Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of

Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of people. Some people say that governments should spend public money on saving these languages, while others believe that it would be a waste of money. Discuss both these views and give your opinion hay nhất giúp bạn có thêm tài liệu tham khảo để viết bài luận bằng Tiếng Anh hay hơn.

Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of

Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of - mẫu 1

It is true that some minority languages may disappear in the near future. Although it can be argued that governments could save money by allowing this to happen, I believe that these languages should be protected and preserved.

There are several reasons why saving minority languages could be seen as a waste of money. Firstly, if a language is only spoken by a small number of people, expensive education programmes will be needed to make sure that more people learn it, and the state will have to pay for facilities, teachers and marketing. This money might be better spent on other public services. Secondly, it would be much cheaper and more efficient for countries to have just one language. Governments could cut all kinds of costs related to communicating with each minority group.

Despite the above arguments, I believe that governments should try to preserve languages that are less widely spoken. A language is much more than simply a means of communication; it has a vital connection with the cultural identity of the people who speak it. If a language disappears, a whole way of life will disappear with it, and we will lose the rich cultural diversity that makes societies more interesting. By spending money to protect minority languages, governments can also preserve traditions, customs and behaviours that are part of a country’s history.

In conclusion, it may save money in the short term if we allow minority languages to disappear, but in the long term this would have an extremely negative impact on our cultural heritage.

Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of - mẫu 2

People remain divided over whether minority languages should be preserved or not. While a school of thought holds that governments should fund the preservation of these languages, others believe that saving them would be a waste of money. Personally, I agree with the former view because if these languages died out, so would the history and the culture they represent.

On the one hand, it is understandable why some people advocate letting these endangered languages vanish. The rationale might be because extinction is an integral part of the natural process of evolution in which strong languages will thrive while the weak ones diminish. As a result, spending public money protecting something that would eventually disappear is therefore pointless, given that many states are under a constraint budget these days. Furthermore, there are other more important domains such as education and healthcare that need investment, and the improvements in these sectors could benefit the public as a whole.

On the other hand, I would concur with those who believe that states should foot the bill to save endangered languages as they are a major component of the living culture and history of our society. In other words, protecting those on the brink of extinction also means preserving our culture and history. For example, many tribes pass on their customs and traditions to the next generations via story-telling and verbal communication instead of documentation. Therefore, those who spoke minority languages are the representatives of their civilization. As governments have already invested an enormous sum of money in the preservation of history and culture, I believe that there's no reason why they should not do the same with languages.

In conclusion, while there are reasons to support allowing less widely spoken languages to disappear, I believe that these languages represent a part of humans' history and cultural heritage, and therefore should be protected.

Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of - mẫu 3

Some languages are in the phase of extinction due to the low population of the speakers. A group of people believe that governments should allocate some budget to preserve these languages, but others think that it would not be effective and efficient. The following essay will discuss both opinions, but I believe that maintaining the diversity of languages is an important thing.

On the one hand, some people believe that spending public money for protecting minority languages is a waste of money and time. The cost of maintaining the languages would be expensive since, there are only a small number of people who speak the languages, and many young people would refuse in learning and speaking in these languages as well. They believe that the money could be allocated for other important matters such as education, public transport and health.

On the other hand, many people believe that it is necessary for governments to preserve the existence of minority languages. Every nation has its own traditional languages which are spoken by their ancestor and descendants, and they have been passing through for many generations. There are a lot of myths, legends, traditional and cultural activities which are passing over to the next generation using these languages, as many tribes have no written literature. And if these languages do extinct, then it means that many nations will lose their precious historical cultures. Therefore, it is important for governments to take some efforts in maintaining minority languages, though the cost of preserving them might be considered as expensive.

In conclusion, it is a fact that several languages in the world are in the phase of extinction. Some people suggest that governments should provide some fund for preserving these languages since they are inherited from the ancestors. Others think that the act is a waste of money as it has not economic benefits. Though both views have their own positive sides, I personally believe that people should protect the diversity of languages.

Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of - mẫu 4

Our civilizations rely mainly on language as it is the most efficient way of communication. Some languages will eventually go extinct since very few people actively speak them. There are several debates on whether governments should spend money to maintain them or whether doing so could waste our public funds. However, I believe it's essential to keep local languages alive.

There are increased attempts from various states, primarily the more affluent ones, to preserve these languages, which could become extinct soon. For instance, languages from many cultures on our planet are shared through campaigns, language tournaments, and language scholarships for students of diverse backgrounds. As people learn more languages, they will use them to communicate in the future and preserve the languages. As we practice more, sustaining those languages for the succeeding years becomes easier.

However, many argue that governments would have wasted resources if they had to invest heavily in retaining those languages. In addition, the significant and necessary developments that will take place in our communities will require these funds. For example, various public systems, such as health care, transportation, and education, require these resources. Moreover, some languages will perish if they are no longer useful to our society because they are no longer required. Then why would they spend that money on them?

I think these languages should not be forgotten. Language is what represents our culture, place, people, and so on. If a particular place’s language is omitted, the place is replaced and barren, as there will be no one representing it. Hence, we should make efforts and spend money to preserve the languages.

In conclusion, there seem to be two reasons for spending more money to preserve languages. It may cost a lot, but preserving our cultural history is worth it.

Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of - mẫu 5

Some languages are in danger of extinction due to the small number of people left who can speak them. Some say that public money should be used to preserve minority languages, but others think it's a waste because health care and education are more important. It's important to keep some of our heritage alive, so a small part of the national budget could go toward that.

The people in favor of investing in the preservation of languages claim that they are essential to our culture and should be kept for future generations. For example, transferring the language into the print format and translating the literature would be incredibly beneficial and not expensive. This historical treasure would be preserved for the future and may serve as a source of information for future generations if this were accomplished. Therefore, it needs to be done correctly and precisely, and the government must contribute to the process.

On the other hand, some people disagree with the previous perspective and say that there are other sectors, like health and education, that are more essential to invest in. Therefore, it cannot be justified to spend public funds on projects that have no beneficial impacts on society. For instance, development funding must go towards providing for the poor, educating children, and researching treatments for serious diseases. Thus, the remaining aspects are secondary, and funding them would be a waste.

To sum up, it is clear that some native languages are in danger of disappearing since very few people speak them. While some strongly believe that the government should use budget funds to save them, others disagree. I think that some resources could be put toward it because it is part of our heritage.

Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of - mẫu 6

Rare languages with a limited number of speakers are on the verge of extinction. Conflicting opinions exist on whether or not governments should preserve such languages with public funds. I tend to agree that the authorities should do them a favor.

Governments are obligated to conserve culture, including all tangible and intangible cultures. As a form of intangible culture, languages appear to be tools through which people can share and communicate their ideas, beliefs, arts, and histories. Many languages are fading away, which implies that the cultures of the people who once spoke them are disappearing. Apart from that, learning a variety of languages might help historians to have a better understanding of the evolution of the civilization composed of speakers of rare languages. So, it is logical for the government to use public money to save rare languages.

On the contrary, there is an alternative perspective that considers it a waste of money. These groups are reluctant to use public funds to save languages from extinction since governments in some countries with poverty or epidemics frequently lack the resources necessary to meet the necessities of their citizens. Instead of using the money to protect minority languages, they would much rather use it to raise the standard of living for the population. However, it is feasible to request the preservation of several languages from the United Nations or international charitable foundations. It should not simply be dropped due to poverty or diseases.

In conclusion, I believe that governments must work to prevent the extinction of local languages and that the United Nations has a role in supporting those countries that are struggling financially to finish their tasks.

Several languages are in danger of extinction because they are spoken by very small numbers of - mẫu 7

Language is a gateway to knowing about any culture, tradition or country. It is observed that many languages are on the verge of extinction due to being less spoken by people. So, the government’s effort by pouring money to save these languages is sought, while others consider it a waste of money. In my perspective, apart from spending money, making them compulsory in school subjects as well as in offices can help to save them.

Two commence with, and firstly, if governmental bodies utilize funds to save minority languages by making them compulsory to read as a subject from early years, then these can be saved. Extensive research is needed to allure the pupils to read them because these are often neglected due to their less usage either at work or school. For instance, now people are more modern, and they display less enthusiasm for underrated languages due to their less usability. But the government can do a great deal by publishing books and journals with the great academicians to publish the rare facts that the other languages do not have. Only then these can be read enthusiastically. If any government grows the plant of language at the beginning of a child’s career, it will flourish in the coming days.

On the other hand, consider that it is a waste of money. They say because any state of a country has other responsibilities such as providing food, shelter and education to the masses. If some governmental share is distributed to save endangered languages, then there are higher chances of neglecting other areas. Do they have a strong argument that what is the use of pouring money? If people are dying of starvation, and if people do not survive, then who will be there to speak. Thus, providing things to the masses is more important. Only then individuals will appreciate the government’s efforts. Moreover, if people are healthy and mentally fit, then they will express their interest in saving these dying languages.

In conclusion, thus, it is clear that if the government spends money to save these less spoken languages, then in the future, people will remain in touch with their culture and traditions, but in its absence, human identity is also in danger. On the other hand, serving people by providing them with essential things is the utmost responsibility of the government because they are those people who will show their interest in speaking to them.

Xem thêm các bài luận Tiếng Anh hay khác:

• Some people say that violence in the media promotes violence in society. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?

• The majority of news being reported is bad news such as wars, famines, accidents, and crime. Why do you think that is? Do you think the news should be a balance of both good and bad news?

• In recent years, there has been growing interest in the relationship between equality and personal achievement. Some people believe that individuals can achieve more in egalitarian societies. Others believe that high levels of personal achievement are possible only if individuals are free to succeed or fail according to their individual merits. What is your view of the relationship between equality and personal success?

• Some employers reward members of staff for their exceptional contributions to the company by giving them extra money. This practice can act as an incentive for some but may also have a negative impact on others. To what extent is this style of management effective? Are there better ways to encourage employees to work hard?

• What are your views on the false means of advertising used by media agencies?

• Hơn 20.000 câu trắc nghiệm Toán,Văn, Anh lớp 9 có đáp án

---