Machjo Posted July 2, 2009 Report Posted July 2, 2009 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. Level of fluency is not part of the definition of francophone. It just means anyone who knows French. For that reason, I'd scrap any statistics on francophones and anglophones altogether and instead replace them with statistics on fluent anglophones and fluent francophones according to some clearly defined objective test that they pass. Francophone and anglophone alone are next to meaningless, but that doesn't change the fact that a person who can scrap by in English is an anglophone, albeit to a limited degree. Quote With friends like Zionists, what Jew needs enemies? With friends like Islamists, what Muslim needs enemies?
Machjo Posted July 2, 2009 Report Posted July 2, 2009 Another point: how would we distinguish, according to the skewed definition proposed by some that it limit itself to 'mother-tongue' speakers, between a native French-speaker who's lost his French over the years and a non-native speaker who's learnt French to fluency? At that stage, according to the narrower definition, then one whose French is poor would be classified as a francohone, while the one who speaks it fluently would not. Quote With friends like Zionists, what Jew needs enemies? With friends like Islamists, what Muslim needs enemies?
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.