Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

the perception I have is that I am not an "ally" or "friend" (despite championing Quebec everywhere I go, and being a fiercely proud native-born son of the Province, and having my children in French immersion since kindergarten, and speaking french to them at home for several hours per week).

In the end it all boils down to how much of an accent “de tête carrée” you have. If you’re at the lower end of the spectrum (accent de tête carrée is negligible) you may be accepted.

[harls]

Originally Posted by le calmar

In the end it all boils down to how much of an accent “de tête carrée” you have. If you’re at the lower end of the spectrum (accent de tête carrée is negligible) you may be accepted.

Damn. Good thing I am a good R roller. Gets me out of crazy situations in the Saguenay.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by lio45

If not meant as sarcasm, then: exactly!

As I said before, there are realistic scenarios where Acajack or I are "enemies" of X or Y, and that doesn't make us bad people.

That pretty much sums it up. I never think of you guys as "bad people", you're just looking after your own interests from a cultural point of view, and (what I really appreciate) participating in numerous 'thought experiments' by giving honest answers and points of view. We may not always agree, and I recognize that I also have the privilege of expounding my point of view and pushing my own self-interests, so it's all good for me.

And, FWIW, when I choose to be sarcastic, I usually try to make it obvious...

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by harls

Damn. Good thing I am a good R roller. Gets me out of crazy situations in the Saguenay.

Alas I have never been able to roll my R's, despite my Scottish heritage.........

I'll have to make sure to stay away from the Saguenay.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by le calmar

In the end it all boils down to how much of an accent “de tête carrée” you have. If you’re at the lower end of the spectrum (accent de tête carrée is negligible) you may be accepted.

You should note that my kids and their friends who are all born in the 2000s seem blissfully unaware of the "tête carrée" slur. (I run very subtle tests on them from time to time.)

As for the accent, yes the more subtle it is the more likely you will be able to "pass", but that's not the whole issue.

It also depends on what you say.

There are anglos who have more of an accent like Paul Wells who "get" francophones a lot better, or are seen as more sympathetic to them, than others who have almost no accent like Don Macpherson.

Former Montreal Liberal MP Marlene Jennings has almost no anglo accent in French and yet is a firebrand angryphone that uses extreme hyperbole against anything that is pro-French.

The late Montreal Gazette journalist William Johnson was also like this.

Thomas Mulcair has more of an anglo accent than either of them and is not seen as antagonistic to francophone Quebec, in spite of being a staunchly federalist NDPer.

[Acajack]

Funny how on such an ecologically-conscious forum where everyone is aware that our very existence as individuals (simply breathing for example) can have an impact, that so many people can be unaware that the very presence of certain people can have a detrimental impact on linguistic and cultural "ecosystems" as well.

[le calmar]

Originally Posted by Acajack

You should note that my kids and their friends who are all born in the 2000s seem blissfully unaware of the "tête carrée" slur. (I run very subtle tests on them from time to time.)

As for the accent, yes the more subtle it is the more likely you will be able to "pass", but that's not the whole issue.

Yes I was exaggerating the whole accent thing of course. And you may be right, de “tête carrée” expression is likely on its way out. It even occurred to me that it was an outdated expression as I was typing it.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Acajack

the very presence of certain people can have a detrimental impact on linguistic and cultural "ecosystems" as well.

I know you didn't mean it, but such a turn of phrase could be misconstrued as advocating a return to the gas chambers in order to achieve a "final solution."

As long as certain peoples continue to exist, then there is a risk to the dominant culture. This cannot be allowed.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I know you didn't mean it, but such a turn of phrase could be misconstrued as advocating a return to the gas chambers in order to achieve a "final solution."

As long as certain peoples continue to exist, then there is a risk to the dominant culture. This cannot be allowed.

I was perfectly conscious of that when I wrote it. Obviously that is not what I think or meant, but I am also not personally responsible for the not-so-nice sides of fundamental human nature.

And of course it's not lost on me that the more radical elements of the environmental movement sometimes advocate for the disappearance of humans from the planet.

[lio45]

I actually recall using the environmental example to point out that MolsonEx could call me an "enemy" of the environment on account of me owning more 4x4 fullsize pickups than strictly necessary (and occasionally, even using them!)

[MonctonRad]

And we continue to get further away from the reasoning behind harls being uncharacteristically exasperated with you guys.

Excellent job at deflection and obfuscation!

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Funny how on such an ecologically-conscious forum where everyone is aware that our very existence as individuals (simply breathing for example) can have an impact, that so many people can be unaware that the very presence of certain people can have a detrimental impact on linguistic and cultural "ecosystems" as well.

I think, as mentioned above, that we are all just looking after our own interests, like everybody does nowadays. We all want things to go our way, or strive for the best outcome for our "tribe", and will battle against anything that threatens the well-being of our interests.

There are times when society tries to look out for the interests of others, but then that can also be characterized as being "woke" (a symptom of the 'battle'). As lio implies, it can be broken down in terms of anything being an 'enemy' if it's looked at with a certain perspective in mind.

But look around... its happening everywhere. Any number of movements or organizations struggling to advance their cause, and the ones who don't get left behind in the commotion. So in a sense, it's all fair game, and we all have the right to defend what's important to us. As long as we understand what's going on, then all's good in my estimation.

I like this thread in that it helps me understand the Quebecois situation, and to gain empathy that I may not have had in the past, but in the end when something that I care about deeply (Canada) can have its very existence threatened (through separation), then I promise I will dig in and oppose it vehemently, even if it is perceived to have a negative influence on francophone culture. There's nothing personal involved, I'm just doing what everybody else is, and defending what's important to me (but not really "defending", just wordsmithing, since it's just a discussion on SSP ).

The way I see it, I'm finally just getting with the program...

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I think, as mentioned above, that we are all just looking after our own interests, like everybody does nowadays. We all want things to go our way, or strive for the best outcome for our "tribe", and will battle against anything that threatens the well-being of our interests.

There are times when society tries to look out for the interests of others, but then that can also be characterized as being "woke" (a symptom of the 'battle'). As lio implies, it can be broken down in terms of anything being an 'enemy' if it's looked at with a certain perspective in mind.

But look around... its happening everywhere. Any number of movements or organizations struggling to advance their cause, and the ones who don't get left behind in the commotion. So in a sense, it's all fair game, and we all have the right to defend what's important to us. As long as we understand what's going on, then all's good in my estimation.

I like this thread in that it helps me understand the Quebecois situation, and to gain empathy that I may not have had in the past, but in the end when something that I care about deeply (Canada) can have its very existence threatened (through separation), then I promise I will dig in and oppose it vehemently, even if it is perceived to have a negative influence on francophone culture. There's nothing personal involved, I'm just doing what everybody else is, and defending what's important to me (but not really "defending", just wordsmithing, since it's just a discussion on SSP ).

The way I see it, I'm finally just getting with the program...

Even if we sometimes disagree, I've rarely if ever found anything disrespectful or highly objectionable in your posts, I have to say.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I would consider him more of an "agent provacateur" than a friend or ally.

Agents provocateurs are like baking powder. Without baking powder, no cakes.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Because he strongly advocates for Quebec sovereignty (which is sort of "meddling" since he is not Canadian/Quebecois)?

I have never advocated for anything. Lol. You read too much into this.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by lio45

For a realistic example, if he bought a house in the northern exurbs of Bruxelles and moved there with his wife and kids, given that no one in his family speaks any Dutch/Flemish, I'm sure some of your distant cousins would deem him "an enemy", we don't even need an alternate/fictional universe to find an example.

As a matter of fact, the municipality of Dilbeek, in the Flemish suburbs of Brussels, but where the majority of the people are thought to be Francophones (there hasn't been a language question in the Belgian censuses since 1947, because the Flemish nationalists have vetoed any language question after the 1947 census showed 3 suburban municipalities of Brussels had become majority French-speaking, and were therefore annexed by Brussels, but Dilbeek back then was only 30% French-speaking, so remained in Flanders), so the Flemish authorities of Dilbeek placed a sign at the entrance of Dilbeek (when arriving from Brussels, which means just crossing the street really) which says (in Dutch): "Dilbeek, where the Flemings are at home". The sign was often painted over (in French) with "Dilbeek, where everybody is at home", but the sign was always cleaned by the authorities.

Recently there was an article in the Belgian media: the sign is now very old, and falling apart, but the Flemish authorities have decided to place a new one which will keep saying the same thing: "Dilbeek, where the Flemings are at home". The town hall of Dilbeek went on explaining why it was neither racist nor narrow-minded, long winded explanation in the article I read.

Since there is no language question in the census anymore, some researchers have used data from the Flemish social security services, which show that the preferred language of mothers in Dilbeek is in its majority French. That's how they presume the population there is now in its majority Francophone. Mostly people from Brussels who can't find affordable housing inside Brussels and buy houses in Dilbeek, but keep working/shopping/going out in Brussels of course. It's as if the border of Ontario ran right through the middle of the island of Montréal.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by lio45

I'd totally be seen as "an enemy" of the local indigenous culture, if I relocated in 2023 to a corner of French Guyana where that (obviously fragile) culture is under threat of being erased by the relentless pushes and encroachements of the Mainstream International French "steamroller", given that, y'know, I know nothing about Guyana, and all the culture I'd be importing there with me would all be Mainstream International French.

Actually... that's the most wrong example possible. French Guiana is the place in the French Republic were local languages are the most lively (and there are many of them in French Guiana, it's a real Tower of Babel).

There is French Guianese Creole, which is the lingua franca on the coast (that's an official French government ad):

• Video Link

There are various Maroon languages in the Maroon country on the Maroni River, for example Aluku here:

• Video Link

Or Sranan Tongo (another Maroon language, which is the lingua franca in Suriname, but is also quite spoken in French Guiana):

• Video Link

There are also various native Indian languages, such as Kalina (better known as Carib in the Anglophone world):

• Video Link

And then there are also immigrant languages, like the 2 Hmong languages of Laos, Brazilian, or Haitian Creole.

Here one of the 2 Hmong languages spoken in French Guiana for example:

• Video Link

[lio45]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

As a matter of fact, the municipality of Dilbeek, in the Flemish suburbs of Brussels, but where the majority of the people are thought to be Francophones (there hasn't been a language question in the Belgian censuses since 1947, because the Flemish nationalists have vetoed any language question after the 1947 census showed 3 suburban municipalities of Brussels had become majority French-speaking, and were therefore annexed by Brussels, but Dilbeek back then was only 30% French-speaking, so remained in Flanders), so the Flemish authorities of Dilbeek placed a sign at the entrance of Dilbeek (when arriving from Brussels, which means just crossing the street really) which says (in Dutch): "Dilbeek, where the Flemings are at home". The sign was often painted over (in French) with "Dilbeek, where everybody is at home", but the sign was always cleaned by the authorities.

Recently there was an article in the Belgian media: the sign is now very old, and falling apart, but the Flemish authorities have decided to place a new one which will keep saying the same thing: "Dilbeek, where the Flemings are at home". The town hall of Dilbeek went on explaining why it was neither racist nor narrow-minded, long winded explanation in the article I read.

Since there is no language question in the census anymore, some researchers have used data from the Flemish social security services, which show that the preferred language of mothers in Dilbeek is in its majority French. That's how they presume the population there is now in its majority Francophone. Mostly people from Brussels who can't find affordable housing inside Brussels and buy houses in Dilbeek, but keep working/shopping/going out in Brussels of course. It's as if the border of Ontario ran right through the middle of the island of Montréal.

Interesting idea! Let's start to collect funding for a giant sign at the Ontario border: "Québec, where the Québécois are at home"

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Even if we sometimes disagree, I've rarely if ever found anything disrespectful or highly objectionable in your posts, I have to say.

Likewise, actually. I think these are good discussions, even if sometimes they can generate a degree of upset - often it takes that level of conversation to genuinely affect ones' point of view.

Then, sometimes (for me), it can be just an opportunity to spell out in words how I'm feeling about something at a particular time when the muse compels me to do so, as in my post above...

[lio45]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

Actually... that's the most wrong example possible. French Guiana is the place in the French Republic were local languages are the most lively (and there are many of them in French Guiana, it's a real Tower of Babel).

That's why I made sure to say "if" in my example

Thanks for the info, though. As I said, I'm not familiar at all with the place. It was plausible (even likely) that some of the local cultures would be unique and somewhat endangered. No need to look very hard for actual examples of that!