First and foremost, I am amused by the varying comments of the different perceptions and views concerning language and for this matter the risk of the Ayapaneco language dying out.

There is freedom in language and no need to make language rigid. The language of many indigenous people exposes the diversity and culture of the people. With only two people left to speak the Ayapaneco language, it is obviously necessary to preserve some aspects of such culture before it dies out completely. Where is our pride in our culture and most importantly, our language?

Some cultures have adopted an official language like English, yet, I STRONGLY disagree with the comment having a common language to solve the problem. For me, it does not necessarily solve the problem of languages but it diminishes the different languages and in the long run, the culture of the people.

Imagine, the fact that there were no traces of evidence, or form of source in studying a particular culture? In extreme cases such as these, language may serve as the basis of some source for some research analysis.

The problem of two men not speaking will be a problem in the near future when the plan of the classroom activity to impact knowledge begins. It is clear that many people are not interested because it is definitely not their language. With only two people left as representatives of the Ayapaneco language, it will be best to preserve the language than to add it to the stock of extinct languages.

I particularly relish the comment that 'All languages hold keys to the origin and history of the peoples who spoke the language, in much the same way as DNA.' Since several ideas, values and customs are embedded in language, then it is disturbing that most languages are gradually fading away.Even more disturbing, if language actually determines thoughts and each cultural sect has a unique contribution to bring to the table, then losing the Ayapaneco language means we are losing a sea of knowledge. I totally agree with one of the comments which says 'it's dispiriting to see how some people can't grasp why it is important to preserve languages. the least that can be done for terminally endangered tongues is recording them so that that knowledge doesn't just disappear into the blue.'


Another thing I find interesting is the different versions of the same language. Imagine if the word 'is' was interprated differently in different ways. Which one will be taken to be the true 'is'? I think the variance in the Ayapaneco language shows that the language is really at the brink of dying. The difference in the dialect shows that in as much as language can be taught the same way to different people, culture can greatly influence it.

Let's take a look at the 'fante' language in Ghana, which has been greatly diluted with English, popularly known as 'FANGLISH'. I won't be surprised if very soon the pure fanti will be non-existent.

I think that, like Efua has said,that a lot of traditional dialects and languages are fading away slowly and being mixed with other languages. This, it appears, from my own experience with traditional language especially in Africa, has a lot to do with a more westernised education which forces many of us to forget our mother-tongues.

With a language like Ayapaneco, which probably had a small minority speaking it from the beginning, its demise is not very surprising. With influences from spanish and other languages spoken by the majority, it was bound to go extinct as people did not even find it necessary to learn if it was not spoken by that many people anyway.

Ok, I agree that preserving languages may hold some sort of Good or the world. However, allow me to take an opposing side for the purpose of creating an interest here.

However, lets assume that it is true that one of these languages may hold keys that are as important as say, the cure to cancer. However, with less than 10 speakers left of the language, how much of the language couldwe preserve?

Surely if the keys locked in this language were easy to unlock, they would have been unlocked by now. Unlocking the keys require experienced speakers who have had constant practice. We can also see that with so few speakers left, they are probably the least likely people to know the parts of the language that can unlock these keys. Even we now with, languages such as Twi, do not know many parts of our languages, eg: Kasakoa.

So, should we spend our energies trying to scrape up the pieces of this language that may have little significance now or should we focus on preserving the languages that are now easier to document and preserve?

Yaw, no matter how fragmented a language may be, it is still essential that it is preserved because the preserved part of the language might fuse with another and beget another language. This fusion will involve a rich intertwine of cultures to produce a language pregnant with knowledge. The Southern African Mfecane, the migration, caused a remix of languages and that's why most southern African clans have similar tongues. Many linguists argue that it is because of the amalgamation of these tongues that the Southern African cultures are breathtakingly rich and popular (e.g. Umoja). Who knows, maybe there will be a discovery in the future which will require the Ayapaneco language for further developments. will we rather watch the language rest in peace now or will we revive it so that one day we can make good use of it?

Language is very important part of culture. It is rather disheartening to find out that there are only two people left who can fluently speak the Ayapaneco language. However, I also do not think that letting pupils now begin to learn the language in this short period of time before the language becomes extinct is the best solution. It is not everybody who can learn languages that fast. Creating an Ayapaneco dictionary too is not the best because what will they really use it for if they have very little knowledge about the language.
Many a time my parents have bought me Fanti dictionaries and bibles to help improve my speaking of the language but it did not help one bit because I do not even know the simplest words properly.

I believe that language is well appreciated and spoken when it is learnt and spoken from a tender age. I know that it is possible to learn many languages at older ages and even by staying for long periods of time with people who speak the language but speaking local dialects with little children help them pick up the words faster and hence learn the language faster. When they grow up, they do not forget it because it has been with them for a very long time

Also I agree with tembi on the fact that this problem has a lot to do with westernised education.
We are told that "Ayapaneco has always been a linguistic island surrounded by much stronger indigenous languages". It is probably on its way to extinction because these people were influenced greatly by the languages surrounding them and languages being taught in school.

If much can be done to save the language then that's good. But I believe people must begin to appreciate and respect their culture and hence language more to the extent that they will find it necessary to pass it on to their children by speaking it with their children, and when their children grow up they will do the same so that even the languages that are spoken in the most distant places will be passed on from generation to generation and situations like these can be avoided.

Wow!
I loved reading the myriad of comments on this topic – I wish we could be as argumentative and passionate as some of the people who commented. These comments gave me a whole insight into the amazing ability of language to teach us about culture, which I did not quite grasp in our class on language.

Like Marilyn said, I’m sure most of the critics of the preservation of Ayapenco take their stance simply because Ayapenco is “not their language”. If their own language was going extinct, they would certainly fight for its preservation. It is very easy to be emotionally detached from things that do not concern us.

Yes,"Language and culture are inextricably linked". However, I worry about the quality and accuracy of the knowledge that can be obtained about the culture of the Ayanpeco people, with these two surviving speakers as the only known authorities on the language. Perhaps there’s written literature on the culture, but if not, how reliable are these two speakers? They’re already disagreeing about certain details - how sure can we be about the truth of those things they agree on, perhaps not the language per say, but folk lore, etc, that they may pass on to others (supposing the National Indigenous Language Institute’s attempt to revive the dying language is successful)?

It reminds me of Winston Churchill saying “History will be kind to be, because I intend to write it.” Manuel Segovia and Isidro Velazquez are writing the history of their culture right now, by teaching other people their language.

Yes Efua, I Agree that the Southern African culture is very rich which may be a result of this amalgamation you speak of.

However, these languages were already strong when they were combined and they still are. They are also very similar so much so that 2 people who do not speak each others language can have a meaningful conversation. This is very much like speaking Fante to an Akuapim. It works.

However, looking at a language where only 2 forms of it remain out of the many that were existing. How easy will it be to combine such languages to produce something fruitful?

With so little left of the language, how useful will it be to scrape the rest. I'm pretty sure that most of what it can provide humanity will have been discovered by the time the language develops enough to provide it.

Hi Efua... i thought earlier you were against the idea of losing "a sea of knowledge" as you put it, by the death of Ayapaneco. So if this language is fused with another language to get another language, won't we, in the end, lose the original Ayapaneco language? If you agree, then it means that in the end we still lose an integral part of the culture of that people since the fusion of Ayapaneco with another language will require some aspects of the language to be discarded to integrate the other language right? So which side are you on Efua? winkwink...

Adjoa has definitely raised a very good point. It is indeed true that these men, especially because they refuse to be associated with each other, will present their language, and eventually culture, in two very different ways as they are already doing. Therefore, I think any attempts to try and understand the culture of these people will prove futile since there is no modicum of evidence we can rely on for the “truth” behind the culture. Who represents the “true” culture?

The language may be revived but not the culture. Never the culture. They don’t even speak! How can the history or the origins of the culture be traced?

It's really interesting how the comments are far from agreement. Forget it or pick it up and find its importance.
The language is obviously of importance to us, us being the global society. For the language is a way of knowing, which will definitely count as something.

I think the speakers of this culture have done themselves a great disservice. The search for where the 'grass grows green' certainly should not have prevented them from keeping their unique identity. Their wives, children, and relatives could have continued, they same way an Indian can meet a fellow Indian and start some small talk even though they may be on a train in Paris.

As for saving the language, like Segovia said, sadly, it will die out. A language embodies more than just speaking it. It involves cultural practices, how they dance, eat, play. All these cannot be put in a dictionary. These things have to be taught hands-on.

As well, one thing that has been overlooked is the assimilation of the culture. Have the natives tried to adapt their culture to new eras and practices? Will there be new words for i-pods, computers? Dynamism is of essence.

I’m rather very late in this discussion but I find the article on its own a very strong representation of the human tendency to always lament our woes and hardly implement any concrete actions. This is not the first time a language has been reported to be on the brink of extinction and it is surely not going to be the last, unless we start to do something about preserving indigenous languages way before they are even threatened by extinction.

It is very necessary to preserve language because it is the only way we can really understand the heart and way of a person. But there’s a catch; in order to really read in between the lines of language, a person must first be a first language speaker or at worst have the language as a second language which is spoken very very often. That is the problem with this Ayapaneco language, because as much as we might hate to admit it, it is simply too late to do anything concrete to preserve the culture behind the language, which is in essence what we are truly looking for.

These two men cannot in any way teach anybody the culture behind the language they speak because
1. They have two opposing views of that very culture
2. As Kweiba said they need to get to very young children who are virgin to any other culture and will easily assimilate the conjoined language and culture.

The little knowledge I can get from this is that indigenous languages must continuously be taught and cemented in the minds of natives from a very young age, such that we do not risk losing the cultures of the world.

Like the air we breathe, language is something that so completely surrounds us - we rarely think about it or are consciously aware of it. Yet it has a central function in human life. By communicating with one another we are able to break out of our small circle of intellect and tap into the collective experience of the community. Imagine a world without language….where people cannot understand each other…then we might as well be animals than mammals i.e by understanding each other’s feelings only….!!!

How much could you possibly know about the world if you had no language or means of communicating with other people?
We all witness the spread of English today- Eg: KWEIBA is more fluent in English than Fante as quoted above, not going too far – I myself have almost forgotten how to write my own language “Hindi” because I have been in an English speaking country since 5 years. But, yes I agree with Kwaw that Indians like talking in their language with each other. This helps to preserve our heritage and prestige as a society.

But with the rise of American culture- have come the deaths of hundreds of other tongues that are losers in the competition for linguistic survival. Today is Ayapaneco, tomorrow will be fante and who knows one day only ENGLISH survives. What about the future generation? Don’t they deserve to know how many languages were present in the past?As one of the comments under the article states, “If everyone spoke the same language what a desolate place the world would be.” And I strongly corroborate this statement.
What does it mean for the rest for us if a language disappears?Well, when a plant or insect or animal species dies , it is easy to understand what has been lost. But language is merely a product of the mind an arrangement among the different people’s nervous systems. What the rest of us lose when language dies is the possibility of a unique way of perceiving and describing the world.

I read an escape clause to preserve a language before it loses its legs - is if a language has been written down there remains are at least the theoretical possibility of reviving it.

Something is always better than NOTHING AT ALL!

Ayapaneco as something that lived and breathe and developed organically does not deserve to be gone forever.