Hi Ed and Ray,

I, too, have been sad for many years that the thousands of languages of the
world are disappearing at a fast clip. (I haven't read the NYT article but
I gather that two or three a week are dying.) However, there's a hopeful
upside to consider.

As Chomsky surmised a long time ago (and as evolutionary biologists are now
confirming) we have an innate faculty for language. Although our genes for
language certainly lay down much hard-wiring (e.g. the neural pathways from
the motor-sensory areas of the frontal lobes to the lips and larynx), there
are also creative opportunities under the influence of the culture and
environment (e.g. we are told of the Inuit's many words for snow). The
thousands of languages of the original hunter-gatherers around the world,
some of them existing only a few miles away from a different one, attest to
this.

Besides language, we have great abilities to create new cultures. I believe
very strongly that when the gross industrial technologies based on the
ephemeral era of cheap fossil fuels disappear in the coming decades then
the present globalisation of economics and culture will once again give way
to localisation as we become adept at genomic technologies. People will
have no need to flock into megalopolises by the million and people will
have no need to commute in order have jobs with social companionship. There
is no reason at all why we shouldn't evolve brilliant local cultures again
(perhaps not so bloodthirsty as some of the traditional ones) and �who
knows? �even new local languages.

And where will politicians and nation-states fit into this?  Nowhere.
They're already dead, or dying, ducks.

Keith

At 16:51 18/11/02 -0500, you wrote:
(REH)
<<<<
You sound like an economist. My former student and my daughter's God mother
Jane Lind is Aleut.  . . . She has spent the last few years working with
and rescuing the indigenous theater and art forms as well as the music and
language in Alaska.    There is a great wealth there and it would be crime
to let all of that experience and richness disappear. Like I said it is a
dark age akin to the burning of the library at Alexandria. . . . .
>>>>
(EW)
I don't mean to sound like an economist and, deep down inside, I do mourn
the passing of languages and of culturally different lenses for seeing
reality. When I spent a lot of time in the Mackenzie Valley, the Yukon and
other northern places during the past four decades, I tried very hard to
see the world the way Native people of those places saw it. I couldn't of
course, at least not completely.  What ever so many young Native people
were trying to do at the same time was see the world as I saw it. They had a
much easier time of it than I did because things were loaded in my
direction and the direction of my society.  Their society, at least in its
traditional forms, was passing, mine was ascending.  Many of them became
politicians and bureaucrats able to operate in my world far better than I
could ever have hoped to operate in theirs.  They are still able to operate
in their world, though it is no longer the world in which they work or
depend on, so it may be fading for them.

That is the upside story.  The downside is something else that I've seen
many, many times as well.  It's young kids, laughing at a grandmother,
because she is giving them hell in a native language they no longer
understand.  Or it's teens, trying to be oh so cool, oh so modern, just
like they've seen on TV.  Or it's far, far worse than that: sniffing gas,
doing drugs, and not really being able to see reality through any kind of
lens at all.

Things pass. It's sad, and one can only hope that the outcome is not
destructive.  Often it is.
>>>>



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
Keith Hudson,6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
Tel:01225 312622/444881; Fax:01225 447727; E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________________

Reply via email to