speak german. Going down south the primary language was italian. Once you move to the outskirts of italy the infrastructure looked like it hadnt been maintained in ages.
I live in Tessin (the Italian-speaking part of Switzerland), and the infrastructure is maintained.
I think they meant that once you cross to Italy the infrastructure was in shambles. And they made this Italian laugh :)
I meant once you get to italy, you have to deal with ticket bait scams with police if you dont punch your ticket train cards. Which is not immediately obvious to a tourist either.
Also police at the train station are armed with assault rifles too, but switzerland is not like this so yeah
Also police at the train station are armed with assault rifles too, but switzerland is not like this so yeah
More like western fifth speak French, southern sixth speak Italian, and the rest speak German.
Why is it not nicer than Germany? :D
Cause germany was one of the only countries to not get affected by the recession
Also because both germany and switzerland are beautiful in all regards :)
Also because both germany and switzerland are beautiful in all regards :)
As a Swiss, I still agree! Both are beatiful!
see also Ladin (not Latin): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladin_language
Spoken by a few South Tyrolian friends of mine, either as mother or as second tongue.
They can effectively learn 4 languages in the school:
* Ladin (elementary) * Italian (elementary) * German (elementary) (South Tyrol is ~60% German speaking autonomy in Italy) * English (when I went to school (started in 1999) it was introduced in middle school, nowadays it's late elementary AFAIK)
Spoken by a few South Tyrolian friends of mine, either as mother or as second tongue.
They can effectively learn 4 languages in the school:
* Ladin (elementary) * Italian (elementary) * German (elementary) (South Tyrol is ~60% German speaking autonomy in Italy) * English (when I went to school (started in 1999) it was introduced in middle school, nowadays it's late elementary AFAIK)
Interesting facts:
- More people speak Portugese in Switzerland than Romansch
- More people speak Albanian in Switzerland than Romansch (there are 350k Kosovars in Switzerland, almost 5% of the population)
https://www.eda.admin.ch/aboutswitzerland/en/home/infografik...
BTW, the Swiss government has several amazing infographics about the country, extremely well designed an informative:
https://www.eda.admin.ch/aboutswitzerland/en/home/infografik...
- More people speak Portugese in Switzerland than Romansch
- More people speak Albanian in Switzerland than Romansch (there are 350k Kosovars in Switzerland, almost 5% of the population)
https://www.eda.admin.ch/aboutswitzerland/en/home/infografik...
BTW, the Swiss government has several amazing infographics about the country, extremely well designed an informative:
https://www.eda.admin.ch/aboutswitzerland/en/home/infografik...
It's funny you should mention Portugese, there was a report in Schweiz aktuell once where they said a lot of Portugese speakers would better integrate in Rumansch speaking parts because Rumansch and Portugese are similar.
Amusingly, my family was on a vacation, and were on a hiking trail above Zermatt. There was a hand written sign offering a fancy meal at a nearby restaurant, in four languages:
German, French, English, and Japanese
German, French, English, and Japanese
"Watched too much anime" is common nowadays.
For tourists?
Yes. It was an area where tourists probably outnumbered locals. Probably the most tourist-y town I've been in. We stayed in a town further down the valley, which was substantially cheaper and more pleasant, but the hikes above Zermatt are still spectacular.
Another interesting fact:
Over 1/3rd of the of the starters of the Swiss Soccer National team are Albanian. (Shaqiri, Xhaka, Berhami, Dzemaili).
They have scored 60% of the Swiss goals in the world cup tournament so far
Over 1/3rd of the of the starters of the Swiss Soccer National team are Albanian. (Shaqiri, Xhaka, Berhami, Dzemaili).
They have scored 60% of the Swiss goals in the world cup tournament so far
Actually, they are all Swiss because otherwise they would not be eligible to play for Switzerland.
Also, Dzemaili's roots are Macedonian, not Albanian.
Also, Dzemaili's roots are Macedonian, not Albanian.
Yes, they all have Swiss 'Citizenship', but they are ethnically Albanians.
I live in the US, and this country recognizes both the differences of citizenship and ethnicities (at it actually celebrates it). Eg. If you immigrated from Italy to the US, you are still italian. Your ethnicity doesn't just disappear. If you get the citizenship, you become Italian-American, and you are free to claim both.
Also, Blerim Dzemaili, is Albanian. (btw, about 30% of Macedonians are ethnic albanians). If he wanted he could get the Albanian citizenship, and actually be eligible to play for Albania as many other ethnical albanians have done. (G. Xhaka's older brother, Taulant actually plays for Albania).
Džemaili was born to Fekredin and Shemije Džemaili,[4] an Albanian family from Bogovinje, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blerim_D%C5%BEemaili#Childhood...
I live in the US, and this country recognizes both the differences of citizenship and ethnicities (at it actually celebrates it). Eg. If you immigrated from Italy to the US, you are still italian. Your ethnicity doesn't just disappear. If you get the citizenship, you become Italian-American, and you are free to claim both.
Also, Blerim Dzemaili, is Albanian. (btw, about 30% of Macedonians are ethnic albanians). If he wanted he could get the Albanian citizenship, and actually be eligible to play for Albania as many other ethnical albanians have done. (G. Xhaka's older brother, Taulant actually plays for Albania).
Džemaili was born to Fekredin and Shemije Džemaili,[4] an Albanian family from Bogovinje, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blerim_D%C5%BEemaili#Childhood...
Romansh, a mystery to everyone except Sean Connery.
>> When the world loses a language, as it does every two weeks, we collectively lose the knowledge from past generations.
No. Google translate. I really disagree with this idea that the death of a language somehow means we are cut off from the culture that used the language. Nobody speaks ancient Egyptian but we can still translate their hieroglyphs. Universally common language promotes communication, cultural exchange, understanding and general world peace. I'd rather focus on the promotion of wold languages than the maintenance of isolated regional dialects. I'd rather learn Arabic than Welsh, Cantonese over Romansh.
Wow. "Romansh" is recognized by my spellchecker. But "Shia" of Shia Islam is not. Makes one think.
No. Google translate. I really disagree with this idea that the death of a language somehow means we are cut off from the culture that used the language. Nobody speaks ancient Egyptian but we can still translate their hieroglyphs. Universally common language promotes communication, cultural exchange, understanding and general world peace. I'd rather focus on the promotion of wold languages than the maintenance of isolated regional dialects. I'd rather learn Arabic than Welsh, Cantonese over Romansh.
Wow. "Romansh" is recognized by my spellchecker. But "Shia" of Shia Islam is not. Makes one think.
As a dual native speaker I can tell you: language is not as transactional as you think. There are things that can’t be expressed in another language. Many words have slightly different meanings than their literal counterparts. And most importantly, language constructs a way of thinking, which can’t be transferred by a literal translation. So, language is culture. That means every time a language is lost a part of the world’s culture is lost.
More generally the idea that "language constructs a way of thinking" is called linguistic relativity [1].
I've been interested in the general idea since reading 1984... where language shaping and limiting thought is a central idea. But I'd be curious to know how much scientific support this idea has.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity
I've been interested in the general idea since reading 1984... where language shaping and limiting thought is a central idea. But I'd be curious to know how much scientific support this idea has.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity
From my readings the scientific consensus feels that we have disproved strong versions of linguistic relativity (Linguistic determinism; that languages determine the scope of how you think), but have mostly been in favor of many of the weak versions (Linguistic influence; that languages influence how you think).
The Wikipedia article you linked has some of the details, but they are obscured a bit if you aren't looking for them. The linked main article on Linguistic determinism has some more direct details in its Criticism section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_determinism
The Wikipedia article you linked has some of the details, but they are obscured a bit if you aren't looking for them. The linked main article on Linguistic determinism has some more direct details in its Criticism section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_determinism
I'd argue it's rather impossible to disprove strong linguistic relativity as long as no one describes an experiment without using language.
You can always invent things first and name them later. Language is not a limiting factor to imagination.
Linguistic determinism is something more among the lines of Newspeak from 1984 or Apple's Emoji Gun Control: By making it harder to talk about something, you make it harder to think about it, and harder to put into action. Thus, you can force language into a certain direction and culture will follow.
Linguistic determinism is something more among the lines of Newspeak from 1984 or Apple's Emoji Gun Control: By making it harder to talk about something, you make it harder to think about it, and harder to put into action. Thus, you can force language into a certain direction and culture will follow.
> By making it harder to talk about something, you make it harder to think about it, and harder to put into action.
"Harder" is actually the weak hypothesis. The strong hypothesis is much more "impossible".
The common critical dissent to the strong hypothesis is often the Piraha and their lack of numbers and counting words, but demonstrated ability to count and do simple arithmetic even if not name the results verbally in their language. In the strong hypothesis, they wouldn't be able to count at all. Certainly they exhibit some symptoms of the weak hypothesis, because they may have a harder time at it than those with words to describe the effort. (The common criticism to the Piraha criticism is that we've also taught horses, pigs, dolphins, primates, etc to count and do simple arithmetic with no mutually distinguishable language whatsoever, so maybe that's not an impressive example, because maybe counting/arithmetic are outside of the linguistic faculties of the brain.)
> You can always invent things first and name them later.
I find a more impressive example of a disproof of the strong hypothesis and implication for the weak hypothesis to be the Calculus. Though the example is still in the domain of math, I feel that particularly as math trends towards more abstracted thought its entanglement with language seems ever stronger (see computing and programming languages as further examples).
Newton and Liebniz were both polymaths that spoke multiple languages and referenced many of the same primary sources (in those primary sources' own languages), but they had distinct native languages and cultures (Newton's English and Liebniz's German), yet both co-evolved the Calculus independently (to most accounts; let us dismiss the accusations of theft in one direction or the other). They evolved very different notations/jargon/language for the same concepts, but you could still see the underlying concepts as isomorphic, and that those concepts didn't particularly have names or words until the pair invented names and words for them.
Liebniz's notation was superior, in that it made it easier to see similar concepts as similar and easier to work with some of the more complex concepts, which is why the notation we use today is closer to Liebniz's than Newton's (though still somewhat of a pidgin/fusion of the two). Yet, Newton, despite using an "inferior" notation to do so is still best known for discovering so many more of the Calculus' implications to other sciences, especially Physics. In that case a potential disproof of even the weak hypothesis, or rather one anecdotal outlier of the weak hypothesis that seems to indicate how particularly "weak" it may be.
"Harder" is actually the weak hypothesis. The strong hypothesis is much more "impossible".
The common critical dissent to the strong hypothesis is often the Piraha and their lack of numbers and counting words, but demonstrated ability to count and do simple arithmetic even if not name the results verbally in their language. In the strong hypothesis, they wouldn't be able to count at all. Certainly they exhibit some symptoms of the weak hypothesis, because they may have a harder time at it than those with words to describe the effort. (The common criticism to the Piraha criticism is that we've also taught horses, pigs, dolphins, primates, etc to count and do simple arithmetic with no mutually distinguishable language whatsoever, so maybe that's not an impressive example, because maybe counting/arithmetic are outside of the linguistic faculties of the brain.)
> You can always invent things first and name them later.
I find a more impressive example of a disproof of the strong hypothesis and implication for the weak hypothesis to be the Calculus. Though the example is still in the domain of math, I feel that particularly as math trends towards more abstracted thought its entanglement with language seems ever stronger (see computing and programming languages as further examples).
Newton and Liebniz were both polymaths that spoke multiple languages and referenced many of the same primary sources (in those primary sources' own languages), but they had distinct native languages and cultures (Newton's English and Liebniz's German), yet both co-evolved the Calculus independently (to most accounts; let us dismiss the accusations of theft in one direction or the other). They evolved very different notations/jargon/language for the same concepts, but you could still see the underlying concepts as isomorphic, and that those concepts didn't particularly have names or words until the pair invented names and words for them.
Liebniz's notation was superior, in that it made it easier to see similar concepts as similar and easier to work with some of the more complex concepts, which is why the notation we use today is closer to Liebniz's than Newton's (though still somewhat of a pidgin/fusion of the two). Yet, Newton, despite using an "inferior" notation to do so is still best known for discovering so many more of the Calculus' implications to other sciences, especially Physics. In that case a potential disproof of even the weak hypothesis, or rather one anecdotal outlier of the weak hypothesis that seems to indicate how particularly "weak" it may be.
I found this podcast[1] on the subject interesting. It should give you a sense for at least one direction the scientific community is going.
http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/lexicon_valley/2014/0...
http://www.slate.com/articles/podcasts/lexicon_valley/2014/0...
While I totally agree with your pov and sentiment from my personal experience (raised in a bilingual family, now speaking 4 languages), I don't see such loss as a terrible tragedy. Cultures that have lost the evolutionary race, who failed to instill competitive world comprehension in the carrier population, are not really useful. Imagine a language that has no concept of future tense, no understanding of planning. Do you really believe it ought to exist? Who are the poor souls that you would sentence to having such a limited and uncompetitive world view just for the sake of diversity, while you go on thinking
in in much more advanced concepts? Such a handicap is not something I would knowingly impose on any fellow human being.
If you really mean tense, then there are plenty of languages without tense at all. E.g. Chinese. They seem to be doing ok.
It is not necessary to have a grammatical future tense to talk or think about the future. In fact, English does not have a future tense in the technical grammatical sense of 'tense'.
More generally, there's no evidence for the existence of human languages with the sort of lack of expressive power that you're talking about. All languages appear to be more-or-less equivalent in their expressive power, although of course that does not imply that exact translation is possible in all instances.
It is not necessary to have a grammatical future tense to talk or think about the future. In fact, English does not have a future tense in the technical grammatical sense of 'tense'.
More generally, there's no evidence for the existence of human languages with the sort of lack of expressive power that you're talking about. All languages appear to be more-or-less equivalent in their expressive power, although of course that does not imply that exact translation is possible in all instances.
> Cultures that have lost the evolutionary race, who failed to instill competitive world comprehension in the carrier population, are not really useful.
I was thinking the other day about that language that has no relative left/right and instead everything is based on (effectively) compass direction. The speakers reportedly have excellent direction sense compared to the average non-speaker. Their language is much more efficient at certain tasks we struggle with (English has crutches like "stage left", "starboard", and "your left" to compensate, but unless expected and practiced those are always effort/error prone. I myself fail at simple right/left way too often.)
Obviously this is a linguistic (and arguably cultural) trait with some value, without denying the value of also having relative kedtýright.
This language is unique (? or at least very rare), which tells me it failed to spread. Logical, as it would be hard for non-native speakers to pick up.
But that means "losing the evolutionary race" has no particular relation to the VALUE to us.
I was thinking the other day about that language that has no relative left/right and instead everything is based on (effectively) compass direction. The speakers reportedly have excellent direction sense compared to the average non-speaker. Their language is much more efficient at certain tasks we struggle with (English has crutches like "stage left", "starboard", and "your left" to compensate, but unless expected and practiced those are always effort/error prone. I myself fail at simple right/left way too often.)
Obviously this is a linguistic (and arguably cultural) trait with some value, without denying the value of also having relative kedtýright.
This language is unique (? or at least very rare), which tells me it failed to spread. Logical, as it would be hard for non-native speakers to pick up.
But that means "losing the evolutionary race" has no particular relation to the VALUE to us.
There is not such thing as an "evolutionary race". Race to where?
Would be OK to forget how to make stone tools because we don't need them for now?
Traits are useful in some circumstances and not some useful when circumstances change, who say you would not miss them in the future?
Knowledge is knowledge, it adds to our always imperfect understanding of the world.
Would be OK to forget how to make stone tools because we don't need them for now?
Traits are useful in some circumstances and not some useful when circumstances change, who say you would not miss them in the future?
Knowledge is knowledge, it adds to our always imperfect understanding of the world.
'My homeland is the Portuguese language.' -- Fernando Pessoa
"language constructs a way of thinking" -- I wonder to what degree this determines things like a country having little prospect of economic success.
Some societies do not have words for counting more than "two".
https://numberwarrior.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/is-one-two-ma...
https://numberwarrior.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/is-one-two-ma...
>> There are things that can’t be expressed in another language.
Idioms. Metaphors. Reference to background material. Such things may not be expressible in as few words, but there is no idea that cannot be expressed eventually.
Idioms. Metaphors. Reference to background material. Such things may not be expressible in as few words, but there is no idea that cannot be expressed eventually.
> Nobody speaks ancient Egyptian but we can still translate their hieroglyphs
Bad example. We know how to decipher hieroglyphs because we discovered that there were actually equivalent to another language that was well known at the time. There's tons of other languages we have no idea idea how to decipher, such as Linear A.
Bad example. We know how to decipher hieroglyphs because we discovered that there were actually equivalent to another language that was well known at the time. There's tons of other languages we have no idea idea how to decipher, such as Linear A.
Google Translate only works if you can provide lots of training data.
If the language dies before a substantial amount is written down, the training data will never exist.
If the language dies before a substantial amount is written down, the training data will never exist.
The majority of those lost languages are spoken only, so we lose the culture's verbal history. Imagine if nobody ever decided to write down the Iliad.
Language loss and change is a natural process that’s gone on forever. It’s only because we now have the means to be aware of as well as means to salvage that we even care.
What is now China with a few local variants was once covered in numerous dialects like India today, though not as numerous. However, one unifying language has led to a less fractured nation compared to say India or even Europe.
What is now China with a few local variants was once covered in numerous dialects like India today, though not as numerous. However, one unifying language has led to a less fractured nation compared to say India or even Europe.
China doesn't have one language. Chinese is a family of languages as diverse as the Romance languages. This has actually been the primary reason that Chinese scholars have failed to replace their current writing system despite trying for a hundred fifty years. Imagine Italians, French, and Spanish speakers all trying to agree on a single written form of a language when they can't acknowledge that they're speaking different languages.
I understand that; however, with respect to reading, they practically have one language and additionally, Mandarin (Beijing dialect) is taught nationwide and is a strict requirement.
When I traveled briefly in Yunnan, down in Xishuangbanna, I frequently ran into folk where I, as a white foreigner with only 4 years of study under my belt, spoke Mandarin more fluently than they did - and this included people who were nominally Han, not one of the 50-odd ethnic minorities down there.
I'm not sure requirements can be said to be strict when the locals will tell you to your face that the mountains are high and the emperor far away.
I'm not sure requirements can be said to be strict when the locals will tell you to your face that the mountains are high and the emperor far away.
> About 30 percent of China's 1.3 billion population, 400 million people, can't communicate in Mandarin
> Language loss and change is a natural process that’s gone one forever. It’s only because we now have the means to be aware of as well as means to salvage that we even care.
Just because something is doesn't mean it's right. Tooth decay is also a natural process, as is myopia, and cancer.
Just because something is doesn't mean it's right. Tooth decay is also a natural process, as is myopia, and cancer.
Sure but this is more akin to being a proscriptive grammarian rather than a descriptive one. Of course we could go old school and try to freeze language in time to be “proper”. This is taking a prescriptive approach to an extreme, in a sense.
There's a difference between a language changing, and a language completely dying out.
It’s part of a continuum. One wouldn’t say Spaniards speak Latin, not would we say Latin is a live language (beside some religious usage). One died another (of a few, in this case) grew. Some don’t have descendants, just as people.
The difference is that before languages were newly created too, due to separation. Now, languages just die.
Right, for now, but what about the future? The ingredients for diversity of language and culture are isolation and time. If you send some friends to the other side of a river, or a mountain, or a wall, or an ocean, or to a different planet, and then stop communicating much for a long time, languages will be newly created again. The question is not if, but when and why will this kind of isolation happen again.
Only on Hacker News would I expect to see somebody celebrating the demise of a language in the name of social progress.
In Wales Cymraeg users demand it being pushed to the fore - this leads to hugely disproportionate spending relative to its economic worth, and a focus on it in schools in preference to use of languages that would foster Xenophilia (languages of other cultures, other countries).
I've no problem with Cymraeg, it's interesting, part of my ancestry, part of British history, half of its fluent speakers prefer it. But if the government stopped putting it up, and supported more learning of major World languages in its place, then I think Wales as a whole would be better off.
Just because something is old, arose in one's own country, etc., doesn't mean it's automatically more valuable (not even culturally) than other things. [And vice-versa of course.]
I've no problem with Cymraeg, it's interesting, part of my ancestry, part of British history, half of its fluent speakers prefer it. But if the government stopped putting it up, and supported more learning of major World languages in its place, then I think Wales as a whole would be better off.
Just because something is old, arose in one's own country, etc., doesn't mean it's automatically more valuable (not even culturally) than other things. [And vice-versa of course.]
A world in which culture is discarded in a pursuit of optimizing for 'economic worth' is not a world I want to live in. Nor I think is it a world you would want to live in, if you really gave it some careful consideration.
Who said discarded?
Handwriting is giving way to typing and other means of writing (I'm swyping this), should we make computing lessons include handwriting in order not to let that "culture" die out. Sure, support those who choose it, but don't hobble those who don't.
Propping up a language at great expense is costly. I don't wish Cymraeg to be discarded (far from it, historic languages are fascinating), I wish other languages - ones suitable for widespread communication - to be fostered.
As a statistic 19% of the population is in the 20-30 year age bracket and so will have had 6 or more years of compulsory Cymraeg (it's been compulsory for 20 years). The number of adults in total that can _speak_ any Cymraeg is <15%. The response to this natural move to using English - spend more and more money on Cymraeg, make it compulsory within every other primary school lesson.
Pushing Cymraeg in this situation has a great cost directly, but indirectly there's an economic cost in the damage to children's education (our numeracy and literacy scores have dropped relative to the rest of the UK).
Culture changes and "progresses", spending more and more to try and halt that progress is misguided.
Handwriting is giving way to typing and other means of writing (I'm swyping this), should we make computing lessons include handwriting in order not to let that "culture" die out. Sure, support those who choose it, but don't hobble those who don't.
Propping up a language at great expense is costly. I don't wish Cymraeg to be discarded (far from it, historic languages are fascinating), I wish other languages - ones suitable for widespread communication - to be fostered.
As a statistic 19% of the population is in the 20-30 year age bracket and so will have had 6 or more years of compulsory Cymraeg (it's been compulsory for 20 years). The number of adults in total that can _speak_ any Cymraeg is <15%. The response to this natural move to using English - spend more and more money on Cymraeg, make it compulsory within every other primary school lesson.
Pushing Cymraeg in this situation has a great cost directly, but indirectly there's an economic cost in the damage to children's education (our numeracy and literacy scores have dropped relative to the rest of the UK).
Culture changes and "progresses", spending more and more to try and halt that progress is misguided.
Wtf is the economic worth of a language.
If you can communicate with more people through a language you can trade, you can create cultural artefacts and people will support that creation.
Trying to prevent the natural decline of one language in the face of a populations preferred use of another costs time and money. There's a cost involved directly and indirectly in not having those resources to spend elsewhere.
Trying to prevent the natural decline of one language in the face of a populations preferred use of another costs time and money. There's a cost involved directly and indirectly in not having those resources to spend elsewhere.
There is a whole lot worse that contributed to our current homogenised global culture.
Which is not intended as celebration, just conversation.
Which is not intended as celebration, just conversation.
It might be a sensitive topic, but apart from small things like knowledge of medicinal plants, there is little to be learned from niche cultures in terms of technology or even the advancements in art. Most of the progress has been made by tinkerers in populous areas and spreaded fast thanks to the shared languages.
Maybe a brash conclusion would be to think that small cultures hamper progress by elevating the barriers to communication and spending energy pointlessly (from an utilitarian point of view) on little artisanal trinkets that are vastly more inefficient compared to, albeit somewhat dystopic, modern manufacturing and unified cultural anglosaxon mish mash.
Maybe a brash conclusion would be to think that small cultures hamper progress by elevating the barriers to communication and spending energy pointlessly (from an utilitarian point of view) on little artisanal trinkets that are vastly more inefficient compared to, albeit somewhat dystopic, modern manufacturing and unified cultural anglosaxon mish mash.
> advancements in art
I don't think art is a linear progression.
> It might be a sensitive topic
You're telling people of non-dominant cultures that their art and "artisanal trinkets" are, at best, a worthless waist of time.
I don't think art is a linear progression.
> It might be a sensitive topic
You're telling people of non-dominant cultures that their art and "artisanal trinkets" are, at best, a worthless waist of time.
> I don't think art is a linear progression.
True, I lumped it together with technology. The case with art is, it benefits from perspiration from other artists which ocurrs mostly at the scale of bigger cultures.
> You're telling people of non-dominant cultures that their art and "artisanal trinkets" are, at best, a worthless waist of time.
Well, that's the logical conclusion from a pragmatic viewpoint, but emotion bends logic, therefore causing many inefficiencies (which may look "efficient", but just because of looking at them through the filter of emotion).
However, I don't follow the dogma of pragmatism on a personal level, which is just another point that explains the human paranoia between logic and emotions.
True, I lumped it together with technology. The case with art is, it benefits from perspiration from other artists which ocurrs mostly at the scale of bigger cultures.
> You're telling people of non-dominant cultures that their art and "artisanal trinkets" are, at best, a worthless waist of time.
Well, that's the logical conclusion from a pragmatic viewpoint, but emotion bends logic, therefore causing many inefficiencies (which may look "efficient", but just because of looking at them through the filter of emotion).
However, I don't follow the dogma of pragmatism on a personal level, which is just another point that explains the human paranoia between logic and emotions.
How can you determine what is efficient without knowing what is valuable? And how you determine what is valuable only by logic?
Even the instinct to survive is an emotion. An emotionless agent wouldn't care about survival.
Logic can show you how to arrive to any place, but only e-motion will compel you to move and go.
Even the instinct to survive is an emotion. An emotionless agent wouldn't care about survival.
Logic can show you how to arrive to any place, but only e-motion will compel you to move and go.
The question we have to ask ourselves is: "Is emotion perfectly aligned with our incentive maximization?".
By now, we don't have an coherent answer as our main method of value assesment is money (whose value is shared as a belief).
Also, before we proceed we should try to strip our incentives of every trace of emotion, which we'll assume as flawedly disposed against us, as it lags by millenia behing our rational brain, which makes most emotional feedback futile nowadays.
We should first strive to develop a framework that encompasses and evaluates every aspect of existence (which money can't capture yet), and then deny our emotions and work towards achieving the goals of said framework. That or wander aimlessly on this planet guided by our hormonal responses and never leaving the Solar System, just living by our feelings. Unless, of course, we'll manage to reduce the lag of experience-emotions to one comparable to that of reason.
By now, we don't have an coherent answer as our main method of value assesment is money (whose value is shared as a belief).
Also, before we proceed we should try to strip our incentives of every trace of emotion, which we'll assume as flawedly disposed against us, as it lags by millenia behing our rational brain, which makes most emotional feedback futile nowadays.
We should first strive to develop a framework that encompasses and evaluates every aspect of existence (which money can't capture yet), and then deny our emotions and work towards achieving the goals of said framework. That or wander aimlessly on this planet guided by our hormonal responses and never leaving the Solar System, just living by our feelings. Unless, of course, we'll manage to reduce the lag of experience-emotions to one comparable to that of reason.
[deleted]
> It might be a sensitive topic, but apart from small things like knowledge of medicinal plants, there is little to be learned from niche cultures in terms of technology or even the advancements in art.
That was the fundamental belief behind the eurocentric approach to anthropology, and other ethnocentric supremacist belief systems which from ignorance brought a lot of hardship to the world.
You don't have to look far enough to see how your culture, not long ago, was just as niche and pointless as the ones you're criticising now. You should also know that dominating cultures have already succumbed into irrelevance in spite of all the supremacist beliefs. Perhaps there's something to be learned about poopooing other cultures
That was the fundamental belief behind the eurocentric approach to anthropology, and other ethnocentric supremacist belief systems which from ignorance brought a lot of hardship to the world.
You don't have to look far enough to see how your culture, not long ago, was just as niche and pointless as the ones you're criticising now. You should also know that dominating cultures have already succumbed into irrelevance in spite of all the supremacist beliefs. Perhaps there's something to be learned about poopooing other cultures
I'm not criticizing other cultures nor idealizing the mainstream one. I'm just pointing out that large efficiency gains can be had from having fewer and bigger cultures.
However, this optimization makes also our civilization more fragile, so the tradeoffs are more complex than in your version of the theory.
However, this optimization makes also our civilization more fragile, so the tradeoffs are more complex than in your version of the theory.
> "I'm not criticizing other cultures"
Maybe that wasn't your intent, but that's certainly what you did. You basically said that all they have to contribute is knowledge of herbs.
Maybe that wasn't your intent, but that's certainly what you did. You basically said that all they have to contribute is knowledge of herbs.
There is more to life than the bottom line. Your conception of life as some sort of great march to technotopia (or whatever variant) is just one viewpoint among many.
I am very much with you.
The standard knee-jerk reaction of wailing at the passing of yet another little-spoken language always fails to take into account the other side of the equation: a huge number of problems on this planet stem from the fact that people speak different languages and profoundly fail to understand one another.
Paying the price of losing little-spoken languages and the bits of culture that tag along with it is a very cheap price to pay when compared to what is gained.
The standard knee-jerk reaction of wailing at the passing of yet another little-spoken language always fails to take into account the other side of the equation: a huge number of problems on this planet stem from the fact that people speak different languages and profoundly fail to understand one another.
Paying the price of losing little-spoken languages and the bits of culture that tag along with it is a very cheap price to pay when compared to what is gained.
> a huge number of problems on this planet stem from the fact that people speak different languages and profoundly fail to understand one another
That was the original thought behind Esperanto... the idea was that there was strife between different groups of people because they speak different languages, and that a universal language would solve this (or at least bring them closer together). [1] Whether this worked out or not is left as an exercise to the reader. ;-)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto#Creation
That was the original thought behind Esperanto... the idea was that there was strife between different groups of people because they speak different languages, and that a universal language would solve this (or at least bring them closer together). [1] Whether this worked out or not is left as an exercise to the reader. ;-)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto#Creation
> people speak different languages and profoundly fail to understand one another.
How much of this do you really attribute to different languages? By and large everyone in America speaks English, but the past couple years in particular has very much demonstrated that we profoundly fail to understand one another. To me the language is obviously important for literal communication, but to an extent pretty irrelevant to the communication barriers in society.
How much of this do you really attribute to different languages? By and large everyone in America speaks English, but the past couple years in particular has very much demonstrated that we profoundly fail to understand one another. To me the language is obviously important for literal communication, but to an extent pretty irrelevant to the communication barriers in society.
I would imagine that there is less than 1% of people under 50 that speak Romansh natively that don't speak another language fluently, most likely Swiss-German, but also English. With the huge amount of homogenization of culture around the world, I think its cool if some corners try and keep some differences. These Swiss are surely not suffering in some backwater area, unable to move to the big city if they want.
> Universally common language promotes communication, cultural exchange, understanding and general world peace.
I'm sure common language helped Russia and Ukraine when they went into war.
What you're looking for is single worldwide culture. But I doubt that could happen. E.g. colonies in "New World" soon departed from their parent cultures. Even if someone would establish a single culture, it's set to collapse and split into a myriad of smaller ones.
There're a lot of things that define culture. Looking at US coasts-vs-flyover divider, language is not what keeps people together. Even if they shared a somewhat similar culture, different environments make people go in different ways.
> I really disagree with this idea that the death of a language somehow means we are cut off from the culture that used the language.
Culture is much more than just translating words. Different people care more about different things. That PoV is lost when nobody speaks the language natively. Well, it may exist in a book in a library. But there's no way to experience the culture anymore. So yes, it's dead, but not lost.
I'm sure common language helped Russia and Ukraine when they went into war.
What you're looking for is single worldwide culture. But I doubt that could happen. E.g. colonies in "New World" soon departed from their parent cultures. Even if someone would establish a single culture, it's set to collapse and split into a myriad of smaller ones.
There're a lot of things that define culture. Looking at US coasts-vs-flyover divider, language is not what keeps people together. Even if they shared a somewhat similar culture, different environments make people go in different ways.
> I really disagree with this idea that the death of a language somehow means we are cut off from the culture that used the language.
Culture is much more than just translating words. Different people care more about different things. That PoV is lost when nobody speaks the language natively. Well, it may exist in a book in a library. But there's no way to experience the culture anymore. So yes, it's dead, but not lost.
Ukrainian and Russian (and Polish) are spoken within the borders that today are called Ukraine, and are not the same language...
Russia worked very hard to ensure that Russian was the dominant language in most Soviet countries, and tried to stamp out local languages as much as was feasible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Russian_languag...
Russian was the dominant language in pre-war Ukraine. Many people identifying as Ukrainians preferred it in their daily affairs. Ukrainian language made a massive comeback in the past few years though.
e.g. https://i.redditmedia.com/VEUcNGVHkNv6E03iKnczBLELoqL4prdSsw...