Language suppression has been an issue and a concern for both Taiwan and Australia. Compared to other countries, Taiwan has taken a more assertive and legislatively supported approach to language revitalization. Taiwan’s response to preventing language loss has been quite methodical, experiencing stronger reinforcement from legal means and aiding Australia’s awareness of their revitalization efforts. In 1788, when British colonization began, Australia witnessed a devastating decline in Indigenous language use, stemming from policies of forced consumption, cultural oppression, and systemic dispossession. At the time of European settlement, approximately 250 Indigenous languages were spoken across Australia. Yet today, fewer than 20 traditional languages remain in use (Marmion et al., 2014). Unfortunately, language loss by the Aboriginal populations is intrinsically tied to cultural erosion, identity struggles, and socioeconomic disparities. Indigenous language revitalization significance holds greater beyond linguistic concerns. Studies show that language is closely linked to mental well-being. Actually, indigenous communities actively using their ancestral language have experienced lower rates of mental health issues, improved education, and a stronger sense of identity. In this respect, the conservation of these languages is not only aimed at protecting cultural heritage but also at promoting the social and psychological well-being of Aboriginal Australians. By taking a keen look at the similarities and differences between the contexts, we can find important strategies that may strengthen the efforts of the countries to preserve their Indigenous languages.

Reference

• AIATSIS. (2019). National Indigenous Languages Report. Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. Retrieved from https://www.arts.gov.au/what-we-do/indigenous-arts-and-languages/indigenous-languages-and-arts-program/national-indigenous-languages-report
• Australian Government. (2021). Indigenous Languages and Arts Program. Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications. Retrieved from https://www.arts.gov.au/funding-and-support/indigenous-languages-and-arts-program
• Hinton, L., & Hale, K. (2001). The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice. Academic Press. Retrieved from https://brill.com/edcollbook/title/24315
• Lo Bianco, J. (2016). Language Policy and Education in Australia. Language Policy, 15(1), 23-45. Retrieved from https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/rest/bitstreams/9bf62bd38ae9-5be6-81d1-8560f2ef3182/retrieve
• Marmion, D., Obata, K., & Troy, J. (2014). Community, Identity, Wellbeing: The Report on the Second National Indigenous Languages Survey. AIATSIS. Retrieved from https://aiatsis.gov.au/publication/35167
• McConvell, P., & Thieberger, N. (2001). State of Indigenous Languages in Australia: Australia State of the Environment Report 2001. Department of the Environment and Heritage. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242767229_State_of_Indigenous_languages_in_ Australia_-_2001
• Norris, M. J. (2007). Aboriginal Languages in Canada: Trends and Perspectives on Maintenance and Revitalization. Statistics Canada. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/reader/61688380
• National Indigenous Australians Agency. (2024). Radio, television and digital media in 21st century Indigenous broadcasting: Place old and new ways. Retrieved from https://www.niaa.gov.au/resource-centre/radio-television-and-digital-media-21st-century-indigenous-broadcasting-place-old-and-new-ways
• Zuckermann, G. (2020). Revivalistics: From the Genesis of Israeli to Language Reclamation in Australia and Beyond. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://academic.oup.com/book/41590
• Zuckermann, G., & Walsh, M. (2011). Stop, Revive, Survive: Lessons from the Hebrew Revival Applied to Australia's Indigenous Languages. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 31(1), 111-127. Retrieved from https://scholar.archive.org/work/dlnwgtihq5f6raqjz2ad35fwtq