Language AC
1
“Resolved: When in conflict, the preservation of minority cultural values ought to be valued above the
preservation of a unified national culture.”
Begaye 1 defines culture. 1
culture is “a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means
of which people communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life.” The
function of culture is established by participation and interpretation of community members’ social
habits. Through interaction, members of a community both individually and collectively establish meaning with behaviors
that must have consistent interpretation with local community ways of knowing. To Geertz, culture is an essential aspect of
According to anthropologist Clifford Geertz,
communities and social groups where behavior and attitude is an expression commonly shared by allowing for interaction and communication among members to play out.
Thus one of the most fundamental aspects of culture is language because it is the way that humans form the
basis of their social norms.
Because the resolution questions what ought to happen, the value is Morality. Other values are just
subcategories of morality because morality is what conceives the dichotomy between right and wrong. Further,
other values do not properly address differences between cultures because they assume a basis of good that may
not be understood, while morality is universal in terms of a metaphysical need to attribute labels to actions.
The value criterion is maximizing the diversity of language. Language is relevant to morality because it is the
way we construct the basis of cultural choices. Without language to destroy the divisive barriers between
humans we can never relate moral propositions. Even if communication can exist non-verbally these forms are
remarkably inefficient and refuted by the development of language to begin with. This means that the criterion
is sufficient because discourse can generate change needed to correct for social ills. Language is important for
several more reasons.
First, it is the only way to express cultural knowledge.
Begaye 2 explains,
we need the knowledge that they (languages) preserve and transmit. Human beings have been able to
evolve cultures that make use of the natural resources of practically every square mile of this planet and each
culture transmits the cumulated knowledge that has been gained from generation to generation through
its language. Dalby asserts that language is not only used as a means of communication but as the carrier of cultural
norms and values.
First,
Second, diversity of language forces us to embrace unconventional views, which is necessary for evaluating the
truth of our own moral propositions.
Begaye 3 continues,
beyond the transmission of acquired and tested language, we need other languages
for the insights they give us into the way things may be — we need them for those alternative world
views. Western culture has made, through language, a provisional analysis of reality and, without correctives, holds
resolutely to that analysis as final. The only correctives lie in all those other tongues which by aeons of
independent evolution have arrived at different, but equally logical provisional analyses.
He also underscores the value of perspectives:
1
Timothy Begaye Native Teacher Understanding of Culture as a Concept for Curricular Inclusion 2007 Assistant Professor Educational Leadership & Policy Studies
Language AC
2
Third, sustaining the diversity of minority languages is the only way to sustain the majority dialogue which is
crucial to our existence.
Begaye 4 explains,
we need a multiplicity of languages because it is
interaction with other languages that keeps our own languages flexible and creative. We have seen, throughout this book, how
Beyond the transmission of knowledge, beyond the transmission of insights into the structure of the human world,
English speakers have drawn on the resources of dozens of other languages to stretch the capabilities of their language and to increase its vocabulary. As far as English is concerned, the phenomenon was never more
The total number of languages spoken in the world, having fallen very steeply to that point, will
continue to fall very steeply, as we have already predicted. From that point, the speakers of English will have fewer and fewer other
languages to draw on for new words and ideas. And within two to three hundred years from now they
will have none. The problem is imaginary, you will say. With its vast inherited resources, English will already have enough
words; possibly too many. No. They will be the wrong kind of words. There is already a vast mass of words in the English
dictionaries, but many of them are lying dormant. Ordinary, innovative, creative people, when they want to express a new idea or spread a new thought, reach for
words and rhythms from their own minds; they don’t reach out for dictionaries. This isn’t how creativity happens. And people don’t usually invent a word out of thin air, For every Kodak (an
invented name) there are several dozen robots (a word borrowed from Czech, though with new meaning). People might do more in the
noticeable than it is today.
way of pure invention of words, it’s true: but it’s an unfriendly business. If you invent your words out of nothing you will be hard to understand. Natural language never has worked that way, and it’s difficult to suppose it
ever will. The knowledge that we and our children need is being lost as we destroy the languages and cultures in which that knowledge has been recorded. The insights that we can gain from understanding the world views
The creativity and flexibility that our descendants will need in their
language, if they are to survive and prosper, will in due course wither away. Our long-term future is
threatened by the disappearance of languages.
embodied in other languages will soon be beyond our reach.
Therefore, attempts to preserve the unified national culture only results in its inevitable failure.
Fourth, losing our language means a loss in our identities as human beings and is symbolic of the loss of all
diversity.
Begaye 5 explains,
the death of any natural language represents an incalculable loss and that
the loss of linguistic diversity represents a loss of intellectual diversity. He further notes that language is a unique tool
for analyzing and synthesizing the world, incorporating the knowledge and values of a speech
community. In making his point, he quotes a study led by Kenneth Hale, another linguist: “there is the cultural pluralist approach: language loss is ‘part of the more
general loss being suffered by the world, the loss of diversity in all things.’ Crawford affirms the social - justice perspective by emphasizing
James Crawford, who has written extensively on language shifts, warns “that
“
the value of a diversity of languages and the social values of communication and multiple perspectives. He notes the value of language diversity while acknowledging the potential loss. In this, his views are similar to those of
The destruction of a language is the destruction of a rooted identity for both groups
and individuals because the concept of identity is predicated on uniqueness.
linguist Joshua Fishman, who writes, “
Identity is important because it is how we attribute meaning to events throughout our lives. Living is shaped by
experiences which in turn form how we view ourselves and judge our significance. Without a personal identity,
life becomes meaningless and empty because there no longer is the motive to improve or fulfill our desires.
Language AC
3
Thus, I contend we should value the preservation of the minority culture over the preservation of the unified
culture because it allows for more languages to exist.
First, minority languages cannot survive in the unified culture, they are almost mutually exclusive.
Begaye 6 explains,
In the context of these demographic transformations and the larger forces of globalization, there is
increasing intolerance for linguistic and cultural diversity. Across the United States, working – class students, students of color, and English language learners are being deskilled in one size fits all, phonics based reading programs and
simultaneously constructed as deficient for their low performance on English standardized tests. According to McCarty,
“There is nothing neutral about these processes. Masquerading as an instrument of equality as reflected,
for example, in the current U.S. policy of ‘leaving no child behind’ the pressures for standardization are,
in fact, creating a new polarization between those with and without access to opportunity and resources.
While language may be taught in social institutions, they can never thrive because of the need of the majority to
destroy and deconstruct what is foreign. Some even go to say that the multiplicity of languages is a nuisance
and that the sooner everyone speaks English, the better.
Second, minority languages can be revitalized, but work is needed, we need to value its preservation.
Begaye 7 writes,
There is considerable hope for Native languages, especially where they are still being learned by children, being taught in bilingual education programs, and receiving
tribal and institutional support. However, in practice, there is limited progress in curbing the overall pace of language shift. Unless language and culture, as it is understood by
society on all sides of the debate on loss, is practiced, sustained, and embedded in daily practice, it cannot be maintained.
Scholars have recognized that this bleak situation is unlikely to change without a stronger commitment at
all levels and without a substantial infusion of new resources. According to many Native people, preservation is a complex challenge because language
and culture is a broad and inclusive concept that is better understood as an inclusive term, and only with
practice and support from multiple perspectives at the policy and community levels will there be survival.
Third, the minority languages of today could be the majority language of tomorrow.
Begaye 8 elaborates,
Despite the rather long history of challenges to sustaining Native languages, McCarty notes how continued immigration of cultural groups and evolving federal policy has diminished the practice and existence of Native
the US is experiencing an unprecedented demographic shift stemming
from the ‘new immigrant’ — those who have emigrated to the USA since national origin quotas were
abolished in 1965. Unlike earlier waves of immigration, which originated in Europe and were largely
white, recent immigrants are primarily from Latin America, Southeast Asia, and the Caribbean. People
of color now compose 28 percent of the nation’s population, with the numbers expected to grow to 38
percent in 2024, and 47 percent in 2050.
languages in the United States. “These pressures come at a time when
Thus even if the majority culture is lost, it can be replaced by the growth of a minority culture.