Your Answer ▼
Many people insist that governments should
provide minor languages with financial support to protect them, while others
think that it is not reasonable from the (여기에 financial 을 넣고, of 이하를 날려버리는 것도 가능합니다.) perspective of the government's
finance. I will discuss both opinions and also suggest my own view.
Some people maintain that minor languages
should be preserved for two reasons. Firstly, it is helpful to maintain a
variety of cultures. The language is not only a mean of communication, but also
a cultural property embodying a history of some groups. It would be more valuable
than other things such as money. Secondly, saving only limited major languages
would lead to inequality between the underdeveloped and overdeveloped countries (기존 표현도 틀린 건 아닙니다. 저는 3개 이상의 국가를 가정하고 수정해드렸는데, 기존 표현의 경우 그냥 개발도상국을 통째로 하나로 묶고, 선진국을 통째로 하나로 묶은 의미로 작성된 것인데, 이것도 적절해요.) country.
If people allow minor languages to die out due to the budget problem, only
languages used in few rich countries are likely to remain in the future. It
would construct the global social conditions that are beneficial for people
living in some rich states.
However, numerous people argue that the
protection of minor language would be a waste of money. They insist that it is a natural phenomenon that a language less used disappears in the world, as there
are a number of languages that could replace the languages of few speakers speckers.
In addition, it would take a lot of money to protect pretect minor language because the government should would have to hire excessively many experts to record and educate them,
although they are less likely to be used in daily life.
In conclusion, it is true that both views
are somewhat reasonable. However, I believe that governments governmets have to attempt to
preserve various languages to prevent world from the simplification of
cultures. |