several languages are in danger of extinct because they are spoken by very small number of people. some people say tgat governments should spend public money on saving these languages, while others believe taht would be a waste of money. Discuss both these views and give your opinion.

Nowadays, many

languages

are exposed to a big threat

that is

becoming extinct due to the few people speaking them. While some people see that governments should encourage these

languages

to survive by an enormous subsidy, others say that the community does not need

such

things and

therefore

spending time and

money

for that purpose will be so wasteful. I believe that

languages

are not vital in our life since several departments need to be subsidized. There are many reasons why many opine that funding

languages

to be survived is useless as long as it does not benefit or make a profit for society. The prominent one is that the government's

money

that is

getting from taxes on products and services must be spent on profitable or beneficial services for the residents of any country.

For example

, the country's infrastructure, education, and healthcare.

In addition

, if we agree on that sort of subsidy and a lot of

money

is spent on them,

this

might be not efficient or practical.

On the other hand

, those who believe the expenditure of

money

on reviving some linguistic ways of communication has to be considered a priority because we do not have to think too much about the tangible benefits, whereas many intellectual and spiritual merits are possible.

For instance

, maintaining some different speeches would have

a

Remove the article

apply

show examples

great merit

regarding

Change preposition

in

show examples

preserving the heritage of some folks.

In other words

, various cultures are needing a new method of communication which they used to speak with. To conclude, depending on the country's state and economy it can decide which is better for its benefit. As far as I am concerned, I profoundly believe that the drawbacks of

this

kind of funding are far greater than its advantages.