←back to thread

231 points rntn | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.541s | source
Show context
ghusto ◴[] No.35413937[source]
On the one hand: If your culture needs a preservation movement, it's not a culture, but a relic. Culture is defined by people, not some sacred thing that needs to be preserved. How much of the Italian cuisine they're trying to protect would exist if they had the same attitude in the 1500s, when the tomato was introduced to Italy?

On the other hand: I think countries should resist global cultural homogenisation. No offence meant to the Americans here, but I detest the exportation of American culture to Europe. I don't mean music and films, but rather the way of thinking about the world. I suspect this is where things like these proposals are coming from; it's the pendulum swing reaching too far before it settles in the middle.

replies(32): >>35414043 #>>35414075 #>>35414127 #>>35414167 #>>35414291 #>>35414385 #>>35414431 #>>35414591 #>>35414663 #>>35415031 #>>35415085 #>>35415093 #>>35415238 #>>35415252 #>>35415290 #>>35415487 #>>35415830 #>>35416551 #>>35416584 #>>35416958 #>>35417161 #>>35417310 #>>35417602 #>>35417643 #>>35418726 #>>35418735 #>>35418854 #>>35419182 #>>35419235 #>>35419782 #>>35419908 #>>35421649 #
Quarrelsome ◴[] No.35414385[source]
I don't think its necessarily about the culture itself here, its merely a cheap populist tactic to rabble-rouse among a nation that has a rich history and struggles to handle the fact that its present isn't at that zenith. France do a lot of this sort of thing too.

I would argue that belittling cultural preservation demonstrates deep Anglo-centric bias. While its fine for lulz, I worry that you're being sincere. Try asking _anyone_ who doesn't have English as their first language in a serious context how they feel about their language and you'll struggle to find someone without a genuine fondness for it.

On paper there is absolutely nothing wrong with cultures seeking to preserve the use of their own language, however it is fair for us to argue that restrictive and punitive measures such as this are not helpful.

Bear in mind one day English will no longer be the lingua franca as demonstrated by the word for lingua franca. ;). Would English then be a "relic" to you?

replies(11): >>35415214 #>>35415408 #>>35416246 #>>35416749 #>>35418768 #>>35419743 #>>35420208 #>>35420515 #>>35420625 #>>35421655 #>>35441939 #
Fire-Dragon-DoL ◴[] No.35416246[source]
I'm Italian, living in Canada, the reason why I'm attached to my primary language is because I know the most vocabulary and language usage. Aside from that, it's an unfortunate language, since you can't use to communicate anywhere else beside Italy.

We tend to forget that the main purpose of a language is communication, when invoking cultural issues. If you have to penalize usage of English words, you are doing something really wrong.

And when I talk about work it's really hard for me to do in my home language. Some words have no translation or incorrect translation (I work as software developer), which incidentally is the same situation my Italian teacher faced when trying to explain some concepts that had a translation in Italian, but the original latin word had a "wider meaning" that wasn't captured by the translation.

replies(5): >>35416296 #>>35417197 #>>35418377 #>>35420187 #>>35421281 #
thefz ◴[] No.35421281[source]
> If you have to penalize usage of English words, you are doing something really wrong.

Just in official documents, though. You can still say "OK" in the street.

replies(2): >>35421573 #>>35459836 #
DannyBee ◴[] No.35421573[source]
This only serves to form unnecessary barriers. If tomorrow, everyone spoke the same language (ignore which one it was), society would be better off.

History and historical culture, on their own, are a bad reason to do something (ie learning from history makes sense. Doing something for no other reason than the length of time its been does not)

The rest is just about which language and who chooses.

The only thing this sort of bill does is make it harder to get to a better state. At least here they are not pretending it's helpful to do it

replies(2): >>35421804 #>>35422540 #
1. Quarrelsome ◴[] No.35422540[source]
> If tomorrow, everyone spoke the same language (ignore which one it was), society would be better off.

It wouldn't last. Within years it would devolve into various creoles and with centuries; almost entirely different languages. Language is not merely functional but cultural and has purpose outside of meaning (e.g. identity).

replies(1): >>35457743 #
2. DannyBee ◴[] No.35457743[source]
This only serves to backup my point that culture preservation for no meaningful goal is highly dangerous.

Language-as-identity as a way of separating people has no meaningful use case that is positive for society.