ISSUE13 [REBORN FROM THE ASHES] TASK ONE by hugesea--有拍必回哦！

hugeseaUID: 190158

13 "Many of the world's lesser-known languages are being lost as fewer and fewer people speak them. The governments of countries in which these languages are spoken should act to prevent such languages from becoming extinct."


As the tide of globalization is sending it ripples across the whole world, more and more languages have become vanish, and at least half of the world’s 6000 languages are expected to disappear over the next century. Because of such accelerated disappearance, the speaker asserts that governments of countries in which such dying languages are spoken should act to protect them before they fade away completely. However, I tent to disagree with the speaker. In my point of view, rather than sheltering such dying languages from becoming extinct, what we should do is to keep them permanent records and then let them die in peace.

First of all, preserving less-known languages is of special significance to preserve cultural diversity. Generally speaking, language was crucial to the depiction of a people, because a particular language is linked to a particular way of life and a particular vision of the world. When a language dies, we lose a unique way of perceiving and describing the world. Furthermore, every language is a living museum, a monument to the culture it has been vehicle to. Language death is symptomatic of cultural death. In short, language diversity is a benchmark of cultural diversity. We should care about dying languages, for the same reason that we care when a species of animal or plant dies. It reduces the diversity of our planet.

It is, of cause, enriching to learn from different languages and cultures. However, what makes a language or culture dynamic and responsive is the interaction across barriers of language and culture, rather than the fracturing of the world with as many different tongues as possible. The more universally we can communicate, the more dynamic our cultures will be. It is not being narrow to believe that it would be better if more people were to speak English, Chinese, Spanish, Russian or Hindi. Moreover, it is absurd to believe that English speakers view the world differently from Chinese speakers, because they speak English. It is even more ridiculous to imagine that all English speakers have a common view of the world due to a common language. People's perceptions of the world are not constrained by the particular language they speak, but shaped by their capacity for language.

Furthermore, the government preservation of dying language may be acting on the best of intentions, but bring about the serious result--giving rise to ideas of racial difference. The ideas of language diversity and cultural pluralism have refashioned the idea of race, with its claim that diversity is good in itself and that humanity can be parceled up into discrete groups, each with its own particular way of life, mode of expression, and unique window upon the world. Thus, such language preservation is likely to have grave consequences: ranking people according to the language they speak.

Finally, a language dying is no more tragic than leaves dropping off in the fall-- they're supposed to fall off and they always have. Rather than preserving the dying language, what governments should do is to keep those dying languages permanent records, for the purpose of drawing lessons from such languages.

In conclusion, neither a culture, nor a way of life, yet nor a language, has the God-given right to exist. What if half of world’s languages are on the edge of extinction? Let them die in peace.

fancywwUID: 2583671

As the tide of globalization is sending it ripples across the whole world, more and more languages have become vanish (vanished), and at least half of the world’s 6000 languages are expected to disappear over the next century. Because of such accelerated disappearance, the speaker asserts that governments of countries in which such dying languages are spoken should act to protect them before they fade away completely. However, I tent to disagree with the speaker. In my point of view （那个写作基础讲中提到过thesis不要出现first person）, rather than sheltering such dying languages from becoming extinct, what we should do is to keep them permanent records and then let them die in peace.

First of all, preserving less-known languages is of special significance to preserve cultural diversity. Generally speaking, language was crucial to the depiction of a people, because a particular language is linked to a particular way of life and a particular vision of the world. When a language dies, we lose a unique way of perceiving and describing the world. Furthermore, every language is a living museum, a monument to the culture it has been vehicle to. Language death is symptomatic of cultural death. In short, language diversity is a benchmark of cultural diversity. We should care about dying languages, for the same reason that we care when a species of animal or plant dies. It reduces the diversity of our planet.    （这句话可不short）

It is, of cause, enriching to learn from different languages and cultures. However, what makes a language or culture dynamic and responsive is the interaction across barriers of language and culture, rather than the fracturing of the world with as many different tongues as possible. The more universally we can communicate, the more dynamic our cultures will be. It is not being narrow to believe that it would be better if more people were to speak English, Chinese, Spanish, Russian or Hindi. Moreover, it is absurd to believe that English speakers view the world differently from Chinese speakers, because they speak English. It is even more ridiculous to imagine that all English speakers have a common view of the world due to a common language. People's perceptions of the world are not constrained by the particular language they speak, but shaped by their capacity for language.
（这段和上一段内容有点矛盾吧，前面作者说“不同的语言给予人们unique way of perceiving and describing the world”，这段又说 it is absurd to believe that English speakers view the world differently from Chinese speakers）

Furthermore, the government preservation of dying language may be acting on the best of intentions, but bring about the serious result--giving rise to ideas of racial difference. The ideas of language diversity and cultural pluralism have refashioned the idea of race, with its claim that diversity is good in itself and that humanity can be parceled up into discrete groups, each with its own particular way of life, mode of expression, and unique window upon the world. Thus, such language preservation is likely to have grave consequences: ranking people according to the language they speak. （这段话没怎么明白，保护与语言怎么跟ranking有关呢，言下之意就是保护了的就会高别的语言一等？但不是因为是endangered才保护码？）

Finally, a language dying is no more tragic than leaves dropping off in the fall-- they're supposed to fall off and they always have. Rather than preserving the dying language, what governments should do is to keep those dying languages permanent records, for the purpose of drawing lessons from such languages. （论证还可以再丰富一点，不太有说服力）

In conclusion, neither a culture, nor a way of life, yet nor a language, has the God-given right to exist.(意思是：没有一种文化，或者一种生命，抑或一种语言，有天赋的存在权，怎么有点反人类的感觉来着，呵呵，可能是由于作者和我的观点截然相反吧) What if half of world’s languages are on the edge of extinction? Let them die in peace.


    感觉作者全文思路还有点不清晰。第一段好像在写“我们要关心正在消亡的语言”，第二段在写“越少语言交流越好”，第三段在写"保护濒危语言会带来危害"，第四段在写“濒危语言应该被记录下来，让后来的人吸取它们之所以灭亡的教训”。各段之间的衔接不是很顺畅。
    另外论据和论证不是很persuasive，有一种"that's my story and i'm stiching to it"的感觉。

    以上是fancy的个人看法，欢迎和我探讨。