As the world advances at a rapid pace, some languages, which are disappearing due to the lack of adaptability of the current social development, are preserved by the relevant authorities. Personally, I think it is not a favorable choice.

It is true that some endangered languages are capable of giving people an insight into the diversity of cultures. The magnetism of culture can be credited to its richness and continuity, and language is one of the best interpretations of this characteristic. The world has never been driven by a single culture, a single language, but rather by the interplay that has led to the lively world we have today. A forceful illustration of this is the preservation of the Sami language in Finland, which allows more people to have closer acquaintance with Santa Claus' homeland and folklore, helping study how influential this legend is in the world.

However, if the government puts too much funds and efforts into the protection of practicallyextinct languages, other causes of social life will be affected economically. Economic progress, education for the children, health care coverage and environmental protection have already become the major concerns. If the government allocates more budgets to the languageconservation, people would feel that it is "failing" in its duty to the service that people are actually in need of today. On the contrary, language preservation requires more efforts from linguists. On the other hand, some languages are becoming endangered mainly because they are no longer adapted to the world. The development of the world requires interaction between cultures, but it also requires efficiency. Inefficient language acquisition and cultural interactions may lead to financial burden as well as the dissipation of resources to the authority.