Mozilla and language preservation

This is great. Well done to all involved. I would love to be able to help make this happen in Australia for some of our Indigenous languages too. Any chance of that eventuating?

Greg, anyone can join the party. Depending on how good you are with code, there are different ways of doing that – there’s the really hardcore approach of editing the dtd etc files manually. At the other end of the spectrum, you could join Locamotion (http://mozilla.locamotion.org/) who will do most of the hard code related stuff for you and all you have to do is translate. Give me a shout if you want more details via email or some other route?

While it is great that localization work goes forward to ensure people who have not learned a lingua franca can benefit from and make contributions through technology, I do not believe preservation of languages (except to document them or to enable younger generations some ability to avoid a precipitous loss of communication with older generations) is really a worthwhile effort.

Yes, language does provide access to culture, and resources, and these cannot always be translated elegantly. Yet it is also within the capacity of any people to express their ideas and values in any human language.

To take an analogy from the computing world, yes, it is no doubt of benefit to computing that innovation of languages has been possible, but even in computing there is a very compelling advantage to a lingua franca. Thankfully, it appears we are starting to have this now, more or less, with JavaScript, with powerful implications to computer literacy and simplification of training.

If English does not automatically take over as the world lingua franca, a vote could no doubt help consolidate it or choose another language to have a language which could indeed be taught in all schools in the world, at an early enough age where language mastery is feasible.

Because while localization is no doubt doing a favor to people, an even greater favor, in my opinion, is allowing everyone access to the knowledge of each other, without restrictions. This is not to extinguish diversity; rather it is the opportunity for all to benefit from it, and to offer it to others.

Because those familiar with language history, whether of human language or computer language, languages change over time, and old forms get thrown to the wind. Very few are clamoring for expanding usage of old English, or Fortran, as there is little need, so what is so harmful with people willingly abandoning their own language traditions if there is no longer a need?

If Mozilla is to get involved in something related to language, I think it would make the most sense to get involved with ensuring that everyone in the world has access to a lingua franca–especially a SINGLE lingua franca of use around the whole world–acquired in early childhood. In other words, promote a standard; as we know, standards bring enormous benefits–no less for the standardization of human language which encompasses so many areas, and whose universal access will provide opportunities for training and collaboration which can hardly be imagined now.

Translation technology or other intermediaries are not sufficient for allowing individual access to any other individual without requiring additional years of study to master yet another “standard”.

If you think standardizing on a web language is important, just see what will happen with a standard human language. English is far from there yet if you think we can just sit on our hands and wait for it to take over (assuming we favor it taking over; proponents of Esperanto or the like are also hardly likely to get their way without a global vote either).

Brett…
1) Speakers of a language do NOT readily abandon their languages. Same as a biological species does not one day decide “hey, you know what, sod this, I’m going to go extinct”, language don’t do that either. There is ALWAYS some sociological, economic or power imbalance that puts pressure on the “weaker” language. In the worst case, that is genocide. At beast, it’s economic disadvatagement (for example by making sure that if you speak X, you will be at a disadvantage) or restricting the ability of the community to pass on the language (for example by forcing education in another language). Languages don’t die. They’re killed. And that death is almost always is associated with generations of anguish and struggles within the community. Grandparents unable to speak to grandchildren. Parents forcing themselves to speak what little they have of the “bigger” language for the fear of holding back their kids. Kids being beaten or made to feel ashamed of speaking their language in school. And then of course being amongst the last speakers of a language is a huge psychological pressure in itself. Frankly, your position borders on linguistic imperialism. Who are you to tell anyone that they’re language ain’t worth peanuts.
2) I recommend some light research into bilingualism. Being a native speaker of more than one language brings with itself a huge raft of cognitive benefits (like being able to see another person’s POV better and at an earlier age) and even health benefits such as delayed onset of age-related degenerative diseases. Children have a massive capacity for learning several native languages… where does this bizarre notion come from that speaking Udmurt has to mean you can’t speak English and Russian too?
3) We’re humans, not computers. There is a reason why we have more than one handbag, smartphone and car … variety IS the spice of life and that applies to our languages too.
4) Frankly, I’m sick and tired of this lingua franca and global commerce nonsense. I happen to speak both Chinese and Scottish Gaelic (58,000 speakers). Funnily enough, I don’t do trade with the PRC and funnily enough, I only very rarely call the Politbureau. Few people do. Most people on the other hand live locally which means that in spite of Gaelic being this tiny blip on the radar, I speak more Gaelic on a daily basis than Chinese.
Thinking cap time…

Ok, I see the relevance now of your discussion of lingua francas. But ry telling that to the innumerable language learners (today or historically) struggling with either Chinese, English, Japanese, French, etc. Just because you may choose to use one language locally does not mean others are not very active and appreciative of learning such a lingua franca. As someone living in China myself, I see the benefits not only of having some international language (now it is English) for not only myself as a visitor, or for Chinese I can communicate with (when my Chinese fails me), and even among Europeans or others I meet here. How you can say that is of no relevance is really beyond my comprehension… The logical extension of your argument (if I understand it correctly) is really that everyone should speak their own different mutually unintelligible language (or at least speak in their local fiefdoms without benefit of maybe even a national language). Sorry, but I see the world as a family, and I want to communicate with my family members–any of them, without restriction. And to the extent we have global English (or whatever candidate can be embraced globally), the better off we all are for not having to struggle and waste time with other lingua francas.