Would you prefer it if there was only one language?

Yes, but for purely selfish reasons.

Doesn't really matter to me but I guess it would be better with just one.

I find it a little shocking that the majority of people said no. It's just a barrier dividing us from other people.

I want a supporting language. Everyone in the world would learn that and still have their language.

If the whole world spoke the same language, there would be no more wars. So yes.

The hell fuckin no!!!!!! No mames claro que no .... Dewarimasen!!!!! Nyet !!!!! Nein .... see beautiful diversity , diversity it what makes thing interesting , BRING DOWN THE NWO!!!!!!! >:(

As much as different languages preserve our cultural identity, the diversity of languages also fuels much of our prejudices. Having one language would reduce these prejudices and promote a better understanding of all people, everywhere.

No. I like the fact that a good part of the world can't understand what I'm saying and vice versa. Besides, English is so widely spoken in international business that there's no really no downside to it for us. If your native language is Dutch, it kinda sucks cuz you have little choice but to learn a second language

Yes! I live that we live in a world with such diverse cultures, but language isn't exactly something key to that in my mind.

@Brodehouse: I wasn't talking about accents.

Other: If we lived in a world where circumstances had developed where language evolved naturally into one universal dialect, I'd be okay with that. This is not our world. If you imply that we should whitewash culture and instate English as the universal tongue, no.

Yes, I think the world would be a better place if everyone spoke a common language.

@HatKing said:

Other: If we lived in a world where circumstances had developed where language evolved naturally into one universal dialect, I'd be okay with that. This is not our world. If you imply that we should whitewash culture and instate English as the universal tongue, no.

None of these. I'm just saying "one language". That language could be anything and it could come about under any circumstances. It's all hypothetical, anyways.

yes, i would enjoy having one language. i would hope that accents would stay there.

english is pretty well known language. in italy, in big cities the people know english, but small towns, cities nobody knows english.

Ní fhearr liom.

Gheobhainn mé mo bháis aige an dia mor, Oghma, más rud adúirt mé "yes".

yes.

its going to happen eventually anyways. globalization and all that. might as well be sooner rather than later. besides you can still have cultural differences with the same language. people in the US and the UK both speak English, pretty big cultural differences.

besides, theres an evolution to culture, if everyone being able to communicate world wide with their voice kills culture, then the human race is doomed. but that wont happen. i mean how many subcultures does the US have alone? asstons. take that to a global level. people build culture, not language. language is merely a tool for communication. culture adds to the language not the other way around.

not to mention. easy world wide communication through a common language + global interdependent economy + internet = world peace. not shitting you. a common language would pretty much make peace SIGNIFICANTLY easier.

this isn't even a hypothetical question, its already slowly in the process of happening and i think it'll happen sooner than most people think.

It would do nothing but make things easier.

It would be more convenient but we would lose so much that its not worth it.

Nope, I like having Norwegian as my first language, and English as second.

Interesting how "No" was far in the lead earlier but that "Yes" has been slowly catching up for a while now.

@Video_Game_King said:

Japanese would likely make me sound really goddamn cute.

Are you really sure about that? think long and hard.

No because Das Racist's 'Rapping 2 U' would suck.

@Clonedzero said:

yes.

its going to happen eventually anyways. globalization and all that. might as well be sooner rather than later. besides you can still have cultural differences with the same language. people in the US and the UK both speak English, pretty big cultural differences.

besides, theres an evolution to culture, if everyone being able to communicate world wide with their voice kills culture, then the human race is doomed. but that wont happen. i mean how many subcultures does the US have alone? asstons. take that to a global level. people build culture, not language. language is merely a tool for communication. culture adds to the language not the other way around.

not to mention. easy world wide communication through a common language + global interdependent economy + internet = world peace. not shitting you. a common language would pretty much make peace SIGNIFICANTLY easier.

this isn't even a hypothetical question, its already slowly in the process of happening and i think it'll happen sooner than most people think.

I would say language does add a great deal to the culture. One thing that people always notice when they come here is the way English is spoken, from our strange lack of strict possessives to our intense aversion to the words yes or no. This is all largely influenced by our native language and is now a part of our culture. A language that has nouns assigned masculinity or femininity can mark the difference where one culture would describe a bridge as majestic or beautiful, another would use powerful or strong. Of course, they are little things, but it does show how language can influence a large group's viewpoint.

Your thought is only limited by the words in your language. They may be subtle changes, but thinking in different languages will have an effect on the way you think. Case in point, English will always limit the way I use continual present tense, because it just doesn't work the same way in my native language. If I didn't have another language to switch to when thinking about it, I simply wouldn't have that way of thinking, and the English version is not an equivalent.

If it was Serbian or Russian, sure. Otherwise no. 

YesNo, I would prefer if actually everybody on earth would be able to speak the same language while keeping their regional language as an alternative. In theory that's how things are right now but only in theory...

Foreign English accents are too good of a tool to pull chicks to give up :P

No because that would be boring.

Languages are some of my favourite things in this world. To have only one would be so incredibly boring.

I don't think I would. It would be nice if there was one language built with communicative efficiency in mind and people across all nations were encouraged to learn that, maybe fewer languages wouldn't be so bad either, but not only do I think we'd lose very valuable cultural diversity by eliminating all but one language, but we'd also lose words from other languages for which there are no direct equivalents in every language, and to some degree we may lessen the ability to of that one remaining language to evolve itself.

I don't want to wipe out the other languages, but it would definitely be nice if there was a universal way to communicate with anybody; It would clear up so many misunderstandings.

Maybe just on the internet, but I like the idea that there's still any reason to fly to another country and if every culture, city and language is the same, I just don't care. Natural landscapes can be photographed, I like to soak in the culture when I travel.

Language is a part of history and culture. I'd prefer a multitude of languages to a homogenized tongue.

Obviously it'd be better if we could all understand each other.

@Flawed_System said:

Kind of already is...English. It's secondary in most first world countries.

Regardless of being a secondary language, English is not fluently spoken or understood by everyone. If it was, the concept of "localization" into other languages would barely exist, wouldn't it?

Would be nice if everyone could agree on learning one master language and just keep their local one as a secondary. Like how in Star Wars everyone knows Basic, but they still know their individual races language as well.

well both yes and no.

i love different language and each language and word has its own history, and even if there really only was one language there would still be dialects that pretty much makes it in to a different language again.

but there would be a lot less misunderstandings

No. Diversity makes us curious.

@crusader8463 said:

Would be nice if everyone could agree on learning one master language and just keep their local one as a secondary. Like how in Star Wars everyone knows Basic, but they still know their individual races language as well.

That's what happens in Spain. Everyone speaks Castilian, and there are regions that speak their region's language as well. In Galicia-Galician, in Catalonia-Catalan, in Basque Country-Basque, etc.

No, absolutely not. Diversity and the multitude of cultures are part of what makes the world so interesting. Through different languages and cultures we are given many unique lenses in which to view the world. If we only had one language we would all just see the world in one way and that sounds pretty boring to me.

There are too MANY languages, but just one would be overkill.

In short no because we would need to mix it up so much that people with diffrent form of sentencing could use it and not be confussed. Plus what languge is easy enough so that people with diffrent tone and sentencing could use it?  

Yeah totally but also I wouldn't mind living in a world without cultural diversity, at the same time living under the same rule of thought sounds boring ... so let's drop all spoken languages and just use body language and mime to express ourself.

No, because that would really be overkill on cultural boundaries.

Not 1, but I wouldn't mind narrowing them down. Say to Arabic, Mandarin, English, French, Russian and Spanish. Most people in the world know at least one of those well enough to understand it, and those that don't, don't really need to.

I don't know why most people asumed the OPs meant to say "let's erase all languages and choose 'that' one for everybody" I think what he ment what if as humans we chose a new language for all of us to speak it wouldn't break cultural diversity, even if people spoke the same language arround the world everybody would have different meaning for certain words and expressions , just like there's different kinds of English and Spanish, is a very hypothetical situation but of course it would be better.

@AngelN7: No. I specifically stated "only one language". The results would be much different and less contentious if I had specified that there would be one universal language with all others remaining intact.

@Catarrhal said:

No. Read Orwell.

Good point. A single unified langauge might be overly susceptible to becoming manipulated as an instrument for social engineering. But do you really believe Orwell's thesis? Language is kinda like sex in way, if its not deeply satisfying to us, then we get fustrated with boredom and become desperate to change our situation. Although there are a lot of stupid people out there, most are probably to smart to fall victum to language control. It's alwasy failed historically so far hasn't it?

No. Although it would certainly make communication with people from different countries easier, I think it would also destroy personality of different cultures in the same way as making every person use exactly same clothes or car.

And same in Finnish:

Ei. Vaikka se tekisi keskustelusta ulkomaalaisten ihmisten kanssa helpompaa, minun mielestäni se tuhoaisi eri kulttuurien persoonallisuuden samaan tapaan kuin pakottamalla jokaisen henkilön käyttämään samoja vaatteita tai autoa.

No. Each language has their own preference and untranslatable words. It's part of what makes us all unique.

I wish there was one universal phrase, though, that was understood by all languages to mean "I cannot speak your language. Sorry."

@Aronman789 said:

No, then I couldn't look mysterious when I mumble to myself in another tongue.

As a bilingual person, I vote no because I find situations where I prefer one over the other.