Language and Nationalism in Europe
By Stephen Barbour, Cathie Carmichael
Contributor Stephen Barbour, Cathie Carmichael
Published by Oxford University Press, 2000
ISBN 0198236719, 9780198236719
319 pages
5 years ago
Showing posts with label Toubon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Toubon. Show all posts
10/18/2008
The Toubon Laws: Language Protection At Its Unpopular Worst
French language protection as advocated by the likes of Chirac always was a thing of the undemocratic elites. The Toubon laws never had a basis in French public opinion. Language and Nationalism in Europe by Stephen Barbour, Cathie Carmichael:
Language and Nationalism in Europe
By Stephen Barbour, Cathie Carmichael
Contributor Stephen Barbour, Cathie Carmichael
Published by Oxford University Press, 2000
ISBN 0198236719, 9780198236719
319 pages
Language and Nationalism in Europe
By Stephen Barbour, Cathie Carmichael
Contributor Stephen Barbour, Cathie Carmichael
Published by Oxford University Press, 2000
ISBN 0198236719, 9780198236719
319 pages
"English won. And didn’t even try."
A quote by Douglas Nerad:
"It’s been my experience that when you become defensive of a position to the point of fanaticism then you’ve already lost. It’s just a matter of time before you realize it. France passed the Toubon Law in 1994 which codifies French as the General Custer of institutional languages. The French even have their Académie française which dictates the use of the language, commanding the use of “courriel” instead of “email”.
French lost. English won. And didn’t even try. It’s nothing to cry about just like English speakers generally don’t celebrate their ascendency."
"It’s been my experience that when you become defensive of a position to the point of fanaticism then you’ve already lost. It’s just a matter of time before you realize it. France passed the Toubon Law in 1994 which codifies French as the General Custer of institutional languages. The French even have their Académie française which dictates the use of the language, commanding the use of “courriel” instead of “email”.
French lost. English won. And didn’t even try. It’s nothing to cry about just like English speakers generally don’t celebrate their ascendency."
10/03/2008
The Futility of Defending French
The futility of defending languages has been amply demonstrated by France à son corps défendant, as Robin Adamson's The Defence of French: A Language in Crisis? describes in a number of passages. Here is a selection:
The Defence of French: A Language in Crisis?
By Robin Adamson
Published by Multilingual Matters, 2007
ISBN 1853599492, 9781853599491
199 pages
The Defence of French: A Language in Crisis?
By Robin Adamson
Published by Multilingual Matters, 2007
ISBN 1853599492, 9781853599491
199 pages
10/02/2008
Lemennicier: "protectionism is detrimental to the very interests of the survival of the French language"
Bertrand Lemennicier, Professor of Economics, University of Paris Panthéon Assas, Head of the Laboratoire d'Economie Publique, (LEP/3DI) University of Paris Panthéon Assas, on the Toubon Law:
The Toubon Law[4] and The theory of the emergence of the State in Public Choice literature or in neo-classical economics[5] are two cases in point.
The first one is a side effect of the typically French protectionism of art and culture. To protect the French language from its "foreign rival" the English language, all conferences held in English on the territory are taxed by the State. The taxation is taking the form of forced Labour[6] or of a fine if we do not respect the law.
Bastiat, if such a law had been passed in his time, would have certainly used his scintillating wit of expression to show how protectionism is detrimental to the very interests of the survival of the French language. Between a Russian, a Peruvian, a French and an English there is an obstacle if they want to communicate to each other: the barrier of language. This obstacle can be reduced by adopting a common language: one of them Russian, Spanish, French or English. Once spontaneously adopted, all people are able to communicate their ideas to others. This is the reason why the French Public Educational system spends a lot of resources to made available to all the French, English as a common language.
At the same time the State have set up at great cost an obstacle to the communication between French and Foreigners: the Toubon's law. By forcing the French to speak French in France, the government enforces a monopoly on the language on the territory like he is doing with money: Euro or French Francs! At the same time Foreign people, if they want to communicate with French people, are forced to learn the French language. This law impedes the communication of ideas "scientific or non scientific" between French and Foreign people. If the exchange of ideas in the long term is an ingredient in the growth of knowledge for everybody, both French and Foreign people are made less wealthy by such an artificial barrier. Fortunately nobody respects the law.
[4] Toubon, one of the leader of a Right wing political party (RPR) was head of the Ministry of Culture when the law has been passed. This fact reveals how the RPR, our conservative party, like the socialist and communist parties, that never repealed the law, is both a nationalist and socialist party.
[6] It is forced labor because the organisers of the conference are forced to present translation in French through resume all communications presented in English if they do not want to be fined.
The Toubon Law[4] and The theory of the emergence of the State in Public Choice literature or in neo-classical economics[5] are two cases in point.
The first one is a side effect of the typically French protectionism of art and culture. To protect the French language from its "foreign rival" the English language, all conferences held in English on the territory are taxed by the State. The taxation is taking the form of forced Labour[6] or of a fine if we do not respect the law.
Bastiat, if such a law had been passed in his time, would have certainly used his scintillating wit of expression to show how protectionism is detrimental to the very interests of the survival of the French language. Between a Russian, a Peruvian, a French and an English there is an obstacle if they want to communicate to each other: the barrier of language. This obstacle can be reduced by adopting a common language: one of them Russian, Spanish, French or English. Once spontaneously adopted, all people are able to communicate their ideas to others. This is the reason why the French Public Educational system spends a lot of resources to made available to all the French, English as a common language.
At the same time the State have set up at great cost an obstacle to the communication between French and Foreigners: the Toubon's law. By forcing the French to speak French in France, the government enforces a monopoly on the language on the territory like he is doing with money: Euro or French Francs! At the same time Foreign people, if they want to communicate with French people, are forced to learn the French language. This law impedes the communication of ideas "scientific or non scientific" between French and Foreign people. If the exchange of ideas in the long term is an ingredient in the growth of knowledge for everybody, both French and Foreign people are made less wealthy by such an artificial barrier. Fortunately nobody respects the law.
[4] Toubon, one of the leader of a Right wing political party (RPR) was head of the Ministry of Culture when the law has been passed. This fact reveals how the RPR, our conservative party, like the socialist and communist parties, that never repealed the law, is both a nationalist and socialist party.
[6] It is forced labor because the organisers of the conference are forced to present translation in French through resume all communications presented in English if they do not want to be fined.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
