FW: the argument for language maintenance

[Sarah Cutfield]

One approach I often take in that situation is to bring 'meta' and self-reference to the conversation, e.g. 'Well, if your approach to language policy is one of economic rationalism, sure, but most people have a much wider view of language. For example, most people think language is tied up with individual and cultural expression, and cultural heritage. We go to great lengths to maintain tangible cultural heritage, and the same rationale applies to intangible cultural heritage, which includes languages, big or small. Also, you don't have to look far to find examples of Australians expressing this view about their own form of English. If we all held the view that we should speak the language of most economic benefit, then we should all be speaking American English (or Mandarin, or... but let's stick with American English for the sake of argument). However, we don't, and what's more, complaining about any small example of the influence of American English on Australian English is a national sport. Australians think maintaining our minority dialect is a point of identity and pride. Speakers of minority languages tend to agree.'

Sarah.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: margaret.carew at batchelor.edu.au
> Sent: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:10:22 +0930
> To: r-n-l-d at unimelb.edu.au
> Subject: FW: the argument for language maintenance
> 
> 
> Hi there
> 
> I got this question - see below - from a (non-linguist) colleague. I
> thought it would be interesting to conduct a quick survey amongst RNLD
> members, so please read on...
> 
> Folks,
> 
> When you have a quiet reflective moment...
> 
> re: the argument for language maintenance
> 
> What are the standard replies given to people who complain that there
> are too many Aboriginal languages for language maintenance, that
> supporting all those languages will cost too much, etc.
> 
> And New Zealand is given as an example where language maint is
> practical, because only 1 language.
> 
> I'm thinking there must be some standard ideas on this question in
> linguistic circles.