 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 29 Mar 13 - 01:58 PM Heritage Minister James Moore wants to spend $1.1 billion on making Canada bilingual in fac; "strengthening unity." The money would go to French Immersion, Immigration, Strengthening minority communities. There are French immersion curicula in B. C. and Alberta, but they have had little effect. One reason is that most people know no one of French extraction, and the language is forgotton as soon as the students leave school. In Calgary, many languages are spoken among the immigrants (almost 25% of the population) and only English becomes common to all. I think that the proposal wastes money that could be uses to better purpose- jobs, medicine, etc. What is your opinion? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Jack the Sailor Date: 29 Mar 13 - 02:06 PM Canada's two major problems, French as a second language and snowbird dollars laving the country could be solved with one simple move. Invite Cuba to join as the 11th province. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 29 Mar 13 - 02:32 PM Oh, dear! A third language? How abot the Caymans, Bahamas, etc.? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST, topsie Date: 29 Mar 13 - 04:10 PM When I was in Montreal in the sixties I got the impression that the French speakers did not want the English speakers to speak or understand French, though I realise that attitudes may have changed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Jack the Sailor Date: 29 Mar 13 - 04:25 PM Yeah a third language, and 20% more Spanish than French. People in BC and the prairies would have a choice of two languages they can't use. More doctors per capita, warm beaches, great music, grow your own coffee and bananas. How much better is that than poutine and bon homme de neige? If it works out, then other islands might be invited Taiwan, Madagascar, Greenland.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 29 Mar 13 - 06:01 PM Litmus test: How popular would it be to spend half this amount of money in Quebec on English Immersion, Immigration, Strengthening English minority communities? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 29 Mar 13 - 07:07 PM Oooooo... can of SLIMEY worms! This may get nasssstaaay! But, can YOUSE handle the truth? The REAL truth? The corruption? "The money would go to French Immersion, Immigration, Strengthening minority communities." French is the hook line. The rest is a ticket for corrupt politicins and bureaucrats to line their offshore bank accounts. There is big money to be made by allowing and funding immigrants to come here and take over businesses built up by Canucks whose families have been here for generations... families who sacrificed and fought in wars. These poor Canucks cannot compete with the $$$ that these immigrants have. I know of one such that happened less than 1km from where I type. There are many. Bilingualism? I am all for it for a number of reasons. It has led to great prosperity for my province and especially for my home town. But, the immigration law changes "tacked on"? The combination of the Departments of Citizenship and of Immigration? WTF? The slimey corrupted pieces of shit should be exposed and land in the PEN! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: bobad Date: 29 Mar 13 - 07:19 PM "How popular would it be to spend half this amount of money in Quebec on English Immersion, Immigration, Strengthening English minority communities?" Education and immigration in Quebec are under provincial jurisdiction. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Jack the Sailor Date: 29 Mar 13 - 07:21 PM Immigration? That is so screwed up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 29 Mar 13 - 08:33 PM bobad... immigration to La Belle is now within provicial jurisdiction? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: bobad Date: 29 Mar 13 - 08:39 PM From wikipedia: The Canada-Quebec Accord is a legal agreement concerning immigration issues between the federal government of Canada and the Province of Quebec. The broad accord signed in 1991 preceded similar agreements with other provinces including British Columbia and Manitoba. The arrangement gives Quebec the exclusive responsibility of choosing immigrants and refugees still living in their own countries but wishing to relocate to the province. Selected applicants are issued a "certificat de sélection du Québec". Citizenship and Immigration Canada issues the actual visa after background and health verifications. The provinces also have agreements with the federal government in that they can nominate individuals for immigration purposes, similar to the way Quebec does. New immigrants are entitled to settlement assistance such as free language training under provincial government administered programs usually called Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada (LINC), for which the federal government has budgeted about $350 million to give to the provinces for the fiscal year 2006-2007.[1] The majority of the $350 million is allocated to Quebec under the Canada-Quebec Accord, at $196 million per year,[2] even though immigration to Quebec represented only 16.5% of all immigration to Canada in 2005.[3] The $350 million is budgeted to increase by an additional $90 million by 2009.[4] |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Jack the Sailor Date: 30 Mar 13 - 02:28 AM Do you think the T-Party would let Texas do that? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Joe Offer Date: 30 Mar 13 - 03:14 AM I think that if a country were truly bilingual, that might be a great economic, cultural, and political advantage. Seems logical to me that the U.S. should have Spanish as a second language, and that would give us good ties to most of the Americas. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 30 Mar 13 - 10:16 AM It does, Joe. And so does immigration. But not politicians who subvert the proper processes that have served Canucks so well for so many years. The whole works should be examined by a royal commission. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 30 Mar 13 - 12:04 PM I'll take one of those posts on a royal commission. I am expert in inflating expense accounts, which is a requirement for selection. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Bert Date: 30 Mar 13 - 12:10 PM Someone speaking out AGAINST education. That's a new one for Mudcat. My great nephew in Calgary was in French Immersion so that he can speak to his aunt in her own language. I wish they had taught French that way when I was in school. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 30 Mar 13 - 12:43 PM Bert, I am not against education (I have a Ph.D), but some efforts are ineffective. From what I observe here in Calgary, your great nephew is an exception. I have a grandson who was in French immersion, but he has already lost most of his ability in the language because he lives in an English-speaking society, with no French contacts except the labels on canned Canadian foodstuffs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 30 Mar 13 - 01:17 PM Q... if a third of the nation can speak it, the other 2/3 can learn and if we all spoke it, we could all talk to each other for practice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: CET Date: 30 Mar 13 - 02:11 PM I have some difficulty with complaints from Canadians about promoting the other official language, when in most countries in Europe you can't graduate high school without having studied at least one foreign language. I would like to see French made compulsory right up to high school graduation, with other languages like Chinese or Spanish as highly desirable options. On the other hand I'm conflicted about bilingualism. I have a degree in French, I have studied in France and Quebec, and I have worked professionally in French for almost 30 years, but I am sick of the bilingual politics in the government - huge amounts of money spent so that senior bureaucrats and officers can punch their bilingual tickets by grinding out a few lines of execrable French at public conferences without ever actual producing any work in French. Also, you see good people whose careers are held back because they didn't make level "C" in the approved government test. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ebbie Date: 30 Mar 13 - 03:31 PM I agree with Joe Offer- it seems logical that the US's second language should be Spanish, probably with a Mexican bent. Not because we don't have a LOT of other languages spoken in this country but the history of Mexico and its people are inextricably woven into ours. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 30 Mar 13 - 04:10 PM Calgary Demographics. Interesting to see that, of the 1.1 million in the city, only 22% call themselves Canadian, 2.7% French, Quebecois or Metis. English 18%, Scot 8%, Chinese 7%, German 9%, etc. French is completely swamped. Quite different from Maritime Canada. I remember sitting outside a playground in the Gaspe (field trip, waiting for vehicles to be gassed up, etc.) and watching the children play. One would say something in French, get an answer in English, and so on among all the children. Bilingualism meant something there, as it was a part of peoples lives. There is some neighborhood separation in Calgary. A map shows a group of northern Calgary neighborhoods as 22% Chinese and 15% Canadian, another 9% call themselves English. A group of named neighborhoods in northeast Calgary is 37% East Indian, 9% Filipino and 11% Canadian. An area in central Calgary (Beltline, Inglewood, etc.) is 18% Chinese, with Canadian about 15% and English 9%. Above from Calgary Herald maps and figures. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST Date: 30 Mar 13 - 04:18 PM It seems logical for English and French to be promoted in each Cdn province. But, the use of one is controlled, even illegal in one province. I suspect this is the root of some of the resistance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST Date: 30 Mar 13 - 04:24 PM Sorry Q Gaspe is part of Quebec, not the Maritimes. New Brunswick is more bilingual, Nova Scotia and Quebec has very few French specking residen |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Jim McLean Date: 30 Mar 13 - 05:41 PM Interestingly, Calgary was named after a town in Mull, Scotland, where most of the residents were turfed out of their homeland to make way for sheep and their Gaelic language had been forbidden previously. Gaelic is making a comeback in Scotland fortunately. I'm a great believer in multilingualism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Joe Offer Date: 30 Mar 13 - 05:58 PM Once upon a time, I explored the French-speaking district of Clare, in western Nova Scotia. They had the most beautiful, wooden churches, enormous buildings out in the middle of nowhere. I went into one, and there was a group of ladies cleaning the church. They were speaking French, but they switched to English as I approached. They were pleased to tell me about the French music they used at Mass, and they gave me a hymnal. My wife and her parents were all born in a French-speaking area near Woonsocket, Rhode Island; but my wife spoke Polish as her first language and learned French in the Catholic schools. I think the most wonderful contribution of multilingualism is in music and culture. Think of the wonderful American music in French, Yiddish, Spanish, and myriad other languages. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 30 Mar 13 - 07:25 PM The Gaspe part of Quebec? So much for my memory of the Canadian east. The Maritimes should steal it. Reminds me of the remark supposedly heard from a tour member, "If it's Tuesday it must be Belgium." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Grishka Date: 31 Mar 13 - 07:23 AM People who only know their mother tongue miss a lot. Learning any second language gives you a different view on humanity, similar to a second eye in 3D cinema. This knowledge never gets lost completely, even if you think you forgot the language or have no "real use" for it. When choosing a language, various criteria must be weighted:
Time and money spent for learning is rarely wasted, but neither are careful thoughts about what to learn first. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST Date: 31 Mar 13 - 09:48 AM Unfortunately, language can also be used for political and economic purposes, as has been in Canada (past and present).That has conbtributed to some of the negativity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Bob the Postman Date: 31 Mar 13 - 10:24 AM Gaspésie is the part of the Maritimes that's in Quebec. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 31 Mar 13 - 11:45 AM Bob, that actually is the take of westerners. Any eastern part of Canada that borders the ocean to the east is maritime. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Grishka Date: 31 Mar 13 - 01:03 PM Guest, I normally do not respond to anonymous guests, but I'll make an exception. Indeed, there is a long bad tradition of imposing languages as a way to gain (perceived) collective power or consolidate it. Resisting such power is legitimate, but refusing to learn the language is often the wrong way of resistance. A better way is to strengthen one's mother tongue as well. Learning a second language primarily benefits the learners, not the native speakers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST Date: 31 Mar 13 - 02:25 PM Explain that to the province of ùquebec-ùgood luck with that;) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 31 Mar 13 - 06:00 PM CET.. but I am sick of the bilingual politics in the government - huge amounts of money spent so that senior bureaucrats and officers can punch their bilingual tickets What about all the $$$ spent for contracts to friends to change all the signs from white letters on black background to black letters on white background just before every election in BOTH official languages? >;-) GUEST... New Brunswick is more bilingual New Brunswick is the ONLY Officially Bilingual province in Canada and us Herring Chokers are SOME DAMN PROUD OF IT!!!! We kinda snicker at others who shit on it and don't know what it means culturally or economically. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,ollaimh Date: 31 Mar 13 - 06:07 PM i'm sure aq and none of his friends know any French people. their ignorance and bigotry would be obvious from the first words they spoke. however there is a significant French population o in alberta. more over learning another labguage, allows one to access other opinions, the real reason the ignorant in alberta are so opposed, it significantly increases learning abilities and iq, and staves off dementia in old age--again too late for q. and you get to get into businesses that go on around the world in French rather that just the oil industry, and all one of our three founding peoples feel welcome in every part of the country.and youn get oput of the frog in the well syndrome. heaqring out side ideas will stop the echo effect of alberta conformity and reduce the ignorance but good luck with the savings program. much more sensible is to eliminate the five or six billion subsidy to the oil industry. but then we all know oil is so unprofitable you can't make a go of it with out public money |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 Apr 13 - 12:16 PM The point should be obvious from earlier posts and my above the line postings of Spanish and French material that no bigotry is involved. Contacts here are common with Asian and African people and Calgary has a Muslin mayor and Asians on Council. It is obvious that O... is unable to add 2+2 and has no business in mudcat. It is also evident that he is a below the line lurker and has never posted anything related to music or musicians. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Bert Date: 01 Apr 13 - 01:23 PM ...a Muslin mayor... See through? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 01 Apr 13 - 02:06 PM ollie loves his personal atacks, unfounded as they are. Just one more nail in his coffin... I expect he'll post it shut soon enough. As I have said on a number of threads, I hope the mods do not delete his post(sss) so it stays for all eternity as a testement to his verbal trash. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 01 Apr 13 - 02:25 PM "A Mudcat, below the line lurker" Now, that's an odd handle I never heard before. Appropriate to the intent or not, it seems to have hints of being kinda "musical-uppity". Wasn't there a thread related to that a few weeks back? :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 Apr 13 - 02:30 PM Yes, it may be "musical-uppity." That was my intent. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 01 Apr 13 - 02:42 PM You may capture some unintended game (bycatch) with that handle:) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Eliza Date: 01 Apr 13 - 02:49 PM topsie, I too was in Montreal in 1967, for Expo '67. I also found that the French-speaking Canadians were very hostile to me when I tried to speak French to them. I speak fluent French so it couldn't have been my bad command of the lingo or a bad accent. I've also taught French to 12 yr olds here in Norfolk UK, and found they don't retain it and haven't a good ear for languages. It could be that here in Norfolk we don't have many speakers of other languages, so there's no motivation. My point is that if it isn't needed for social purposes and isn't in practice, a language will fade away and no-one will want to speak it. On the other hand, I've been in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, where Gaelic is spoken all the time. I lived with some Gaelic speakers from Skye and Lewis, and they delighted in using their Gaelic in front of me as (I suspect) a small way of showing their political objections to the English, who historically had wrecked their way of life and their very culture. I've heard the same attitude prevails in Wales. So a second language can end up being a separatist tool rather than a uniting one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 01 Apr 13 - 03:06 PM Language, has historically been much more than a vehicle to communication. It can both unite and duivide people and has done both throughout history. (I am not speaking about the benefits of language that allows one to enjoy learning about another culture, or to assist travellers). India, with many dialects (languages) is a good example of these complexities (social, class structure, economic and others), as noted in the article below: Language can unite or divide |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Eliza Date: 01 Apr 13 - 06:45 PM I have loved languages from my infancy and when abroad can hardly help picking up words and phrases almost without effort. But I have to bear in mind that not everyone is thrilled by an opportunity to learn a language, or to speak to a fellow human being in their own tongue. Even in the same language (eg English in UK) a person has only to open their mouth to reveal their origins, 'status', educational level, place of birth, age and even political attitude from their choice of words and their accent. So a government bent on imposing a second language on all its people, such as in Canada, is not necessarily going to achieve its original aims. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 01 Apr 13 - 07:04 PM Eliza... "So a second language can end up being a separatist tool rather than a uniting one." You do NOT know what a mouthful you said there and I don't mean in the broad sense. Here, we pride ourselves on sharing our mutual heritages and cultures and languages. However, some on both sides spew "English vs French" CRAP for their own gain. Divide and conquer the stunned as me arse? Yup... every chance they get. 95+% of us are appalled but the 5?% are... stunned as me arse. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 01 Apr 13 - 09:12 PM This thread has wandered. I still would like to know if throwing over one billion dollars at bilingualism will "strengthen unity." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 01 Apr 13 - 09:14 PM Good thinking, Eliza. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Grishka Date: 02 Apr 13 - 07:06 AM Q, actually I understood your OP as "is it wasted?" - my answer, uninformed about Canada's exact mindset, was: "very probably not!" But will it strengthen "unity", and in what sense? I am not sure. I was in Switzerland and found that most Swiss have some knowledge of German and French, but native speakers of different tongues rarely talk to each other, or may even do so in English! Since there are no "ethnic conflicts" involved (as opposed to Belgium and possibly Canada), they are all happy. Still, the mere experience that a different language implies different ways of thinking, can be a big step towards peace and tolerance, which are the real base of democratic states. The dangerous counterexample can be seen from a quotation I read on Mudcat, something like: "English was good enough for Jesus, so English is good enough for me!" If your government sells language learning as a concession to the minority, they should rething their marketing strategy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: bobad Date: 02 Apr 13 - 07:56 AM Where the problem arises in Canada is the promotion, by the Federal government, of bilingualism for the country wherein one province, with approximately 25% of the population, has designated itself unilingually French. This tends to breed a certain degree of resentment in the rest of Canada. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Howard Jones Date: 02 Apr 13 - 08:55 AM It's been many years since I visited Canada, but when I did so I travelled overland from coast to coast, so I saw quite a bit of it. Outside Quebec province I found very few native French speakers, but many from other backgrounds. What I did become very aware of was considerable resentment at being required to learn French, especially for government jobs, when there was very little use for it and at the expense of those languages which would be useful in that area. This was particularly true of those with non-English backgrounds who resented the French being given special treatment when they were an almost invisible minority. Like Eliza, I didn't find bilingualism extended to Quebec, where there was a general reluctance to use or understand English. My favourite story is when I tried to buy a burger - "A burger with ketchup please" met with shrugs, but when I said "Un burger avec ketchup s'il vous plait" with no attempt at a French accent I was immediately understood. Sheer bloody-mindedness - understandable in many respects but hardly conducive to establishing unity and amity throughout the land. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Charmion Date: 02 Apr 13 - 09:22 AM Eliza, the reaction you got to your French in Montreal may have had as much to do with your "francais de France" vocabulary and syntax as your British accent. 1967 was a politically fraught time in Quebec, and you just happened to get a wee bit ofthe backwash. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Eliza Date: 02 Apr 13 - 12:35 PM You're quite right, Charmion. My hubbie (speaks an Africanny-sort-of-French) says that Canadian Franch has a completely different accent to French French. They sussed me out as either a Brit or a French lady, neither of which would have been much welcomed then in Canada. But it begs the question, "Why on Earth have Expo 67, a festival of all the nations with Pavilions for each one, if you're not prepared to be friendly and welcoming to foreigners?" I'm so proud of us Brits, because after the Olympics, nearly all countries were very struck by our friendly welcome and openness to folk from other lands. But then, we have a long long tradition of immigration and incoming populations, especially in London. As to a Government promoting and pushing a second lingo, Wales did this very well. They spent a lot oin bilingual signs and all schools have to have Welsh as well as English during lessons. Nowadays, a goodly proportion there now speak this historic language and their culture is preserved. By the way, on what exactly would the 1.1 billion dollars be spent? Education, promotion, TV, publishing, training teachers? I'd be interested to know, as getting a language off the ground ain't easy! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 02 Apr 13 - 12:42 PM Two digressive stories. I was in Montreal on business in 1967-68, when Rene Levevesque and others were getting together to form what would become the Parti. One night I happened to be in the hotel where convention members were staying (hazy now about the constituents and details). Liquor was flowing, and members kept knocking on my door. I gave up on sleep and opened my door. I received an apology and an invitation to join in the "party." I ended up in drunken discussions, had a good time (I think) and and ended up in no condition to go to meetings the next day. I spoke no French, but it was not needed. Service in Montreal and Quebec City restaurants was often unfriendly, the waitstaff didn't like western Canadians and dining was uncomfortable. A few years later, I told my son, who had to go to Quebec on legal business, about my problems in restaurants. Being a lawyer with acting in his background, he put on his Texas accent and manners and had no trouble at all in getting good service. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Eliza Date: 02 Apr 13 - 01:02 PM Just think, Q, this was forty-six years ago!! Isn't it incredible how the years flash past? Having 1.1 billion dollars to spend won't guarantee a result though. (To get back to the OP) We've had French lessons in schools here for decades, but people generally are either totally unable to remember a word, or use the odd phrase in a terrible, franglais accent. It makes me giggle to hear "Common vooze alley vooze?" asked of my husband. And as for 'Lez Mizzer Arbles', well...! Have any ideas been mooted by the Canadian Government as to how to implement this? The whole secret is Motivation. Without it, you're flogging a dead horse I'm afraid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Charmion Date: 02 Apr 13 - 01:48 PM The Cdn$1.1 Billion will not do any more good than the other billions we have flushed down that particular cultural hole since the Bi-and-Bi Commission filed its report back in the dear, dead days of the Pierre Trudeau's first term in office. As Eliza says, it's all about the motivation. Any federal civil servant will tell you that the second-language training provided to anglophones works rather differently from that offered to francophones. Francophones studying English learn to function adequately in a workplace highly tolerant of mangled pronunciation, spelling and syntax even from native speakers of the language of Shakespere and Sam Johnson. Anglophones studying French are flogged and driven through a program of drills until they can pass a highly nuanced examination that requires a mastery of civil service jargon and turns of phrase. Often, these tests require one to deliver a response that demands an analysis of workplace culture as much as of the nuances of French vocabulary. If you dislike the civil service culture (as I do), you will have difficulty with the test. I speak and read French well enough to work as a French-to-English translator, but I could never do better than a B grade on the oral comprehension or written expression components of these tests. Eventually, I quit playing that game and focussed my efforts on doing my job. In my opinion, anglophone Canadians see little benefit in learning French because they perceive little welcome from the other solitude. Too often, francophone interlocutors lose patience and switch to English, not willing to be cast in the role of language tutor when they are just trying to complete a commercial or bureaucratic transaction. Meanwhile, social interaction in mixed-language groups usually takes place in the language of the least-skilled -- usually (but not always) the anglophone in the room. The net result is a set of perverse incentives, and not a heck of a lot of bilingualism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 02 Apr 13 - 04:11 PM How many places in the world is putting a business sign out, or offering a menu in a eating establishment, in a language other than what the majority speaks, a crime? How does that create a "welcoming climate" to a person who speaks a different language, because they live in a place with a different language mix? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Grishka Date: 02 Apr 13 - 05:24 PM Group conflicts must be solved at the precise points where they originate. If there are no such conflicts (as seemingly in Switzerland), people will see no reason to be too fussy about symbols. Conversely, ultra-correct symbols will not solve any conflict underneath. There are many good reasons for anglophones to learn French, not the least of which is that they learn a lot about their own language. The government should rethink (not "rething") their marketing strategy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Eliza Date: 02 Apr 13 - 06:04 PM We have a super little children's TV show on the BBC Children's Channel Cbeebies called The Lingo Show. It's aimed at preschool children (ie under fives) and has little insect cartoon figures, one each day from certain countries such as Japan, China, France, Spain etc. It really encourages a love of languages, and doesn't attempt too much, just the odd phrase or word.I'd recommend a starting point like this, just getting people interested in all languages, then focusing in on French once the interest is there. Maybe some TV ads for adults with a phrase in French slipped in. None of this need cost a billion dollars! But I know from my experience with East Anglians that if the person is dead set against 'learning bloody French, what for, we're bloody English aren't we?' then you're onto a loser sadly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 02 Apr 13 - 06:26 PM Many good points, but few adress Q's original question... "I still would like to know if throwing over one billion dollars at bilingualism will "strengthen unity."" Allow me to give you the definitive answer. NO. A THOUSAND TIMES, NOOOOO! Now. Here is why. That BILLION dollars did not have to be spent. Who in their right mind would accept such an expediture? It was simply a way for the federal government to hide monies spent on other shit. ANd, of course, and as usual, to pay off friends of the government with contracts to, as I said, change all the signs in every federal building to be white lettering on black signs and then back again just before the next election (think I am shittin ya?... NO... I am NOT! Just like buying all new office furniture or paving roads or whatever the feds and provinces do just before an election... it's fuckin sickening!) Ya wanna do the two language thing, ya just say so and ya spend a few bucks. Ya wanna line the pockets of crooked politicians and their buddies, ya spend a billion bucks. Q has a point but it's misunderstood by Q and by most Canucks. It ain't rocket science. Seriously, HOW could $1B be justified for this simple endeavour? Bilingualism good... corruption bad. Hehehehe... I recall Q took me to task on the $1B on the reno of Parliament Hill. Same deal. Bullshit and corruption. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 02 Apr 13 - 07:02 PM Just wonder if the comment "There are many good reasons for anglophones to learn French, not the least of which is that they learn a lot about their own language." is just as true for learning any language, not just French? I suspect so? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 02 Apr 13 - 07:11 PM I suspect so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 02 Apr 13 - 07:30 PM Q.... $10M on pandas from China + Harper flew a governent jet to TO so he could pet the fuckers? Harpers head rattles when he shakes it. A shitload of loose screws in there. Mine rattles in a different way when I shake it in disgust at the fuckin crap. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 02 Apr 13 - 07:50 PM Good politics, Gnu. Got to keep the Chinese purring. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Grishka Date: 02 Apr 13 - 08:02 PM Ed T, unfortunately I cannot present myself as totally impartial on that matter, because of my biographical link to France. And yes, German and Latin would be other good choices, for the goal of understanding the nature of English language. Who says you can learn only one foreign language? Just, Eliza, please don't tell pupils that they learn French to please the French. We don't bloody care. We learn English and other languages to gain an advantage over you lazybones. Serves you bloody right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Charmion Date: 02 Apr 13 - 09:10 PM It will no doubt come as a surprise to you lot of linguistic athletes, but most English-speaking people don't want to learn any more about their own language than they absolutely have to, let alone anybody else's language. I have worked as a writer and editor for 30 years, the last 13 in a military headquarters. My colleagues there were all well-trained and many were well-educated, but damned few had even a basic knowledge of the mechanics of grammar, and syntax was a black box of mystery. Those who had been through intensive second-language training had learned these concepts in French, and I could discuss the nuts and bolts of their writing with them using the French terms, an experience that seemed to add insult to injury. As the editor in the building, all that was my job, and there were days when I felt like a human reference book. I vividly remember an up-and-coming artillery captain with two university degrees who could not name the parts of speech, let alone parse and analyse a sentence. How was this man supposed to improve his writing skills when he could not understand basic instructions such as, "Use the active voice" or "Make sure pronouns match their antecedents in number, gender and case"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Grishka Date: 03 Apr 13 - 05:59 AM Charmion, we all know that most people (of whatever mother tongue) do not want to learn things that those in power tell them to learn. Explanation of the reasons may or may not do the trick, and so will "artificial" motivations such as the insect cartoon figures mentioned by Eliza. Material incentives, including school marks and career opportunities, only work in their limited scopes and are counter-productive outside it, as you describe. Now what do youngsters actually like to learn, even if they do not see the direct usefulness? Best chances are with abilities that are seen as prestigious. There were times when knowledge of grammar was among these abilities - whence the derivation "glamour" (no belated April joke!), but those times are gone. Speaking and reading foreign languages, even dead ones, still has a certain prestige, which can be boosted by methods of modern marketing, or ruined by obviously political intentions of the authorities. Prestige is transported by visible examples of success. The Channel Islands are positively proud of their bilingualism, since it is perceived as an attribute of success and independence. Alsace used to be bilingual as well, but youngsters no longer want to learn German well (including the local dialect). Communication across the Rhine works alright in French or English. A desparate mayor said on TV: "Learn German, so that you can compete with Germans for the well-payed and prestigious jobs in Switzerland!" Now I cannot give any detailed advice to Canadians, but these mechanisms should be taken into account. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 03 Apr 13 - 06:48 AM I suspect if there an economic advantage to learn a language beyond your main one, many would encourage their children to do so. There is in New Brunswick, where the bilingual nature of the province (especially in the northern sections) provide that condition. In many other parts of Canada, there are fewer economic advantages, except some government jobs (even many government jobs offer free language training for some dual language jobs, even if they never use it at work). Beyond that, I suspect it depends on the culture of a country (some European areas are cited) and the interest of individuals and families. My observation is some adults excel at second language skills, while others less so. Possibly Charmion's experience in some military trades reflects past deficiences in education in some locations and demographics in areas of Canada? I would expect this has improved in more recent generations? I have not had a similar experience in the varied work I have had throughout my career. Additionally, my son is in the military, has a University degree and has excellent English skills (I know because I used to proof his essays). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Grishka Date: 03 Apr 13 - 11:06 AM I suspect if there an economic advantage to learn a language beyond your main one, many would encourage their children to do so.Such an advantage may well be assumed in most cases. Many employers appreciate general language proficiency, even if they have no use for the particular language. For example, good marks in Latin are considered an indication for both logical and cultural competence, even outside Latin America ;-). Parents who are aware of that usually encourage their children to learn, but as with maths and other subjects whose economic advantage is unchallenged, this does not always suffice to motivate students permanently. Youngsters watch their society, notably their peer group, for what they declare important with their "body language". Maths often lack such support, and so do most languages. The role of money in our motivation is often overestimated, in particular if it is only being promised for a distant future. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 03 Apr 13 - 02:15 PM ""Such an advantage may well be assumed in most cases."" While that may be so in some locals, (I remain unsure if this assumption is broadly valid or not, as assumptions tend to be "soft" in nature), I don't believe that many in Canada - the area noted in the title, weigh this advantage as you indicate. I suspect that learning English as a second language has also declined in Quebec throughout the recent years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Charmion Date: 03 Apr 13 - 02:17 PM Oh, Grishka, you are so right. Monetary gain (through employment security, assured promotion and broader career choice) is the bait actually offered to most Canadians of both major linguistic groups to encourage them to learn the other official language. At the same time, however, the rhetoric around bilingualism is all about culture, national unity and national identity. Obvious hypocrisy typically undermines popular response to official policy, and anglophone Canadians' behaviour around learning French follows that pattern. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 03 Apr 13 - 03:08 PM The economic benefits in learning a second language differs, depending on where you live in Canada, which unlike many European countries, covers a huge distance east to west (and North to south). If you do not work (in association) with the federal government - which has some requirements, are a French teacher or translator, or work in tourism, there is a low economic advantage of speaking French in BC, Alberta, Sask, southern Ontario, much of Nova Scotia, PEI and Newfoundland. Actually, speaking a language other than French may be more of an economic advantage in some of these areas. As gnu noted, the situation in officially bilingual New Brunswick, especially the northern areas differs, as does areas of Manitoba. I suspect there are also some economic advantages to speak English in Quebec, since many market sectors, and travel destinations, outside the province (and to the south), operate in English. Often the federal government minimizes their requirement, by listing jobs that require French as French non-essential, and training successful candidates through expensive government sponsored language training (IMO, with a dismal success rate). While government lists bilingualism as a priority, it imposes employment targets based on whether an employee is a Francophone or Anglophone (mother tongue), with no targets for those who are actually bilingual in practice. (Bbtw, I have experienced Anglaphones "murder" the French language after being certified under this program, and also Francophones who murder English after being certified as bilingual. IMO, there is a big divide (and, yes, also negative attitudes) in Canada when it comes to English and French use - and I do not see it limited to English Canada either. I suspect much of the negativity in both camps comes not from the languages themselves, but from Canada's history - and as I stated earlier, it also involves politics and economics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Grishka Date: 03 Apr 13 - 04:22 PM Just to make that clear: I was talking about the economic impact of learning a suitable language, compared with being lazy. And I was talking about market value, not political incentives. And I was not specifically referring to the problems in Canada, of which I know too little. It is another quasi-material advantage to be able to understand all one's national politicians and other authorities on TV. Swiss citizens appreciate that (at least with respect to German and French - speakers of Italian and Rhaeto-Romance cannot expect to be understood nation-wide). That is a benefit of "national unity" for the individual citizen, as opposed to the anonymous "nation", behind which one may suspect political factions with their own interests. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 03 Apr 13 - 04:31 PM Grishka, I suspect it is "confounding" to attempt to analyze the thread topic and the related Canadian situation from a European perspective. I see few problems that Canadians have understanding their politicians (should they choose to do so). Generally, most politicians represent those with a similar language profile. Additionally, senior politicians tend to speak both official languages (when they choose to do so) and translation services are readily available. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 03 Apr 13 - 05:44 PM Ed... "There is in New Brunswick, where the bilingual nature of the province (especially in the northern sections) provide that condition." Ed... "As gnu noted, the situation in officially bilingual New Brunswick, especially the northern areas differs..." Ahhhhhh... youse got MORE Acadiens than us in Nouvelle-Écosse! And, there are shitload more in SE NB than anywhere else. They are not the %age as in the north... but at about 1/3, well educated, prosperous, I still have to hammer on the fact the mother tongue of 1/3 of the population of Canada is French. Anyone who ignores that FACT is either historically uneducated or... whatever This is a country. JOIN IT! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 03 Apr 13 - 06:32 PM I guess it depends on what you define as an Acadian gnu. I was speaking about Francophone Acadians, not Anglophone Acadians that are certainly around the Maritimes in numbers, many with French accents, but not speaking a lick of French. The number of the former variety in NS are much smaller than in NB, and are mainly in Pubnico to Church Point in southwestern NS, and in smaller numbers in isolated parts of Cape Breton. BTW, Nouvelle Ecosse was only adopted as an official French version of Nova Scotia a few years back. The view was, that it should not be translated, as it is not English. In the main city, the % of francophones (Acadians and otherwise) is too small to have the city listed as officialy requiring federal bilingual services through the standard procedure. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 03 Apr 13 - 07:11 PM ""I still have to hammer on the fact the mother tongue of 1/3 of the population of Canada is French. Anyone who ignores that FACT is either historically uneducated or... whatever This is a country. JOIN IT!"" Firstly, gnu most of us are fortunate to lve in a country where we are free to speak whatever language we wish, and are seen as "no less Canadian" for doing so. Hopefully, I misunderstood your last message that some may see as suggesting differently? Before you drop your "educated hammer" on others, I suggest you check the factual francophone make-up of Canada from the 2006 Census. It is not one third, as you state, but is somewhere between 20 and 25 percent mother-tongue Francophone speakers. What is significant is the decrease in Francophones outside of Quebec - According to the 2006 Census, "4.1% of the population outside Quebec have French as their mother tongue, down from 4.4% in 2001". Interestingly, bilingual New Brunswick, where Francophones make up 33%, had the largest drop in Francophones of any province between 2001 and 2006. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 03 Apr 13 - 07:12 PM Here is a link to the 2006 Census I mentioned below: 2006 Census |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 03 Apr 13 - 07:31 PM gnu, belopw is some info. on Francophone numbers and communities in NS. You will see that the percentage is a mere 4 Percent, as opposed to 33 percent in New Brunswick. Also stated in one site is "Nearly 30% of Nova Scotia's Francophones were born outside the province. For the most part, they are Acadians from the other Atlantic provinces, especially New Brunswick". Francophones in NS Francophone communities in NS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 03 Apr 13 - 09:01 PM Of Alberta's 3.5 million, only 2% (61,000) list French as the mother tongue. Wikipedia |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Grishka Date: 04 Apr 13 - 06:46 AM Ed T, 03 Apr 13 - 04:31 PM: I suspect it is "confounding" to attempt to analyze the thread topic and the related Canadian situation from a European perspective.Certainly true, and the same with, say, attempting to analyze the situation Belgium from a Swiss perspective. My points, not related to any particular continent, are:
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: GUEST,Grishka Date: 04 Apr 13 - 07:15 AM P.S.: Looking at other countries, and/or back in history, will normally not lead you to a correct analysis directly, but it can help a lot to test a proposition. Very often the answer is "It ain't necessarily so!" As a Canada-related example, you may remember Michael Moore comparing the gun topic (another Mudcat pet) between the USA and Canada. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Ed T Date: 04 Apr 13 - 07:21 AM It would certainly not be inpolite to do so, Grishka. Your posts and knowledge are most welcome. It is just complex, given the countries English-French history (remnants of the early conflicts remain behind the scene). Some of the resistance goes beyond the normal personal, cultural and social benefits of having a multi language profile. The reality of geography, a changing society from immigration (many having a mother tongue that is neither French nor English) and the cultural and econimic influence from English neighbours are added factors. Some aspects of language in Canada relates to political unity. But, it is also a double sword, that has been and is used for the opposite purpose. If government spends a few dollars, will it make a major impact on human behaviour trends? IMO, it would not be an effective use of dollars. IMO, it is like trying to stop the power of the ocean on coastline erosion. Will more Canadians embrace multi-languages in the far future? Likely so. But, it may not be prediminately English-French, as the benefits of learning other languages increase. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: gnu Date: 04 Apr 13 - 08:51 AM As usual, Ed is write and I am wrong. Thanks for your time and for your effort in this regard. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Charmion Date: 04 Apr 13 - 09:44 AM As usual, Ed, a masterful summing up. Would that we were all so careful and balanced in our argument. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Canada bilingualism- $1.1 Billion From: Q (Frank Staplin) Date: 04 Apr 13 - 12:17 PM Ed's summary is perhaps the best answer we'll get. In Griska's post in favor of learning languages, when I was in research, I had to understand the content of articles published by peers in Russian, German, French. We had the service of translators, but service was slow and expensive. Moreover, most translators were expert only in conversational language; they made mistakes when they attempted scientific translations. I was adequate in scientific German (studied at university), but I had to pick up a bit of Russian in order to tell if work in that language was pertinent to my own work. Never did learn any conversational speech in these languages, but I wished I had- especially when attending foreign symposia. Now, Chinese and Spanish seem to be the most important. |
