0910AW 同主题写作第一期 ISSUE13 by superelle

superelleUID: 2531276

I agree with the speaker that losing language should be protected from disappearing from the world. After all, every language is on behalf of a unique national culture and symbol for one group. Nevertheless, considering the practical situation that the most significant purpose of language we use is to communicate with others from different districts and nations, it is controversial that whether undue emphasize should be put to preserve languages being lost.

One reason for my agreement with the speaker is that the extinction of a kind of language brings one nation a severe result, whose history or culture could not be passed down from one generation to another, if so, the multiplicity of civilization in the whole world would be destroyed seriously. Here is a good example that can support my reason: Similarly, panda, species in rare animal area, live in a natural protected location as a symbol of China so that multiplicity of species could be continued and descendents have opportunity to see this precious creature.

However, languages act as useful tools for people with diverse backgrounds in global village to communicate and exchange their ideas. For example, most of international events and high tech research thesis are reported in English on the internet in order that people all over the world could get amount of information everyday. If residents in a country only master their own language, known by less than 1000 persons, the nation’s development about economy, business or polity will be hampered badly.

Also, several languages on the edge of extinction, as a result of not being adapt the social development, need not be persevered by government. To illustrate this point clearly, here is a persuasive example. Manchu character, disappeared many years ago, insofar are commanded just by archaeologist. Because it is too obscure to understand, government have not use it any more after Qing Dynasty. For some languages or cultures, which are unsuitable to use and pass down, being displayed in the museum or recorded in history are better choices to preserve and remain them by government.

In conclusion, protect extinct languages from vanishing, admittedly, is a meaningful action. After all, we can keep down people’s history, civilization and its like. Nevertheless, the practicality of language as a tool outweighs the benefit of preserving a dying language. In the final analysis, government and society should not put undue emphasis on fading languages, and whether it will vanish or retain is decided by its own user.