Meaning: The quote by Edward Sapir touches upon the evolving nature of language and its role as an international medium of communication. Sapir, a renowned linguist and anthropologist, points to the precarious nature of English's dominance as a global language by drawing parallels to the historical prominence and subsequent decline of French in diplomacy and Latin in the sciences.

The quote suggests that while English may currently hold the position of an international language, its future as the sole and secure mode of global communication is not guaranteed. This idea prompts us to consider the complex and dynamic nature of language and its function in a globalized world.

The reference to French as the "one and only accepted language of diplomacy" harks back to the historical period when French was the lingua franca of international diplomacy and politics. For centuries, French served as the primary language of diplomacy and was widely used in official communications, treaties, and negotiations among nations. However, with the shifting geopolitical landscape and the rise of English-speaking countries as global powers, the dominance of French in diplomacy has waned. Today, English has largely supplanted French as the de facto language of international diplomacy and discourse.

Similarly, Sapir's mention of Latin as the "international language of science" alludes to the historical role of Latin as the language of scholarly and scientific discourse during the Middle Ages and the early modern period. Latin was used as a common medium for academic writings, scientific treatises, and communication among scholars across different regions and countries. However, as modern languages and national scientific communities developed, Latin gradually lost its status as the primary language of science, giving way to the use of vernacular languages and the emergence of English as the predominant language of scientific communication in the contemporary world.

Sapir's comparison of English to French and Latin highlights the transient nature of language hegemony and the potential for linguistic shifts in the global arena. It prompts us to consider the factors that contribute to the rise and fall of languages as international mediums of communication, such as geopolitical power dynamics, economic influence, technological advancements, and cultural diffusion.

The quote also invites reflection on the implications of language dominance and its impact on cultural diversity, linguistic heritage, and the potential for inclusivity in global communication. As English continues to exert its influence as a global lingua franca, questions arise regarding linguistic imperialism, the preservation of indigenous languages, and the need for multilingualism in a diverse and interconnected world.

In conclusion, Edward Sapir's quote serves as a thought-provoking commentary on the fluidity of language as a tool of international communication. It reminds us that linguistic dominance is not static and that the fate of English as a global language is subject to the same historical forces that shaped the rise and fall of French in diplomacy and Latin in science. As we navigate the complexities of multilingualism and cultural exchange in the modern era, Sapir's words prompt us to critically examine the role of language in shaping our interconnected world.