Many local languages today are dying out due to the rise of languages like English. Is this a positive or negative development?

Sample 1:

The ubiquity of English as a lingua franca is leading to lesser-known languages fading away. Although this is a great cultural loss for the world as a whole, it is a positive development for the ethnic groups in question.

Those who regret these loses point out the irreplaceable role of unique languages among ethnic peoples. A good example of this would be in India which is home to 22 national languages and hundreds of unofficial languages in various states of decay. Once a region begins to assimilate and learn English and Hindi, their native tongue becomes antiquated. Since language does more to shape how we see the world than our vision, this also means an interpretation of the world falls away. Over time, younger people will tend to follow global or national trends rather than local ones and the culture itself will be at risk.

Despite the disadvantages mentioned above, assimilation means progress. Western tourists might feel their right to see authentic ethnic minorities is being stripped away, but those groups typically want better lives for themselves and their children. Speaking a language known only to a small group of people greatly limits your opportunities. You can remain in your village and live below the poverty line your entire life or learn a widely spoken language and be able to travel, work and stay abreast of developments abroad. Even if they do not leave the country, they can move to bigger cities and pursue their passion. Those that remain in their villages, will have better chances of finding online work as well.

In conclusion, the disappearance of smaller languages is inevitable and positive from a purely utilitarian point of view. It would be great to find a means of supporting indigenous tribes that choose to preserve their ancestors’ way of life.