We already do. The global super-community exists as well, in some form. But that super-culture is a product of all the cultures that contribute to it.
It is. I do consider this an amazing time to live in since foreign cultures are much more accessible thanks to internet.
I've observed at fairly close quarters how the Fenno-Ugric cultures in Russia and Siberia have withered; their traditions, songs, literature, and way of life slowly but relentlessly eradicated, largely through the destruction of their languages. That doesn't mean that, say, the Komi or the Mari shouldn't learn Russian. But it means that once the last native Mari-speaker dies, we will all be a little bit poorer.
But they die so much more quickly than they evolve. Cultural evolution is not unlike biological evolution in that sense -- species can become extinct much more quickly than they evolve. Loss of cultural diversity is as devastating to humanity as loss of biodiversity is to the ecosystem.
I guess it all depends on how accessible you can make that culture and what it contributes to the world. Cultural traditions is interesting to study because by studying foreign cultures you get perspectives to your own culture and your own life. However, there are
cultural traditions that have no more value than anecdotes in historybooks.
The good part with living in the digital era is that songs and literature can be recorded and
shared in a way that wasn't possible in previous generations.
Not less interesting, perhaps, but nevertheless poorer, less nuanced. Someone compared reading a book in translation to looking at a Persian rug from the back. You can see all the detail and craftmanship that went into it, and admire the pattern, but it's still a pale reflection of what it's meant to be. I have read the Kalevala both in Finnish and in English and French translations, and the experience is different.
Naturally, when a person who already know both languages and compare the native version (on his/her mothers tongue) with the translation, he/she will naturally experience the translation as pale. But this have more to do with personal nostalgia.
You know the language. You have lived with the language all of your life. It's part of you and your communication. Almost every experience you ever did is tied to that language. I, however, wouldn't get anything from Kalevala in Finnish as I haven't lived with that language, nor do I understand the nuanced meaning that you have throughout your life tied to each word. It's not the language itself that create the experience you feel, it's how the text responds to the complex neurological network in your head, forged by your unique individual experience. If you had never ever spoken Finnish, you would get the exact same experience as I do.
Compare this with the Bible. All over the world there are people who live their entire lives by the bible. They consider it their moral compass and it's the most important book they ever read. Some passages might boil up incredible emotions. Some quotes can be used to describe your situation perfectly or how to act in specific situations.
But what % of all those understands Arameic, Greek or Hebrew?
I've read the Qur'an in two translations, a "literary" Finnish one, and an "academic" French one. I believe the former got closer in "feel" to experiencing it in Arabic, but I entirely believe my Arab friends who tell me that it just cannot be properly appreciated in any other form than the original.
I have an academic version and a more "muslim friendly" version. The academic version is basicly saying "this is what the book say" and pay little attention to how muslims themselves commonly interpret the passages. There are no "soft" translations in it, if a passage sounds barbaric at first, there's no attempt to trying to find a softer translation. The other version pay great attention to try to be true to as many different meanings as possible and it also contains apologetics, explanations etc. The second version is called "The Message of the Qur'an" rather than the "Qur'an" as an open confession that it's a translation and not the arabic original.
Language is like music, or dance, or poetry, or any other really complex cultural art form. It has a truth and a beauty in and of itself, quite apart from the truth and beauty of any artifacts woven with it. I value language for its own sake, and I believe we are poorer if we lose our linguistic riches, and not only because there won't be anyone left to admire those rugs right side up.
Oh well. I guess I have to confess that I do enjoy some songs in languages that I cannot understand.
