An Archeology of Language

Languages Die, but Not Their Last Words - NYT

I have mixed feelings when I read articles like this one. On the one hand, the loss of a form of communication comes as a blow to my academic sensibilities. The death of a language does not sit well with me. But on the other, any project that attempts to record dying languages seems at best a futile effort and at worst a form of intellectual masturbation. Without active speakers of a language then that language holds no meaning. Recording the sounds, while serving its own purpose as a historical record, does not allow for future generations to understand the language, let alone effectively speak it. If the intent is to preserve the language in a way that allows for future communication then a dictionary of that language is necessary for starters. Even so, I doubt that one could effectively save a language by writing it down, recording it or preserving it in any form other than active usage. Latin was able to maintain itself through its continual usage, if only among a select minority of people. But the meaning was preserved, which is what is important for a language. While I don't begrudge the scientist and academics of their desire to capture these languages before they fade completely, I do have problems with the intent of the project. One cannot bottle up a language as if it was a specimen.