Language codes aim to codify all languages and dialects in a short form, similar to country codes. However, different organizations and countries use different codes, leading to confusion. Creating a unified language code would require overcoming conflicts and considering different languages and alphabets. A solution could be a general language code with a country or dialect code added. The question of whether the birthplace of a language has the right to the plain language code should also be considered.
A language code is an attempt to codify all of the world’s languages as well as the major dialects of those languages in a short, codified form. The goal is for any language to be identifiable as a simple literal code rather than needing to be spelled out in full. The language code idea is similar to adopting short three-letter forms for countries around the world, which turns England into ENG and Wales into WAL.
The Library of Congress in the United States is one such organization to codify languages from around the world. While it demonstrates a noble attempt to create a language code, it also demonstrates many of the problems with trying to do so. For example, English is naturally condensed to ENG. However, it then lists Middle English as ENM and Old English as ANG. The latter two codes would make little sense to most academics and a good many non-academics. This is because the most common codes for Middle English and Old English are ME and OE, respectively.
The problem with language codes is that many countries, as well as organizations and academics, use different codes for the same languages. This has led to a patchwork of confusing acronyms that are only accentuated by linguistic and political considerations. The lack of a common code means that documents on the same subject could lead to confusion by using different codes.
Another question is whether to distinguish between versions of the same language spoken in different countries. This means deciding whether to distinguish between British English and American English. It also raises the question of whether to distinguish between the national dialect and the regional dialects. For example, the difference between Queens English in England and Scots English or Scouse, as spoken in Liverpool, could be codified. The Library of Congress code makes no difference, but the Microsoft® language code does.
One solution to the problem would be to create a unified language code. This would be a code accepted by all nations and peoples of the world, whatever their language. There are, however, a number of issues to overcome in order to create this.
First, no nation should have the power to decide, as there will naturally be conflicts. Second, the code should take into account the different languages themselves and how each language describes itself. Thirdly, there is the problem of different alphabets.
The code should take into account the desire of a nation or dialect to have a separate code. This could be done by having a general code for the language, then adding a dash and a country or dialect code. This may turn American English into AM-ENG or ENG-AM. One question that should be considered is whether the nation or group that gave birth to the language has the right to have its language code be the plain language code, thus turning the code for British English into ENG instead of UK- ENG or ENG-ENG.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
