Some People Think that it is Important to have a Single Language as an International Official Language IELTS Writing Task 2

But those dialects should be preserved to prevent them from going extinct. On the one hand, adopting a single language has numerous advantages. It includes improved international relations and more international cooperation as well as a positive impact on the economy. First of all, having a universal language would facilitate simple communication. Consequently, improve global commercial transactions and those of the trading industries. Additionally, by cutting down on the time needed to translate texts into various regional languages for various nations, a sizable sum of money can be saved. For instance, the overhead expenses for translators and other web-based programs could be applied to another crucial service, generating more money. On the other hand, some who are opposed to creating one international tongue have argued that this could have negative effects. Because it would bury a nation's identity and culture. The main justification for this is that a nation's distinctive dialect is crucial to its identification. For example, the population of England is known as "English People." There are also many customs associated with a dialect, such as chanting, songs sung on various occasions, and other ceremonies. Nevertheless, these customs could disappear due to a shared platform. For instance, a recent study reveals that several dialects are no longer spoken. It means that the cultural practices linked with them are also no longer practised. To sum up, it goes without saying that having a global official language is essential for fostering better relations. These are required between nations and stimulating their economies. But maintaining distinctive tongues must be respected; else, a nation's identity and traditions may be lost.

All of the essay's points of view will be discussed in the paragraphs that follow. There are many benefits to creating a single phrase on an international scale, to start. First off, it's important to consider whether the widespread usage of one communication tool can strengthen political ties between countries. And as well as improve corporate partnerships. Second, since many emerging nations are dealing with the problem of unemployment, it will be simpler for people from other nations to find employment. As a result, both the employment rate and the ability of young people to survive will increase. For instance, the Australian government set the requirement that candidates for employment pass an international English language test. The test will reveal their command of the language. On the other hand, it would be a major disadvantage for many countries if international authorities made a single speech mandatory for everyone. Because many societies' traditions depend on their accent. As a result, there is a greater likelihood that they will lose their art and traditions. It will have a negative impact on the nation's economy given that many other countries' civilizations are a major draw for tourists. For instance, India is a diverse nation that is well-known for both its languages and its many different practices. Because of this, people from all around the world are interested in their historical aptitude and visit the town to learn about it. In conclusion, a single speech is important for employment prospects and for knowing many types of individuals internationally. It may also lead to the extinction of other expression-speaking communities' cultures.

Let's first examine the perspective that underlies every official piece of writing in the world. First and foremost, creating a single official term on a worldwide scale improves communication between individuals everywhere. To elaborate, language is the main obstacle to learning the cultures and histories of many nations. It would be easier for individuals from many nations to understand one another if a single vocabulary were imposed on the entire planet. For instance, in October 2017, a global poll of 2560 people was undertaken. It was discovered that 53.25 per cent of them agreed that it would be beneficial. As if a single expression were mandated over the entire planet, people would get closer because they would understand one another better. Let's instead examine the argument against establishing a single language as the international standard. The adoption of a common speech would primarily result in the cultural blending of various nations. It would result in the annihilation of diverse nations' cultural heritage. To be clear, there would be a good likelihood that people's original dialect would deteriorate if they had to communicate using a single international language. The world's cultures would be similar since the next generation would not be able to converse in their own language. As an example, consider the article on language convergence that The Tribune's editor-in-chief, Dr Harish Khare, wrote in May 2018. It was suggested that the cultural legacy of many nations would suffer greatly. This could be if everyone had to talk in the same style. To summarise, one dialect would bring people from all over the world together by fostering harmony. It would also lead to the annihilation of culture in many countries.