Does language identity relate to the person or the group?

[fellowtraveller]

Really? Our behaviour contradicts that assertion. How can an English Canadian really know the heart of French Canadians if he never reads Le Devoir or Le Monde Diplomatique in French or Paris Match, never listens to or watches the SRC, etc. Yet they're so familiar with CNN, the BBC, Fox, the London Times, the New Yorker, the Wall Street Journal, etc. Many native English speakers have never even heard of the Sorbonne or the Haute École de Commerce, yet are so familiar with Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge, etc. In fact, I'd challene any unilingual native English speaker in this forum to tell me which of the radio and TV stations and newspapers and universities above are in Quebec, and which in France. All of them are at least somewhat famous in the French-speaking world on both sides of the Atlantic, yet few monolingual English speaking Canadians could tell which is where without Googling it first.

And whatare two common songs Quebecers will often sing at a birthday party?

Yet some English Canadians can sing at least the first line or two of the US national anthem or God Save the Queen.

It's nice to say in theory that native English speakers identify more with Quebec than with the UK. In reality, even those who pretend so, if given a culture test, would be more familiar with UK culture than with Quebec.

Yes, really.

"Yet they're so familiar with CNN, the BBC, Fox, the London Times, the New Yorker, the Wall Street Journal, etc." Who is? Faux News is not generally avail;bale in Canada, nor are the NYT , London Times and most English speakers would get the Financial Post or G &M. The BBC is a minor, extra cost cable channel. It would seem you are grossly out of touch with conventions in English Canada.

"Many native English speakers have never even heard of the Sorbonne or the Haute École de Commerce, yet are so familiar with Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge, etc." So familiar in what way? They have heard of some of the great universiites in the world? The Sorbonne is likely the only French language Top 100 university in the world. Why would anybody have heard of others? I know Le Devoir and Radio Canada are big deals in Quebec, but really- Quebec is one province in a country that is of little consequence. if you separate, you'll be a small, poor and pointless place on the edge of nowhere. Your 'institutions' will matter even less in the large scheme. But, the 'cultural' scene in Quebec is analogous to puppy love: meaningless to everybody except the puppy.

I know you are building your case for separatism, and I tell you this: tell it to your fellow Quebecois. Decide your destiny and then get on with it. We're all sick of it all, make up your mind and do it. But above all, stop the incessant whining. Please. Have some mercy.

Edited June 3, 2009 by fellowtraveller

[Smallc]

He doesn't live in Quebec.

[Machjo]

Yes, really.

"Yet they're so familiar with CNN, the BBC, Fox, the London Times, the New Yorker, the Wall Street Journal, etc." Who is? Faux News is not generally avail;bale in Canada, nor are the NYT , London Times and most English speakers would get the Financial Post or G &M. The BBC is a minor, extra cost cable channel. It would seem you are grossly out of touch with conventions in English Canada.

"Many native English speakers have never even heard of the Sorbonne or the Haute École de Commerce, yet are so familiar with Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge, etc." So familiar in what way? They have heard of some of the great universiites in the world? The Sorbonne is likely the only French language Top 100 university in the world. Why would anybody have heard of others? I know Le Devoir and Radio Canada are big deals in Quebec, but really- Quebec is one province in a country that is of little consequence. if you separate, you'll be a small, poor and pointless place on the edge of nowhere. Your 'institutions' will matter even less in the large scheme. But, the 'cultural' scene in Quebec is analogous to puppy love: meaningless to everybody except the puppy.

I know you are building your case for separatism, and I tell you this: tell it to your fellow Quebecois. Decide your destiny and then get on with it. We're all sick of it all, make up your mind and do it. But above all, stop the incessant whining. Please. Have some mercy.

Whoever said I was a Quebecois?

[Machjo]

He doesn't live in Quebec.

Thanks. Franco-Ontarian to be precise.

[Machjo]

As for the issue of Quebec sovereignty, since it's been brought up, I'm more concerned with ensuring friendly relations between Quebecers and other Canadians at the grassroots than with whether or not Quebec remains a part of Canada, which is really just debate over administrative responsibilities.

[Smallc]

Now we certainly disagree there. We can foster relations...within Canada.

[Machjo]

Now we certainly disagree there. We can foster relations...within Canada.

Disagree on what exactly?

If anything, focussing less on the political aspect of it and more on promoting friendlier relations between English and French Canadians though through our education systems through closer relations and colaboration between our Ministries of Education would likely increase the chnaces of Quebec remaining in Canada; whereas always focussing on the political aspect, under what conditions Quebec can have a right to cesede, what must be asked on the ballot, etc., though certainly important, should not be the main forci of our attention, otherwise it risks coming across as if the only real commonalities between us are politial, which is quite superficial in the grand scheme of things compared to promoting closer cultural ties at the grassroots.

Essentially, it comes down to this. I don't want Quebec to separate, but if the only way for it to remain is through constant political pressure, that's equal to a spouse staying in a broken marriage just because the other spouse is fighting for the marriage. That can only last for so long. On the other hand, trying to build grassroots relations is more equal to one spouse trying to understand the other's grievances while at the same timre recognizing that at the end of the day, whether they remain together or not, they need to try to at least separate on friendly terms. Yet that reaction is more likely to save the marriage. forcing someone to stay repels them more than allowing them to leave while offering to build bridges.