In my opinion the world would be a little more peaceful if everyone spoke the same language. First off, if there was one worldwide language there would be less of a chance of miscommunication which could stop some unnecessary fighting and wars such as the case of World War I. Secondly, I believe that if everyone spoke the same language there would be less hate since everyone would share a common trait which would make everyone seem more equal and help eliminate useless acts of violence. Another way that the world would be more peaceful is that we would eliminate the need for translators and this would lead to expressing our ideas more clearly and efficiently and avoid certain problems which are included with the act of translation. The world would be more peaceful if we all spoke the same language.
-Andrei Papai-
In my point of view having a universal language would have its positive and negatives. On the positive end of the spectrum miscommunications would be lessened a considerable amount. The negative end of the spectrum would be the loss of culture that goes along with the loss of a language. For many peoples the language is essential to retaining a distinct culture. The differing cultures of the world is what drew me in to international diplomacy in the first place. It is these distinctions that make us human, are miscommunications make us human as well. If we all spoke one language our culture might mold into something new and cohesive. Even if it is cohesive i think there would still not be wide spread peace. History has taught us that even peoples with the same language still can have cultural misunderstandings that lead to armed conflict. For example, the civil war in America. The Americans of the North and the South both spoke one language, arguably. Yet the people of the North didn't want slavery, the slave owners of the South had slavery engrained into their culture. This is just one example of this kind of mono linguistic conflict but there are many more. Yet another example is something all the scholars in the NSCl international diplomacy program know well. The World simulation, where each table had its own recourses and and government and we were to conduct diplomacy and warfare like in the real world. After the first hour it became clear to all the tables/countries that this game would soon boil down to nothing short of a good old fashioned cold war arms race. Despite our shared language and similar cultures we soon began developing " super mustard gas" to wipe out each others countries. One may argue that this is just a bunch of teenagers playing war, I argue that some of the world leaders are just a bunch of teenagers playing war. it all comes down to the flaws of humanity, which i believe are numerous. It is our flaws that make us so belligerent, but also so entertaining. You can make a single language, but i think World Sim and Robert E. Lee has showed us that wont do much good.
ReplyDeleteI personally strongly oppose the belief that any benefits would arise from a mono-lingual society. Both Andrei and Daniel explain the single benefit of having a universal language; that there will be fewer miscommunications due to the riddance of a language barrier. However, miscommunications are primarily derived from individual perceptions and misinterpretations of another culture rather than the specific language itself, according to studies by Kevin Avruch and Peter W. Black of the Conflict Resolution Organization. Andrei states that that a universal language would make peace efforts more efficient, however, this is not true because nations currently communicate effectively and efficiently through diplomacy and organizations such as the UN. Conflict arises primarily through ones interpretations of another culture and not being able to understand reasoning behind actions leading to misunderstandings. On the other hand, the benefits of a multi-lingual society includes enriching the world with culture. The individual culture of nations allow people to exist harmoniously on a local level and instill pride in their own nation. Through diminishing hundreds of languages to create a universal one, we will begin to lose unique cultural values upsetting many people in the process of the compromise leading to excessive amounts of conflict. The benefits of a multi-lingual society are much greater than the cons.
ReplyDeleteHere is a link describing how miscommunications are derived from perception and not specifically language:
http://www.crinfo.org/articlesummary/10033/
I do agree with Dan because it is true that misunderstandings due to language differences would be lessened, if not disappeared with a single world language. Furthermore it would’ve had its own minute positive outcomes that would sum up to be a pretty large difference: billions and billions of paper would not go to waste because of the unread user’s manuals (according to Hürriyet, a Turkish newspaper, half of the paper consumption in 2002 would’ve been saved this year if a country wrote the user’s manuals only in the official language) and a lot of time would be saved everywhere where the announcements were made only in one language (countries like Belgium and Switzerland where there are more than two official languages have to spend extra time on trains and planes and other means of transportation because all the announcements have to be done in all three languages, which takes an incredibly long time).
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand the negative effects of a single language would pose a threat to peace, like it has done in the past and has been doing today: for Muslims the Arabic language is the universal language, since the holy book is written in that language. Regrettably, thousands of Muslims kill each other every year solely because of the difference of their religious sects (and different sects mean different elucidations of the same book). Ideally everyone is supposed to get the same meaning from the Quran however different interpretations of a single language cause casualties. Sadly, the same applies for Christianity as well. To conclude, I reckon it is especially tricky to guess if a single language would make the world “more peaceful,” but I think it is worth trying.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete