The Off Topic Topic

[The Brain]

Closing coal mines isn't civil genocide.

[Tamas]

Considering how a lot of conflicts in life are from a failure to communicate, the sooner dialects and different languages die out the better.

I suspect that more conflicts, cruelty, and straight up killing has been done in the name of eradicating dialects and different languages compared to those caused by "failure's to communicate" because people had different mother tongues. Especially when you consider language is often used as an identifier by people perpetrating genocide.

Well yes.

[Duque de Bragança]

Closing coal mines isn't civil genocide.

Is keeping coal mines open ecocide? 

[Josquius]

Considering how a lot of conflicts in life are from a failure to communicate, the sooner dialects and different languages die out the better.

The optimum situation is one where every region maintains its own dialect with a flourishing culture yet nonetheless where everyone is educated enough to speak common where relevant.

[Zanza]

My copy of the 'Chambers dictionary of etymology' has it's borrowed from the middle Dutch 'splinter'

Your dialect word could be derived from the middle German 'spelte' for splinter?

No idea about middle German, but High German is Splitter.

[Sheilbh]

I suspect that more conflicts, cruelty, and straight up killing has been done in the name of eradicating dialects and different languages compared to those caused by "failures to communicate" because people had different mother tongues. Especially when you consider language is often used as an identifier by people perpetrating genocide.

Yes. I imagine the single biggest cause of language death has been immperialism and colonialism. I'm not sure it's a process to cheer on.

[Valmy]

I suspect that more conflicts, cruelty, and straight up killing has been done in the name of eradicating dialects and different languages compared to those caused by "failures to communicate" because people had different mother tongues. Especially when you consider language is often used as an identifier by people perpetrating genocide.

Yes. I imagine the single biggest cause of language death has been immperialism and colonialism. I'm not sure it's a process to cheer on.

That's a theory that that is the biggest cause. And if we are talking about ye olde days I would agree.

But it seems to me the impact of the information age is doing that on steroids in the late 20th and early 21st century. If what you say is true when why are we seeing what we are seeing in that map? Was England colonized and crushed by a brutal empire between 1950 and now?

[Josquius]

I suspect that more conflicts, cruelty, and straight up killing has been done in the name of eradicating dialects and different languages compared to those caused by "failures to communicate" because people had different mother tongues. Especially when you consider language is often used as an identifier by people perpetrating genocide.

Yes. I imagine the single biggest cause of language death has been immperialism and colonialism. I'm not sure it's a process to cheer on.

That's a theory that that is the biggest cause. And if we are talking about ye olde days I would agree.

But it seems to me the impact of the information age is doing that on steroids in the late 20th and early 21st century. If what you say is true when why are we seeing what we are seeing in that map? Was England colonized and crushed by a brutal empire between 1950 and now?

Literally? Not really.
In practice? The scouring of the north and packing of the entire economy into London has had a similar effect.

Worth remembering that so much of this imperial devastation of languages didn't come from an active top town decision but rather people choosing, consciously and sub-consciously, to chase what they felt gave them the best chance. This was the major factor with the decline of Irish for instance.

[Sheilbh]

That's a theory that that is the biggest cause. And if we are talking about ye olde days I would agree.

You say ye olde days - Russia considers Ukrainian a dialect not a language. I'd be surprised if China has ongoing tolerance for Uyghur and I wonder if Chinese languages will be standardised. All of those are arguably only possible because of the information age.

And I do mean across all time I suspect it's the biggest cause.

But it seems to me the impact of the information age is doing that on steroids in the late 20th and early 21st century. If what you say is true when why are we seeing what we are seeing in that map? Was England colonized and crushed by a brutal empire between 1950 and now?

Imperialism isn't necessarily brutal - or at least not to everyone (I suspect colonisation always is).

I don't think that map is language death, though - I think it's dialects shifting and a language evolving which always happens. They're always evolving and changing and maybe even new ones emerging which is absolutely partially shaped by non-coercive forces.

I think a language going from being alive and spoken to extinct - I suspect there's probably almost always an element of coercion and violence in that story. Though there's obviously a huge spectrum of how bad that was

Worth remembering that so much of this imperial devastation of languages didn't come from an active top town decision but rather people choosing, consciously and sub-consciously, to chase what they felt gave them the best chance. This was the major factor with the decline of Irish for instance.

Erm - maybe for some. State policy was also monolingual. Irish was discouraged by schools (funded by the state administered by the church). The areas that were most Irish-speaking were worst hit by the famine and most likely to experience emigration.

And obviously the ascendancy led to the dispossession of traditional Irish elites meaningthere was no elite setting for Irish culture, which resulted in it being perceived as a language of poverty and peasants because the spaces where it could be anything else (courts, church, literature) were systematically destroyed and often banned. There were plenty of top-down decision to wipe out and suppress the indigenous "non-British", Catholic, Irish culture - and there were similar top-down "improving" policies by the British state in relation to other Celtic languages in the 19th century. There's a reason almost every nationalist party in these isles has started with or been heavily influenced by a movement for revival of the language.

There is an element in what you're saying in the rise of English, I'm not sure if it explains the decline of Irish. My understanding is that now the view is that Ireland was probably majority Irish speaking until the early 19th century - which is when the schools are introduced.

[Valmy]

Literally? Not really.
In practice? The scouring of the north and packing of the entire economy into London has had a similar effect.

Worth remembering that so much of this imperial devastation of languages didn't come from an active top town decision but rather people choosing, consciously and sub-consciously, to chase what they felt gave them the best chance. This was the major factor with the decline of Irish for instance.

Which is a completely normal development in how languages develop in the face of changing circumstances.

[Razgovory]

Considering how a lot of conflicts in life are from a failure to communicate, the sooner dialects and different languages die out the better.

I suspect that more conflicts, cruelty, and straight up killing has been done in the name of eradicating dialects and different languages compared to those caused by "failures to communicate" because people had different mother tongues. Especially when you consider language is often used as an identifier by people perpetrating genocide.

It's in the Bible!  

And the Gileadites took the passages of Jordan before the Ephraimites: and it was so, that when those Ephraimites which were escaped said, Let me go over; that the men of Gilead said unto him, Art thou an Ephraimite? If he said, Nay; Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right. Then they took him, and slew him at the passages of Jordan: and there fell at that time of the Ephraimites forty and two thousand.

— Judges 12:5–6

So it must be okay.

[Valmy]

That's a theory that that is the biggest cause. And if we are talking about ye olde days I would agree.

You say ye olde days - Russia considers Ukrainian a dialect not a language. I'd be surprised if China has ongoing tolerance for Uyghur and I wonder if Chinese languages will be standardised. All of those are arguably only possible because of the information age.

Russia and China behaving badly is certainly a thing but not the biggest cause of languages and dialects going out of use. And certainly advanced technology can be used for all sorts of purposes both good and bad. I don't really follow how standardization of language is only possible in the information age as we have seen that play out prior to that.

And I do mean across all time I suspect it's the biggest cause.

No I don't think so. I think most languages die out or fall into disuse through organic processes over time. The Celts spread over Europe and west Asia mostly steadily over time with a steadily building cultural dominance, I am sure it wasn't entirely peaceful but I don't think it is a genocidal or imperialist process. The whole idea of outlawing a language using the coercive power of a nationalist colonialist or imperialist state is a more recent development and one that seems to have fallen a bit out of favor. It seems like most modern states are, in fact, doing the opposite and desperately funding academic and cultural establishments in an effort to save dialects and languages from extinction. But how much success are they having?

Imperialism isn't necessarily brutal - or at least not to everyone (I suspect colonisation always is).

That's true. I guess if cultural spread and hegemony is imperialism then I guess you are correct. I just think that is largely an organic process, though certainly plenty of states try to do it with soft power strategies. I don't know how successful those are as a tool of imperialism.

I don't think that map is language death, though - I think it's dialects shifting and a language evolving which always happens. They're always evolving and changing and maybe even new ones emerging which is absolutely partially shaped by non-coercive forces.

I think a language going from being alive and spoken to extinct - I suspect there's probably almost always an element of coercion and violence in that story. Though there's obviously a huge spectrum of how bad that was

I suppose. Most times when humans are interacting with each other there is some coercion and violence going on someplace. It is hard to find purity. I simply took exception to the idea that the majority was due to that.

There is an element in what you're saying in the rise of English, I'm not sure if it explains the decline of Irish. My understanding is that now the view is that Ireland was probably majority Irish speaking until the early 19th century - which is when the schools are introduced.

Sure. But there has been a state that has tried to revive it for 100 years or so, has there not?

[Tamas]

Guys, where did I say we should eradicate languages and dialects by sword and fire? But the natural slide toward one common language for humanity should not be fought. There is no intrinsic cultural value in two people being unable to understand each other.

[Habbaku]

Guys, where did I say we should eradicate languages and dialects by sword and fire?

Um, right here?

I say we should eradicate languages and dialects by sword and fire

[Valmy]

Guys, where did I say we should eradicate languages and dialects by sword and fire?

Um, right here?

I say we should eradicate languages and dialects by sword and fire