Paper short abstract:

A small Papuan language called Tayap is dying. What factors influence whether speakers regard the dissolution of their ancestral language as a particularly consequential loss, or not? And how might scholars respond to language loss in ways that go beyond lamentation, or calls for revival?

Paper long abstract:

Language death is an emotional issue for linguists and linguistic anthropologists. In recent years, there has been a spate of publications reporting on language loss, and lamenting it. Books about language death usually include a chapter that asks some version of the question: “Why should we care?” And they offer a number of reasons why we should. These include the idea that linguistic diversity is better than uniformity; that languages express identity; that languages reveal particular knowledge about the world; and that languages are the repositories of a people’s history. All those reasons are all indisputably true and genuinely compelling. But they are bird’s-eye views. They represent the assessment of experts who are privy to a vast panorama. The perspective of people who have lost or are losing their language will inevitably be quite different.

I will discuss the impending loss of a small Papuan language called Tayap, and reflect upon the perspectives of people who lived in Gapun, the village where it used to be spoken. What kinds of factors influence whether those villagers regard the immanent dissolution of their ancestral language as a particularly consequential loss, or not? And how might scholars respond to language loss in ways that go beyond lamentation, or calls for revival?