Globalization has been occurring so rapidly that certain languages, such as English, Spanish, and Chinese, have become virtually universal, facilitating communication among various nations. Meanwhile, less widely spoken languages of ethnic minorities are at a greater risk of extinction. As a result, some individuals consider public investments aimed at preserving these endangered languages to be wasteful and futile. However, I firmly believe that all languages should be protected and preserved.
On the one hand, the biggest drawback of saving minority languages is the issue of efficiency that people are confronted with. Firstly, there are millions of people in need of help to overcome far more urgent issues, such as battling severe starvation or mass disease. It follows that investment in minority languages is reportedly considered a needless waste of money. Secondly, the greater the variety of languages, the less efficient the conversations among people from different countries are. For instance, when people speaking different languages have to make much more effort and take more time to communicate, it leads to increased transaction costs and misunderstandings.
Despite the aforementioned argument, I suppose that governments should immediately take action to protect and preserve less-spoken languages. A language not only is the means of communication but also reflects distinctive cultures of various nations. If a significant number of languages go extinct, the world will be standardized and there will be a decline in cultural diversity. As a result, societies are unlikely to progress to higher stages of development.
In conclusion, I would say that the short-term benefits in terms of cost saving, which is derived from the opposition to preserving minor languages should not outweigh the long benefits in terms of high diversity.