Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[lio45]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Who's to say the poor clown hasn't been away to language training already, but, since he rarely gets to practice his newfound skills, they quickly atrophied through lack of use, and within six months he was back to baseline.

If that’s the case, then it’s the Canadian taxpayers who are the clowns/suckers in the story.

We wouldn’t be talking about this if the CBSA instead had a more reasonable sign: “This is the Michigan-Ontario border, who the hell expects anything other than Unilingual English service here???”

End of story.

My point has always been the false advertising angle, not the “I’m being genocided, I can’t order a 7up in French” one.

I’m fine with a given restaurant not offering coffee, just don’t have a sign advertising that you have fresh coffee on hand. That’s all.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

If that’s the case, then it’s the Canadian taxpayers who are the clowns/suckers in the story.

We wouldn’t be talking about this if the CBSA instead had a more reasonable sign: “This is the Michigan-Ontario border, who the hell expects anything other than Unilingual English service here???”

End of story.

My point has always been the false advertising angle, not the “I’m being genocided, I can’t order a 7up in French” one.

I’m fine with a given restaurant not offering coffee, just don’t have a sign advertising that you have fresh coffee on hand. That’s all.

Especially not if it's the only way to get coffee in town, and the coffee shop is funded by your taxes and mine!

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

I could make a contrarian case.




wikipedia



Cité Libre was not exactly the haunt of anglos.

Cosmopolitans like PET are always the target of nationalists. Even when they conveniently overlook the cosmopolitanism of the arch-anglophile, Jacques Parizeau.

As you know, PET was a highly complex individual. Among other things he flirted with Nazism in his 20s and rode around Montreal and Quebec on a motorcycle with a German military helmet because he thought WW2 was Britain's war and not ours.

I actually think this unfortunate episode eventually scared him a bit and he began to see his French Canadian side as something dangerous - both for him personally and for Quebec society.

Yes he agitated for change on what was an ebullient French Canadian "side" (in opposition to anglo power) at the time but this was very much in accordance with his own my-way-or-the-highway views of how things should be. They were not always in tune with the majority of Québécois. Or at least, there were various courants emerging in Quebec at the time. Fitting the personage, he had his own which was almost a cult of personality. A lot of Québécois bought into the PET vision as well, but as time wore on the shine came off it and his nemesis Lévesque's alternate view of things (even if not going as far as everyone embracing independence) became the dominant tendance.

Trudeau's mistrust of French Canadian impulses is quite evident in this famous essay of his, and if you read between the lines this almost sets the stage for his constitutional machinations several decades later:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/138618?seq=1

French Canadians need anglophones to keep them in line. Anglophones need French Canadians for... well... something. I dunno, maybe to make their country stand apart from the US?

[harls]

Originally Posted by lio45

That's pure fabrication on your part. You're assuming a hostile attitude that wasn't there at all.

Sure.

[harls]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

So, Anglophones in Québec who speak French should just use it to get services instead of demanding services in English? Right?

Yes.

I go to my doctor (who actually ran for the PQ) and talk French to the guy.

Maybe that tiny bit of respect for who he is and where I am actually gets him to be more compassionate.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Acajack

French may not overtake English, but it's actually gaining in momentum as an international language right now. It's quite ironic that (some) Canadians are so eager to jettison it when it's already been a competitive advantage for the country, and is an even bigger potential one going forward in the future.

I'm confused lol... just last page you were saying that it's a language in need of life support via government intervention to limit the spread of a competing language?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by dleung

I'm confused lol... just last page you were saying that it's a language in need of life support via government intervention to limit the spread of a competing language?

French speaking black sub Saharan Africans don't count.

[ciudad_del_norte]

Originally Posted by thewave46

Sure. I can understand the grievances and the issues of another place. Or how a jurisdiction can feel disconnected or ignored in higher decision making.

It is a big stretch for framing though to call a place a ‘nation’ on that premise, without other distinguishing nation characteristics.

It was somewhat an attempt at levity as well. Mea culpa.

I think the problem is that is a stretch to call Canada a "nation". It is a state but lacks a shared sense of common place, history and identity beyond superficial things. And most attempt at framing a Canadian nation is based in the history of central Canada (and to some extent the maritimes). The prairies and NFLD are largely areas that had interconnected, but distinct histories and then ended up being part of the same country in the end largely out of the desire from central Canada and the British to ensure broader territorial control and access to resources.

The levity is fine, but I think there is a tendency to mock rather than actually engage with why these things happen and adjust our attempts at national (state?) narratives to something that people can actually identify with.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I might stop here, but honestly we could fill up the thread with this stuff. Some recent good ones.

Kelly McParland: Quebec should look to Doug Ford for how to respect a minority language
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/kel...ority-language


Opinion Quebec’s intolerant government undermines Canadian claims of progressiveness
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...e-nationalism/

The latter one is from an American paper (arguably the 2nd most prestigious in that country) but the author is Canadian from Vancouver and their "analyst" for all things Canadian.

In spite of his location and total ignorance of French (which he boasts of) he focuses disproportionately on Quebec and French language issues.

Basically, Quebec is never intolerant, but the rest of Canada and the world beyond is.

Gotcha.

You guys are starting to sound like Gilles Rhéaume, or Robin Philpot

S'il vous plaît, je voudrais avoir un sept en haut

[someone123]

Originally Posted by lio45

We wouldn’t be talking about this if the CBSA instead had a more reasonable sign: “This is the Michigan-Ontario border, who the hell expects anything other than Unilingual English service here???”

I've always thought the interview portion of the border crossing had a very poor ROI. I'd favour rationalizing rules with the US to eliminate the crossing completely (Schengen style), but failing that it could be a pre-registered online thing where you scan your passport/Nexus or a person waves you through in a few seconds. A small percentage of people could be sent for screening at random.

Canada is a country with absurd and poorly performing bureaucracy where people argue over whether it should be in English or French or if you should be entitled to ask for service in the advertised language.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by lio45

"Québécois", especially with those two acute accents (letters that don't even exist in the English language), I'd limit that to Francophones.

four legs good, two legs better.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by someone123

I've always thought the interview portion of the border crossing had a very poor ROI. I'd favour rationalizing rules with the US to eliminate the crossing completely (Schengen style), but failing that it could be a pre-registered online thing where you scan your passport/Nexus or a person waves you through in a few seconds. A small percentage of people could be sent for screening at random.

Canada is a country with absurd and poorly performing bureaucracy where people argue over whether it should be in English or French or if you should be entitled to ask for service in the advertised language.

In theory I like that idea, but there's political problems on both sides of the border that would likely make this impossible to implement nowadays:

- 9/11 is still fresh in the memory of Americans, even if it was over 20 years ago now. Maintaining heavy security at border crossings to keep terrorists and other "undesirables" out is a bipartisan political win.

- A lot of Canadians would not support open borders with the US. For one thing, the issues around illegal gun smuggling into Canada would cause too much concern, and for me as long as the US has the 2nd Amendment that's reason enough to maintain some level of security. Additionally, as we saw during the height of the pandemic, there were a lot of Canadians who voiced a desire to block Americans from ever visiting the country again, not only because of Covid but because of right-wing extremism and "possible Trump supporters". Even this year since restrictions were relaxed, after the cruise ships resumed, there were some Victoria residents on social media absolutely horrified about Americans being able to arrive on a boat and freely walk around their city (even though they had to be fully vaccinated to get in). Even before the pandemic, there were Canadians on social media, albeit a minority of them, who voiced support for closed borders and not allowing anyone into Canada. Maintaining a border checkpoint is a compromise between those who support open borders and those who support closed borders.

[harls]

Here's an anecdote.

One time I took the 15 on my way to New York. The American customs agent took a look at our passports. My wife has a French last name and I do not have an English last name. He actually started speaking French to us - very broken French, but at least he tried.

If only more people would put in an effort like this dude instead of defaulting to the 'it's my right' shit.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Basically, Quebec is never intolerant, but the rest of Canada and the world beyond is.

Gotcha.

You guys are starting to sound like Gilles Rhéaume, or Robin Philpot

S'il vous plaît, je voudrais avoir un sept en haut

Not sure what's so objectionable about posting articles from The National Post and The Washington Post?

None of us here wrote them.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by ciudad_del_norte

I think the problem is that is a stretch to call Canada a "nation". It is a state but lacks a shared sense of common place, history and identity beyond superficial things. And most attempt at framing a Canadian nation is based in the history of central Canada (and to some extent the maritimes). The prairies and NFLD are largely areas that had interconnected, but distinct histories and then ended up being part of the same country in the end largely out of the desire from central Canada and the British to ensure broader territorial control and access to resources.

The levity is fine, but I think there is a tendency to mock rather than actually engage with why these things happen and adjust our attempts at national (state?) narratives to something that people can actually identify with.

Canada has always been a merger of nations. Unlike Europe, which went on killing sprees and drew lines in the sand that way, Canada was an artificial creation by a polity dependent on preserving its self-interest at minimal cost to itself.

Some places have a more distinct claim to being a nation within it. Maybe it is language that sets it apart. Or history. Or culture. Does Saskatchewan (or the Prairies) qualify? Language-based? Not really. History? They have never been an independent state, nor distinctly defined independent polity. They were creations of the federal government, ironically. How long does one need to get that history? Good question. I don’t have an answer to that.

Culture? Maybe, but it would be pretty thin gruel. In my travels in Western Canada, I never felt like an outsider. Nor did they seem that different to me. Who knows? Maybe I was a space alien to them or something, with my Maple Leafs talk, and mention of living near the foreign cities of Toronto and Ottawa.

I mostly make a remark to it for the somewhat weak-sauce political agitation of a Premier under criticism for mishandling other things. If one is going to agitate based on being a ‘nation’, better have a stronger argument backing one up. If Saskatchewan wants expanded powers, great. They are welcome to argue for it. I just wouldn’t try and use the ‘nation’ argument in their case.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by someone123

I've always thought the interview portion of the border crossing had a very poor ROI. I'd favour rationalizing rules with the US to eliminate the crossing completely (Schengen style), but failing that it could be a pre-registered online thing where you scan your passport/Nexus or a person waves you through in a few seconds. A small percentage of people could be sent for screening at random.

Canada is a country with absurd and poorly performing bureaucracy where people argue over whether it should be in English or French or if you should be entitled to ask for service in the advertised language.

I talk with Customs very little during my arrival in Canada at airports most of the time. I spend more time at the kiosk than anything.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by harls

Here's an anecdote.

One time I took the 15 on my way to New York. The American customs agent took a look at our passports. My wife has a French last name and I do not have an English last name. He actually started speaking French to us - very broken French, but at least he tried.

If only more people would put in an effort like this dude instead of defaulting to the 'it's my right' shit.

Good story. I've had the same experience with US border staff on a few occasions. Pretty sure the crossings that border Quebec have at least some staff members who know a bit of French, though obviously it's not a systematic thing but rather a "just in case" if they're on duty.

I even once got one at the Thousand Islands Bridge so near Brockville, Ontario. Kinda weird crossing into a foreign country speaking in my language (French) with their officials, then crossing back into my country at the same place some time later and dealing with "my" public servants and having to speak English.

That said, none of this really a counter-example to Lio's. Yes it's a good example of someone with a good attitude, but he was the service provider, not someone who demanding for his "rights" to be respected.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by dleung

I'm confused lol... just last page you were saying that it's a language in need of life support via government intervention to limit the spread of a competing language?

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

French speaking black sub Saharan Africans don't count.

Nice attempt at a "gotcha!" guys, but someone needs to tell the feds!

https://www.canadim.com/news/canada-...can-countries/

https://www.tvo.org/article/canada-i...phone-students

The Quebec government has actually been vehemently denouncing this since last year, at they want these students to come here.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

When you know a language you are more likely to understand the people who are speaking it than if you outsource the communication to a translator. The subtleties (or even the bulk) of a message can get, well, lost in translation. If the leaders of a company (or at least the managers responsible for a specific market) know the language of their customers, they will have a better control on the message (and its retroaction), which is vital to avoid miscommunication. And if you just chose to let your customers handle the burden of translation, not only you might lose the message but you also lose control on the cost of translation which will make your product more expansive (in money but also in the trouble it takes to translate compare to another product that is already "translated").

The anglosphere is used to be the biggest market and to have everybody speak its language to sell their products, and it is therefore used to their customers (that are often the same people) knowing English. Will business in English speaking countries be able to react as fast when their competitors have a new communication advantage on them?

We all heard about American tourists outraged that people sometimes don't speak to them in English in other countries, imagine that at the scale of a whole company.

Absolutely, and companies know this. In the case I'm familiar with, the company would send people to the United States and Canada for five year stints, to not only learn the language, but to understand the culture. They would also hire or promote executives from one of these countries to provide additional understanding.

I think it's a mistake to get caught up in the 'Anglophone vs the world' mindset, as it's not as simple as all that.

The American tourist stories are always a form of entertainment for me, though, especially the ones that are more extreme and not necessarily true...

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by manny_santos

In theory I like that idea, but there's political problems on both sides of the border that would likely make this impossible to implement nowadays:

- 9/11 is still fresh in the memory of Americans, even if it was over 20 years ago now. Maintaining heavy security at border crossings to keep terrorists and other "undesirables" out is a bipartisan political win.

- A lot of Canadians would not support open borders with the US. For one thing, the issues around illegal gun smuggling into Canada would cause too much concern, and for me as long as the US has the 2nd Amendment that's reason enough to maintain some level of security. Additionally, as we saw during the height of the pandemic, there were a lot of Canadians who voiced a desire to block Americans from ever visiting the country again, not only because of Covid but because of right-wing extremism and "possible Trump supporters". Even this year since restrictions were relaxed, after the cruise ships resumed, there were some Victoria residents on social media absolutely horrified about Americans being able to arrive on a boat and freely walk around their city (even though they had to be fully vaccinated to get in). Even before the pandemic, there were Canadians on social media, albeit a minority of them, who voiced support for closed borders and not allowing anyone into Canada. Maintaining a border checkpoint is a compromise between those who support open borders and those who support closed borders.

Definitely agree with this last part especially. At one point I might have been favourable to a Schengen-style agreement for the Canada-US border, but today I am so glad we never implemented that.

That said, the border crossing process should be improved and streamlined, with more focus on criminal and illegal stuff and less on duties and taxes for perfectly legal products.