Sometimes It’s O.K. to Let a Language Die | The New Yorker

When cultural preservation comes at the expense of speakers’ decisions, sometimes it's O.K. to let a language die.

Save this story Save this story How sad should we be when a language dies? Consider the case—call it callous or simply tough-minded—for saying, “Not at all.” A language, when it comes down to it, is a means of communication. When too few people are using it to communicate, it has stopped doing its principal job, and it may as well be allowed to die. It is, of course, a tragedy when languages are killed , especially when they are killed out of malice or bigotry. But death by natural causes—well, that’s just how things go. Despite its ominous title, Sophia Smith Galer’s “ How to Kill a Language:

saved by

• Jaime Redondo Yuste
• Shaleen Baral
• Sophia Cheng

related reading

• Large Language Muddle | The Editorsnplusonemag.com
• Language Birth—Asteriskasteriskmag.com
• Politics and the English Language | The Orwell Foundationorwellfoundation.com
• jamesgerity.com/biblio/authority.pdfjamesgerity.com
• Should India Speak a Single Language? | The New Yorkernewyorker.com
• Blunt-Force Ethnic Credibility | Som-Mai Nguyenastra-mag.com
• Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid - The Atlantictheatlantic.com
• The Parents Trying to Pass Down a Language They Hardly Speak - The Atlantictheatlantic.com
• To Speak Is to Blunder | The New Yorkernewyorker.com
• To Speak Is to Blunder | The New Yorkernewyorker.com
• The Terrible Downside of AI Language Translationtheatlantic.com
• The End of the English Major | The New Yorkernewyorker.com