Why I chose this topic was to create an awareness against lose of languages.
Resource:
Could the language barrier actually fall within the next 10 years?
Assistant Professor of Spanish, University of South Florida
Some people claim that we will be communicating throughout the world without any differences in language. Even if it seems like a wonderful idea, isn’t it actually to kill lots of languages on earth?
David Arbesu says in his article that every language has its own rules, such as syntactic, phonemic, semantic rules. I agree with him in terms of protecting these rules, since these rules are the basic things that make the language a language. Ignoring these rules and focusing on the rules of one specific language which will be used throughout the world means eliminating many of the languages in the world, and this will lead to the lose of diversity of language, culture and language richness of the world. Surely, I can say that most of the people, upon a common language coming about, will be interested in learning this language specificly, which will cause to forgetting many languages.
I can, also, agree with the Arbesu’s idea that using only one specific language throughout the world will result in being loaded more data into translating programmes. Arbesu claims that words will not indicate the meaning while being translated, as it is impossible to interpret the meaning of emotions and metaphor. In his article, Arbesu express this by stating that computers can not interpret the meaning, because a computer or any device doesn’t have the ability of language acqusition that humanity has.Therefore, he doesn’t regard the devices as real translators. According to me, this seems logical not to regard them as real translators, since they can’t recognize the emotions, sarcasm etc.
However, when it comes to sarcasm, there becomes a translation paradox Arbesu says. To make it clear, machines aim for perfection and rationality, but, in contrast, languages are imperfect and irrational. Making the machines much more logical prevents human speech to be interpreted correctly, as a result, I can say that it is impossible to detect the sarcasm for a machine.
Apart from all these, in this sense, this idea comes to my mind: Can a maschine do multitasking speaking jobs? To illustrate, a simultaneous translator can interpret many people’s speech at the same time such as dialogues, debates etc. Can a computer succeed this? I don’t believe in it. Or else, this will mean disappearing of translation science, which is terrible. I think, the replacement of machines will not satisfy the needs and will not be reliable, to prove this I want to ask this question,how can humanity with its imperfectness and all the defects it has, create something that is perfect? I don’t believe it or I don’t want to believe .
To sum up, people shouldn’t kill their language by using specific one just to communicate throughout the world, they had better learn many languages instead of one and widen their horizons by learning new languages with their new culture. By this way, there will be no lose of language, culture or ,even, jobs.
Little Academician 