Canada to firmly re-assess its status as a British colony

[Razgovory]

Like I said to Valmy, why do the voters want it then.

That is a better question for our Quebeckers but I assume it is because politicians are bravely claiming they are defending Quebec's heritage and culture from evil liberal...er...I mean Anglo subversion.

I could see that as an excuse for why both languages must be on a sign (sorta of I guess), but not why French font must be larger then any other language.

[Valmy]

I could see that as an excuse for why both languages must be on a sign (sorta of I guess), but not why French font must be larger then any other language.

There has to be a story behind that.  Legislation like that usually comes in reaction to some outrage or another.

[Razgovory]

It does make me wonder why they bother translating everything into French anyway if that product cannot be sold in Quebec but I suppose that is to satisfy Canadian federal requirements.

There is this entire other country with lots of people who all speak French. It is called "France".

The French have a similar mindset.  After all they have ancient institutions dedicated to preservation of the French language from corruption of less pure languages.  There is a cultural difference here I suppose.  There is no body governing the use of English.  And the idea of one existing would strike most English Speakers as strange.  Note: The French have never really been bothered preserving other languages.  They gleefully made efforts to exterminate other languages in Metropolitan France.

[Malthus]

I think you are mixing things up the way Berkut suggested.

Um Oex said that specifically to point out how the language laws are not a big deal.  So far that was the only defense of them I have seen in this thread.  I guess my question is if things are usually introduced into Quebec where all three languages are usually listed equally.  Are they responding to the English usually being on top and in larger font which is not unusually the case with products here?  Because if not I guess I have to agree that it is an economically damaging and probably short-sighted harmful policy that does not really do much to advance French.

The "French must predominate" thing causing difficulties with company launches in Quebec is an unintended consequence.

The reason French must predominate is historical. In the past, Anglophones dominated the economic life of Quebec. Power shifted, and the Francophone majority gained more power. They (justly enough) wanted their rights preserved, but they also went further - they wished to redress the preceived "historical humiliation" of being economically dominated in their own province. Hence, taking measures to assert that they, the majority, are now in power, and not any minority - such as "French must predominate". It's a largely symbolic assertion of supremacy of one group over another. 

Taking measures to ensure the domination of a majority over a minority, however "minor", is never a pleasant or worthwhile thing, whatever the justifications advanced for it. In this case, it comes with (unintended) costs - it makes Quebec a less attractive jurisdiction for business.

[Valmy]

The French have a similar mindset.  After all they have ancient institutions dedicated to preservation of the French language from corruption of less pure languages.

There are good reasons for that.  French, the language, was a very important unifying political tool that reversed the Balkanization of France.  It is a big antiquated today but, you know, old institutions have powerful inertia.  I do not think the mindset is similar they are reaction to very different things.

Note: The French have never really been bothered preserving other languages.  They gleefully made efforts to exterminate other languages in Metropolitan France.

Well yeah that was the entire point of regulating the language in the first place.  Having dozens on languages in one country is pretty historicaly destructive in Europe.  I think every European country tried to regulate the language inside its borders.  Italy faced the problem that Italian was not widely spoken in Italy but they fixed that and Britain did similar things with its minority languages....most famously in Ireland.

[Berkut]

There are good reasons for that. 

Don't you mean, maybe at best, that there *were* good reasons for that?

French, the language, was a very important unifying political tool that reversed the Balkanization of France.

Past tense.

  It is a big antiquated today but, you know, old institutions have powerful inertia.

I would call this a rather bad reason, today. I cannot think of too many examples of "good reasons" that amount to "old institutions have powerful inertia".

[MadImmortalMan]

There are good reasons for that.  French, the language, was a very important unifying political tool that reversed the Balkanization of France.  It is a big antiquated today but, you know, old institutions have powerful inertia.  I do not think the mindset is similar they are reaction to very different things.

In the process, it made the more-adaptable-by-comparison English language much more able to conquer the world.

[HVC]

There are good reasons for that.  French, the language, was a very important unifying political tool that reversed the Balkanization of France.  It is a big antiquated today but, you know, old institutions have powerful inertia.  I do not think the mindset is similar they are reaction to very different things.

In the process, it made the more-adaptable-by-comparison English language much more able to conquer the world.

to be fair english on it's own didn't out compete french. a world spanning empire and a super power is why english is the new linga franca.

[Razgovory]

The French have a similar mindset.  After all they have ancient institutions dedicated to preservation of the French language from corruption of less pure languages.

There are good reasons for that.  French, the language, was a very important unifying political tool that reversed the Balkanization of France.  It is a big antiquated today but, you know, old institutions have powerful inertia.  I do not think the mindset is similar they are reaction to very different things.

Note: The French have never really been bothered preserving other languages.  They gleefully made efforts to exterminate other languages in Metropolitan France.

Well yeah that was the entire point of regulating the language in the first place.  Having dozens on languages in one country is pretty historicaly destructive in Europe.  I think every European country tried to regulate the language inside its borders.  Italy faced the problem that Italian was not widely spoken in Italy but they fixed that and Britain did similar things with its minority languages....most famously in Ireland.

The Academie is tasked with the preservation of purity of the French language.  This implies a superior position of French compared to other languages which would presumably make French impure.  The motive seems very similar, to keep the French language in a state of superiority to other languages.

Incidentally, you made an argument for not preserving French in Canada, as you pointed out it is "Historically destructive".

[Oexmelin]

Would Mexico reject the materials even though there is a Spanish version already as not being "Spanish enough" because the Spanish version wasn't 2/3 larger than the English and French versions?

We're getting into quite the technical details.

* Labelling, manuals, etc. needs to have a French version. These need not be predominantly French. This includes packaging. In other words, you can't have, as it happened before, a whole package in English, with a small sticker added with a minuscule French version. You can have a package where the lettering of French, English or Spanish is equal.
* All non-profit material can be unilingual
* Stand-alone commercial advertising - i.e. flyers, banners, ads, are those targetted by the Charter.
* Commercial advertising as inserts, i.e., that you find in newspapers, can be unilingual - as long as a French version is available. I.e., The Bay produces two versions of the same flyer, one inserted in French newspapers, one in English.
* Same, of course, for TV ads. There are no bilingual TV or radio ads.

[Barrister]

It seems clear to me you guys don't understand why Quebec would want its language laws.  It's not merely about being a "largely symbolic assertion of supremacy".

The simple fact is that most Francophones know English (or enough English to get by), but most anglos do not know French.  I've numerous times had the experience of entering a room where a couple of francophones are talking - and they then must speak in English to continue the discussion.

Quebec had the experience that even in francophone owned and operated business, most of the day to day language being spoken was English.  They wanted, for a variety of reasons, to change it so that the predominate language of Quebec, both at home and in business, was in French.

Ontario has no reason to mandate the use of English because the use of English is in no way in threat in Ontario.  Arguing along that line seems to me similar to the "gays have the same right to marry the opposite sex as anyone else does".  It's simply not the same situation.

Now does Quebec take an economic hit for its language laws?  Of course it does.  But they have either chosen to ignore that fact, or have accepted it as a cost worth paying in order to ensure the use of French in the province.

As I said before - there is probably room for imrovement around the edges on the implementation of Bill 101 (really - a Chinese restaurant has to have French predominate?), but if you think your language is worth fighting for, I understand why they are doing it.

[Razgovory]

There are good reasons for that.  French, the language, was a very important unifying political tool that reversed the Balkanization of France.  It is a big antiquated today but, you know, old institutions have powerful inertia.  I do not think the mindset is similar they are reaction to very different things.

In the process, it made the more-adaptable-by-comparison English language much more able to conquer the world.

to be fair english on it's own didn't out compete french. a world spanning empire and a super power is why english is the new linga franca.

France had an empire as well.  Unfortunately for France, French power peaked about 200 hundred years ago.  It remained a prestige language through out the 19th century.  Americans, Britons, Russians, etc would learn French in an effort to be sophisticated.  Sadly as France has decline in relative power the luster of the French language has waned and we must make do with the base grunts and howls that is the English language.

[Razgovory]

It seems clear to me you guys don't understand why Quebec would want its language laws.  It's not merely about being a "largely symbolic assertion of supremacy".

The simple fact is that most Francophones know English (or enough English to get by), but most anglos do not know French.  I've numerous times had the experience of entering a room where a couple of francophones are talking - and they then must speak in English to continue the discussion.

Quebec had the experience that even in francophone owned and operated business, most of the day to day language being spoken was English.  They wanted, for a variety of reasons, to change it so that the predominate language of Quebec, both at home and in business, was in French.

Ontario has no reason to mandate the use of English because the use of English is in no way in threat in Ontario.  Arguing along that line seems to me similar to the "gays have the same right to marry the opposite sex as anyone else does".  It's simply not the same situation.

Now does Quebec take an economic hit for its language laws?  Of course it does.  But they have either chosen to ignore that fact, or have accepted it as a cost worth paying in order to ensure the use of French in the province.

As I said before - there is probably room for imrovement around the edges on the implementation of Bill 101 (really - a Chinese restaurant has to have French predominate?), but if you think your language is worth fighting for, I understand why they are doing it.

This argument would carry more weight if the signs merely said that it had to have French on them.  But as Malthus says French must predominate.  That goes beyond utility.  That's making a statement of importance.

[Barrister]

It seems clear to me you guys don't understand why Quebec would want its language laws.  It's not merely about being a "largely symbolic assertion of supremacy".

The simple fact is that most Francophones know English (or enough English to get by), but most anglos do not know French.  I've numerous times had the experience of entering a room where a couple of francophones are talking - and they then must speak in English to continue the discussion.

Quebec had the experience that even in francophone owned and operated business, most of the day to day language being spoken was English.  They wanted, for a variety of reasons, to change it so that the predominate language of Quebec, both at home and in business, was in French.

Ontario has no reason to mandate the use of English because the use of English is in no way in threat in Ontario.  Arguing along that line seems to me similar to the "gays have the same right to marry the opposite sex as anyone else does".  It's simply not the same situation.

Now does Quebec take an economic hit for its language laws?  Of course it does.  But they have either chosen to ignore that fact, or have accepted it as a cost worth paying in order to ensure the use of French in the province.

As I said before - there is probably room for imrovement around the edges on the implementation of Bill 101 (really - a Chinese restaurant has to have French predominate?), but if you think your language is worth fighting for, I understand why they are doing it.

This argument would carry more weight if the signs merely said that it had to have French on them.  But as Malthus says French must predominate.  That goes beyond utility.  That's making a statement of importance.

It's because it's not about having French available - it's about making French the predominate language in Quebec.

So in other words, I agree with you.  It's not about utility.  It is a statement of importance.  But why is that such a terrible thing?

[Oexmelin]

Could be malice, or could just be they figure quebecers would just go to the .fr site. Corporations on a whole rarely work on malice. Unless all the IT guys and Baard of directors really hate quebec and veto'd the implementation or something. Oversite and stupidty is often a more accurate theory.

Er... No. If I want to buy the product in Canadian dollars, with Canadian service, why would I go to the .fr site - especially when the site adjusts to the IP adress?

Just in case it was oversight, I wrote an email (in English) asking why this was the case. Twice. Over a year ago. I have yet to receive an answer. I also asked in person, when I needed customer service, to have someone who spoke French talk to me. It never happened.

And, yes, this was but a single example. But when you multiply these examples in your personal life, you get frustrated - or you get the message that to get service in any kind, you should learn English. Which is what people here seem to be championing anyway - yet this is a different form of coercion. But since it is from the market, it is all alright.