A' Roghnachadh Guth	Choosing a Voice
Chan eil a h-uile duine, fiù 's a h-uile duine a tha gam faicinn fhèin adhartach, a' creidsinn ann an gleidheadh chànanan. Tha Daniel Nettle agus Suzanne Romaine a' toirt freagairt - tro Chothrom - do dh'aonan dhiubh. (eadar-theangachadh)	Not everyone, not even all those who consider themselves progressive, believe in language maintenance. Daniel Nettle and Suzanne Romaine respond - through Cothrom - to one of them. (original text)
A bheil feuchainn ri cànanan is cultaran dùthchasach a chumail suas a' glasadh daoine ann am bochdainn, neo a' leasachadh an cor beatha? Tha cànanan an t-saoghal ann an cruaidh-chàs, agus coltas ann gum bàsaich co-dhiù an dara cuid aca taobh a-staigh ceud bliadhna. Tha e coltach gu bheil an ràta bàis nas àirde, a rèir meud, na th'anns an ìre dhraghail de bhàs bith-eòlasach a tha bualadh air a' phlanaid an-dràsta.	Is trying to preserve indigenous languages and cultures a way of locking people into poverty, or a way of improving their lot? The world's languages are in crisis, with at least half of them likely to die out in the next hundred years. The rate of linguistic extinction is probably higher, in relative terms, than the worrying rate of biological extinction that the planet is currently undergoing.
Chan eil e 'na chùis iongnaidh, a-rèist, gu bheil sinn air tòiseachadh air cluinntinn bho chionn grunnan bhliadhnaichean rabhaidhean mu bhàs chànanan. Tha buidhnean air a bhith gan cur air chois, 'nam measg am Foundation for Endangered Languages (www.ogmios.org), agus chaidh àireamh leabhraichean fhoillseachadh, 'nam measg Language Death aig David Crystal agus Vanishing Voices againn fhìn (Cothrom 26, d45 air son lèirmheas dhe na dhà), gus solas a chur air càs nan teangannan aig a' chinne-daonna a tha bàsachadh.	It is not surprising, then, that over the last few years we have begun to hear expressions of alarm about language death. Societies have been formed, including the Foundation for Endangered Languages (www.ogmios.org), and several books have been published, including David Crystal's Language Death and our own Vanishing Voices (Cothrom 26, p45 for review of both), to highlight the plight of humanity's dying tongues.
Ach tha freagairt eile ann cuideachd. "Ma thogair ma tha an dara cuid de chànanan an t-saoghail an impis bàsachadh?", tha Kenan Malik a' faighneachd san lèirmheas aige de Vanishing Voices san iris Prospect: "Leig leotha a dhol gu clos", ars' esan. Thèid cànanan bàs, tha Malik ag argamaid, seach nach bi miann no feum aig daoine orra tuilleadh. Tha iad a' sireadh beatha nas fheàrr, agus seach gur iad a' Bheurla agus cànanan mòra eile a bheir an cothrom sin dhaibh, bidh iad a' roghnachadh an tùs-chànanan a thrèigsinn. Mar sin dheth, duine sam bith a tha ag iarraidh cànanan a ghleidheadh, air cho spaideil 's a tha a thrusgan uachdair libearalach 'se eascaraid leasachaidh is adhartais a th'ann aig bun.	But there is another response, too. "So what if half the world's languages on the verge of extinction?", asks Kenan Malik in his review of Vanishing Voices in the magazine Prospect: "Let them rest in peace" , he says. Languages die, Malik argues, because people don't want or need them any more. They yearn for a better life, and since English and other large languages offer them that possibility, they choose to abandon their original tongues. It follows that anyone who wants to preserve languages is actually, however smart his external liberal garb, a conservative and a reactionary at heart.
Tha seo air shàillibh 's gu bheil feuchainn ri cànan no cultar a ghleidheadh, do Mhalik, 'na oidhirp chianalach gus stad a chur air atharrachadh sòisealta, uile air sgàth dòigh beatha thradiseanta a bha bochd, cruaidh is iomallach. Mar sin 'se tha fa-near dhaibhsan a bhios ga moladh ach slòigh dhùthchasach a chuingealachadh ri beatha de sgùgadaich san fhàsaich an àiteigin, mar nàdar de dh'an-sgaradh cultarach. Agus chan eil Malik leisg an ceangal seo a dhèanamh ri poilitigs na làimh dheis: tha an t-artaigil aige a' coimeasadh luchd srì chànanan an cunnart ri Uilleam Hague agus fiù 's ri Enoch Powell, cho math ris an fheallsanaiche thòraidheach Roger Scruton.	This is because, for Malik, trying to preserve language or culture is a nostalgic attempt to halt social change, all for the sake of a traditional way of life that was in fact poor, back-breaking and marginal. Thus those who advocate it are really trying to consign indigenous peoples to a life of sulking in the forest somewhere, a kind of cultural apartheid. And Malik is not shy of making this link with right-wing politics: his article compares endangered-language activists to William Hague and even Enoch Powell, as well as conservative philosopher Roger Scruton.
Cò ma-thà a chreideas sinn? Am bu chòir dhuinn call cridhe cultair a chaoidh gach turas a thèid cànan bàs, neo am bu chòir dhuinn fàilte a chur air mar chomharra dhen imeachd mhòir a dh'ionnsaigh leasachaidh is adhartais?	So who are we to believe? Should we bemoan the loss of a culture's heart every time a language dies, or should we celebrate it as a symptom of the great march to development and progress?
Ach chan e iomsgaradh fallsa a tha romhainn. Tha an treas rathad ann a sheachnas an dà chuid tagradh romansach air fìrinneachd bhuan gach cultair agus mar a chreideas Malik gum feum atharrachadh sòisealta a bhith sìor nuadhachadh. 'Sann nach eil an saoghal cho sìmplidh 's a chanadh fear seach fear dhe na fir fhalamh seo, agus tha e air fairtleachadh air Malik na h-argamaidean aig leabhraichean mar Vanishing Voices a thuigsinn, agus am fiosrachadh mu leasachadh an t-saoghail a th'air an cùl a ghabhail a-staigh. Tha sinn ag argamaid nach ann an aghaidh a chèile, mar a tha tric an dùil, a tha feumalachdan glèidhteachas chànanan agus feumalachdan leasachaidh chomainn air iomall an t-saoghail, ach dà thaobh coileantach dhen aon cheist.	In fact, we are not faced with this false dichotomy. There is a third way that steers clear of both romantic insistence on the unchanging authenticity of each culture and Malik's belief in the necessarily progressive nature of social change. The world is just not as simple as either of these straw men would have it, and Malik has failed to understand the arguments of books like Vanishing Voices, or appreciate the facts about world development which inform them. We argue that the needs to preserve languages and the need for development in the world' s peripheral societies are not opposing ones, as is widely supposed, but complementary aspects of the same problem.
Bidh cànanan, mar chultaran, a' sìor atharrachadh. Bidh an t-atharrachadh seo, sa chumantas, a' freagairt air feumalachdan is fèin-fhiosrachadh an luchd labhairt, agus mar sin dheth tha beachd gum bi ìre nas fheàrr no nas fhìrinniche 'nan leasachadh tuairmseach, mì-chiallach. Tha Malik a' fàgail air iomairt nan cànanan an cunnart, gu bheil i air son casg a chur air atharrachadh cànanach is cultarach aig àm sònraichte (an-dràsta), agus toirt air daoine brìgh air choreigin aig gach cànan gach cultar a ghleidheadh. Ach mar a tha e fhèin ag ràdh, 'se deagh rud a th'ann an eadar-obrachadh is an eadar-iomlaid, is iad a' cur luach is neart ri cultaran, mar sin cha bu chòir dhuinn a bhith feuchainn ri'm mùchadh.	Languages, like cultures, are always in a state of change. This change, broadly speaking, reflects the needs and experiences of speakers, and as such any idea that there is a "better" or "truer" phase in their development is arbitrary and nonsensical. Malik charges the endangered-language movement with wanting to arrest linguistic and cultural change at some point in time (now), and have people continue to preserve some "essence" of each language and culture. But as he points out, interaction and exchange are positive things, which enrich and strengthen cultures, so we shouldn't be trying to suppress them.
Agus gu dearbh, chan eileas. 'Se tè dhe na h-argamaidean aig Vanishing Voices guidhe air son 's gun gabh structaran ri nì a th'air a bhith ' na phàirt neo-fhoirmeil de bheatha a' chinne-daonna fad mhìltean a bhliadhnaichean: ioma-chànanas. Fosglaidh ioma-chànanas dorsan gu cultaran, gu margaidhean, gu foghlam agus gu eòlas air nach biodh cothrom aca as an aonais. Tha an-diugh mòran shlòigh san t-saoghal leasachaidh ag iarraidh cànanan eadar-nàiseanta mar Bheurla a chur ris an stòr aca, agus cha bu chòir dhuinn bacadh sam bith a chur air a-seo. Bheir e cothrom dhaibh air slighean ùra feumail eaconamach is sòisealta. Gu dearbh, tric togaidh daoine cànanan ùra, dhe'n toil fhèin, air na dearbh adhbharan sin.	And indeed, no-one is. One of the arguments of Vanishing Voices is a plea for the acceptance institutionally of something that has been a normal fact of human existence informally for thousands of years: multilingualism. Multilingualism allows people access to cultures, to markets, to education and knowledge that would be barred them otherwise. Many developing world peoples these days are seeking to add international languages like English to their repertoire, and we would in no way discourage this. It will allow them welcome new economic and social avenues. Indeed, people often acquire additional languages, as a choice, for precisely these reasons.
Chan eil na cothroman foghlaim uile a' dol na h-aon slighe, ge-tà. Feuch Haunoo, air a bruidhinn sna Philippines, a dh'aithnicheas 450 seòrsa ainmhidh agus 1,500 lus. Tha seo a chòrr air an àireimh air an aithneachadh san sgìre do shaidheans an t-Saoghail an-Iar mu 400. Bho chionn beagan bhliadhnaichean tha companaidhean drogaichean air a bhith rùrachadh na coille-uisge air son na th'air a bhith aig na slòigh thradiseanta fad linntean agus a dh'fhaodadh a bhith 'nan drogaichean nuadha.	Not all the educational possibilities flow in one direction, though. Take Haunoo, spoken in the Philippines, which recognises 450 types of animal and 1,500 plants. This exceeds the number in the area known to Western science by around 400. Pharmaceutical companies have in recent years scoured the rainforest for potential new drugs amongst traditional peoples who have used them for centuries.
Tha Malik ag argamaid gum faigh cànanan bàs seach nach bi daoine gan iarraidh tuilleadh. Bidh iad dìreach a' taghadh rudeigin eile a fhreagas nas fheàrr air am feumalachdan aig an àm. Tha Malik car coltach ris an Dr Pangloss còir an-seo, ag argamaid gum bi na thachras math oir 'se sin a roghnaich daoine. Coltach ri luchd a' mhargaidh shaoir air raointean eile, ge-tà, tha Malik a' dol ceàrr leis a' bheachd a th'aige air cho saor 's a tha an taghadh fìor aig na bochdan.	Malik argues that languages die out because people don't want them any more. They simply choose something else better suited to their current needs. Malik is rather like the good Dr Pangloss here, arguing that whatever is happening must be good since it is what people have chosen. Like free-marketers in other domains, though, Malik goes wrong in his rosy estimation of the extent of free choice which poor people actually have.
Tha iomadh adhbhar ann do bhàs chànanan, agus tha saor-thoil 'nam measg. Ach an urrainn dhuinn dìreach a ràdh nach eil Tùsanaich Astràilia, mar eisimpleir, ag iarraidh an 250 no an còrr chànanan tuilleadh? Faodar a bhith an dùil nach robh iad ag iarraidh bàs trì cairteal an cuideachd le galaran gabhaltach; neo an cuid fearainn a chall agus gu bhith air an sgapadh, gu bhith air am fuadach gu tèarmannan no gu bonn na pìle shòisealta; neo an cuid chloinne a bhith air an goid bhuapa agus air an àrach ann an teaghlaichean coimheach; neo gu bhith air an aimrideachadh an aghaidh an toil. Faodar gabhail ris nach eil iad ag iarraidh ràta bàis fo ghalar gabhaltach a thrì cheud uimhir ris a' chuibheas Astràilianach, agus air fear dhen fheadhainn as àirde san t-saoghal, nas motha. Ach 'siad seo na h-adhbharan air son eachdraidh thùrsach bàs nan cànanan is nan cultaran Astràilianach.	There are many reasons why languages die out, and voluntary factors are amongst them. But can we say that the Australian Aborigines, for example, simply didn't want their 250 or so languages any more? One can suppose that they didn't want three-quarters of their people to die of infectious disease; to lose their lands and be dispersed, moved to reserves or the bottom of the social pile; to have children abducted and brought up in surrogate families; or to be involuntarily sterilised. One can assume they don't want a rate of death from infectious disease 300 times higher than the Australian average, and among the highest in the world, either. But these are the factors that lie behind the sorry history of the death of Australian languages and cultures.
Cha fhreagair idir am modail roghainn shaor-thoileach air cor nan Tiomorach nas motha, a bha fo smachd feachd gabhail brùideil Indonìseanach a mhùch saorsa ionadail ann am foghlam cho math ri poilitigs. Cha freagair e nas fheàrr air na Curdaich, dha nach eil e ceadaichte an cànan fhèin a chleachdadh no a theagasg. Cha fhreagair no air na còmhlain dhùthchasach anns an Amasan, is iad air am fuadach gus slighe rèidh fhàgail do leagail chomeirsealta chraobhan no do rainseachadh, bho nach fhaigh iad tairbhe sam bith.	The voluntary choice model hardly applies to the Timorese either, ruled by a brutal Indonesian invasion force which suppressed local educational as well as political autonomy. It applies no better to the Kurds, not allowed to use or teach their own language. Nor does it apply to indigenous groups in the Amazon, forcibly relocated to make way for commercial logging or ranching, from which they derive no benefit.
'Se an fhìrinn nach iad na roghainnean a bhios ro mhòran shlòigh dhùthchasach na saor roghainnean cofhurtail a shaoileadh Malik còir, a rèir choltais. Chan e foghlam nas fheàrr, cothroman eaconamach nas fheàrr agus gluasad sòisealta nas fheàrr a th'air a bhith aig mòran dhe na slòigh dhùthchasach, ach sgrios nan àrainnean aca, mùchadh poilitigeach agus tuilleadh bochdainn. Tha an ìre dòigh beatha aig a' chairteal as ìsle dhen chinne-daonna 'na tàmh. Tha na daoine sin ag iarraidh fàs eaconamach so-leantainn, cùram slàinte agus deamocrasaidh. Far nach eil an siostam nuadh gan lìbhrigeadh-san, tha seo gu minig mar thoradh air structaran a bhios co-dhiù ro mheadhanail agus mì-fhreagarrach gu h-ionadail, agus 's dòcha ainneartach.	The truth is that the options being faced by many indigenous peoples are not the comfortable, free choices Malik naively seems to imagine. Many indigenous peoples have encountered not better education, better economic options and increased social mobility, but destruction of their habitats, political repression and continuing poverty. The standard of living of the bottom quarter of humanity is stagnant. Those people want sustainable economic growth, health care and democracy. Where current arrangements are not delivering those, it is often because institutions, where not actively oppressive, are too centralised and locally inappropriate.
Tha Malik a' faicinn bàs cànain mar fhianais air saor-roghainn ga dèanamh le daoine; ach 'sann tha e 'na dhearbhadh gun deach a leithid a chumail bhuapa. Tha an t-ath-bheothachadh ann an srì nan dùthchasach air feadh nam fichead bliadhna a chaidh seachad air dèanamh soilleir miann shlòigh dhùthchasach air feadh an t-saoghail air son fèin-stiùireadh, agus tha e air mòran aca aonachadh ann an oidhirp gus an cànanan, cultaran is àrainnean a ghleidheadh. Cò sinne gus còir roghainn a chumail bhuapa?	Malik sees language extinction as evidence of people exercising free choice; whereas in fact, it is all too often evidence that they have been denied it. A resurgence of native activism over the past twenty years or so has made clear the desire of indigenous peoples all over the world for self-determination, and has united many of them in an effort to preserve their languages, cultures and habitats. Who are we to deny their right to choose?
Tha an neach duais Nobel Amartya Sen air an argamaid a dhèanamh gu bheil saorsa roghnachaidh 'na prìomh mheadhan is prìomh amas leasachaidh. Tha com-pàirt, ceannsal is cunntasalachd na coimhearsnachd ionadail mar phàirt de dheagh leasachadh. Far a bheil leasachadh dhen ghnè seo, tha e nas coltaiche gum bi e so-leantainn, agus a thuilleadh air a-sin, chan eil e cho coltach gun caillear cànanan. Leis a-sin, chan eil guidhe air son gleidheadh chànanan a' dìteadh daoine gu bhith sgùgadaich sa choille, ach tha i ag aithneachadh gu bheil mòran dhe na coilltean, anns am faod daoine a bhith sgùgadaich mar a thogras iad, air an leagail mar-thà.	Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has argued that freedom of choice is both a principal means and end of development. Good development involves local community involvement, control and accountability. Where development is of this type, it is more likely to be sustainable, and moreover, you are less likely to lose languages. So the plea for the preservation of languages does not amount to condemning people to sulk in the forest, but is rather a recognition of the fact that many of the forests which people might or might not choose to sulk in have already been chopped down.

You can find more articles in the archive under Gaelic Column and information on the organization at C.L.I.