Language Police to Force Children to Speak French During Recess

[Ideologue]

You know what he said so you can't tell him to speak white

T'en fait pas poulette. J'tiens les rosbifs occupés en attendant que tu reviennes.

Something about not being a chicken and occupying the roasts until Oex returns.

[HVC]

Lol close eniugh.

[Caliga]

Ide, what's with all the posting in French lately?  Francais est la langue des homosexuelles.

[Eddie Teach]

Teach.  Moderation is generally apathy toward the political process.

Election night's certainly a lot less fun when you don't have a team to root for. 

[garbon]

Ide, what's with all the posting in French lately?  Francais est la langue des homosexuelles.

Quelle horror!

[Ideologue]

Ide, what's with all the posting in French lately?  Francais est la langue des homosexuelles.

Trying to learn it, in my customary desultory manner.

[Berkut]

@Berkut: you are right. I don't think I am a moderate. But one can express one's conviction with moderate words, I hope  

I agree completely, and while I don't think you are a moderate, I do appreciate that your are one of the more even toned and pleasant posters on Languish.

I am almost the opposite - I am rather moderate in outlook, and not all that moderate in tone at all.

[Sheilbh]

That may well be so in general, but this story is hardly an example of it. As stated above, it was a news story in the (French) press in Montreal first, that got picked up in the Anglo press.

That's nothing to do with what I said though.  This is a good local news story - especially with the court challenge - so it's normal for the Montreal press to report it.  I think it could be an interesting kick off for a national piece on immigration and schools.

What actually happened was that the Anglo press took this decent local story and, as I say, squeezed it into the pre-fit template of Quebecois stories.  Look at the judgements in first sentence alone: 'The playgrounds, hallways and cafeterias of Quebec's largest school board will soon be French-only zones as authorities move to silence other languages, even during recess.'

[Jacob]

And Mal, for all his fine points, and he has many, of course (he's one of my favorite people here) can be smug about anything

Malthus has many fine points

[Ideologue]

Yeah, I don't mean it as a slam.

If it were a slam, I'd call him a stroller-sympathizing son of a bitch.

[Duque de Bragança]

Ide, what's with all the posting in French lately?  Francais est la langue des homosexuelles.

Great, lesbians now.

[Malthus]

That may well be so in general, but this story is hardly an example of it. As stated above, it was a news story in the (French) press in Montreal first, that got picked up in the Anglo press.

That's nothing to do with what I said though.  This is a good local news story - especially with the court challenge - so it's normal for the Montreal press to report it.  I think it could be an interesting kick off for a national piece on immigration and schools.

What actually happened was that the Anglo press took this decent local story and, as I say, squeezed it into the pre-fit template of Quebecois stories.  Look at the judgements in first sentence alone: 'The playgrounds, hallways and cafeterias of Quebec's largest school board will soon be French-only zones as authorities move to silence other languages, even during recess.'

There is nothing whatever inaccurate about that sentence.  That's exactly what the policy is intended to do.

As the story goes on to explain, the ostensible purpose of making the school a "French only zone" is total immersion and the parents, as also described in the story, are by a large majority in favour of it.

Note that the story gives the last word to the spokesperson from the school in favour of the policy.

As to the notion that it is the Anglo press that is "pre-fitting" the story into some sort of narrative about language rights, that is simply silly and counter-factual - it totally ignores the fact that it is within the province of Quebec that the legal challange (as documented in the story itself) is being made!

As I said already, it is a story about language politics within Quebec that is merely being reported on. I fail to see the offence here. 

[Malthus]

You always say this after you've had an argument with Malthus et al about French vs English.

It probably owes more to the fact that Languish gets on my nerve in recurring cycles, and that Canadian politics are now perhaps the only threads I participate in. Plus I am currently overworked and tired. Though I still think that Malthus - whom I appreciate - takes an awfully smug tone in these usual debates.    Add to the fact that I more and more subscribe to what Mihali wrote a few days ago; and I still mean what I said when I thought that Languish was reactionary. I'd explain at more length if I wasn't so tired, and if I knew that my words wouldn't be needlessly twisted; that might have make for an interesting discussion.

Well, I'm not reactionary.  You splitter.

And Mal, for all his fine points, and he has many, of course (he's one of my favorite people here) can be smug about anything.

Also he never gave me any feedback on whether I was interpreting the PMPRB guidelines correctly.

I am amused how an argument in which I pointed out that Oex had incorrectly ascribed to an article a title that it did not have, and did not see content that it did have, is now "about" me being smug.

Are we such delicate flowers now, that we cannot stand being proven wrong but must melt into some sort of mutual congratulation society? Languish is all about hard arguments. If arguing hard is the sign of a smug asshole, then I'm happy to be one.

[Sheilbh]

There is nothing whatever inaccurate about that sentence.  That's exactly what the policy is intended to do.

As the story goes on to explain, the ostensible purpose of making the school a "French only zone" is total immersion and the parents, as also described in the story, are by a large majority in favour of it.

I'd argue the tone is far from neutral reporting.  'French only zone' is emotive, not to mention the phrase 'silence other languages'.  'The playgrounds, hallways and cafeterias ... even during recess' is also the language you get in the Daily Mail when it's on one of its 'is nothing sacred' rants.  Similarly it mentions the school board in the first half of the sentence, after that it's 'the authorities' which is rather more statist and shadowy. 

There's a tone in that first sentence which shapes how you're meant to read the rest of the article.  It may be entirely factual but it's not neutral in any way.

As to the notion that it is the Anglo press that is "pre-fitting" the story into some sort of narrative about language rights, that is simply silly and counter-factual - it totally ignores the fact that it is within the province of Quebec that the legal challange (as documented in the story itself) is being made!

I acknowledge the legal challenge, that's entirely beside the point which is my observation that the Anglo-Canadian media have a particular slant when it comes to reporting on Quebec.  If anything it reminds me of the sort of reporting you get in The Guardian about Israel or the US.  The adjectives and adverbs have been written they just need to place the facts around them.

[Malthus]

I'd argue the tone is far from neutral reporting.  'French only zone' is emotive, not to mention the phrase 'silence other languages'.  'The playgrounds, hallways and cafeterias ... even during recess' is also the language you get in the Daily Mail when it's on one of its 'is nothing sacred' rants.  Similarly it mentions the school board in the first half of the sentence, after that it's 'the authorities' which is rather more statist and shadowy. 

There's a tone in that first sentence which shapes how you're meant to read the rest of the article.  It may be entirely factual but it's not neutral in any way.

I disagree. The job of the lead sentence is to get you interested in the article. Why should anyone care about this story? The answer: because, it is alleged, it is a challenge to rights.

The point is that the *allegation it is a challenge to rights is not something invented by the RoC*. As the article itself states, it is something that originates in *Quebec*. The controversy is a *within Quebec* controversy. 

I acknowledge the legal challenge, that's entirely beside the point which is my observation that the Anglo-Canadian media have a particular slant when it comes to reporting on Quebec. 

I see how you would get to that position: if you decide the facts of the story are "entirely beside the point".

The very point, I would think, is this: is the story:

(a) The "anglo-Canadian media" taking a factually neutral incident and, by imposing their pre-existing political slant on it, concluding that this incident ought to be (shock, horror) some sort of manufactured "controversy" for enflaming the biased masses of Anglos against Quebec? or

(b) is the Post simply reporting on a story concerning an existing "controversy" in Quebec?

Knowing all the talking heads quoted, knowing that the story first broke in the Montreal French press, it is pretty obviously (b).

The kicker is this: in reading the story, it isn't obvious that we are intended to come away with the belief that the Quebec schoolboard is in the wrong!