Olympic ceremonies lack French

[Machjo]

YOU must have been mixing with other privledged people who could afford to fly around the planet for fun...most like myself are earth bound.

Actually, I'd never been to Japan, though I'd been in China. Yet I'm still aware of the Ainu and Korean Japanese community. I learnt it through reading.

[Machjo]

Also, if you make friends from people from around the world and have a sense of curiosity, you'll be amazed at what you can learn without having to travel. I've met 'earth-bound' people who sometimes know more about the world than avid travellers who just stick to organized tour groups everywhere they go.

[Smallc]

You're both wrong, 99.99% of the worlds popualtion know nothing of Canada and have no desire to know more.

I find that quite hard to believe. I'm pretty sure Canada on it's own has more than .01% of the population, and Canada is also just outside of the 10 most touristed countries in the world....not to mention the number of immigrants and refugees that we take in every year.

[William Ashley]

What people 'want more French'?

I'd like more French, I actually feel deprived I didn't have more of it growing up.

If they actually exist anymore, they have virtually no impact on my life.

And...

The etymology of either language is of no interest except to pedants and separatists,

Just cause you have no taste doesn't mean other people don't.

what is of interest is the future.

I prefer the past, it tells you a lot about today you didn't know yesterday.

Trade in Canada, the money that greases all wheels,

I prefer national sufficiency, localization is better for the environment. My next door neighbor is francophone.

is mainly and increasingly North-South, not East -West.

Well you need to get it from the US when you don't make anything yourself. Maybe there is an alternative solution to that.

If you live in English Canada, you're wasting your time learning French instead of Mandarin, Japanese, Hindi or Spanish

I disagree. Personally I find French #1 and Spanish #2 for in the Americas for those who are anglos.

India and China have huge demands to meet, and they have plenty of English speakers.

While I do think Indian would be interesting to learn, and Chinese also interesting, unless you plan on visiting Asia it is mostly useless. Also Chinese is incredibly difficult to learn, far more difficult than English or Spanish. Greek and Russian are easier to learn, and atleast then you have access to civil classics.

because those are where the future lies,

I'm very suprised you would say Canadians have more of a benefit learning Indian and Chinese over French and Spanish.

Far more countries use these languages than Hindi and Chinese.

not in fighting old battles with Central Canada. If you are from French Canada, learn Englisg because your financial future is with the United States and they are not learning your language.

I think it is good either way around. I find Anglo's who look down on french to be disgraceful as they don't know what they are missing, especially in knowing their fellow citizens. I think there are far more people who embrace english coming from a french background than french from an english per capita. It is just a division forced by people like you that impedes progress in Canada by creating internal division and strife. If only you embraced your nation and heritage rather than attacked it.

Edited February 18, 2010 by William Ashley

[Oleg Bach]

You're both wrong, 99.99% of the worlds popualtion know nothing of Canada and have no desire to know more.

Our little disagreements about language and culture have lost resonance here and never had any anywhere else.

That's a relief to know..now General Wolf and that other forgotten guy can rest easy in their graves...nothing worse than a skeletal wrestling match in Hades.

[capricorn]

I'd like more French, I actually feel deprived I didn't have more of it growing up.

You sound envious of English speaking Canadians who have a good command of the French language. Did you ever take French language courses to increase your proficiency? That's how a lot of them became bilingual.

I think there are far more people who embrace english coming from a french background than french from an english per capita.

French speaking Canadians outside Quebec have always needed English as a second language in order to be employable. That used to be case in most of Quebec as well and I'm pretty sure it still is in the province's financial districts.

[Oleg Bach]

You sound envious of English speaking Canadians who have a good command of the French language. Did you ever take French language courses to increase your proficiency? That's how a lot of them became bilingual.

French speaking Canadians outside Quebec have always needed English as a second language in order to be employable. That used to be case in most of Quebec as well and I'm pretty sure it still is in the province's financial districts.

ALL big buisness is conducted in English. When a person in Toronto calls an associate in Montreal they do not speak French. They are talking serious money matters and their is no room for political correctness or mindless appeasment of the franco ego.

[CANADIEN]

Have you ever been abroad. When I was in Asia, I'd met people who asked me about Canada's different cultural groups, including First Nations, Quebecers, and even Franco-Ontarians. So if people on the other side of the world know of Franco-Ontarians, then I can assure you they're aware of Quebec. It's the same as us being aware of Japan's minotiry ethnic groups like the Korean Japanese and the Ainu for example.

A friend if mine grew up in an unilingual English-speaking envrionment, had forgotten most of the French he had learned in high school, then decided to take French immersion after a trip to Northern Europe... While there, he kept being asked "Your Canadian, how come you don't speak English AND French?"

Edited February 18, 2010 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

what is of interest is the future. Trade in Canada, the money that greases all wheels, is mainly and increasingly North-South, not East -West. If you live in English Canada, you're wasting your time learning French instead of Mandarin, Japanese, Hindi or Spanish because those are where the future lies, not in fighting old battles with Central Canada. If you are from French Canada, learn Englisg because your financial future is with the United States and they are not learning your language.

The issue is not what language(s) someone needs to learn to sell products overseas. It is what language(s) the Government of our country should serve Canadians in.

[M.Dancer]

French speaking Canadians outside Quebec have always needed English as a second language in order to be employable. That used to be case in most of Quebec as well and I'm pretty sure it still is in the province's financial districts.

Find a publicly traded quebec company and then find the unilingual manager.....his future is limited...

Same is partly true for any non Quebec large cap company..many boardroom level executives, if not fluent in French, can at least have a passable conversation.

[Machjo]

Who cares what does French have to do with Quebec.. there are french speaking Canadians who live outside of Quebec.

I know. I'm one of them. I'm a Franco-Ontarian by birth. However, you obviously didn't read what I was responding to. The point was that if we assume an English-Canadian is stupid because he doesn't know French, then clearly the same would have to apply to a French-speaker who doesn't know English, right? Whether I agree with a particular argument or not, I still expect to see some consistency in its logic.

[Machjo]

The premise of both sole anglos and francos does apply - it isn't hard to learn the basics of another language.

The basics will only get you so far. I speak basic Chinese. But you'd be surprised how much of daily conversation involves higher-level language. We're not just economic robots engaging in trade all the time. Over the course of a day, we make puns, joke, discuss the news, films, books, etc. etc. etc. Knowing just the basics will always leave you handicapped in the end. Add to that that outside the environment, a person who just knows the basics is likely to get bored with just the basics in the end, and so will have to either progress or eventually forget his language.

[Machjo]

They aren't. People would rather sit infront of a tv watching people going around in circles or watching totally baseless fantasy rubish about police chasing down criminals than trying to learn more about the country they live in. It is a population who bases itself in a fantasy reality rather than grounded in real applicable skills.

So are you advising we ban TV now? Clearly if this is the , then any intelligent teacher could figure out that maybe an easier second language ought to be introduced that these lazy sods could handle, don't you think?

Let's look at King Sae Jong about 300 years ago. Back then, few Koreans could read and write the Chinese characters. But he didn't just sit there blaming them for being lazy. He realized the importance of literacy and so brought a committee together to create a new script that would be easy for all to learn. Instead of blaming them for their vices, he simply went out and solved the problem. We need problem-solvers, not whiners.

Edited February 18, 2010 by Machjo

[Machjo]

Now in response to a few other comments. It's said that English and French are not difficult. By whose standards? I know both languages fluently, so they're not difficult for me, any more than it would be difficult for the incredible hulk to lift a 1 ton car over his head. We're not going to say now that it's easy to lift a car over our heads because the Hulk can, are we?

So what other basis can we use for judging the difficulty level of a language more objectively? Perhaps we could take a statistic of how many people can lift a car over their heads, and that might be a more accurate and objective measure of difficulty. According to Stats Can, only about 15% of Canadians are bilingual in English and French. I

m among them, but as for making a more general observation of whether English and French are easy to learn in a public school setting, obviously statistics are more reliable than the simple question of whether I can learn them. I'm but one person. the goal is to teach it to a whole country.

We could learn from King Sae Jong here. He knew the Chinese script, but he was still smart enough to recognize that it was too difficult for most Koreans. He was able to look beyond himself. Today,Korea has among the highest literacy rates in the world and we can thank Sae Jong's committee of scholars for that.

We can learn from Zamenhof too. He spoke at least nine languages, but still recognized the value in creating an easy language for all to learn. 'Abbas Effendi likewise know a number of Middle-Eastern languages, but when in the West, realized how useless all those languages were. He too supported the idea of a universal auxiliary language.

It's not enough, when talking about universal public education, to ask what I can learn, but rather what the whole population can realistically learn based on real and not imaginary circumstances. On these fronts, we can certainly learn from those wise men.

[William Ashley]

You sound envious of English speaking Canadians who have a good command of the French language. Did you ever take French language courses to increase your proficiency? That's how a lot of them became bilingual.

Yes I have actually.

French speaking Canadians outside Quebec have always needed English as a second language in order to be employable. That used to be case in most of Quebec as well and I'm pretty sure it still is in the province's financial districts.

I don't think that is universal. Of course having both languages available surely wouldn't hurt regardless of where you are in Canada. Bilingualism is a boon for employment in many national companies that operate or sell products to French and English speaking persons.

Edited February 18, 2010 by William Ashley

[William Ashley]

So are you advising we ban TV now?

No, but it wouldn't hurt to offer more educational non fiction television programs. Keep people in touch with the real world rather than the fantasy one.

Just to clarify when I speak politically and that is what it would be if we speak of a ban on something then it is speaking of governmental powers.

1. I feel that society should not be legislated for lifestyle choices, nor does government have the jurisdiction to force people to make lifestyle choices. I'm sure you think right away gay rights, but it is more than that. I think that social lifestyle choices are a form of private contract, and ought to only involve those in the contract.

TV is like that. Although I think we should be concerned with the high amount of electromagnetic radiation

that cell phones, TV and radio put into our airspace... we are constantly being bombarded with those signals, and I don't think that cancer is being purely caused by diet alone. Although I'm not saying ban Electromagnetic radiation from being generated, I am saying peoples choice in TV programming is a consensus between the networks and the audience, not government and the audience. I think fictional programming presents some issues though for the CRTC as it is far easier to serve as indirect propaganda debasing moral and ethical standards. The thing is though I don't believe in ethical censoring (if there is an off switch, and it involves private function, not public function) , I would hope that the viewers or parents would serve in setting the standards for themselves and their children.

Although I think that the internet presents the opportunity for educational programming, I think that TV and Radio should be more liberalized with no controls except on frequency or arbitrating business law (which is necessary because companies which are incorporated are extensions of the state, so the state has some responsibility for what they are allowed to do.

So no, I don't think TV should be banned, but I do think people should be more conscious with how they spend their time and the value of the programming they watch. That is an individual choice though.

1. Free choice in society on lifestyle

2. Fiscal Responsibility from government, government self funding of programs.

3. Protection and Access to Legal Rights, in public courts

4. Free and Fair Elections, without partisan recognition

5. National Economic Security and Environmental Sustainability

Those are 5 basic principles of governance I support. Banning TV doesn't fit into any of them.

Clearly if this is the , then any intelligent teacher could figure out that maybe an easier second language ought to be introduced that these lazy sods could handle, don't you think?

Let's look at King Sae Jong about 300 years ago. Back then, few Koreans could read and write the Chinese characters. But he didn't just sit there blaming them for being lazy. He realized the importance of literacy and so brought a committee together to create a new script that would be easy for all to learn. Instead of blaming them for their vices, he simply went out and solved the problem. We need problem-solvers, not whiners.

And how is this applicable to French in Canada being accessible to Canadians. You can use the word whiners but the fact is that it isn't whining it is preventing poor administration. You can say whiners because you don't care. But there are many people who without access to the other language are impeded in their liberties. And while the answer may be for them to learn the other language for themselves, and yes i would agree, offering the language for those who don't is the other part. Living in a majority state ain't going to protect minorities, and protection of minorities to insure protection within the legal framework of the state is something that should be embraced, even if you are a majority, because perhaps one day you won't be. If self service isn't reason enough for you and societal provision isn't enough, then I really don't care what you think.

Edited February 18, 2010 by William Ashley

[Leafless]

Well here it is ...the inevitable.

The Official Languages Commissioner is expected to launch an investigation into the amount of French in the 2010 Olympic Games opening ceremony, his office confirmed Wednesday.

Commissioner Graham Fraser has received a number of complaints, said spokesman Robin Cantin. The spectacle has also drawn criticism from Heritage Minister James Moore, Quebec Premier Jean Charest and Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Language+czar+review+Games+ceremonies/2579153/story.html

This is despite of:

For their part, the IOC was quite happy with the level of French at the ceremonies, said Rene Fasel, the IOC member who oversees the Games.

http://www.thespec.com/Sports/article/722594

Nobody will ever convince me that the Official Languages Commissioner Graham Fraser and his federal cronies are nothing more than the federal equivalent of the Quebec provincial language police enforcing totalitarian language policies.

[Machjo]

ALL big buisness is conducted in English. When a person in Toronto calls an associate in Montreal they do not speak French. They are talking serious money matters and their is no room for political correctness or mindless appeasment of the franco ego.

Perhaps in Canada. On the international stage though, there is plenty of international business going on in languages other than English. English might be the major one, but by no means the only one.

I remember coming across Chinese who did business with Korea in Korean, not English.

Edited February 18, 2010 by Machjo

[Machjo]

A friend if mine grew up in an unilingual English-speaking envrionment, had forgotten most of the French he had learned in high school, then decided to take French immersion after a trip to Northern Europe... While there, he kept being asked "Your Canadian, how come you don't speak English AND French?"

That's no different from Canadians who assume all Chinese know chinese or all Russians know Russian. Any geographically large political entity brewing with many ethnic groups is likely to be multilingual too. for example, even in Nunavut according to Stats Can 2006, about 15% of the population knows neither English nor French. I'd come across something similar in Western China. Some of them spoke Chinese quite poorly. Europeans coming from small relatively homogeneous countries are not likely to understand such complexities unless they're well travelled, well read or something.

[Machjo]

Well here it is ...the inevitable.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Language+czar+review+Games+ceremonies/2579153/story.html

This is despite of:

http://www.thespec.com/Sports/article/722594

Nobody will ever convince me that the Official Languages Commissioner Graham Fraser and his federal cronies are nothing more than the federal equivalent of the Quebec provincial language police enforcing totalitarian language policies.

Seeing that the Olympics are under the responsibility of the IOC and not the Canadian Federal government, I don't think it's appropriate for the Canadian Federal Government to be criticizing this so publicly. If there's an issue, bring it up with the IOC in private, and if there really is an issue, I'm sure the IOC will make the appropriate modifications come next Olympics. But as the article says, the IOC seemed to be satisfied, so what's the issue?

[Moonbox]

This is a whole lot of 'waah waah wahhhh!'

[Wilber]

Seeing that the Olympics are under the responsibility of the IOC and not the Canadian Federal government, I don't think it's appropriate for the Canadian Federal Government to be criticizing this so publicly. If there's an issue, bring it up with the IOC in private, and if there really is an issue, I'm sure the IOC will make the appropriate modifications come next Olympics. But as the article says, the IOC seemed to be satisfied, so what's the issue?

What makes you think this has anything to do with substance? It's all about domestic optics, nothing more. It just makes us look like idiots to the rest of the world.

[Moonlight Graham]

Nobody will ever convince me that the Official Languages Commissioner Graham Fraser and his federal cronies are nothing more than the federal equivalent of the Quebec provincial language police enforcing totalitarian language policies.

To their defense, we are an officially bilingual country, so however amount of english was in the opening ceremonies should have been roughly matched in french.

Don't hate the playa', hate the game. BIATCH!!!!!!

[Leafless]

To their defense, we are an officially bilingual country,

No we are not.

We are a country that has two official languages under federal entities.

This has nothing to do with how bilingual Canadians are, which is under 20%.

so however amount of english was in the opening ceremonies should have been roughly matched in french.

If you calculate that on a percentage basis it should have been around 20% in French. and I am being generous.

Anyways the point is that the IOC was quite happy with the level of French spoken.

[CANADIEN]

Well here it is ...the inevitable.

The Official Languages Commissioner is expected to launch an investigation into the amount of French in the 2010 Olympic Games opening ceremony, his office confirmed Wednesday.

I said it before, and I'll say it again, I for one was mostly happy with what I saw and heard. that being said, unlike totalirian countries in Canada people can complain if they feel the Government or its agencies are not acting the way it should by law... evn when they are wrong.

This is despite of:

For their part, the IOC was quite happy with the level of French at the ceremonies, said Rene Fasel, the IOC member who oversees the Games.

While I agree with them for the most part, IOC members will be happy with about everything as long as they are well dined and wined.

Nobody will ever convince me that the Official Languages Commissioner Graham Fraser and his federal cronies are nothing more than the federal equivalent of the Quebec provincial language police enforcing totalitarian language policies.

Don't worry. Nobody here has any hope you'll see common sense. Funny though that you use the word totalitarian to describe the type of policies you want to implement in Ontario.