This document discusses the challenges in measuring linguistic diversity across countries. It notes discrepancies between different data sources, such as the Ethnologue Project identifying over 7,000 languages while the Encyclopedia Britannica used by Alesina et al identified only 1,055 language groups. Introducing a concept of "language distance" that considers similarity between languages helps resolve some of these discrepancies. However, data on native languages does not capture those spoken by migrant communities, which can undermine social trust if the host language is not adopted. Overall, accurately defining and measuring linguistic diversity remains complicated.
This document discusses the challenges in measuring linguistic diversity across countries. It notes discrepancies between different data sources, such as the Ethnologue Project identifying over 7,000 languages while the Encyclopedia Britannica used by Alesina et al identified only 1,055 language groups. Introducing a concept of "language distance" that considers similarity between languages helps resolve some of these discrepancies. However, data on native languages does not capture those spoken by migrant communities, which can undermine social trust if the host language is not adopted. Overall, accurately defining and measuring linguistic diversity remains complicated.
This document discusses the challenges in measuring linguistic diversity across countries. It notes discrepancies between different data sources, such as the Ethnologue Project identifying over 7,000 languages while the Encyclopedia Britannica used by Alesina et al identified only 1,055 language groups. Introducing a concept of "language distance" that considers similarity between languages helps resolve some of these discrepancies. However, data on native languages does not capture those spoken by migrant communities, which can undermine social trust if the host language is not adopted. Overall, accurately defining and measuring linguistic diversity remains complicated.
This document discusses the challenges in measuring linguistic diversity across countries. It notes discrepancies between different data sources, such as the Ethnologue Project identifying over 7,000 languages while the Encyclopedia Britannica used by Alesina et al identified only 1,055 language groups. Introducing a concept of "language distance" that considers similarity between languages helps resolve some of these discrepancies. However, data on native languages does not capture those spoken by migrant communities, which can undermine social trust if the host language is not adopted. Overall, accurately defining and measuring linguistic diversity remains complicated.
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as txt, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 4
Hi there.
In the previous video we
looked at ethnicity and we examined attempts to measure it. We also described the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index. We'll be using this same index in this video. But this time we're going to be focusing on linguistic diversity. Now if ethnicity had seemed complicated, language may offer a back doorway into the same sort of questions. Indeed, one author refers to differences in languages as cultural fractionalization. So, having seen the difficulties we experienced in measuring ethnicity, you could have been forgiven for thinking, that languages will be much easier. All you have to do is to see what language people speak. Well, if only that were the case. Well, let's start with the idea of your mother's tongue. Is that the language spoken at home or the language generally used? Think of someone in a migrant family, first or second generation. Who may indeed speak his or her mother's language in the home. But the host language, of course, will be spoken outside. Or think of multinational lingual communities that are genuinely bilingual. As in the case of Wales, where everyone that speaks Welsh can also speak English and often has to. Similarly in Belgium many citizens can converse in either French or in Flemish. And in mixed families they may do so at home as well. In Africa too many language groups are so similar that people can freely switch between them. This bring us, naturally, to a second problem. When is a language a language? When is it a dialect? This is essentially if we're trying to establish linguistic diversity. The usual criteria employed is one of mutual intelligibility. A language does not count as a separate language if it can be understood from another language. Okay. Let's have a look, make it easier. Let's have a look at Scandinavia. Norwegians can understand both Swedish and
Danish, and Danes and
Swedes can understand each other, although the Danes have a bit more difficulty. And yet they all claim to speak separate languages, and they are always usually listed as such. So, let's have a look at the evidence then. The paper produced by Alesina and his associates in 2002 used exclusively, Encyclopedia Britannica. From this source they managed to distill 1,055 language groups for 201 countries. They choose to ignore the evidence collected by the Ethnologue Project. Now this is a group of linguists interested in preserving languages. And in the 2013 edition of their handbook, they listed over seven thousand languages. Seven thousand one hundred and five to be precise. So now we've got an obvious discrepancy between the two sources. Well, fortunately, the Ethnologues offer a further breakdown. They have 682 languages as official language, officially recognized as such, by some national or international authority. They categorize a further 2,500 languages as vigorous. Which means they're used in face-to-face communication by all generations. Another 1,500 or so languages are defined as developing. So, these 4,700 languages are spoken by almost 99% of the world's population. So we don't need the rest to suspect that the encyclopedia's been a little enthusiastic in compressing the language groups. So I did a second test for myself. According to Wikipedia Papua New Guinea with over eight hundred and fifty languages is a most linguistically diverse place on Earth. Now the ethnology project nuances this picture a little. Twelve of the languages are already extinct, thirty six are dying and a further hundred also are in trouble. All presumably because they don't have many speakers. And because of that, they're unlikely anyway to impact on a fragmentation index. Whereas calculated as such, the small percentage in the total doesn't count for much. Now, the Ethnologue's calculate Papua's fractionalization score
at 1.990 making it indeed the most
fragmented country on earth. Alacenia and Associates calculated 0.35 making it less linguistically diverse than the Netherlands. Now one way of resolving this discrepancy is to introduce a concept of language distance. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. French and Italian are closer to each other than either of them are to English. But all three are closer to each other than any of them is to Chinese. Now, linguistics construct linguistics construct linguistic trees to capture the degree of similarity and differences between languages. By applying criteria of vocabulary and syntax to the world's languages listed by the Ithalog database. One doesn't have to make a crude distinction between language and dialect. The effect of this basically, is to decrease the diversity in Central Africa where most languages are rooted in different versions of Bantu. And to increase the range in Latin America, where there's a large gulf between the European languages and the native languages stemming from before the conquest. The result of this exercise leaves Papua New Guinea with a score of naught .6 and the third in the world. And the Netherlands now has a much more believable score of not .13. Now I will we could say that we could now conclude the discussion, but there's one more question we have to address. All of this data relates to native languages. None of the data makes any attempt to capture the languages spoken by first or second generation migrants. In fact none of the studies even mention it as a problem. But if languages form a mean of communication in society and migrant groups don't speak the host language. It's certainly going to damage the formation of trust. Now one solution in the past was for the host population to translate the information and then in this form it would act as a way of socialization. When I visited the local
history museum in Chicago I
was struck by a poster calling the workers to go on strike. That's nothing unusual, but the poster was in English and in German. Another solution is simply to wait for the problem to disappear. The second generation would speak their native language at home, their host language outside. The third generation would learn a few sentences to talk to grandmother and by the fourth, it would be totally assimilated. But this model no longer works. Because transport costs have fallen, so every generation has the opportunity to return to their home country. They might even migrate back. As a result there's an incentive in maintaining native language fluency. And again as migrant communities plug into satellite television, so they recreate more of their home culture around themselves. And this, again, reduces the incentive to adapt linguistically. Much of the relative linguistic homogeneity in Europe conceals a potential social and economic problem, and one that might undermine the high trust goals that they still have and they still for the time being manage to register. So let's sum up then. In this video we've looked at the phenomenon of linguistic diversity, and we've looked at the difficulties in defining it and measuring it. In the next video we're going to turn our attention on religion. Meanwhile, we'd like you to look at a visualization of the world's map of linguistic diversity that we've constructed for you.