![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() |
|
![]() | On 10 April 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Language revival. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 September 2019 and 31 December 2019. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
LindsayBotterill.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2020 and 18 December 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Chaalb123.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Zerocarey. Peer reviewers:
Rdow,
Simpson Hannah,
MerodioJJ,
Tedrickja.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 April 2019 and 7 June 2019. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Kc cotton.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 02:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Number 5 under "Steps in reversing language shift" reads:
I am a native speaker of English, and I do not understand how a language could be used "in lieu of" education. Is this a standard expression in some form of English? I am from the US, and it makes no sense to me, but perhaps it makes sense in some other dialect(s). I see how a language could be used "in lieu of" the official state language in compulsory education, and would recommend changing the wording here.
Jalopeura ( talk) 10:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Why is Old Norwegian a revived language? Old Norwegian is the dialect of Old Norse spoken in Norway, that later evolved into modern Norwegian. I don't see how you can "revive" such a language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiven ( talk • contribs) 06:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
"Indigenous languages of the Americas" should be replaced with specific languages -- I'll make a list and add it here. -- babbage 22:57, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
The Ladino article says that it is in decline everywhere. Is this correct? Should it be removed from this page? Jd2718 20:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
To be revived, mustn't a language be endangered? Jd2718 21:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
I wouldn't say Catalan has ever been an endangered language as a whole, particularly in Catalonia. It was a banned language, which is different. Nowadays it may be considered endangered, though, in France and Italy. Purplefire 08:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't understand how Galician, spoken and/or understood by the vast majority of the population at the time it was made a joint co-offciial language following the demise of the Franco regime could ne "revived". Whether or not it is actually enjoying a social revival is also a moot question. Surely this article should be claerer about wahat is meant by "revival" as opposed to standardisation of fully normal social usage of a language. Neal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.60.79.142 ( talk) 18:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
A lot of the languages listed seem odd to include as examples of 'language revitalization', especially Czech (with 12 million speakers), Basque (with more than 1 million), and Taiwanese (with between 15 and 49 million speakers). On the ground language revitalization is usually working with only a few speakers (if any) on languages. I wonder about making two categories for this page: a section for languages with language populations of speakers, but which are still under threat (such as Basque), and languages, for example, of North America, with a very low number of speakers. These situations warrant different treatments, I think. It would also be nice to have citations that these languages listed are 'endangered'.
Thoughts? Suomichris ( talk) 21:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Nairam ( talk) 21:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Unicted for months moved from article for citing:
|
I'm just glancing through the contents list of Fishman (2001). Irish, Frisian, Basque, Catalan and Ainu all appear in chapter titles. I've tried to widen the definition at the beginning of the article. Fishman uses the term threatened, or weaker language. The majority of the world's languages probably fall into that category. But listing them all here is not going to be very useful. Perhaps we should just focus on key examples, of which Hebrew has to be one. Cornish and Irish revitalisation are also described in Wikipedia, so there seem like useful examples for further reading. Gailtb ( talk) 14:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
References
In thinking about this article yesterday, I wonder if there isn't space for two articles. 'Language revitalization' on the one hand, to cover endangered languages and attempts to revive them, and 'Language revival', which could cover efforts to promote languages such as Latin, Ancient Greek, Sanskrit, etc., which are not dead in that they have descendant languages.
Thoughts on this? Another possibility would be to put a separate section in 'language revitalization' to clarify how it is different than efforts to promote Latin, Sanskrit, etc.
Suomichris ( talk) 19:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
There's no section on criticism of language revitalization, while there probably should be. Many people have criticized it as being divisive and keeping people poor or isolated from the larger world culture, as it isolates them by preventing them from communicating as well. Titanium Dragon ( talk) 23:42, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Many of the supposedly "revived" languages discussed here were never even endangered, let alone near extinction. Either the definition is wrong, or the examples are, either way this article is original research and in desperate need of citations. Yobmod ( talk) 16:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm just asking (I have no intention of inserting this into the article at all), would the recent minor revival of Old English be considered a legitimate (or even semi) language revitalization? I know of several people who speak it, and some of us actually use it as a preferred means of communication, but there arent any modern native speakers– yet. So far, its primary use is among those interested in ancient European history, as well as adherents to Heathenry. — ᚹᚩᛞᛖᚾᚻᛖᛚᛗ ( talk) 13:59, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
I removed the line about many linguists not caring about revitalization because the source given, a book on revitalization by Tasaku Tsunoda is not likely to support such an assertion. I haven't read the book, but I checked a peer-reviewed book review, written by another linguist who works in revitalization, who did not mention or seem concerned about anything in the book being against revitalization efforts. I suppose there could be a line or two about linguists' lack of concern as a description of the problems revitalization efforts face, but in that case those linguists should probably be referenced. As it was, it appeared that Tsunoda was against revitalization, which is disingenuous. Feel free to add the line back in if you have a more reasonable source, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshisanonymous ( talk • contribs) 21:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
We're told that "some lovers" are revitalising Manx. This strikes me as comical (and incorrect) use of English, since "lovers" without any further qualification (such as "art lovers" or "pasta lovers") can really only mean people in a sexual relationship! Of course the meaning isn't unclear, but surely "some enthusiasts" (or something else) would be better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.189.28.182 ( talk) 17:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
From the article:
"In addition, literary languages have sometimes risen to the level of becoming first languages of very large language communities. An example is standard Italian, which originated as a literary language derived from the language of 13th-century Florence, especially as used by such important Florentine writers as Dante, Petrarch and Boccaccio. This language existed for several centuries primarily as a literary vehicle, with few native speakers; even as late as 1861, on the eve of Italian unification, the language only counted about 500,000 speakers, many non-native, out of a total population of c. 22,000,000. The subsequent success of the language has been through conscious development, where speakers of any of the numerous Italian languages were taught standard Italian as a second language and subsequently imparted it to their children, who learned it as a first language.[citation needed]"
While this is true, it is very ironic to use as an example in this article because the success of standard Italian came at the expense of the other languages of Italy... Alternatively, this could be considered dialect leveling since the languages that it was replacing were all closely related to standard Italian. I propose that a better example be sought. Alázhlis ( talk) 07:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Language revitalization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:46, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Language revitalization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:59, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
This seems to be unnecessarily tokenistic as an article. There's been so much written about the successful revival of Cornish, its recognition by the UK government, its funding, large-scale publication of literature, introduction on public signage, swearing in of MPs from Cornwall in Cornish, .... (I could go on).
The rather lame 'several attempts' seems to be damning with faint praise or implying failure. Very POV. Suggest either removing the section until someone can take the time to deliver something more objective or at least a partial upgrade. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.233.77.71 ( talk) 11:23, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I have added/started a section addressing current revitalization efforts. I think it will be beneficial to distinguish examples of successful revitalization from current efforts going on around the world. Kc cotton ( talk) 17:01, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity: should Kenan Malik's criticisms be included in this section?
I am asking because he isn't a linguist, unlike McWhorter. Additionally, his criticism seems to ignore a lot of the cultural aspects of language; it's too simplistic and reduces language to a utilitarian object. Basically, I don't really think he has a strong case against revitalization. While I am for revitalization, I do think the criticisms need to be more thought-provoking than his to warrant being used on this page.
On the other hand, McWhorter's criticism are much more fitting.
Hello all, I will be briefly editing this page for my ANTHROPOLOGY 473 Living Languages class. Please feel free to add/change anything I add or let me know of errors etc. Thanks, Lindsay LindsayBotterill ( talk) 19:59, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
A UNESCO language vitality and endangerment document from 2003 identifies 6 degrees of language endangerment with descriptive names for each degree. I'm thinking that because the current five stages don't have a source to link back to, I'll add these in as an alternative method of assessing a language's degree of endangerment [1]
Chaalb123 ( talk) 04:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
The same UNESCO document identifies factors that we would apply the degrees of endangerment to so that one could assess the language's overall level of endangerment. Given the previous discussion on this talk page about how a language is classified for revitalization (previously endangered or not), I'm thinking this may be helpful here for context about how a language becomes classified as endangered
Chaalb123 ( talk) 04:34, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Many linguists (i.e. Warner et al) have started using "dormant" instead of "extinct" -- maybe this distinction should be reflected, too.
Lukewarm Cabbage ( talk) 18:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
References
Hi everyone, I'll briefly be editing this page for my Indigenous Studies class on Endangered Languages and Language Revitalization. Feel free to change, add, or tag me to correct errors.
I'm going to add to this section a brief description of the role that immersive learning plays in language revitalization - giving the examples of modern Hebrew and Maori
Chaalb123 ( talk) 05:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
This article would benefit from the inclusion of efforts to document, preserve, and revitalize sign languages as well. The vast majority of the world's documented sign languages face an especially potent combination of threats, including the rarity of generational transmission, small population size, scarcity of use in educational contexts, low social prestige, decreasing population size (due in part to the increasing availability in hearing technologies that lead to language shift favoring spoken languages), and contact with (& corresponding language shift toward) more globally-dominant sign languages (among which American Sign Language is the primary offender).
Good references include: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]
Matthall.research ( talk) 15:57, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
References
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) -- Maddy from Celeste ( WAVEDASH) 20:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Language revitalization → Language revival – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Also just makes more sense. 90.252.42.166 ( talk) 19:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Spanish is in no way experiencing a revival in the Philippines. Just because former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed a decree re-introducing the language as an elective in schools does not mean the language is seeing an increase in usage. In fact, the number of Spanish speakers has declined from a little less than 500,000 during her administration to 400,000 in 2020. [1] Additionally, more students are choosing to picking up Mandarin and Japanese instead. As of 2020, nearly as many students chose Japanese as their foreign language elective versus Spanish, and Mandarin is the fastest growing. [2] The average Filipino could not care less about reintroducing Spanish into schools or society. [3] What's more, the section is written with a very biased stance. There has been no government promotion of the language since Arroyo's administration and "demand for Spanish-speakers"? Absolutely not. - 139.135.147.25 ( talk) 15:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a Spanish language revival in the Philippines right now:
Joseph20202021 ( talk) 07:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
References
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() |
|
![]() | On 10 April 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Language revival. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 September 2019 and 31 December 2019. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
LindsayBotterill.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2020 and 18 December 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Chaalb123.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Zerocarey. Peer reviewers:
Rdow,
Simpson Hannah,
MerodioJJ,
Tedrickja.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 April 2019 and 7 June 2019. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Kc cotton.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 02:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Number 5 under "Steps in reversing language shift" reads:
I am a native speaker of English, and I do not understand how a language could be used "in lieu of" education. Is this a standard expression in some form of English? I am from the US, and it makes no sense to me, but perhaps it makes sense in some other dialect(s). I see how a language could be used "in lieu of" the official state language in compulsory education, and would recommend changing the wording here.
Jalopeura ( talk) 10:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Why is Old Norwegian a revived language? Old Norwegian is the dialect of Old Norse spoken in Norway, that later evolved into modern Norwegian. I don't see how you can "revive" such a language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiven ( talk • contribs) 06:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
"Indigenous languages of the Americas" should be replaced with specific languages -- I'll make a list and add it here. -- babbage 22:57, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
The Ladino article says that it is in decline everywhere. Is this correct? Should it be removed from this page? Jd2718 20:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
To be revived, mustn't a language be endangered? Jd2718 21:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
I wouldn't say Catalan has ever been an endangered language as a whole, particularly in Catalonia. It was a banned language, which is different. Nowadays it may be considered endangered, though, in France and Italy. Purplefire 08:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't understand how Galician, spoken and/or understood by the vast majority of the population at the time it was made a joint co-offciial language following the demise of the Franco regime could ne "revived". Whether or not it is actually enjoying a social revival is also a moot question. Surely this article should be claerer about wahat is meant by "revival" as opposed to standardisation of fully normal social usage of a language. Neal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.60.79.142 ( talk) 18:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
A lot of the languages listed seem odd to include as examples of 'language revitalization', especially Czech (with 12 million speakers), Basque (with more than 1 million), and Taiwanese (with between 15 and 49 million speakers). On the ground language revitalization is usually working with only a few speakers (if any) on languages. I wonder about making two categories for this page: a section for languages with language populations of speakers, but which are still under threat (such as Basque), and languages, for example, of North America, with a very low number of speakers. These situations warrant different treatments, I think. It would also be nice to have citations that these languages listed are 'endangered'.
Thoughts? Suomichris ( talk) 21:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Nairam ( talk) 21:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Unicted for months moved from article for citing:
|
I'm just glancing through the contents list of Fishman (2001). Irish, Frisian, Basque, Catalan and Ainu all appear in chapter titles. I've tried to widen the definition at the beginning of the article. Fishman uses the term threatened, or weaker language. The majority of the world's languages probably fall into that category. But listing them all here is not going to be very useful. Perhaps we should just focus on key examples, of which Hebrew has to be one. Cornish and Irish revitalisation are also described in Wikipedia, so there seem like useful examples for further reading. Gailtb ( talk) 14:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
References
In thinking about this article yesterday, I wonder if there isn't space for two articles. 'Language revitalization' on the one hand, to cover endangered languages and attempts to revive them, and 'Language revival', which could cover efforts to promote languages such as Latin, Ancient Greek, Sanskrit, etc., which are not dead in that they have descendant languages.
Thoughts on this? Another possibility would be to put a separate section in 'language revitalization' to clarify how it is different than efforts to promote Latin, Sanskrit, etc.
Suomichris ( talk) 19:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
There's no section on criticism of language revitalization, while there probably should be. Many people have criticized it as being divisive and keeping people poor or isolated from the larger world culture, as it isolates them by preventing them from communicating as well. Titanium Dragon ( talk) 23:42, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Many of the supposedly "revived" languages discussed here were never even endangered, let alone near extinction. Either the definition is wrong, or the examples are, either way this article is original research and in desperate need of citations. Yobmod ( talk) 16:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm just asking (I have no intention of inserting this into the article at all), would the recent minor revival of Old English be considered a legitimate (or even semi) language revitalization? I know of several people who speak it, and some of us actually use it as a preferred means of communication, but there arent any modern native speakers– yet. So far, its primary use is among those interested in ancient European history, as well as adherents to Heathenry. — ᚹᚩᛞᛖᚾᚻᛖᛚᛗ ( talk) 13:59, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
I removed the line about many linguists not caring about revitalization because the source given, a book on revitalization by Tasaku Tsunoda is not likely to support such an assertion. I haven't read the book, but I checked a peer-reviewed book review, written by another linguist who works in revitalization, who did not mention or seem concerned about anything in the book being against revitalization efforts. I suppose there could be a line or two about linguists' lack of concern as a description of the problems revitalization efforts face, but in that case those linguists should probably be referenced. As it was, it appeared that Tsunoda was against revitalization, which is disingenuous. Feel free to add the line back in if you have a more reasonable source, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshisanonymous ( talk • contribs) 21:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
We're told that "some lovers" are revitalising Manx. This strikes me as comical (and incorrect) use of English, since "lovers" without any further qualification (such as "art lovers" or "pasta lovers") can really only mean people in a sexual relationship! Of course the meaning isn't unclear, but surely "some enthusiasts" (or something else) would be better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.189.28.182 ( talk) 17:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
From the article:
"In addition, literary languages have sometimes risen to the level of becoming first languages of very large language communities. An example is standard Italian, which originated as a literary language derived from the language of 13th-century Florence, especially as used by such important Florentine writers as Dante, Petrarch and Boccaccio. This language existed for several centuries primarily as a literary vehicle, with few native speakers; even as late as 1861, on the eve of Italian unification, the language only counted about 500,000 speakers, many non-native, out of a total population of c. 22,000,000. The subsequent success of the language has been through conscious development, where speakers of any of the numerous Italian languages were taught standard Italian as a second language and subsequently imparted it to their children, who learned it as a first language.[citation needed]"
While this is true, it is very ironic to use as an example in this article because the success of standard Italian came at the expense of the other languages of Italy... Alternatively, this could be considered dialect leveling since the languages that it was replacing were all closely related to standard Italian. I propose that a better example be sought. Alázhlis ( talk) 07:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Language revitalization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:46, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Language revitalization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:59, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
This seems to be unnecessarily tokenistic as an article. There's been so much written about the successful revival of Cornish, its recognition by the UK government, its funding, large-scale publication of literature, introduction on public signage, swearing in of MPs from Cornwall in Cornish, .... (I could go on).
The rather lame 'several attempts' seems to be damning with faint praise or implying failure. Very POV. Suggest either removing the section until someone can take the time to deliver something more objective or at least a partial upgrade. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.233.77.71 ( talk) 11:23, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I have added/started a section addressing current revitalization efforts. I think it will be beneficial to distinguish examples of successful revitalization from current efforts going on around the world. Kc cotton ( talk) 17:01, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity: should Kenan Malik's criticisms be included in this section?
I am asking because he isn't a linguist, unlike McWhorter. Additionally, his criticism seems to ignore a lot of the cultural aspects of language; it's too simplistic and reduces language to a utilitarian object. Basically, I don't really think he has a strong case against revitalization. While I am for revitalization, I do think the criticisms need to be more thought-provoking than his to warrant being used on this page.
On the other hand, McWhorter's criticism are much more fitting.
Hello all, I will be briefly editing this page for my ANTHROPOLOGY 473 Living Languages class. Please feel free to add/change anything I add or let me know of errors etc. Thanks, Lindsay LindsayBotterill ( talk) 19:59, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
A UNESCO language vitality and endangerment document from 2003 identifies 6 degrees of language endangerment with descriptive names for each degree. I'm thinking that because the current five stages don't have a source to link back to, I'll add these in as an alternative method of assessing a language's degree of endangerment [1]
Chaalb123 ( talk) 04:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
The same UNESCO document identifies factors that we would apply the degrees of endangerment to so that one could assess the language's overall level of endangerment. Given the previous discussion on this talk page about how a language is classified for revitalization (previously endangered or not), I'm thinking this may be helpful here for context about how a language becomes classified as endangered
Chaalb123 ( talk) 04:34, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Many linguists (i.e. Warner et al) have started using "dormant" instead of "extinct" -- maybe this distinction should be reflected, too.
Lukewarm Cabbage ( talk) 18:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
References
Hi everyone, I'll briefly be editing this page for my Indigenous Studies class on Endangered Languages and Language Revitalization. Feel free to change, add, or tag me to correct errors.
I'm going to add to this section a brief description of the role that immersive learning plays in language revitalization - giving the examples of modern Hebrew and Maori
Chaalb123 ( talk) 05:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
This article would benefit from the inclusion of efforts to document, preserve, and revitalize sign languages as well. The vast majority of the world's documented sign languages face an especially potent combination of threats, including the rarity of generational transmission, small population size, scarcity of use in educational contexts, low social prestige, decreasing population size (due in part to the increasing availability in hearing technologies that lead to language shift favoring spoken languages), and contact with (& corresponding language shift toward) more globally-dominant sign languages (among which American Sign Language is the primary offender).
Good references include: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]
Matthall.research ( talk) 15:57, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
References
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) -- Maddy from Celeste ( WAVEDASH) 20:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Language revitalization → Language revival – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Also just makes more sense. 90.252.42.166 ( talk) 19:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Spanish is in no way experiencing a revival in the Philippines. Just because former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo signed a decree re-introducing the language as an elective in schools does not mean the language is seeing an increase in usage. In fact, the number of Spanish speakers has declined from a little less than 500,000 during her administration to 400,000 in 2020. [1] Additionally, more students are choosing to picking up Mandarin and Japanese instead. As of 2020, nearly as many students chose Japanese as their foreign language elective versus Spanish, and Mandarin is the fastest growing. [2] The average Filipino could not care less about reintroducing Spanish into schools or society. [3] What's more, the section is written with a very biased stance. There has been no government promotion of the language since Arroyo's administration and "demand for Spanish-speakers"? Absolutely not. - 139.135.147.25 ( talk) 15:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a Spanish language revival in the Philippines right now:
Joseph20202021 ( talk) 07:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
References