Keeping languages alive

那你还是开始学中文吧！😉

It's worth the effort. Many stories are not documented so the spoken word is often the only way to pass them down through the generations.

Lots of examples out there to read up on

I thought this was going to be about cobol and Fortran…

那你还是开始学中文吧

No thanks.

The pachyderm in the kitchen of course is, as a native English speaker I'm fortunate that the rapid explosion of the web has meant a massive driver for English at least as a second language. There may well be more Mandarin speakers by force of numbers, but I would expect those to be more localised geographically.

Ive wondered that but then you read a book written with words and expressions you grew up with and you realise it conveys more than just the words.   It takes effort though so it is worth spending the money.   At best life is about the community you live in and the language is a core part of that.  Sometimes it is a vocabulary and sometimes it is a complete language but it is part of the package

Many stories are not documented so the spoken word is often the only way to pass them down through the generations.

Then you need a common language, not a specific one? Or am I misunderstanding what you mean? (ah, irony)

I suppose that's relevant if you've got say an isolated tribe on an island somewhere. But there surely must be vanishingly few people who only speak (to stick with the original example) Gaelic and not English also?

Even in places like France (where IIRC they have a language preservation society or some sort of legal requirement to use the language, or something) most people also speak English except in the really rural areas. I actually found this quite irritating when I was on holiday there, I wanted to practice my terrible GCSE French to try and improve but most people I interacted with just dropped straight into near-fluent English.

The flip side of keeping languages alive, is preventing regimes from actively destroying languages. True, Mandarin is spoken by a huge number of people, but at the expense of the Chinese regime suppressing local languages, as is happening in Hong Kong with Cantonese.

If pressed I’d perhaps think that the whole point of language is effective communication, so if it’s something only a handful of people understand then if anything it becomes isolationist.

Languages are much more than just a tool for communicating information, they are closely tied up with identity.

Ultimately, for a language to survive, it needs to be used, so kids need to learn it and use it at home, plus they need access to books and other media written in the language. The cost to keep dying languages alive is not that huge in proportion to the size of national budgets. I'm not saying write a blank cheque, but I do think it's worth trying to keep them alive.

At best life is about the community you live in and the language is a core part of that.

Sure, that makes sense. Even speaking English, my East Lancashire drawl is a part of my identity I wouldn't want to lose, but it can be a cultural barrier (talking at full chat in non-touristy parts of the US can create a good deal of confusion). And I can see it normalising with generations, I'm not as broad as my grandad and likewise younger locals think I have a thick accent. I think that's a little sad.

But... should it require propping up? Do I need to think ey up and sithee, and start up the Lanky Twang Preservation Society, owd lad? If people want to speak a language or dialect should it not be self-sustaining?

For many Australians English is their fourth or fifth language.
Homogeneity is the death of culture. Their languages contain the stories of the lands. I like to think that this level of diversity is what European languages once had.

This language map gives an insight into 780 Australian languages.

https://www.abc.net.au/indigenous/gambay-languages-map

Ultimately, for a language to survive, it needs to be used,

Conversely, if it's used then it will survive.

Languages... are closely tied up with identity.

For those who already speak it, no?

Like, say I'm from Wangland. Local spoken languages are English and Wangish. If I speak Wangish as a proud Wanglander then that's part of my cultural identity. But if everyone around me speaks English by default and I'm being taught Wangish because it's what my ancestors spoke then... well, that's not my identity at all, it's someone else's.

Plenty of people understand Latin, no-one has it as a first language any more. Does that matter? Should it?

(again for the avoidance of doubt: I don't particularly have an opinion here, I'm just spitballing ideas around)

It's good that you asked this question. But the fact that you have to ask it demonstrates that you aren't affected by the issue. It's like CIS people asking why we should bother with LGBTQ+ rights, or white people not understanding we need race laws.

Imagine Britain lost the war and we were all being forced to speak German. Wouldn't you want English to be preserved?

Or, just look at how upset people get when we use Americanisms; now imagine American was a completely different language that everyone was using instead of British and people were forgetting their native language.

If people want to speak a language or dialect should it not be self-sustaining?

There's this thing called cultural imperialism, also related is the Tyranny of the Majority.

Learning Scots Gaelic has been on my to do list since moving back up....but not quite got on with in. Then a few weeks ago I worked with a mountain leader who had excellent (mostly self taught, suspect he is a gifted linguist) Gaelic. We were working in an area new to both of us but his ability to not just pronounce geographical features from the map but translate their meaning brought the trip alive. It was both enlightening and practically useful. Knowing the hill was named after the big grey boulder on the summit or the shaded corrie made them instantly recognisable. The kids we were working with were enthralled - it definitely added so much to their appreciation of the landscape.

I came away from that trip with renewed intent to get on with it and start learning it properly.

More broadly I think the 'luck' most of us here have had being brought up with one of the world's most effective communication tools as our mother tongue has probably also dumbed down our appreciation of language as part of a person's individual, regional and national identity. I speak a little Turkish and visiting the local Turkish tailor yesterday the pride and delight in his eyes to talk Turkish with me for a few minutes was lovely to see. It's so tied up with his personal identity that using it on a rare occasion, even when we could have more conveniently have just spoken English (his is very average but better than my Turkish) is not something I can ever imagine wanting to lose.

Languages ,as others have said, are a part of cultural identity. If you liik back to a historic culture, don't you wonder how it sounded - how would King Richrd, or any early English king or common person sound to us?

It’s like CIS people asking why we should bother with LGBTQ+ rights, or white people not understanding we need race laws.

That's an interesting take. Food for thought.

Imagine Britain lost the war and we were all being forced to speak German. Wouldn’t you want English to be preserved?

Is this not the other side of the same coin?

What I mean is, yes, being forced to speak a different language is cultural appropriation by, well, force. But what if it just happened, if that's what people chose...? We rail against perceived or actual Americanisms because they're not part of 'correct' British English, but if the vast majority of people used them then they would become so. And perhaps crucially, does that matter?

English is a bastard mongrel language which has evolved from German, Latin, Norse, Greek and christ only knows what else. Look at classic texts, Shakespeare is relatively recent and can be near-impenetrable to modern eyes (and he also made a lot of shit up). Middle English is unreadable. English changes with the wind, it adapts (whether we like it or not). OK, Boomer?

Maybe the English speakers should learn to revive Britonic to exponge the cultural imperialism of the Normans.

The flip side of keeping languages alive, is preventing regimes from actively destroying languages

And I guess Gaelic is a prime example.

Can I just apologise again for my English ancestors being utter ****s?

And perhaps crucially, does that matter?

According to those whose cultural identity is being erased, yes it does.

@Cougar - you're probably struggling to see the relevance 'cos you're English. You can lazily travel the world and not bother speaking other languages if you wish.

The minority rights/issues comment is a useful analogy.

Don't forget that in the UK, particularly in England, people have lost their regional identity. If you travel from the Auvergne to the Pyrenees you'll encounter different words, foods, wines etc. It's not just dialect, it's languages too at times. Moving from Lancashire to Yorkshire or Cumbria the differences are not as pronounced.

I think there's a difference between having ones cultural identity forcibly erased (see, cantonese, the celtic languages, and a whole bunch of others) and natural wastage as language evolves/culture changes over time.

According to those whose cultural identity is being erased, yes it does.

Is there not a difference between "being erased" and "dying a natural death"?

You're talking, I think, about oppressive regimes crushing extant cultures. Which of course should be fought against. But the question I was framing was more simply "what if people just don't really use it much any more?"

It can be two sides of the same coin and even the milder forms of subjugation were being used in the 60s and 70s here

you’re probably struggling to see the relevance ‘cos you’re English. You can lazily travel the world and not bother speaking other languages if you wish.

Correct. It's fantastic, I'd recommend it to everyone. 😁

Moving from Lancashire to Yorkshire or Cumbria the differences are not as pronounced.

Maybe to your ears.

More seriously: you make an interesting point, yes. One could perhaps argue similarly, what's the point of keeping all these Van Goughs lying around, it's just a bunch of stuffy old paintings that aren't even all that good.

You’re talking, I think, about oppressive regimes crushing extant cultures. Which of course should be fought against. But the question I was framing was more simply “what if people just don’t really use it much any more?”

I'd say one of the biggest discussion points in society today is the morphing of what an 'oppressive regime' looks and feels like. We were brought up thinking it looked like a jack boot and of course it still can. I'd argue that it can now look a lot softer - the pressures and inclusion issues of globalisation and social media. That'll squash regional identity pretty quickly without the inconvenience of getting all fighty.

那你还是开始学中文吧

也許你應該考慮學習這個更有趣的傳統版本

Is there not a difference between “being erased” and “dying a natural death”?

No, not really. Why would a language die? How does that happen?

也許你應該考慮學習這個更有趣的傳統版本

Sorry don't agree. It's Putin's fault.

Used to speak Irish in our house when young.

I’d perhaps think that the whole point of language is effective communication

There is so, so much more to it than that.

My wife is watching lots of Korean dramas at the moment. Often the dialogue seems weird. Having read up about Korean, it is apparent that the words they are using are packed with meta-information that English cannot handle succinctly enough to fit with the filmed scenes and the available space. Thousands of years of cultural history are encoded in the language that they use every day.

And the same is true of English, you just don't notice precisely because it's your native language. But you feel its effects.

Languages don't just enable communication, they shape it. Less obvious perhaps among tightly related languages that share a similar grammar, but a Japanese person just won't have the same thoughts as a British one.

Whether this is important or not is another matter. Supporting multiple languages is costly.

Oh, molgrips just wrote the same above. Yes I noticed specifically with Squid Game, though I don't know any Korean.

Sorry don’t agree. It’s Putin’s fault.

Used to speak Irish in our house when young.

You gave up your Irish language? Why? How is that possible?

We don't give up our language but just keep adding more to it.

Having read up about Korean, it is apparent that the words they are using are packed with meta-information that English cannot handle succinctly enough to fit with the filmed scenes and the available space.

Same with Chinese language.

If you do not practice it, you lose it

You gave up your Irish language? Why? How is that possible?

My parents mainly spoke it to each other and us kids only picked up bits. Was living in England and it's not in the curriculum as it is in Ireland. Hope to pick it up again when I move back.

Grew up in Southern Ireland, learned Irish in school from an early age, and there are areas where it is primary language.
There is a strong history of oral historians due to lack of ability to write - all that would have been lost/ different without keeping Irish going. Our language use was suppressed by Britain and even now in Norn Ireland its an ongoing political hot topic.
I also found learning a 2nd language from early has led me to be quite receptive to other languages, don't know of it helps wire the brain that way. I could understand more than can speak now but am really glad learned it. There was a massive resurgence in popularity in 90's - my nieces go to an Irish language school which I think is awesome.
I also think having our own language something to be proud of, even if majority use English.

Gaelic will only survive if it is spoken in the home and at school. My mum and her two sisters were all brought up in a Gaelic speaking household. None of them married a Gaelic speaker. None of their children speak the language beyond a few common phrases.

It's a funny thing language. When my mum was dying in the last few days she had stopped responding when we spoke to her but responded when a nurse spoke to her in Gaelic despite communicating mainly in English for over 65 years.

My parents mainly spoke it to each other and us kids only picked up bits. Was living in England and it’s not in the curriculum as it is in Ireland. Hope to pick it up again when I move back.

I see. Sounds a bit like my sister & BIL who tend to speak in a 3rd "neutral" language to the children. The children understand the "traditional" language but just don't speak them.

No, not really. Why would a language die? How does that happen?

How many native Latin speakers do you know?

I noticed specifically with Squid Game, though I don’t know any Korean.

I watched Squid Game with subtitles. The text and the dub were notably different, like they'd been translated by different teams. I don't know what conclusion to draw from that but I thought it was interesting.

People used to think that kids having two languages would confuse them and delay their academic development. This was a key driver behind 20th century efforts to eradicate Welsh (but not 16th century efforts). However we now know, perhaps through looking at the rest of the world where it's common and mundane, that it doesn't. In fact, it makes you better at languages in general (of course) and helps your brain in other ways too.

How many native Latin speakers do you know?

Ancient Latin? None. Modern versions of Latin? Loads. There are hundreds of millions of them.

Anecdotal only @molgrips , but I made point above that I think learning Irish from about age 4 has helped me grasp other languages easier.

Language is about thought as much as it is about communication. When I look at Arabic or Japanese writing I am totally aware that it is expressing things beyond the capabilities of Latin text.

There's not many books on African philosophy, yet it exists within a range of overlapping cultures and languages. It was put to me by an African that these philosophies don't translate well to Latin script, because they contain certain thoughts and perspectives that English or French just don't cover.

Do languages die out naturally or are they killed off by technology? In the rush to make communication more efficient there is a danger of losing knowledge, poetry and thought.

They are killed off my trade, regional inequality, economic migration, colonialism, bureaucracy, administration and conquest.

Tagging @saxonrider he might enjoy this one.

No, not really. Why would a language die? How does that happen?

One is by a younger generation not interested in learning it or speaking it and also people moving away from areas where it is being spoken. Or as in the past an influx of foreign speakers such as an invading force to that area and establishing their language. Unfortunately for one reason or another languages die out.

There are probably hundreds of languages dying out throughout the world. I remember reading a story a few years ago on the news about two old women who were the only surviving members of an original native language that ended up not speaking to each other.

I've got a nephew who grew up in a bilingual household and he didn't start talking till he was about 18 months old .

Once he started talking though he wouldn't shut up. Apparently people who grow up listening to two different languages have to spend a lot more time listening and processing than a child in a monolingual household.

Sometimes, as an English only speaker I feel that half my brain is missing or has been left dormant from birth. Language is deffo more than communication.

Plenty of people understand Latin, no-one has it as a first language any more. Does that matter? Should it?

So many languages (including English) are derived from Latin that understanding it is extremely useful for historians, linguists and as an educational tool in all sorts of scientific, religious and historical contexts.

One is by a younger generation not interested in learning it or speaking it

Why would they not be interested?

I don't know, probably because they can't see the point, maybe they think they only need to know English?

I was never interested in learning French or Italian at school as at the time I couldn't see the point of it and thought it was useless in learning it.

"And the same is true of English, you just don’t notice precisely because it’s your native language. But you feel its effects."

This depends who you are talking to. I've lived in Germany for 20 years and travel around Europe for work. Often the only person whose 'English' is not understood is my Yorkshire accent.
Everybody else has earned a generic, low vocab version.
No real accuracy or nuance. My German is the same but with a bit of Schwabisch thrown in.

It's not about intelligibility, it's about the .ETA information you add without realising it. English is notable for having loads of different words for the same thing. The word you choose convey a lot of meaning and also say a lot about you and how you want to be perceived. This may be lost on non native speakers. My Finnish colleagues found this interesting.thry were all fluent speakers but they were unaware of this whole other layer of communication. And the way the native Swedish speakers spoke English was quite different to the native Finnish speakers.

inkster
Free Member
I’ve got a nephew who grew up in a bilingual household and he didn’t start talking till he was about 18 months old .

Once he started talking though he wouldn’t shut up

That's actually quite normal for monolingual kids, unlikely to be related to bilingualism.

English is notable for having loads of different words for the same thing.

All languages have synonyms, but it's rare for synonyms to be perfect (i.e. redundant). For example, "seat" and "chair" are partly synonymous, but not perfectly. "Seat" also describes a sofa, a settee, a bench, a couch, etc., but those are distinctly different to a chair. If you talk to Japanese people, you will often hear that Japanese is unique because it has subtle shades of nuance, ignoring that there is an English word to describe what they believe is a feature unique to Japanese, and also that the English word is derived from Latin. Things like nuance and synonyms are universal features of languages.

This is what I was meaning, my colleagues have a much better understanding of what each other intend to say because often, their contextual understanding of a word is very similar (although the Cz, Sk, Pol & Hu team can differ to the E, Por, Fr groups) and they fully miss the intensity/subtelty of message from me.

All languages have synonyms

Yes but I think English has an unusually large number.

Yes but I think English has an unusually large number.

I doubt it.

<quote>People used to think that kids having two languages would confuse them and delay their academic development. This was a key driver behind 20th century efforts to eradicate Welsh (but not 16th century efforts). However we now know, perhaps through looking at the rest of the world where it’s common and mundane, that it doesn’t. In fact, it makes you better at languages in general (of course) and helps your brain in other ways too.</quote>

1st language grammar takes a hit. Exam scores go down. But yes, and dependent on the languages, other subjects can get higher grades. Not sure if it's the connections in the brain that are formed, or the benefits from cultural learning, and the instructor's personality (With language comes culture. With good instructors comes learning)

"That’s actually quite normal for monolingual kids, unlikely to be related to bilingualism"

Well that was a binary response...

Exam scores go down.

Which exams?

1st language.

I teach English as an L2 in markets where exam scores are everything to involution/backwash stressed learners....

Can you teach me enough English to understand that sentence? 😁

Yes but I think English has an unusually large number.

English is an exceptionally rich language. It has far more words than, for example, French. This is because despite living on an island Brits historically have been crap at keeping out foreign invaders - every new invader has added new words to the language.

I was brought up in a tri-lingual household, my parents spoke a mixture of Spanish and French between themselves and I always spoke French to my Father and, in later childhood, always English to my mother.

At the age of six I was learning, from scratch, my third language - English. I am not sure those sort of upheavals helped my development in anyway - at school I was trying to learn how to read words which I didn't necessarily understand the meaning of.

Now I can only speak English, my Spanish and French has pretty much disappeared.

As I said on a previous thread a while back imo it reflects the stupidity of humans that we can't all communicate between each other using the same language. I have no problem people having a hobby and speaking a language which only a select few are able to speak, but imo it makes no sense that all humans don't all to speak the same one language. The world would be a much better place if they did imo.

As I said on a previous thread a while back imo it reflects the stupidity of humans that we can’t all communicate between each other using the same language.

Perfectly possible to speak a common language for practical communication and your own language for cultural reasons. It's how much of the world does it, especially in India.

I wanted to practice my terrible GCSE French to try and improve but most people I interacted with just dropped straight into near-fluent English.

Ah so you think we should have a common language but are disappointed that you can't try out your French? I like the sounds different languages make much as I like different English dialects. It would be a shame to lose either.

1st language grammar takes a hit. Exam scores go down. But yes, and dependent on the languages, other subjects can get higher grades. Not sure if it’s the connections in the brain that are formed, or the benefits from cultural learning, and the instructor’s personality (With language comes culture. With good instructors comes learning)

There are a lot of very complex issues mixed up in this. The biggest predictor of exam scores is parents' income. Bilingual kids are most likely to be immigrants' kids, so it's not really a case of language interference, just that immigrant kids tend to come from poorer families.

Wealthy families have historically usually been bilingual or multilingual, upper class children were expected to speak French or other foreign languages and nannies or tutors were hired to teach these. It's utter nonsense that multilingualism hurts educational achievement. It's like asserting that learning to swim makes you a worse cyclist.

English is an exceptionally rich language.

No, it's not. All languages are rich, English is no richer than other languages, whatever "richer" means.

All languages have synonyms

Yes but I think English has an unusually large number.

hmm, really? Try Finnish:

The spruce is on fire. = Kuusi palaa.
The spruce retums. = Kuusi palaa.
The number six is on fire. = Kuusi palaa.
The number six returns. = Kuusi palaa.
Six of them are on fire. = Kuusi palaa.
Six of them return. = Kuusi palaa.
Your moon is on fire. = Kuusi palaa.
Your moon returns. = Kuusi palaa.
Six pieces. = Kuusi palaa.

But I can't remember the all important phrase for "60 quid for four beers? Are you taking the pi$$????"

We're lazy here in the UK at getting to speak forrin languages. However, in our defence, when abroad a lot of foreigners find it easier to speak to us in english, rather than our mushed up version of their language we may be attempting.

After asking for a 'Single ticket to Vlissingen please" in my 'best' dutch, the answer in perfect english was "That'll be 22 Euros please"

I gave up.

No, it’s not. All languages are rich, English is no richer than other languages, whatever “richer” means.

You are arguing that English isn't richer than others languages despite not knowing what I meant by richer?

The very next sentence explained it : "It has far more words than, for example, French." It is a simple arithmetical fact that English has far more words than French.

As I said on a previous thread a while back imo it reflects the stupidity of humans that we can’t all communicate between each other using the same language.

Perfectly possible to speak a common language for practical communication and your own language for cultural reasons. It’s how much of the world does it, especially in India.

Yes of course it "perfectly possible" but it doesn't happen - that is precisely my point. Not all humans can all communicate between each other using the same language.

Good thread. I reckon that whenever a language dies out we lose a whole culture and a perspective on our (sometimes shared) history. Learning a language conversely makes that language more secure and sometimes makes the history and culture more secure. It makes us richer. This is a good read. https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Spoken_Here.html?id=t_wmcRmCxccC&redir_esc=y

One of the frustrating things about Scottish Gaelic is that the word meaning "look for something"- Lorg is the same as the word for "found" -Lorg. Also there is no Scottish Gaelic word meaning to own. I have no idea whether that is significant or not but it is certainly interesting, ( The word used is aig meaning at plus whatever personal pronoun is appropriate so agam agad, againn, agaibh etc

Do you mean context rich or high context language?

English is a precise language with most words only having 1 meaning. If a word doesn't exist we'll create one.

Spanish is very different and they use the same word for many different contexts so as a tourist it's very confusing.

So many languages (including English) are derived from Latin t

English is placed in the Germanic not romance language tree although it does have Latin influence via French and also directly (mostly for professional terminology).

I am referring to rich in the number of words. As I said, each new invader to the British Isles added new words. The old words often carried on existing only the meanings were changed very slightly to create a subtle differences, often so subtle that it is barely noticeable.

I don't know if that is the reason why English also appears to be so illogical and without clearly defined rules unlike, for example, Spanish which in comparison is much more logical.

On a different subject, I think Italian is by far the most beautiful language in the world, followed a distance second by French.

I reckon the world would be a happier and more beautiful place if everyone spoke Italian.

Sometimes, as an English only speaker I feel that half my brain is missing or has been left dormant from birth. Language is deffo more than communication.

+1

I started learning French almost two years ago - as in seriously trying to see if I can become 'fluent'. Absolutely fascinating process as it's a whole new experience watching my brain adapt to things it's never had to do before (I don't count O level French 35 years ago).

One of the weird things was I started listening to French radio every day, maybe 6+ months ago. At first I couldn't really work out what was going on at all, but quite quickly my brain learnt to hear individual words (which is quite hard as French runs it all together). I still had no idea what the words meant, but I could pretty much write down exactly what they were saying and then look it all up. The process of learning all the vocab will take years and probably never really ends.

But… should it require propping up? Do I need to think ey up and sithee, and start up the Lanky Twang Preservation Society, owd lad? If people want to speak a language or dialect should it not be self-sustaining?

Yes prop them up for sure. I don't speak Welsh but my kids go to a Welsh language school. It's blown my mind how beautiful the Welsh Language and Welsh Language culture is.

More variety in art and culture is surely a good thing.

More variety in art and culture is surely a good thing.

Absolutely but unfortunately minority languages can be weaponised and politicised as has happened in Wales. I've seen the re-organisation of English and Welsh speaking schools in Cardiff to the detriment of the English speaking school. Many natives who dont speak the minority language find lots of barriers to employment and don't get me started on the complexity of Welsh roads signs, something that needs to be clear and easily grasped is double the size required and needlessly complicated to grasp as you drive past.

I do think languages like this should be preserved, we do that with many areas of our historic culture, but not to the detriment of people in their daily lives.

I didn't used to think it made sense. But then someone said to me that language is just the medium, what's important isn't preserving the medium itself but the art that it conveys. Not everything can be translated, and keeping a language alive and its art accessible needs a body of speakers. ("alive" doesn't just mean "in use", it means fully understood with all of its inherent metaphor and allusion and inexplicable rules of use)

It's a bit of a forced example but they suggested, what if we develop immersive 3d film and gaming- would we then declare 2d screens obsolete and let every bit of art made for them be forgotten? Seal it in a can and say it's preserved? Thta struck home for me, because I'd been thinking the same about some of the amazing art in games that gets put beyond use as soon as a platform is dead. Like not looking at the fighting temeraire because it doesn't move.

Given the continuing efforts to keep Latin and Ancient Greek alive as languages for toffs I think there is an imperative to support the understanding, study, teaching, and learning of languages.

The subjugation of language is a control employed by many conquering cultures.

Sure, American English and Mandarin might be the Lingua Franca of the internet but the support for uncommon languages is vital for future generations.

Ah so you think we should have a common language but are disappointed that you can’t try out your French?

Are they mutually exclusive?

I suppose part of it was just to see if I could; I'd learned (at a very basic level) a skill years ago, I relished the opportunity to see if I could use it. I'd have felt the same way about trigonometry. The other part was that it seemed rude not to at least try, rather than being the stereotypical Brit talking to foreigners like they're either deaf or retarded.

It is a simple arithmetical fact that English has far more words than French.

So is that richer, or is it simply more convoluted?

Do we really need two words for stew and broth (as a random example)? Do we even agree on what that means? And gods help us if it comes served with a bread roll.

@stumpyjon It's not only the minority language that can be weaponised

Do we really need two words for stew and broth (as a random example)?

Ask a poet or a songwriter.