Canada's Bilingualism Racket

[cannuck]

The Catholic school system in SK offers immersion in French, Ukrainian and German.  Should not be a surprise, since German is the second language spoken here, Ukrainian the third and French the fourth.   Indigenous languages probably exceed French, but are more than one language - and of course offered in aboriginal communities - but I do not think in an immersion setting (haven't lived up North for a while, now curious about that).

Our children were raised in French (lots of primary immersion schools, but only one high school worth of students in all second languages due to attrition).  The comment about France above is interesting to us.  Our kids did an exchange with schools in Nantes.   Kids from SK spoke nearly flawless Parisienne French, but children from Nantes were not immersion and spoke very weak English.   While Canada may have two official languages, fortunately (IMHO of course) at least here kids learn actual French - and would have a tough time dealing with the butchered Quebecois version of the language.   Kind of like an English speaker moving to the deep South of the USA.

Due to the huge benefits to STEM abilities of students of language (and music) IMHO this (second language immersion) is some of the best money we spend on education.   And, yes, our kids are accomplished musicians and scientists - public school education having been a significant part of it.

Edited December 4, 2018 by cannuck

[bush_cheney2004]

5 minutes ago, cannuck said:

   Kind of like an English speaker moving to the deep South of the USA.

 

Lots of Canadian English speakers move to the "deep South of the USA" and communicate just fine.   Must be the weather, eh ?

[cannuck]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Lots of Canadian English speakers move to the "deep South of the USA" and communicate just fine.   Must be the weather, eh ?

A gated community in Brownsville may be located in the deep South, but it really isn't IN the Deep South.  Of course, the same community for Eastern Snowbirds in FL means they can't communicate since Spanish is pretty rare around here.

BTW:  we have a similar situation in Newfoundland.   While technically they speak "English" the dialects were isolated hundreds of years ago from all over the UK and mixed into the pot.   VERY unique place linguistically.

Edited December 4, 2018 by cannuck

[bush_cheney2004]

3 minutes ago, cannuck said:

A gated community in Brownsville may be located in the deep South, but it really isn't IN the Deep South.  Of course, the same community for Eastern Snowbirds in FL means they can't communicate since Spanish is pretty rare around here.

 

But for some, it still beats freezing your ass off back home...in English or French.

[Rue]

12 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Ontario is not an officially bilingual province.  New Brunswick is the only province/territory that is in all of Canada.  The Ontario government has absolutely no obligation to serve the french language in Ontario.  How many francophones live in Ontario outside the national capital region (which borders Quebec)?

It is legally. In reality the pockets of Francophones are in Sudbury, Timmons, Ottawa, Toronto, true, but....so what.

[Rue]

2 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

But for some, it still beats freezing your ass off back home...in English or French.

People do not freeze in Buffalo, Green Bay, Bismark..they do just fine. That's why they get along with us. People from California have skin cancer or lung cancer anyways. 

[Rue]

2 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Lots of Canadian English speakers move to the "deep South of the USA" and communicate just fine.   Must be the weather, eh ?

First of all you allowed Qubecois to take over Florida. You did let my people take over a portion of Miami thank you. You have no one to blame for those g strings but yourselves.

[Machjo]

21 hours ago, taxme said:

Maybe they should not be allowed to have a french university. All that will happen if a french university was built would be to promote french and french Quebec and a place for the french to attack Anglophones and demand even more rights. The french language needs to stay in Quebec only. Bilingualism has not done a thing to promote unity but has divided both people instead. And not to forget to mention that bilingualism has probably cost the Canadian taxpayer's trillions in tax dollars by now. The french have always been running and pretty much ruining the rest of Canada. Quebec serves no purpose in Canada. They have become a pain in the Anglo ass. 

Maybe Quebec should give back the Anglophones their rights in Quebec. It seems that it's always about french rights in Canada but never Anglophone rights in Quebec. Quebec should not be allowed to call itself a unilingual french speaking province only and get away with it. I know dam well that if an English speaking province did the same thing they would be attacked right away by the Anglophone media and Anglophone politicians. The Anglophones in this country are their own worse enemy. 

If Quebec was all concerned about saving their language then all they had to do was to create a law that says that everything done in Quebec would be done in English and french. There was no need to make Anglophones not feel at home in their own home and province. The french are kicking the Anglophones asses every day and they could care leas about it. Bloody sad indeed. 

So if I understand you correctly, Franco-Ontarians should just pay their taxes and then shut up?

I oppose Franco-Ontarians demanding special rights for themselves above and beyond what we might grant Deaf, indigenous, and other language communities, but I also oppose attempts to purposely quash all diversity too.

[turningrite]

13 hours ago, Machjo said:

1.) I could be wrong, but I think English is compulsory in Scandinavian secondary schools. Bear i mind though that they're also Germanic countries. France is one country where students do have a choice but overwhelmingly choose Engllish. Qhen France tried to rectify that by making a second foreign language compulsory, they overwhelmingly turned to German as their second foreign language. So yes, it doesn't always work in all countries, but even the French system still has the virtue of giving choice at least in principle. Where choice of the second language has proven more successul is Hungary where only around 40% of students actually choose English, around 30% German, and shockingly, Esperanto comes in a distant third followed by French in close fourth followed by other languages numbering over fourty from which to chooce.

2.) As for Canadian history, I know enough to know that the notion of 'two founding races' is a myth. I've read the B&B Commission report. In fact, did you know that the only linguist by profession among the Commissioners wrote a dissenting opinion in the report with the main focus of his dissent surrounding the notion of 'two founding races.' Also, did you know that Chinook Jargon, an indigenous language of the pacific Northwest, borrowed words from Chinese too? Did you know that Ukrainian Canadians consider themselves among the 'founding races' of Canada too? You'll find that in the dissenting option of the B&B Commission report if you read it.

3.) The report makes for dry reading, granted, but I think one can not truly understand the development of the notion of 'two founding races' without reading at least Book I of that report. Perhaps ironcally, my reading of that report made me further reject the notion of 'two founding races.' I say ironically since except for the dissenting opinion, the rest of it attempts to convince me to adopt the notion of 'two founding races.'

1.) English is overwhelmingly the preferred choice for second language instruction throughout multilingual Europe (and much of the rest of the world), a trend that's increased substantially over the past couple decades according to a Pew Research study. The dominant role of English in international affairs and popular culture is the reality that most suppresses the inclination and need in primarily English-language societies to learn or use foreign languages. It's just a fact of life.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/08/more-than-any-other-foreign-language-european-youths-learn-english/

2.) Well, the Constitution is pretty clear that English and French are the primary languages in this country. Most of us who attended school here, at least in decades past, were made aware that the Canadian Confederation of 1867 was explicitly intended as a political arrangement between the two primary linguistic groups then dominant in Canada, the French and the English. In my opinion, it's one of the great myths of Canadian multiculturalism that Canada somehow exists as a cultural blank slate of sorts. The risible young Mr. Trudeau, who promotes a "post-national" vision for Canada, might believe in this nonsense but it's sustainable only if one simply erases the country's past. Most multi-generational Canadians are of mixed (mainly) European ethnicity. This doesn't detract from the fact that English and French form the basic framework of the country's dual linguistic heritage and current reality. 

3.) You shouldn't get too upset about the notion of 'two founding races' as this had a different connotation in generations past than is the case today. The term 'race' was simply a substitute for what we now describe as ethnicity. For instance, my long-form Ontario birth registration form lists my 'race' as French and Irish. (The other less prominent bits, Portuguese and English, were simply ignored.) Those who object to the old-fashioned terminology should simply substitute 'societies' for 'races' in order to more accurately understand the meaning of the term and in order to avoid becoming sidelined by arcane debates focused on semantics.

Edited December 4, 2018 by turningrite

[Argus]

On 12/3/2018 at 12:37 PM, Machjo said:

One problem that I see has to do with both English and French Canadians complaining but no one actually offering a solution. The core problem is that both English and French are too difficult to learn and stats bear that fact out. From a purely technocratic perspective, the solution would be to promote an easier second language.

Stop requiring bilingualism except for specific positions which deal with the public. The federal government already designates a 'language of work' for specific geographical areas. For example, you cannot work in Ottawa if you can't speak English. You cannot work in Montreal if you can't speak French. There is no need of internal bilingualism because everyone who works on this side of the river has to be sufficiently fluent in English to do their jobs.

As far as politicians go. I think we should get the best person. If they don't speak the other language, then they should have a deputy who will communicate orally with the public. Diefenbaker couldn't speak a word of French, but he had a French deputy who did all his verbal communicating for him. Supreme court judges, of course, should simply be the best at law, without regard to province of origin or language. The current nonsense about only hiring bilingual SC judges will water down an already watered down (because of geography) selection process. A 'bilingual' judge from BC won't speak French nearly as well as the translators anyway.

Edited December 4, 2018 by Argus

[Argus]

15 hours ago, turningrite said:

I find it odd that many people outside of Quebec react so strongly against French language institutions and rights. We uncontroversially fund multilingual services and heritage language programs and yet French language services somehow generate vitriol and angst.

I don't see this vitriol or angst about French language services. The vitriol and angst I see is about unnecessary french language laws which promote Francophones over Anglophones (or incompetents over competence) for jobs, especially top jobs in politics, government and the judiciary.

[Argus]

15 hours ago, turningrite said:

It's true that Ontario is not officially bilingual. But there are vast swaths of Quebec outside of the Montreal region and Eastern Townships where there are very few Anglophones. Quebec, however, still funds extensive English-language services, including three mainly English-language universities, despite the fact that it's official language is explicitly French. Many English-speaking Canadians point to Quebec's French-language laws and the status of French as its sole official language to justify their antipathy. My guess is that many Franco-Ontarians would be quite happy were Ontario to fund French-language services to the same extent English-language services are funded in Quebec.

How do you know they don't? Because we don't have three universities? Those three Anglo universities in Quebec were built by the English community long ago when they made up a far higher percentage of the population than is the case now. And if you check I think you'll find more than a quarter of the student body are foreigners.

[taxme]

2 hours ago, Machjo said:

So if I understand you correctly, Franco-Ontarians should just pay their taxes and then shut up?

I oppose Franco-Ontarians demanding special rights for themselves above and beyond what we might grant Deaf, indigenous, and other language communities, but I also oppose attempts to purposely quash all diversity too.

1. Pretty much. It would work better for me if Quebec separated. Then maybe we would get along much better. The french can keep and have their unilingual french speaking only country and the rest of Canada can have and make the rest of Canada a unilingual English speaking country only. The rest of Canada pretty much went bilingual to please Quebec and to try and bribe them into staying in Canada. And that has got English Canada nowhere. Trillions of tax dollars blown on a pretty much dying french language. The french controlled federal government has tried to make the rest of Canada bilingual for decades now when there was no need to do so in the first place. Just one of the many liberal leftist programs and agendas that have done nothing to make Canada great. All the bilingualism program has done is just put Canada and Canadians deeper in debt. It was not worth it one bit. 

Diversity is not our strength but instead will be our weakness and only will cause division down the road. Diversity is a program of division and not unity. My opinion of course. 

[Machjo]

1 hour ago, turningrite said:

1.) English is overwhelmingly the preferred choice for second language instruction throughout multilingual Europe (and much of the rest of the world), a trend that's increased substantially over the past couple decades according to a Pew Research study. The dominant role of English in international affairs and popular culture is the reality that most suppresses the inclination and need in primarily English-language societies to learn or use foreign languages. It's just a fact of life.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/08/more-than-any-other-foreign-language-european-youths-learn-english/

2.) Well, the Constitution is pretty clear that English and French are the primary languages in this country. Most of us who attended school here, at least in decades past, were made aware that the Canadian Confederation of 1867 was explicitly intended as a political arrangement between the two primary linguistic groups then dominant in Canada, the French and the English. In my opinion, it's one of the great myths of Canadian multiculturalism that Canada somehow exists as a cultural blank slate of sorts. The risible young Mr. Trudeau, who promotes a "post-national" vision for Canada, might believe in this nonsense but it's sustainable only if one simply erases the country's past. Most multi-generational Canadians are of mixed (mainly) European ethnicity. This doesn't detract from the fact that English and French form the basic framework of the country's dual linguistic heritage and current reality. 

3.) You shouldn't get too upset about the notion of 'two founding races' as this had a different connotation in generations past than is the case today. The term 'race' was simply a substitute for what we now describe as ethnicity. For instance, my long-form Ontario birth registration form lists my 'race' as French and Irish. (The other less prominent bits, Portuguese and English, were simply ignored.) Those who object to the old-fashioned terminology should simply substitute 'societies' for 'races' in order to more accurately understand the meaning of the term and in order to avoid becoming sidelined by arcane debates focused on semantics.

1. I'm not disputing that even in those states in which the student can choose his second language, English remains the preferred choice. I'm well aware that Eastern Europe is somewhat of an anomaly and even in Hungary where English might be the least popular choice, English still comes first at over 40% far ahead of German in the 30% range. And that's not to mentioni the many states especially in the Far East that simply make English compulsory. But let's not confuse studying the language with achieving any reasonable level of competence in it. The success rate in germany hovers at around 7% and in India at around 4% for example; and even Quebec experiences shortages of competent English teachers and most Quebcers fail to learn English well too. A difference exists between a language's popularity among students and the actual rate of success in that language.

2. You are in fact correct. Indigenous and other peoples were very much excluded. Indigenous peoples were soon interrred at residential schools and while the state tolearated Germans, Ukrainians, etc. for a while when it needed them, it later turned on them when it banned them from sending their children to school in their languages after WWI.

3. I've read the B&B Commission report, so I'm well aware that 'race' was used more or les synonymously with 'people,' but it also makes it clear that 'the Indians and the eskimaux' and 'the other ethnic groups' didn't belong. In fact, its entire Book I pretty much devotes itself to definig and defending the idea of 'two founding races' even though the only linguist by profession among the commissioners wrote a dissenting opijnion rejecting the idea of 'two founding race,' arguing that there existed a few 'founding races' including the Ukrainians and other European Canadians and that they should enjoy certain language rights regionally too; though even he made sure to exclude any non-European peoples from the mix. It's basically a pseudo-scientific and pseudo-historical claim of mythic proportions. Heck, even chinook contains words of Chinese origin, and that's an indigenous language.

Edited December 4, 2018 by Machjo

[Machjo]

21 minutes ago, Argus said:

Stop requiring bilingualism except for specific positions which deal with the public. The federal government already designates a 'language of work' for specific geographical areas. For example, you cannot work in Ottawa if you can't speak English. You cannot work in Montreal if you can't speak French. There is no need of internal bilingualism because everyone who works on this side of the river has to be sufficiently fluent in English to do their jobs.

I actually do favour official unilingualism jurisdictionally. That's why I think Ontartio should adopt English as its sole official language of government administration while leaving each municipality to choose its own official language too.

[Argus]

Just now, Machjo said:

I actually do favour official unilingualism jurisdictionally. That's why I think Ontartio should adopt English as its sole official language of government administration while leaving each municipality to choose its own official language too.

There's nothing wrong with being able to provide service to the public in their own language. But the internal bilingualism is unnecessary, expensive, and hugely diminishes the talent available. Almost all communication between government and citizen now is by phone or mail, and you don't need bilingualism for that. Separate groups can handle requests based on language.

[Machjo]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

There's nothing wrong with being able to provide service to the public in their own language. But the internal bilingualism is unnecessary, expensive, and hugely diminishes the talent available. Almost all communication between government and citizen now is by phone or mail, and you don't need bilingualism for that. Separate groups can handle requests based on language.

True. I was referring to an official language of internal government administration.

[taxme]

4 hours ago, Rue said:

First of all you allowed Qubecois to take over Florida. You did let my people take over a portion of Miami thank you. You have no one to blame for those g strings but yourselves.

And I heard that many Floridians have complained about the Quebecois rudeness and arrogance. They think that they own the place in the winter and can say or do as they please in french.   And just what has your people done for Florida lately? Just curious. 

[turningrite]

37 minutes ago, Machjo said:

1. I'm not disputing that even in those states in which the student can choose his second language, English remains the preferred choice. I'm well aware that Eastern Europe is somewhat of an anomaly and even in Hungary where English might be the least popular choice, English still comes first at over 40% far ahead of German in the 30% range. And that's not to mentioni the many states especially in the Far East that simply make English compulsory. But let's not confuse studying the language with achieving any reasonable level of competence in it. The success rate in germany hovers at around 7% and in India at around 4% for example; and even Quebec experiences shortages of competent English teachers and most Quebcers fail to learn English well too. A difference exists between a language's popularity among students and the actual rate of success in that language.

2. You are in fact correct. Indigenous and other peoples were very much excluded. Indigenous peoples were soon interrred at residential schools and while the state tolearated Germans, Ukrainians, etc. for a while when it needed them, it later turned on them when it banned them from sending their children to school in their languages after WWI.

3. I've read the B&B Commission report, so I'm well aware that 'race' was used more or les synonymously with 'people,' but it also makes it clear that 'the Indians and the eskimaux' and 'the other ethnic groups' didn't belong. In fact, its entire Book I pretty much devotes itself to definig and defending the idea of 'two founding races' even though the only linguist by profession among the commissioners wrote a dissenting opijnion rejecting the idea of 'two founding race,' arguing that there existed a few 'founding races' including the Ukrainians and other European Canadians and that they should enjoy certain language rights regionally too; though even he made sure to exclude any non-European peoples from the mix. It's basically a pseudo-scientific and pseudo-historical claim of mythic proportions. Heck, even chinook contains words of Chinese origin, and that's an indigenous language.

1.) You raise Hungary as an example, which is interesting. While only 40 percent of its primary school students study English as a foreign/second language, according to the Pew Research study I link notes this rises to 82 percent by upper-secondary school. Even in historically Anglophobic France, an extraordinarily large percentage of students study English. Where you state that "[a] difference exists between a language's popularity among students and the actual rate of success of that language," I trust you're excluding English in your analysis. English has become pervasive throughout much of the world, to the extent that I've read that some governments are trying to resist its influence and counteract its popularity. I read a piece not long ago about Latin American kids who learn English adopting it as their default mode of interaction. It seems it's viewed by these youngsters as "cool" to speak English, presumably due to the influence of English-language popular culture.

3.) You place a lot of store in the B&B Commission report, which I think in practical terms offers a somewhat skewed perspective. While much of the analysis relating to the status of French may still apply, my assumption is that any study or analysis of the role of other languages was insisted on by representatives from various ethno-cultural communities, who no doubt were represented at hearings and sought consideration of their interests. It likely doesn't bear any relationship to the practical role and influence of what are sometimes referred to as "heritage" (i.e. non-official) languages. French has a historical and legal status that elevates its role even if outside of Quebec it often appears to hold declining influence while the role of immigrant languages is generally informal and often transitory and runs into the reality that the English language is an assimilative juggernaut. One of the problems of Canadian multiculturalism is that it undermines the need of immigrants to quickly integrate by learning English and in so doing exacerbates immigrant isolation and economic inequality.

[Moonlight Graham]

18 hours ago, Machjo said:

3. Establish a school-voucher program that would allow each student to present a voucher to the institution of his choice and allow each institution to teach in the official or unofficial language of its choice accoridng to market supply and demand.

Oh hell no.  All students, besides possibly aboriginal ones, should be required by law to be taught primarily in one of the official languages.  We don't need the children of immigrants to stay in their ethnic bubbles even moreso than they do now.  They are required to assimilate, period.

Quote

4. Make learning a second language in secondary school compulsory (as is already the case), but let each school teach and each student take the test in the second language of his choice (within reasonable limits like in Hungary) to fulfil the second-language requirement to obtain his secondary-school diploma. in Hungary for example, a student can choose from languages as diverse as Latin, Esperanto, and Hungarian Sign Language among many others.

Absolutely not.  Let Hungary do whatever it wants.  All this will do is encourage people to send their kids to ethnically-dominated schools even moreso.  Few students would learn an unofficial language for the sake of education, it would be in the service of the parent's wishes to maintain the foreign culture for their children.  If you want to teach your kids another language do it at a privately funded school on your own dime.  International languages have no protected rights in Canada, nor should they,, other than you are perfectly free to learn them and speak them in your private life.

We've had horrible problems historically with unity & politics in having 2 large language groups.  It literally almost destroyed the country several times.  We do not need more divisiveness, we need more unity.

[Moonlight Graham]

6 hours ago, Rue said:

It is legally. In reality the pockets of Francophones are in Sudbury, Timmons, Ottawa, Toronto, true, but....so what.

Francophones in Toronto are a small group.  In terms of mother tongue or even 2nd language spoken, it ranks quite low.  The census would have the numbers.

The University of Ottawa is a french-first school.  Wynne wanted to built a french university in Toronto, not sure the demand for it.

[Machjo]

48 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

We've had horrible problems historically with unity & politics in having 2 large language groups.  It literally almost destroyed the country several times.  We do not need more divisiveness, we need more unity.

A multilinguistic society with one common second language can work even better than one with no common language and two dominant groups.

[Moonlight Graham]

50 minutes ago, Machjo said:

A multilinguistic society with one common second language can work even better than one with no common language and two dominant groups.

The former isn't even possible in Canada, and wouldn't be under your plan.

Ontario is an anglo province.  Everyone should know English, besides possibly aboriginals & recent refugees, and not knowing english (including aboriginals) is almost always to that person's economic detriment.

People from foreign cultures can keep their cultures including language, it's a free country, but that doesn't mean the government should subsidize it on the taxpayer dime.

[Machjo]

25 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

The former isn't even possible in Canada, and wouldn't be under your plan.

Ontario is an anglo province.  Everyone should know English, besides possibly aboriginals & recent refugees, and not knowing english (including aboriginals) is almost always to that person's economic detriment.

People from foreign cultures can keep their cultures including language, it's a free country, but that doesn't mean the government should subsidize it on the taxpayer dime.

Of course a person who resides in Ontario should probably know English except maybe (big maybe) in majority-French municipalities. However, encouraging people to become bilingual helps the tourist indutry. Unless we're now going to expect foreign tourists to know English too? Trust me, a good chunk of tourists to Canada do not know English. Knowing a second language helps not only for those who live here but to interact with tourists and others too. In fact, though I presently work in Quebec, I call South America, Europe, and more rarely Asia on a fairly regular basis and if I'm dealing with a smaller business (which is often the case), I do encounter language barriers often enough but I muddle through inefficiently. the fact is that the world is quite integrated and so we should promote personal bilingualism.

 

[Argus]

16 minutes ago, Machjo said:

Of course a person who resides in Ontario should probably know English except maybe (big maybe) in majority-French municipalities. However, encouraging people to become bilingual helps the tourist indutry. Unless we're now going to expect foreign tourists to know English too? Trust me, a good chunk of tourists to Canada do not know English. Knowing a second language helps not only for those who live here but to interact with tourists and others too. In fact, though I presently work in Quebec, I call South America, Europe, and more rarely Asia on a fairly regular basis and if I'm dealing with a smaller business (which is often the case), I do encounter language barriers often enough but I muddle through inefficiently. the fact is that the world is quite integrated and so we should promote personal bilingualism.

You can't keep up a second language unless you use it. And it's not going to be used for French tourists. Most of our tourists are English or American or Chinese. I don't have a cite but I read once that Quebec Francophones virtually never travel west of Ottawa. They'd rather go south.