4/1: The project of mapping language

Imagine if we were to assign each language its own, minutely specific color on a spectrum of shades visible to the human eye, and then took a map of the world and placed a minimal dot of that color for each speaker of each language. At a small scale, except in certain linguistically homogeneous places, perhaps each dot would cover the other and crush into a mix of indistinguishable black or brown. But if the map were large enough, the rainbow spectrum of all 7000+ human languages would be incredible, with regions of dense color difference, even just streets apart; polka-dot pockets in supposedly homogeneous nations where language differences persist; patterns of interconnected networks where speech communities are built; and more. 

This kind of mapping on the individual speaker level, which resembles what governments try to do with censuses, is only one type of language mapping. And if conducted through political channels, like censuses, these methods also might not accurately report the linguistic diversity, depth, and precariousness present in a nation or region. Entire pockets of language might be erased, or homogenized. But mapping languages doesn’t only have value for censuses or this visual experiment I just described. Maps are tools that can lead to increased accessibility and resources for communities, allow for community organizing, and more. So, nonprofits in linguistically diverse areas and across the world work to find ethical, accurate ways of collecting true language data, and then using that data to create useful and impactful maps related to language.

For example, the Endangered Language Alliance is a nonprofit that works primarily in New York to preserve and document linguistic diversity, and one of their key projects has been to create a map of the languages spoken throughout New York City, the most linguistically diverse city in the world. The map, which has a digital version accessible here, is stunning, both in its beauty and the sheer quantity, over seven hundred, of languages packed into the five boroughs. Why is this type of map useful? It's useful for languages that only exist in a spoken form, for example, and might not have few other forms of documentation. In its digital, interactive form, it also contains useful information for understanding the status of a language, such as how many global speakers each one has. On a personal level, seeing the linguistic diversity present in your own neighborhood might encourage you to seek out new speech communities and engage with learning endangered and threatened languages.
 

Creating comprehensive and interactive maps of language communities can also support the work of existing nonprofits and projects seeking to preserve or grow the speakers of endangered languages. For example, if there is an organization in California trying to preserve and revitalize a specific language, and the type of map that ELA created shows that there are also speakers of that language in New York City, then the organization will be able to support more speakers, and to teach and conserve a more complete version of the language. 

Another example of this type of large-scale mapping was created by LEP.gov, a program through the US government meant to increase accessibility for speakers with limited proficiency in English. They provide a map application that allows people with limited proficiency in English to find communities and resources in their areas or new areas that serve people in similar linguistic situations. Mapping like this can also help public education better serve its students and their language level, as well, by helping understand the dominant first languages spoken in communities with less English, for example.

These are just few examples of how mapping can be used as a tool for language, and there are more intricate and intensive language maps, as well. Using the NYC language map I've already described, for example, the Endangered Language Alliance also created a map that illustrates connections between languages spoken and COVID-19 cases across New York. This map not only helps researchers better understand the concentrated effects of COVID-19 on specific communities — it also may provide valuable information about how public health information has or hasn't been disseminated in the primary language of specific communities. The language map, then, becomes a tool for showing inequity which can be addressed by language policy and translation work.

Is there any downside to collecting large amounts of raw data on where speech communities are concentrated? As with all data collection on individuals, there is always the concern that this type of data could, theoretically, allow for the systematic suppression or erasure of specific languages and the speech communities that comprise them. However, knowing where language communities exist and how to connect with them is also a powerful tool for organizing individuals to vote and advocate for linguistic justice. Maps are tools of empowerment as well. And the organizations interested in language mapping are often explicitly interested in revitalizing, supporting, and documenting endangered and indigenous languages, as is the case with the ELA. 

So our imagined rainbow array language map, no matter how beautiful, is only the simplest possibility. When used with purpose and care, language mapping is a powerful tool to concretely support all of the speech communities and languages that make up this incredible rainbow of world language.