anglo-phone and franco-phone influences on the African continent can directly be attributed to colonialism–and subsequently, ‘colonial language’. However, lumping Kiswahili into this category raises a few questions. Was it actively used as a language of assimilation in its infancy? my ansser would be negative since it sprung up as a ‘language of Trade’ NOT colonialism. following colonial language logic one would have to assume that a colonial power would want it’s proper language, and not some hybrid to be the lingua franca. If Vasco Da Gama, and the Persian sultans had intentions of fully assimilating the occupied territory and it’s peoples, then I’d imagine that they wouldn’t want a baturdized(sp) version of their National language(s) to spoken by the locals. the evidence of portuguese, Arabic, and/or Persian involvement in actively teaching their respective languages to the locals (subjects?) is lacking, while the evidence of intermingling–as well as intermarriages–of cultures brought on by trade (including slaves) abounds.

you could very well argue that Kiswahili is a language borne through pure capitalism. A unique characteristic in and of itself when compared to other languages.

As far as the preservation of lesser known/spoken African languages (and other languages in general), the future looks somber. but in my estimation most of these languages will assimilate into relative, larger languages. for example most bantu languages are redundant in my opinion. the Nilotic languages of the Maasai and Rendile tribes are so similar that the distinction between the two tribes can seldom be made by reference to their respective lanuages. this can be said of most other tribal dialects in Africa. what we are seeing now is the amalgamation of quasi-disparate languages. not a loss, but a net gain. this is the way it was before and during the first intra-continental African migration of the diaspora.

Funniest quote of the week!

Quit hating LOLCATZ, the STILLZ RULE!

I think we should all learn like 4 languages each!

The data on disappearing languages also does not take into consideration how languages evolve, reemerge, and are invented. It is hard because we aren’t sure how many of these will develop fully or find usefulness.

As to the internet, it does provide a forum for homogenization, but it also allows for connections to be retained. It also catalyzes change and adaptation. And in some ways is leading to the evolution of language.

Twenty years ago this would have been meaningless:
IMHO iMac is gr8 4 twittering, OMG LMAO.

Is this a new language?