Which language would you add/remove to/from the United Nations?

[PeterMollenburg]

If they added my L1 Cantonese then maybe I could finally understand them better, like, who they are and what they do

The UN is a private organisation with a semi-hidden agenda (it can be found if you know how to uncover the truth) which is something along the lines of a world and people united for a single purpose- control, and it is sold to the public via mass media as peacekeepers and do-gooders. The people that make up the UN are for the most part oblivious to the motives behind the scenes or just followed their career into the organistion, much as tellers work at a bank and banks do not have peoples interest at heart but peoples' interest lining the pockets of those at the top. I have friends who work in banks, as others probably know people who work at the UN, they are not evil, but the ultimate agenda behind such organisations is not pretty. And in answer to the question of languages, none! I would dismantle the UN altogether then languages in general would stand a better chance of survival in a globalizing world.

[Seneca]

If they added my L1 Cantonese then maybe I could finally understand them better, like, who they are and what they do

The UN is a private organisation with a semi-hidden agenda (it can be found if you know how to uncover the truth) which is something along the lines of a world and people united for a single purpose- control, and it is sold to the public via mass media as peacekeepers and do-gooders. The people that make up the UN are for the most part oblivious to the motives behind the scenes or just followed their career into the organistion, much as tellers work at a bank and banks do not have peoples interest at heart but peoples' interest lining the pockets of those at the top. I have friends who work in banks, as others probably know people who work at the UN, they are not evil, but the ultimate agenda behind such organisations is not pretty. And in answer to the question of languages, none! I would dismantle the UN altogether then languages in general would stand a better chance of survival in a globalizing world.

What is the premise for that argument? If nothing else, UNESCO publishes information about endangered languages and encourages the use of them in school textbooks and such. How would removing that influence entirely be helpful to small languages? If anything, globalization alone would destroy even more languages as those on the fringes face more and more pressure from the dominant language of economics in a given location. If you wish to preserve languages, a "free market" where language learning is driven only by economics and the natural course of populations rising and falling is not the route I'd choose first.

[PeterMollenburg]

If they added my L1 Cantonese then maybe I could finally understand them better, like, who they are and what they do

The UN is a private organisation with a semi-hidden agenda (it can be found if you know how to uncover the truth) which is something along the lines of a world and people united for a single purpose- control, and it is sold to the public via mass media as peacekeepers and do-gooders. The people that make up the UN are for the most part oblivious to the motives behind the scenes or just followed their career into the organistion, much as tellers work at a bank and banks do not have peoples interest at heart but peoples' interest lining the pockets of those at the top. I have friends who work in banks, as others probably know people who work at the UN, they are not evil, but the ultimate agenda behind such organisations is not pretty. And in answer to the question of languages, none! I would dismantle the UN altogether then languages in general would stand a better chance of survival in a globalizing world.

What is the premise for that argument? If nothing else, UNESCO publishes information about endangered languages and encourages the use of them in school textbooks and such. How would removing that influence entirely be helpful to small languages? If anything, globalization alone would destroy even more languages as those on the fringes face more and more pressure from the dominant language of economics in a given location. If you wish to preserve languages, a "free market" where language learning is driven only by economics and the natural course of populations rising and falling is not the route I'd choose first.

My words were unclear, i was meaning exactly what u stated that globalisation is bad for languages and their survival

[reineke]

"The Indian government is prepared to spend up to four billion rupees ($63 million) to make Hindi one of the official languages of the UN, according to the country’s external affairs minister, Sushma Swaraj.

Speaking in the Lok Sabha (India’s lower house of parliament) last month, Swaraj said that the only hindrance to making Hindi an official UN language was procedural, not financial. Hindi is India’s most widely spoken language, with an estimated total of over half a billion speakers (400 million mother-tongue speakers plus 130 million Indians who have learned it), or 53% of the country’s population, but India has 29 languages with over a million speakers (including 125 million English speakers) when second and third languages are taken into account.

Less than 15% of speakers of southern languages know Hindi. With such a variety of languages, the promotion of Hindi as a national language is controversial and often meets with protest..."

https://www.languagemagazine.com/2018/0 ... ficial-un/

[Xenops]

I've always wondered how India and China, with so many different languages and dialects, are able to run their countries. This push to make Hindi more official will be interesting to watch.

While there has been people making challenges to learn all languages in X country or continent, I'm surprised nobody has wanted to learn all of the UN languages? It is, after all, only *six* languages.

[MamaPata]

I've always wondered how India and China, with so many different languages and dialects, are able to run their countries. This push to make Hindi more official will be interesting to watch.

While there has been people making challenges to learn all languages in X country or continent, I'm surprised nobody has wanted to learn all of the UN languages? It is, after all, only *six* languages.

This occasionally occurs to me when I'm procrastinating on something really important. English is my native languge, I already study three of them, have studied another. Arabic and Chinese... that would be fine?

And then I remember what I'm really meant to be doing. (Maybe remind me when I finish my exams... Or don't. It's a terrible idea, please don't remind me)

(There is a schoolgirl with a blog called something like Brooke and Yara, who is planning to learn them all.)

[Cavesa]

I've always wondered how India and China, with so many different languages and dialects, are able to run their countries. This push to make Hindi more official will be interesting to watch.

While there has been people making challenges to learn all languages in X country or continent, I'm surprised nobody has wanted to learn all of the UN languages? It is, after all, only *six* languages.

This occasionally occurs to me when I'm procrastinating on something really important. English is my native languge, I already study three of them, have studied another. Arabic and Chinese... that would be fine?

And then I remember what I'm really meant to be doing. (Maybe remind me when I finish my exams... Or don't. It's a terrible idea, please don't remind me)

(There is a schoolgirl with a blog called something like Brooke and Yara, who is planning to learn them all.)

Yeah, I usually start learning or gathering resources for tons of languages instead of studying.

India and China are interesting examples.

China unified the writing system. And as far as I know (please correct me) pushes Mandarin as the main language of education.
India uses English for lots of purposes, and actually seems to be protecting the original languages to various extent.

But let's not forget these countries cannot be the examples of how to do it right.

China is a totalitarian country. What is centrally decided really happens. Therefore it is much easier to either support or destroy a language (or a culture or an ethnic group). The same way, USSR was pushing Russian to be the majority language and solve the issue with various native languages of the people, and we could find many more historical examples of such solutions to governing a multilingual region. No matter what language solution can we imagine for any given region, I suppose we'll agree that a totalitarian way to implement it is definitely not an acceptable path.

India is different. It is in general a very poor country despite lots of changes and successes (like their space program). The language of the richer people, education, and business, seems to be English. Please correct me, if I am wrong. So, I wouldn't take India for a good example either, as the message could easily be "get rid of the small languages or starve".

I think people are not after the UN languages, as the UN is simply less attractive as something to identify with. I am definitely not gonna enter any discussion on what is the purpose or agenda of the UN on this forum, neither for it or against it. But it is obvious the UN doesn't bring the "I am a unitednationer" sentiment, which would attract language learners to learn the six languages. "I am european" is an identity bringing people to learn the EU languages, at least a few of them. There are other examples but this is the best one.There are also people identifying with or passioned about the middle east, the mediteranean, scandinavia, southeast asia, the former A-U empire, and so on. The UN is simply too distant from the individual people to evoke such an emotion.

And out of the people who do not learn languages as a passion or hobby: why would they learn all the UN languages? A pragmatic typical learner will learn only the necessary ones. And as those six are all equal in the UN, why learn more than one?

However, I am surprised I haven't seen any decisions to learn the BRIC languages, those would make sense for all the "I want to learn only the most useful business languages" people. And a combination of Brazilian Portuguese, Russian, English (or perhaps Hindi) and Mandarin still sounds less difficult than the UN combination.

[tarvos]

I think Hindi and Portuguese are really the only viable candidates.

China is really hell-bent on pushing Mandarin, which is a shame, but with the mounds of local dialects there it's no surprise they need a lingua franca.

[Seneca]

I think Hindi and Portuguese are really the only viable candidates.

China is really hell-bent on pushing Mandarin, which is a shame, but with the mounds of local dialects there it's no surprise they need a lingua franca.

The arguments between Hindi and Portuguese could be quite interesting, I think.

[Dylan95]

Turkish and Japanese. Potentially Swahili or Indonesian as well.