shadowrunr recently posted a link to slashdot's science section, on an
article regarding disappearing languages. I read through the comments, and found them lacking in some ways, so I posted a comment there, and I'm repeating it here -- for my two cents.
It is not languages that embody unique cultures and ways of thinking. It is PEOPLE who embody unique cultures and ways of thinking. This planet now holds 6.5 billion unique cultures and ways of thinking. If you want more, then you want a breeding program, not a language preservation program. Languages, in and of themselves, are just a coding scheme. Trying to assign them more weight than that is simply romanticizing the subject, and irrational.
Even if it were true that languages embody ideas -- not all ideas are equally valuable. Each dying language was contained within a culture that was in contact with neighboring cultures. If we grant, arguendo, that there are ideas being lost with the languages, then they are ideas that had so little appeal and vigor that none of the neighboring cultures felt the ideas were worth being assimilated, emulated, or spread -- otherwise the ideas would also be embodied within other languages that are not being lost.
Presuming that some derivative form of English will be one of the final few dominant languages (or the very final one) is not mono-lingual prejudice. I once asked a multi-lingual Vietnamese what the EASIEST "second" language was, for him to learn. He said, "Oh, English by far!" If you understand that, and you understand that humans are genetically programmed to trend toward the easiest paths, then the outcome is inevitable. Overall numbers of speakers as of today is almost an irrelevant issue. In the end, it will simply come down to which language is the easiest to learn. If your language of choice is not as easy for a non-native to learn as English, then your language will eventually die. I'll wager money on it. Conduct your own poll -- see for yourself.
I also disagree about the wondrous value of learning multiple languages. I spent several years learning to say the same things in French that I can say in English. 99.99% of every one of those 7000 languages is devoted to communicating identical content. This is extremely inefficient. Condense out the interesting .01% of each that I cannot say in English, and I will gladly learn it. Until then, it is not an efficient use of time or brainpower.
Please note, too, that NOT ONE CULTURE in all of recorded history has lasted forever. So for those here who are weeping about how painful it is to lose your cultural heritage -- that may very well be true, but it is historically inevitable for every culture, and every language. It's just a matter of time.
One other thing: we have now entered the digital age. Many people start with an outdated basic assumption that info and understanding about cultural differences is hard to find, and therefore precious. But it won't be long until all this multicultural info is available at your fingertips. In 20 years, you will have 10 lifetime's worth of learning about cross-cultural differences sitting right in front of you at any moment. In that upcoming era of overabundant info on cultures and language, much of this debate will look silly.