By Marco Testa
In multicultural and multiethnic societies, the concept of “community” languages is often framed as a tool to preserve heritage, keeping alive a certain relationship between generations.
On the surface, this seems both logical and necessary: languages carry history, identity, and cultural memory, which in a country where a language remains confined to particular contexts preservation is key to its survival.
There is no doubt that languages allow communities to maintain ties with their ancestry, to transmit values, stories, and traditions across generations. Yet, there is an overlooked challenge in this framing. By defining languages primarily as “community” assets, we risk politicising both the language and the communities themselves.
Languages become markers of difference, and their value is debated in terms of identity politics, funding, and recognition rather than becoming an integrated feature of a shared belief in an education system that values the broader contribution that learning a language does to its citizens.
As a result, in Australia, decisions about which languages are taught, supported, or prioritised either reflects strict mercantile ideologies or a range of broader societal tensions about who belongs and whose heritage is “worthy” of institutional attention.
This political framing can have unintended consequences. When a language is treated as a symbol of cultural or ethnic difference, it risks becoming a site of contestation rather than a means of engagement. Communities may be reduced to their linguistic label, and the richness of language as a medium of connection and communication can be overlooked. In turn, this can limit the opportunities for individuals within these communities to fully participate in wider society, as well as for outsiders to appreciate and engage with the culture the language represents. It can also reinforce divisions, suggesting that language is a boundary rather than a bridge, and unintentionally discouraging interaction between groups.
What is often forgotten is that languages are not only repositories of heritage, they are bridges. They connect people, ideas, and experiences across boundaries, cementing personal growth, an appreciation of the other and greater cohesion in society.
Learning a language is not just about preserving the past but it can potentially be the way to navigate present societal divisions and therefore help shape the future of the nation we aim to be. Language learning enables relationships to form beyond cultural or ethnic lines, fosters empathy, and encourages curiosity about the world. A bilingual or multilingual individual is not simply a guardian of ancestral memory—they are a participant in a broader, interconnected human landscape.
By valuing languages for the connectivity they provide, societies can shift from a model of protectionism to one of engagement. Instead of asking, “Which communities should we preserve?” we might ask, “How can we use languages to build understanding and collaboration?” In this framework, languages are no longer limited to the boundaries of the communities that speak them; they become tools for dialogue, for shared projects, for intercultural literacy. Schools and institutions that approach language learning with this mindset empower students not only to retain heritage but to communicate meaningfully across cultural and linguistic divides.
Furthermore, framing languages in terms of connection rather than solely heritage challenges the assumption that English—or any dominant language—is sufficient for participation in the global community. In an increasingly interconnected world, relying on a single lingua franca can foster a narrow, self-centred perspective. Languages offer cognitive, professional, and social benefits, but most importantly, they allow us to engage with others on their terms, not merely ours. They remind us that human experience is diverse, complex, and interwoven, and that meaningful interaction often requires effort, patience, and respect for difference.
Ultimately, the problem with the “community” language narrative is that it risks turning cultural assets into political instruments. By reframing languages as tools of connectivity, we honour human potential.
We encourage curiosity, empathy, and collaboration. In doing so, we move beyond politicisation, fostering societies which possess the tools and mindset necessary to cultivate a more peaceful, inclusive, engaged and globally aware world.
