In recent years, a lot has been said about dying languages. The Ethnologue, a comprehensive source of basic information about all the world’s languages, states that there are 516 “nearly extinct” languages spoken in the world today (the definition of “nearly extinct” is when “only a few elderly speakers are still living”). To the man on the street, this is likely a non-issue, especially for those of us who live in monolingual cultures. Most people have no idea that there are 6,912 known languages in the world today.
However, if no one else cares, linguists (and their academic brothers, anthropologists) are very interested in the fact that languages are disappearing rather rapidly. A number of university departments and other stand-alone organizations are dedicated to learning why languages are dying, documenting nearly extinct languages and trying to stop them from dying (some examples: Foundation for Endangered Languages, Endangered Language Initiative, The Endangered Languages Project, and the UNESCO Red Book of Endangered Languages). Further, the US government has grant money available to study endangered languages. There are also efforts underway to revitalize and revive dying languages.
Why People Care
Here are some reasons people care that languages are dying:
- When a language dies, a wealth of cultural knowledge (history, art, native religion, ethnomedicine, etc.) tends to die with it.
- Since language is the identifying feature for a people group, when the language disappears, that group’s distinctive identity is diminished and it is therefore less able to access political or material things it used to own.
- The scientific quest for universal grammar, or information about a theoretical “original” language, is hindered by fewer samples to study if a language dies.
Does God Care?
Yes, some people care if languages die, but does God? According to the book of Revelation, God expects there to be representatives of all language groups in heaven to praise him (Rev 7:9-10):
9 After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. 10 And they cried out in a loud voice: “Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb.”
I was recently telling someone about my job as a missionary Bible translator, and mentioned the fact that many languages are dying. She replied, “Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Maybe it is a good thing since there would be fewer languages that need to have the Bible translated into them. More people can understand the gospel message already available in another language.”
I wasn’t sure how to reply. So my question is: In view of this verse, does it matter to God if languages die?
“Every nation, tribe, people, and language” is a poetic way of saying “everybody.” It doesn’t indicate that God gives language any special significance. My guess is God doesn’t care whether a language dies any more than he cares about any other event in human history.
Except for research purposes, I can’t think of many reasons why a language should be saved. You might want to save or revive a language as part of a campaign to build a common identity. But that’s using language as a tool, not a means in itself. (For example, see modern Hebrew.)
As for the lost tribal history, folk tales, etc. that die when a language ceases to be spoken, I’m not sure those things have much value. They have some value to researchers, but none to the average man. The only reason to preserve those things is to build or preserve a common identity among a people group.
“As for the lost tribal history, folk tales, etc. that die when a language ceases to be spoken, I’m not sure those things have much value.”
What if the cure for cancer is in the the knowledge of ethnobotany that only that language group knows? That might be of value to the average man.
And what would you say to the tribal history being lost of, say, English speakers?
Well I’m not letting my language die without a fight. But if it dies, so be it.
“What if the cure for cancer is in the the knowledge of ethnobotany that only that language group knows?”
I recognize your point. Folk medicine is sometimes based in fact. Losing the chance at a medical discovery would be unfortunate. That kind of tribal knowledge could be transmitted even if the language dies out, though. (Parents and grandparents still talk to the younger generation, even if the younger folks don’t speak the tribal language anymore.) Or the knowledge could be lost even if the language survives.
Some people would say that the tribal history and folktales have value in themselves. I’m not so romantic.
The loss of cultural knowledge is a human loss, and could be a significant one.
But back to the question of does this matter to God. I know at least one person who says it does matter. His idea is that the variety of languages on earth is a reflection of the complex nature of God, of his infinite capacity to communicate.
“The loss of cultural knowledge is a human loss, and could be a significant one.‘
Why? So we lose some stories and some history. Big deal.
“”His idea is that the variety of languages on earth is a reflection of the complex nature of God, of his infinite capacity to communicate.”
The variety of languages on earth is a reflection of man’s sinful nature needing monitoring. The only reason we have so many languages is Babel. True, as people groups seperate, language transforms, but we’d all still speak something with a common root if it hadn’t been for that event.
I have a feeling that losing languages isn’t an issue God cares about as much as the way the world is moving to a common language. And even that, I think, is something that would be good if it weren’t for all the end-time significance.
Yes, the fact that we have many languages is a result of God punishing man’s sin. In Genesis 1 and again in 9 God told people to be fruitful and fill the earth. But they didn’t want to fill the earth, they wanted to all stay in one place and make a name for themselves. They could do that since they all spoke one language.
Genesis 11:6 says “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.” That is an astounding statement. Is the power of one language so much that even God says man will be able to do everything he plans? (Hmm, look at the amazing technological advances via English today.)
When they no longer spoke the same language, they had to move out to different locations and they had to quit all working on the same project. Maybe this was God’s way to keep man from advancing too far.
So how sinful is it to learn other languages and make it possible to work on the same project?
I think a one-world language sounds great - especially in the form of a trade or business language. A lot of warring and destruction can be traced to poor / lack of communication. I don’t think God wants to keep men from advancing too far technologically or linguistically. The whole sin of Babel was idolatry - motive, intent and pride. Man had become so debased and morally repugnant - the tower and language were just articulations and embellishments on that original sin against God.
Yes, a single world trade language would be a boon for humanity. English is the closest thing we have, but as a trade language it’s rather a poor choice. A trade language should be simple and easy to learn. A dialect of Malay would make a better choice. We’d have to convince everyone to learn it, though.
There was no sin in the fact that they all spoke the same language (and Sharon, there is no sin in anyone learning anyone else’s language). Rather, the sin was two-fold: (1) they refused obey God’s command to fill the earth but rather stayed in one place, and (2) they misused the power that having one language gave them in trying to build a name for themselves with building the tower to heaven.
God had already promised not to destroy man again as he did with the flood, so this time he solved the problem in a rather unique and clever way.
I don’t know if I agree with your statement, Colin, about “I don’t think God wants to keep men from advancing too far technologically…” There are a lot of things that God doesn’t “want” but he allows, to our detriment. Creation of the nuclear bombs enough to really mess up his creation, is one possible example of something that man with one language has created that to me, borders on going too far.
Advances in nuclear physics didn’t all happen in English. For example, Einstein published in German, as did his German colleagues.
Next time I’ll skip the sarcasm.
Jew, you mean a world trade language that’s simple but complex in vocabulary? It would have to be. I doubt we’ll ever get one besides English, though, even if it isn’t the most practical.
Sometimes having two or more languages actually increases (the rapidity of) technological advances, as in the space race between the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.
Sometimes having two or more languages actually increases (the rapidity of) technological advances, as in the space race between the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.
Is that really attributable to language differences? The Cold War was about dominating the world. That’s what drove the space race. Language didn’t enter into it.
No, that’s true. I shouldn’t have worded it that way. But it seems to be an indirect factor, since rivalry for dominating the world (and the technology to go with it) occurs more often between nations of differing language and culture.
Have there been any recent wars between people who speak the same language? The last time America fought a major war against English speakers was 1865. Today, the various English-speaking nations are all on pretty good terms with each other.
Is that just an accident of history? Is it attributable to some special quality of the British? I don’t see the same level of friendship among Spanish-speaking nations or among French-speaking nations.
There was no sin in the fact that they all spoke the same language (and Sharon, there is no sin in anyone learning anyone else’s language). Rather, the sin was two-fold: (1) they refused obey God’s command to fill the earth but rather stayed in one place, and (2) they misused the power that having one language gave them in trying to build a name for themselves with building the tower to heaven.
God had already promised not to destroy man again as he did with the flood, so this time he solved the problem in a rather unique and clever way.
Good to see we agree here.
I don’t know if I agree with your statement, Colin, about “I don’t think God wants to keep men from advancing too far technologically…” There are a lot of things that God doesn’t “want” but he allows, to our detriment. Creation of the nuclear bombs enough to really mess up his creation, is one possible example of something that man with one language has created that to me, borders on going too far.
I think I know that God want us in heaven with him. He wants to make a new heaven and earth. Those are his long term plans anyway. There is no desire expressed in scripture that man would not see technological advancements for it’s own sake. It’s one of those cause and effect mix-ups - like “premarital sex leads to dancing.” Atom bombs were created because man’s thoughts are violent and depraved - not because technology itself is bad.