Francophone population in Ontario gets boost

[Leafless]

Around 50,000 Ontario residents will officially become francophones when Madeleine Meilleur, the minister responsible for francophone affairs, announces a "new statistical definition" of Ontario's francophone community today.

Currently, Ontario's Office of Francophone Affairs defines a francophone as someone whose mother tongue is French, but today's announcement will result in the inclusion of many racial minorities whose mother tongue is neither official language, but who at least understand French.

According to a government website, there are almost 549,000 Franco-Ontarians, with 41 per cent of them in Eastern Ontario.

In his annual report submitted to the provincial government in May 2008, French Language Services Commissioner François Boileau recommended that the "definition of the Francophone population" be reviewed.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Life/Francoph...0651/story.html

How humiliating it must be to be as biased and inferior as Madeline Meilleur or for that matter French Language Services Commissioner Francois Boileau who paddles in the same boat.

Although today's announcement is purely "statistical," it could affect everything from funding for French-language services to per capita transfer payments from the federal government.

And the catch of course is that the approx. 96% English speaking population ends up paying for 'any extras' resulting from Madeleine Meilleur "new statistical definition" of Ontario's Francophone community.

I predict it will not be that long in the future before new statistical evidence will prove that all Ontarians are some how or some way related to being Francophone.

Edited June 4, 2009 by Leafless

[M.Dancer]

How humiliating it must be to be as biased and inferior as Madeline Meilleur or for that matter French Language Services Commissioner Francois Boileau who paddles in the same boat.

Would that be as humiliating or less humiliating to be as biased and inferior as you?

[Borg]

Why in the hell is it neceassary to even have a minister of french affairs? Tiny group of people will simply become a financial burden on the rest of the province.

Tail wags the dog and the libs love it.

If they are so concerned about their language tell them to move to kebec

Borg

[capricorn]

Adding to the number of francophones in Ontario will probably result in more money being earmarked for activities, programs and special events targetting francophones.

[Machjo]

"Around 50,000 Ontario residents will officially become francophones when Madeleine Meilleur, the minister responsible for francophone affairs, announces a "new statistical definition" of Ontario's francophone community today.

Currently, Ontario's Office of Francophone Affairs defines a francophone as someone whose mother tongue is French, but today's announcement will result in the inclusion of many racial minorities whose mother tongue is neither official language, but who at least understand French."

That would just bring the definition into conformity with the dictionary definition of the word. 'Francophone' is synonymous with French-speaker, not native French-speaker. I believe that every democratic government should strive to rid itself of legalese, and use terms according to their standard dictionary definition. So I applaud this move.

[Machjo]

"Although today's announcement is purely "statistical," it could affect everything from funding for French-language services to per capita transfer payments from the federal government."

Now this I disagree with. Governments spend enough money as it is.

[Leafless]

"Around 50,000 Ontario residents will officially become francophones when Madeleine Meilleur, the minister responsible for francophone affairs, announces a "new statistical definition" of Ontario's francophone community today.

Currently, Ontario's Office of Francophone Affairs defines a francophone as someone whose mother tongue is French, but today's announcement will result in the inclusion of many racial minorities whose mother tongue is neither official language, but who at least understand French."

That would just bring the definition into conformity with the dictionary definition of the word. 'Francophone' is synonymous with French-speaker, not native French-speaker. I believe that every democratic government should strive to rid itself of legalese, and use terms according to their standard dictionary definition. So I applaud this move.

This has got nothing to do with 'French speakers' but racial minorities 'who understand French'.

So explain again why are you applauding this corrupt definition?

[Leafless]

"Although today's announcement is purely "statistical," it could affect everything from funding for French-language services to per capita transfer payments from the federal government."

Now this I disagree with. Governments spend enough money as it is.

Absolutely!

Ontario will plunge into deficits totalling $56.8B over 7 years

http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNe...6/?hub=CP24Home

[Borg]

"Around 50,000 Ontario residents will officially become francophones when Madeleine Meilleur, the minister responsible for francophone affairs, announces a "new statistical definition" of Ontario's francophone community today.

Currently, Ontario's Office of Francophone Affairs defines a francophone as someone whose mother tongue is French, but today's announcement will result in the inclusion of many racial minorities whose mother tongue is neither official language, but who at least understand French."

That would just bring the definition into conformity with the dictionary definition of the word. 'Francophone' is synonymous with French-speaker, not native French-speaker. I believe that every democratic government should strive to rid itself of legalese, and use terms according to their standard dictionary definition. So I applaud this move.

Simply a move to bump up the numbers and make the francos look like they are a larger number than they truly are.

Simply politics by someone who dares you to take them up on it face to face - it will bring down the force of the lib government - all calling anyone who disagrees a racist and francophobe (kind of like that term).

No need for a minority to have a representing minister - become a citizen and throw out that damned minister of "entitlement".

Where is the minister for muslim affairs? Wait - I am sure it will come.

Libs and francos - an entitled combination - no matter where they live

Borg

[Machjo]

This has got nothing to do with 'French speakers' but racial minorities 'who understand French'.

So explain again why are you applauding this corrupt definition?

I though it was simply saying that it would define anyone regardless of race who knows French as either a first or second language as a Francophone. I understood it to mean that whereas non-whites who wren't mother-tongue speakers and born in Canada who were once excluded from the definition, they will no longer be.

[Argus]

Would that be as humiliating or less humiliating to be as biased and inferior as you?

I take it you believe that redefining the numbers of Francophones based on some who at least speak some French is appropriate.

Would you care to explain why you have this belief?

[Argus]

"Around 50,000 Ontario residents will officially become francophones when Madeleine Meilleur, the minister responsible for francophone affairs, announces a "new statistical definition" of Ontario's francophone community today.

Currently, Ontario's Office of Francophone Affairs defines a francophone as someone whose mother tongue is French, but today's announcement will result in the inclusion of many racial minorities whose mother tongue is neither official language, but who at least understand French."

That would just bring the definition into conformity with the dictionary definition of the word. 'Francophone' is synonymous with French-speaker, not native French-speaker. I believe that every democratic government should strive to rid itself of legalese, and use terms according to their standard dictionary definition. So I applaud this move.

Whatever semantic games you play, a francophone is one who uses French as his or her main language, not someone whose native language is something else but who understands some French.

[Leafless]

I though it was simply saying that it would define anyone regardless of race who knows French as either a first or second language as a Francophone.

She is including numbers that:

Currently, Ontario's Office of Francophone Affairs defines a francophone as someone whose mother tongue is French, but today's announcement will result in the inclusion of many racial minorities whose mother tongue is neither official language, but who at least understand French.

"To only understand French" (and at what level) is NOT knowing the French language and has little to do with the definition of a Francophone.

It is a corrupt definition.

Edited June 5, 2009 by Leafless

[Leafless]

No need for a minority to have a representing minister - become a citizen and throw out that damned minister of "entitlement".

Borg

Especially when we already know who minorities are... CANADIANS.

[Machjo]

Whatever semantic games you play, a francophone is one who uses French as his or her main language, not someone whose native language is something else but who understands some French.

By dictionary definition, a person who knows French is a francophone, just as a person who knows English is an anglophone. Now of course if we take it at face value, a person who knows a word of French could call himself a francophone. At that stage, the word becomes near meaningless. But we could talk of fluent francophones to narrow it down to fluent French speakers.

I still don't think taxpayers should be wasting money on this though.

[Machjo]

She is including numbers that:

"To only understand French" (and at what level) is NOT knowing the French language and has little to do with the definition of a Francophone.

It is a corrupt definition.

By definition if I know how to say 'ello' in English, I'm an anglopphone. Not a fluent anglophone, granted, but anglophone none-the-less. Same applies to Francophone.

Personally, I think keeping statistics on francophones and anglophones is useless precicely because of the ambiguity in the definition. Instead, I'd look at fluent francopones and fluent anglophones, and not by self-assessment but through objective fluency tests.

[Visionseeker]

That would just bring the definition into conformity with the dictionary definition of the word. 'Francophone' is synonymous with French-speaker, not native French-speaker. I believe that every democratic government should strive to rid itself of legalese, and use terms according to their standard dictionary definition. So I applaud this move.

As do I.

My wife's mother tongue is Romanian, her first language is English and her third is French. By definition, my mother tongue is English yet I am fully bilingual. My kids go to French school or daycare and I almost always speak to them in French. They can all speak English, but their first language is French. By the earlier definition, they would not be considered as Francophone. Not only is this wrong, it's rather insulting.

[Visionseeker]

By dictionary definition, a person who knows French is a francophone, just as a person who knows English is an anglophone. Now of course if we take it at face value, a person who knows a word of French could call himself a francophone. At that stage, the word becomes near meaningless. But we could talk of fluent francophones to narrow it down to fluent French speakers.

If that was indeed the standard being applied, it would be meaningless. But what the province is correcting is the notion that allophones necessarily produce anglophone children. My daughters French language school has maybe 60% French as mother tongue pupils. The rest come from allophone parents with a greater familiarity of French over English or families such as mine - perfectly comfortable in either official language.

I am born from two solitudes. And it is my duty to hand down this hybrid gift to my children. As for the allophone parents, I see there desire to effectively engage in their child's education as their primary motivation: that, and the warm inclusiveness that the Francophone community affords them. Minorities seem almost innately attracted to other minorities. And it is my and my children's experience that a marvelous and diverse community springs from this.

I still don't think taxpayers should be wasting money on this though.

Where's the waste? Are my children less worthy than others? No, the real waste is found in the countless numbers of Canadian children whose parents refuse their children of the gift of learning other languages and cultures when it is readily available.

At my daughter's school they offer a weekly Spanish lesson in her before school program. About three weeks ago my daughter decided to recite what she's learned. Now I know enough Spanish to correct her when she's made a mistake with basic words, but my wife is the "expert" on this front so I play dumb and defer to her. But two weeks ago, she started counting in Spanish and I answered each number in German. We counted to thirty together in our chosen languages at least six times and then she switched and counted flawlessly in German. I congratulated her on the result and she responded «merci papa pour me faire apprendre» or "thank you daddy for helping me learn".

That my friends is what languages are: a window to vast stores of knowledge and culture - to indulge in it, you need only open the window.

[Machjo]

Where's the waste? Are my children less worthy than others? No, the real waste is found in the countless numbers of Canadian children whose parents refuse their children of the gift of learning other languages and cultures when it is readily available.

At my daughter's school they offer a weekly Spanish lesson in her before school program. About three weeks ago my daughter decided to recite what she's learned. Now I know enough Spanish to correct her when she's made a mistake with basic words, but my wife is the "expert" on this front so I play dumb and defer to her. But two weeks ago, she started counting in Spanish and I answered each number in German. We counted to thirty together in our chosen languages at least six times and then she switched and counted flawlessly in German. I congratulated her on the result and she responded «merci papa pour me faire apprendre» or "thank you daddy for helping me learn".

That my friends is what languages are: a window to vast stores of knowledge and culture - to indulge in it, you need only open the window.

I wholeheartedly agree on the education side. I was referring to second-language training for civil servants. Honestly, I don't see how such a redefinition will increase costs. After all, it's just a redefinition of a term, not a spendng policy. However, one poster above made reference to increased spending in the bureaucracy, so I was just clarifying to avoid any misunderstanding that my support for this redefinition in no way implies my support for increased funding for second-language instruction for civil servants.

In fact, if anything, such a redefinition might even save money as it will make it easier to identify French-speaing candidates for the civil service rather than spend money training non-French speakers.

Again, my statement was not meant to suggest that I believed this would increase costs, but simply to clarify to another poste above that my support for this is conditional on its not costing much. But honestly, I don't see how a simple redefition of a term would increase costs.

[CANADIEN]

My definition of Francophone is very simple, and limited. It's someone whose first language is French and/or uses it as his/her primary language of communications.

So, while a measurement of how many people choose to access government services in English or French is a useful in defining government policy, that's not the same as being an Anglophone or a Francophone.

[CANADIEN]

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Life/Francoph...0651/story.html

How humiliating it must be to be as biased and inferior9...)

You tell us. You're the one who insists on owering yourself through your own bias and ignorance.

I predict it will not be that long in the future before new statistical evidence will prove that all Ontarians are some how or some way related to being Francophone.

:lol: :lol:

[CANADIEN]

Simply a move to bump up the numbers and make the francos look like they are a larger number than they truly are.

Simply politics by someone who dares you to take them up on it face to face - it will bring down the force of the lib government - all calling anyone who disagrees a racist and francophobe (kind of like that term).

No need for a minority to have a representing minister - become a citizen and throw out that damned minister of "entitlement".

Where is the minister for muslim affairs? Wait - I am sure it will come.

Libs and francos - an entitled combination - no matter where they live

Borg

I for one would be happy if there were no need for a Ministry whose sole role is to make sure that government services are available in French as well as English. Too bad there are imbeciles standing in the way with their belief that Franco-Ontarians should either become citizens (which we are) or that we should "move back" to Quebec (why, Ontario has stopped being part of Canada?).

[CANADIEN]

Especially when we already know who minorities are... CANADIANS.

Now, you have me puzzled...

Are you admitting (again) that French-speaking Canadians are Canadians?

Or you you claiming (again) that they are not Canadians, and adding on top of that the non-sense that white English-peaking Canadians are less than the majority?

:lol:

Edited July 1, 2009 by CANADIEN

[Machjo]

Whatever semantic games you play, a francophone is one who uses French as his or her main language, not someone whose native language is something else but who understands some French.

Look it up in a dictionary. Franchophone is a synonym of French-speaker. So if you speak French, you're a francophone by definition. If we used your definition for anglophone, then there'd be few anglophones in Torono, Vancouver and Montreal, where many speak neither official language as a mother tongue. That would skew statistics considerably, giving a false impression that if you travel to Toronto or Vancouver, you'd better have a phrase book with you.

Besides, why would we want the legal definition to be any different from the dictionary definition. Do we like legalese so much that we want to encourage more of it?

Edited July 2, 2009 by Machjo

[Machjo]

My definition of Francophone is very simple, and limited. It's someone whose first language is French and/or uses it as his/her primary language of communications.

So, while a measurement of how many people choose to access government services in English or French is a useful in defining government policy, that's not the same as being an Anglophone or a Francophone.

Why do we insist on legalese. I usually rely on a regular dictionary to understand things, not some special legal dictionary. In a democracy, definitions should fit with the dictionaries most people have in their homes.