LAURA KNIGHT-JADCZYK AND JOE QUINN
Since the 9/11 attacks, no book has provided a satisfactory answer as to WHY the attacks occurred and who was ultimately responsible for carrying them out - until now.
Why is the "extinction of a language" a problem? I appreciate the loss of oral history, but the bottom line is that in any given language you can express the things that need to be expressed by the people who need to express it.
OK, the Eskimos supposedly have three bazillion words for "snow", but so do English speakers, they just don't express it as "one single word", it will be rendered as a "phrase". What is the MEANINGFUL difference? What is the difference between a "word" and a "phrase"? Why does this difference matter?
I just can't yet get beyond the sense that the loss of language is "a fact" rather than "a tragedy". Hopefully someone can educate me as to why it matters.
What you're saying is that it's not a tragedy if there's no more wood - we can replace it with wood-looking plastic.
As for the difference between a word and a phrase... If I replace the word "horse" by its dictionary description - "a solid-hoofed plant-eating domesticated mammal with a flowing mane and tail, used for riding and to carry and pull loads" - how will you know I mean a horse, and not a donkey? ;-)
I kind of see loosing a language every 2 weeks as a sad occurrence. I believe that every language has a bit of hidden knowledge and when there is no one around to analyse the language or connect the dots, when there is still someone around who speaks it, all of its history dies with the last person if it isn't put into text form and there isn't a Rosetta stone out there..
In the second paragraph, "The English language has about 800,000 words." and "Italian movies have won the most Academy Awards for Best Foreign Film." are related to the whole subject of language, but they appear to be put oddly between other sentences.