seabee Posted July 24, 2008 Report Share Posted July 24, 2008 What is this forum coming to. I agree with Leafless and Canadien. How can that be? Probably not going to last. A one-night stand. Kind of fun, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 24, 2008 Report Share Posted July 24, 2008 (edited) you are indeed a tard. I suggest you send Indian Affairs a letter stating that fact to them, since you obviously know more than they. In case you didn't notice, I was mocking your ideas. Sorry to everyone else for what could be justifiably be considered a form of trolling on my behalf, but the temptation was too great. Edited July 24, 2008 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 24, 2008 Report Share Posted July 24, 2008 What is this forum coming to. I agree with Leafless and Canadien. How can that be? Probably not going to last. A one-night stand. Kind of fun, though. I will confess that right now I believe I could have done better than feeding the beast by first insisting on the facts and then mocking certain ideas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seabee Posted July 24, 2008 Report Share Posted July 24, 2008 Canadien At one point, I thought of entering the debate, but on the other hand, I could see how this person is making itself, or whatever, rather ridiculous, at least on this issue. Il s'auto-pelure-de-bananise, si on me permet l'expression. Et il/elle va probablement me dire que ce néologisme est d'origine abénaquis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 24, 2008 Report Share Posted July 24, 2008 CanadienAt one point, I thought of entering the debate, but on the other hand, I could see how this person is making itself, or whatever, rather ridiculous, at least on this issue. Il s'auto-pelure-de-bananise, si on me permet l'expression. Et il/elle va probablement me dire que ce néologisme est d'origine abénaquis. Err.. actually, it's the contrary; he would argue it's of French origin even if it was full of word taken from Abenaquis. On a most serious note, you were wise. I should have just said whatever the moment he invoked the Bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted July 24, 2008 Report Share Posted July 24, 2008 who are not Canadians, we know thatGo ask some Franco-Manitobans old enough to remember how good of a deal that had when they were forbidden to learn or speak their own language at school, speak it in government service centres, or in the provincial legislature in violation of the terms under which the Province joined Confederation. You know I am no fan at all of Quebec language laws, but in terms of their philosophy and intent they were inspired... Since the Frenchies are not Canadians, why are you surprised it's not enough? Interesting... I happen to think the "we are the majority we can do what ever we want" was more fitted to the Mississippi of the early 1960's. Not all English-speaking Manitobans thought that when Franco-Manitobans started using the courts to reclaim the rights that have been illegally taken from them. But hey, if you think otherwise, good for you. Welcome to how what happens when you win. Winners set the terms and the losers abide by them or leave. That's what happens in a war and in democracy. Remember there was no Geneva convention in the 1700's the Brits could have just as easily massacred them, but in seeing that was wrong they let them live like they used to. What do we get in return, an economic backwater with a racist government that can't get over that they got taken to the woodshed in the 1700's. I was referring to Quebec's abysmal economic state is compared to Mississippi, but I'll agree that their language laws are on par with the civil rights of Mississippi during the 60's. And your defending the people who elect these pathetic lawmakers, that's like defending the bigoted southerners in the 60's from the blue states calling them backward hillbillies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted July 24, 2008 Report Share Posted July 24, 2008 I was referring to Quebec's abysmal economic state is compared to Mississippi, but I'll agree that their language laws are on par with the civil rights of Mississippi during the 60's. And your defending the people who elect these pathetic lawmakers, that's like defending the bigoted southerners in the 60's from the blue states calling them backward hillbillies. 1) How many lynching have there been in Quebec? How many people have been beaten and arrested for trying to vote? 2) Quebec's abysmal economic record? The second largest GDP in Canada? A GDP about $5000 greater than Mississippi? The per capita GDP of Quebec was growing faster than Ontario in 2001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whowhere Posted July 24, 2008 Report Share Posted July 24, 2008 Welcome to how what happens when you win. Winners set the terms and the losers abide by them or leave. That's what happens in a war and in democracy. Remember there was no Geneva convention in the 1700's the Brits could have just as easily massacred them, What is most tragic is Napolean went after Russia instead of channeling all efforts on Britain. Back to the language issue. It sounds to me, everyone here is stating everyone who speaks one language enunciates and pronounces their language the same. Accents must be works of our imagination. Everyone has their own verbal speak. Cartier interpreted this person's verbal speak into his interpretation of this person's speaking. Had Cartier heard someone else his interpretation could have been different. Cartier came up with kanata from this person's verbal speak. From this Canada was derived. If I follow the logic of some on this thread: if I hear a crow make a sound such as kah, kah. I guess forever forward that is the crow's word and I should forever attribute the word to the crow. Yeah, sure, when the crows produce their own alphabet instead of trying to parasite another language's alphabet, perhaps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted July 24, 2008 Report Share Posted July 24, 2008 1) How many lynching have there been in Quebec? How many people have been beaten and arrested for trying to vote?2) Quebec's abysmal economic record? The second largest GDP in Canada? A GDP about $5000 greater than Mississippi? The per capita GDP of Quebec was growing faster than Ontario in 2001 Point 1 taken. However, was Mississippi taken to the UN human rights tribunal? Point 2, yet Quebec is even a have not province today taking billions of dollars from Ont, SK, NFLD, and Alberta. Sure it's nice to have a large GDP, but when the rest of the country bankrolls it there are some problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted July 24, 2008 Report Share Posted July 24, 2008 Point 1 taken. However, was Mississippi taken to the UN human rights tribunal? Point 2, yet Quebec is even a have not province today taking billions of dollars from Ont, SK, NFLD, and Alberta. Sure it's nice to have a large GDP, but when the rest of the country bankrolls it there are some problems. The money rest of the country has nothing to do with the GDP. Quebec receives Equalization because it is below the per capita 10 province standard. Its also got the second largest population and that is much of the reason that it receives so much in the way of funding and grant money. I don't see why everyone has such a problem with this. We're all Canadians and we're all in this together. Why can't we all play nice and share? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 (edited) Welcome to how what happens when you win. Winners set the terms and the losers abide by them or leave. That's what happens in a war and in democracy. Remember there was no Geneva convention in the 1700's the Brits could have just as easily massacred them, but in seeing that was wrong they let them live like they used to. What do we get in return, an economic backwater with a racist government that can't get over that they got taken to the woodshed in the 1700's.I was referring to Quebec's abysmal economic state is compared to Mississippi, but I'll agree that their language laws are on par with the civil rights of Mississippi during the 60's. And your defending the people who elect these pathetic lawmakers, that's like defending the bigoted southerners in the 60's from the blue states calling them backward hillbillies. Thanks for demonstrating once again your limited vworld view, in which there are no rights other than what the guys with the bigger fist or the bigger posse decide. With that and your annoyance that the Frenchies dare standing up for their rights (and we both know Quebec's langauge laws is not what I am talking about), you would have been treated like a kindred spirit by all those democrats in white robes in 1960 Mississippi. As for your insistance that I support people by desagreeing with... whatever. Edited July 25, 2008 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 (edited) If I follow the logic of some on this thread: if I hear a crow make a sound such as kah, kah. I guess forever forward that is the crow's word and I should forever attribute the word to the crow. Yeah, sure, when the crows produce their own alphabet instead of trying to parasite another language's alphabet, perhaps. So now, Aboriginals just make sounds, like crows. Must assume that they are not people, like the crow. Whatever. Edited July 25, 2008 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 From the compact Oxford Dictionary: word • noun 1 a single distinct meaningful element of speech or writing, used to form sentences with others. 2 a remark or statement. 3 (a word) even the smallest amount of something spoken or written: don’t believe a word. 4 (words) angry talk. 5 (the word) a command, slogan, or signal. 6 (one’s word) a person’s account of the truth, especially when it differs from that of another person. 7 (one’s word) a promise or assurance. 8 news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 Point 1 taken. However, was Mississippi taken to the UN human rights tribunal? It should have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whowhere Posted July 27, 2008 Report Share Posted July 27, 2008 So now, Aboriginals just make sounds, like crows. Must assume that they are not people, like the crow. Whatever. parasite (dictionary.com) 1. an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment. 2. a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others. The species (the French Christian Cartier) derived and documented the word Kanata and Canada using his French Language skills (taught to him by France a country ruling by devine right) and his mind/soul bestowed upon him by God. For the aboriginals to having no documented language of their own and for you to suggest they have entitlement to words derived by Cartier would coin the aboriginals as parasites. I believe you to be a British History Revisionist. Like all British History Revisionists you are inciting discontent with the aboriginals towards the French of Canada. I will remind the readers of this thread My Blood is of French/English Ancestory. Actually, it's not confirmed, but I may also have some aboriginal ancestors as well. . If so, that changes nothing as to my opinions put forward. I have no bias of English over French or French over English. My interest is in what is true and accurate. Your interest Canadien is apparently propoganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 27, 2008 Report Share Posted July 27, 2008 (edited) The species (the French Christian Cartier) derived and documented the word Kanata and Canada using his French Language skills (taught to him by France a country ruling by devine right) and his mind/soul bestowed upon him by God. For the aboriginals to having no documented language of their own and for you to suggest they have entitlement to words derived by Cartier would coin the aboriginals as parasites. The fact Cartier and others after him wrote down the words the Aboriginals said is not documenting a language, because as we all know Aboriginals are like crows, unable to form words and therefore have a language, written or not. Whatever. My interest is in what is true and accurate. Your interest Canadien is apparently propoganda. Like the Aboriginals didn't have words, and the French and Aboriginals are not of the same species. Whatever. Edited July 27, 2008 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted July 27, 2008 Report Share Posted July 27, 2008 (edited) The fact Cartier and others after him wrote down the words the Aboriginals said is not documenting a language, because as we all know Aboriginals are like crows, unable to form words and therefore have a language, written or not. Whatever. I guess, then, by Whowhee's logic, the transliteration of a crow's sound into English makes "CAAAAW" an English word. Odd, as I'm sure if you asked anyone who spoke French, Adai, Chinookan, Haida, Iroquoian, Siouan-Catawban, Tonkawa, Zuni, or whatever human language, to mimick a crow's sound, they'd say the exact same thing: CAAAW! Are they all speaking English, then? Edited July 27, 2008 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 27, 2008 Report Share Posted July 27, 2008 I guess, then, by Whowhee's logic, the transliteration of a crow's sound into English makes "CAAAAW" an English word. Odd, as I'm sure if you asked anyone who spoke French, Adai, Chinookan, Haida, Iroquoian, Siouan-Catawban, Tonkawa, Zuni, or whatever human language, to mimick a crow's sound, they'd say the exact same thing: CAAAW! Are they all speaking English, then? Apart from the French, they all emit sounds, they don't speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted July 27, 2008 Report Share Posted July 27, 2008 Apart from the French, they all emit sounds, they don't speak. Ah, I see. So, "CAAAW" is also a French word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 27, 2008 Report Share Posted July 27, 2008 Ah, I see. So, "CAAAW" is also a French word. Yep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whowhere Posted July 27, 2008 Report Share Posted July 27, 2008 Apart from the French, they all emit sounds, they don't speak. So I guess monkeys and apes just emit sounds to each other and don't speak? It has been established, animals communicate amongst themselves. More Canadien propoganda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted July 27, 2008 Report Share Posted July 27, 2008 So I guess monkeys and apes just emit sounds to each other and don't speak? It has been established, animals communicate amongst themselves. More Canadien propoganda. Yet of another of saying "the Aboriginals Cartier met emitted sounds, they didn't have words".Whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.