some people think governments should spend money on measures to save language with few speakers from dying out completely. others think this is a waste of financial resources. discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some argue that languages which can be extinct should be conserved by governments, while others say it could be a waste of money. It is a common belief that saving

language

is not necessary as there are other areas which should be funded urgently.

However

, it is more crucial in conserving traditional languages due to cultural diversity. On the one hand, the government should invest in more significant aspects

such

as national defence rather than researching dying

language

. By increasing funding for military defence, soldiers who sacrifice to protect their nation can have better meals and equipment.

This

can be achieved by shifting financial resources for keeping

language

to the military.

For example

, in South Korea, there are more

people

dedicated to the national defence who require more support in terms of their welfare

such

as the place where they stay and the food they eat every day.

Nevertheless

,

people

will appreciate it if the

language

used by fewer

people

was conserved by the government. It is true that native speakers love what they speak for communication.

This

can be enriched by showing the same but slightly different

language

used in a few other areas in the country. An example of

this

is that on Jeju island in South Korea, indignant

people

use

Korean

dialect which is hard to understand for normal

Korean

people

.

This

language

is introduced through public education;

therefore

,

Korean

people

are surprised and feel appreciated due to the diversity of

Korean

. In conclusion, it can be suggested that financial support should be conducted in other necessary fields like the military.

However

, it is definitely more significant to conserve diverse languages spoken by fewer natives because citizens can have cultural pride.