The future of French

[tastyonions]

The main thing I've observed, is that French people themselves aren't very concerned about preserving the language in the motherland. The general attitude towards people who speak "posh" is very negative. As France heads into an inevitable era of hardship, the people seem to associate properly-spoken French with the rich and privileged, whom they dislike.

Do you have any examples of this? What is “properly spoken French” for you, and how is it different from what most French people speak?

There must be such a thing as "proper French", because an entire council exists for the purpose of regulating the use of the French language. Of course I'm referring to Academie Francaise which has existed since 1635. If there is no such thing as Standard French, then that organization wouldn't exist, I don't think. And whatever this council has done seems to have worked. When you compare 1600s written French to 1600s written English, the French has remained almost the same. But English keeps changing wildly every couple of centuries or so.

Which people are speaking bad / improper French? The ones using anglicisms à tout-va? The young people greeting each other with “wesh les kheys, bien ou quoi?” Some other group?

Just curious what your particular grievance is.

[noblethings]

There must be such a thing as "proper French", because an entire council exists for the purpose of regulating the use of the French language. Of course I'm referring to Academie Francaise which has existed since 1635. If there is no such thing as Standard French, then that organization wouldn't exist, I don't think. And whatever this council has done seems to have worked. When you compare 1600s written French to 1600s written English, the French has remained almost the same. But English keeps changing wildly every couple of centuries or so.

Which people are speaking bad / improper French? The ones using anglicisms à tout-va? The young people greeting each other with “wesh les kheys, bien ou quoi?” Some other group?

Just curious what your particular grievance is.

I think you are reading my comments with the wrong idea. Just because Academie Francaise wants everyone to speak French the same "proper" way, doesn't mean I care about that personally. I am speculating about if and how French will survive, since that's pretty much what this thread is about. What I said has little to do with how I feel about it - except the part where I like to see victims overcoming after being oppressed. Like I said before, I think French will survive, but it might not be what people consider to be "standard" French. I never said this would bother me, if it actually happened. Why would it? I hope I haven't given the impression that I'm some kind of Defender of French and France!

[PeterMollenburg]

There must be such a thing as "proper French", because an entire council exists for the purpose of regulating the use of the French language. Of course I'm referring to Academie Francaise which has existed since 1635. If there is no such thing as Standard French, then that organization wouldn't exist, I don't think. And whatever this council has done seems to have worked. When you compare 1600s written French to 1600s written English, the French has remained almost the same. But English keeps changing wildly every couple of centuries or so.

Which people are speaking bad / improper French? The ones using anglicisms à tout-va? The young people greeting each other with “wesh les kheys, bien ou quoi?” Some other group?

Just curious what your particular grievance is.

I think you are reading my comments with the wrong idea. Just because Academie Francaise wants everyone to speak French the same "proper" way, doesn't mean I care about that personally. I am speculating about if and how French will survive, since that's pretty much what this thread is about. What I said has little to do with how I feel about it - except the part where I like to see victims overcoming after being oppressed. Like I said before, I think French will survive, but it might not be what people consider to be "standard" French. I never said this would bother me, if it actually happened. Why would it? I hope I haven't given the impression that I'm some kind of Defender of French and France!

It sounds a bit the opposite. Like a lot of 'French bashers' it sounds to me like you have it in for the French and you're basing it on heresay. While your points may have some merit, a little discussion around what (evidence) you base your claims on wouldn't hurt, otherwise it sounds like you have a problem with French (aristocracy?) for unknown/unfounded reasons. Many authorities have been involved in oppressing people. I don't deny that the French have a mediocre record, as do many other colonizing/western powers.

[Cavesa]

I have no doubts more standards of French are likely to arise (similarily to more versions of English or Spanish), but I sincerely not just hope, but truly believe that the african countries will not throw it away.

For the practical reasons already described (a neutral language between various original ones. You know, if people from two tribes can agree on using disliked French, it is still better than a fight over which one gets to linguistically oppress the other one). But it would be dumb to cut themselves from an already strong base that gives access to a huge market and academic opportunities.

Even in spite of the reality of being taught to dream of living in France while not being much welcome anymore, it stays a language of power, and a base they can build on. Just like Canada and Australia are their own countries and worlds, while still using English and profiting from the advantages. Getting rid of French now, after having already paid a huge price, would be unwise.

Even if each of these countries had a single alternative ready, it would be really sad to watch them make the same huuuge mistake my country did. The second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th included so much wasted time, money, and intellectual work on getting rid of German. So much creative and intellectual work wasted, so many social problems. And the reward now, 150 years later? We have an internationally worthless official language, and a huge language barrier to access larger markets or the wider academic world (because the small Czech pool is rotting due to lack of normal competition), and the language is one of the major obstacles in catching up with the richer countries of the EU. Central Europe has a lot ot teach, including many "nope, this is not the way" moments. But unfortunately, nobody is interested, nobody has our history in their classes.

So even if we assumed Mali or Niger or other countries could agree on one replacement for French (not just legally, but also in the economy and academia), I think they'd just waste tons of resources now, to gain worse opportunities later. In the next twenty years they'd waste money and time on replacing French, instead of trying to shine on the larger market. And they could forget about ever becoming a country keeping people in (especially the more competent, more educated, more intelligent, more hardworking people) and actually attracting skilled immigration.

What are the real alternatives:
1.fight between the existing linguistic and social and ethnic groups. fragmentation of the country, social problems, and so on.
2.replacement by another seemingly "neutral" language. In some cases English (which totally removes any colonialism based argument against French), or Arabic (which means joining a much more problematic shared cultural space, that doesn't really lead to more freedom, equality, or better growth of the society), or others (Niger coup is clearly pro-Putin, but I highly doubt it would make the people learn Russian)

I highly doubt they'll get rid of French. It may become more equal to bigger original languages of the countries or regions. It may get several more standard versions. But it will not disappear for at least a few generations.

What worries me a bit more is the situation in Europe, where French is ceding academic space to English, and where francophone countries seem to have a hard time forcing immigrants to learn French, which creates huge local problems. But that's still very much different from the language dying out.

[noblethings]

It sounds a bit the opposite. Like a lot of 'French bashers' it sounds to me like you have it in for the French and you're basing it on heresay. While your points may have some merit, a little discussion around what (evidence) you base your claims on wouldn't hurt, otherwise it sounds like you have a problem with French (aristocracy?) for unknown/unfounded reasons. Many authorities have been involved in oppressing people. I don't deny that the French have a mediocre record, as do many other colonizing/western powers.

Okay, so I said I observed that French people have a negative attitude towards the rich, and you have somehow concluded that I have a problem with French aristocracy. This is similar to the previous person, who assumed that because I said French would survive in a non-standard form, that means I have a grievance with non-standard French. If I really "had it in" for French aristocracy, I would not spend any of my time learning the language, and definitely not FSI French, of all things. I am capable of admiring more than one dialect of French, the same way I simultaneously love posh British accents and the Jamaican accent.

You might notice on my profile that French is one of my Heritage languages, and it's not something far removed. Your assumptions, which are probably based on other people you've met, don't necessarily apply to me. You mentioned the colonizing western powers and France's "mediocre record". Their record is not mediocre, it's objectively atrocious. But there is no such colonial power that can operate on its own. So it would be irrational to hate France - or the other powers which help France or remain silent in the face of wrongdoing. One can sympathize with a victim without hating the oppressor. At least, I can. I know that everywhere, people say they hate the French, but it doesn't seem fair for you to assume that I am one of those people, or that I would have the same reasons as other people for hating anything. It actually pains me to see what is happening to France. But this topic is about the future of the language, not about how sad I am.

So I'd like to say clearly, that I think French will be around for a long time. But I don't think it will sound the same, and it's very unlikely to sound "proper" according to Alliance Francaise or your average educated aristocrat. And it's not unreasonable for me to think so, neither do I need evidence to prove it, because I'm just speculating. Who knows what will really happen? French might grow exponentially in Canada and Africa, or it might disappear completely, and all I can do is speculate.

[PeterMollenburg]

It sounds a bit the opposite. Like a lot of 'French bashers' it sounds to me like you have it in for the French and you're basing it on heresay. While your points may have some merit, a little discussion around what (evidence) you base your claims on wouldn't hurt, otherwise it sounds like you have a problem with French (aristocracy?) for unknown/unfounded reasons. Many authorities have been involved in oppressing people. I don't deny that the French have a mediocre record, as do many other colonizing/western powers.

Okay, so I said I observed that French people have a negative attitude towards the rich, and you have somehow concluded that I have a problem with French aristocracy. This is similar to the previous person, who assumed that because I said French would survive in a non-standard form, that means I have a grievance with non-standard French. If I really "had it in" for French aristocracy, I would not spend any of my time learning the language, and definitely not FSI French, of all things. I am capable of admiring more than one dialect of French, the same way I simultaneously love posh British accents and the Jamaican accent.

You might notice on my profile that French is one of my Heritage languages, and it's not something far removed. Your assumptions, which are probably based on other people you've met, don't necessarily apply to me. You mentioned the colonizing western powers and France's "mediocre record". Their record is not mediocre, it's objectively atrocious. But there is no such colonial power that can operate on its own. So it would be irrational to hate France - or the other powers which help France or remain silent in the face of wrongdoing. One can sympathize with a victim without hating the oppressor. At least, I can. I know that everywhere, people say they hate the French, but it doesn't seem fair for you to assume that I am one of those people, or that I would have the same reasons as other people for hating anything. It actually pains me to see what is happening to France. But this topic is about the future of the language, not about how sad I am.

So I'd like to say clearly, that I think French will be around for a long time. But I don't think it will sound the same, and it's very unlikely to sound "proper" according to Alliance Francaise or your average educated aristocrat. And it's not unreasonable for me to think so, neither do I need evidence to prove it, because I'm just speculating. Who knows what will really happen? French might grow exponentially in Canada and Africa, or it might disappear completely, and all I can do is speculate.

Thank you noblethings for politely clarifying your situation and your views.

I apologise for misconstruing your words. I'm often hypocritical and this was yet another occasion. My apologies for not reading your comments more clearly.

I read an article yesterday evening on the West African situation and I would not be surprised if the French language were to largely slowly disappear from Africa in the coming several decades with political strain (that's putting it very mildly) being the root cause. This stems from -as you pointed out- an atrocious record of colonisation and heavy medling in African affairs. No the French are not alone in abusing their Western power, agreed, and I'd add that many an African leader (not all) have agreed to take part in 'unbalanced situations' (avoiding politics here) for personal gain. The people of Africa have been downtrodden in many places for far too long (they should never have been), and the recent backlash against French interference was inevitable, it seems. I hope that an amicable relationship can be established in which the French language (and not to the detriment of local languages) remains important.

[DaveAgain]

I read an article yesterday evening on the West African situation and I would not be surprised if the French language were to largely slowly disappear from Africa in the coming several decades with political strain (that's putting it very mildly) being the root cause.

This thread has convinced me of the opposite, that French in Africa has already established itself as a living language, rather than just a utility lingua-franca that can be easily displaced.

If you (or anybody else) happen to know: where would you place the Democratic Republic of Congo on that list? In terms of countries with French as an official language, I believe it's the largest in the world, but my understanding is that it also competes with Lingala and maybe Swahili. Is French an ascending language there?

I just watched two short videos (video1 | video2) that said primary school eductaion in the Congo is carried out in a local african language, and French becomes the language of education for secondary school and higher education.

EDIT
Another video about the DR Congo includes a map of the language areas, from ~6m50s into the video.

[Le Baron]

This thread has convinced me of the opposite, that French in Africa has already established itself as a living language, rather than just a utility lingua-franca that can be easily displaced....that said primary school eductaion in the Congo is carried out in a local african language, and French becomes the language of education for secondary school and higher education.

It should be understood however that French isn't promoted and supported in Africa by mainland France just for 'cultural' reasons. That is only the superficial top layer. It is used to create a ready-made link and 'dependency' for very specific geo-economic reasons. The reasons why are out of the scope of this thread, but suffice it to say that language imperialism isn't the only imperialism at play.

That Radio France is currently awash with frenzied 'debates' about the situation in Niger is astonishing (though not surprising) to me. Could anyone imagine e.g. the British media having the same 'condemnatory' meltdown if there was a similar situation in, say, Kenya? The list of British 'Commonwealth' members who have simply removed the monarch as head of state and function as actual republics with a right not to be interfered with is to be contrasted. For France colonialism only changed shape, but even then it's embarrassingly always on display.

[DaveAgain]

This thread has convinced me of the opposite, that French in Africa has already established itself as a living language, rather than just a utility lingua-franca that can be easily displaced....that said primary school eductaion in the Congo is carried out in a local african language, and French becomes the language of education for secondary school and higher education.

It should be understood however that French isn't promoted and supported in Africa by mainland France just for 'cultural' reasons.

I was watching a video earlier that says the treaties of independence signed by France's former african colonies require French to be the language used in their education systems!

[lichtrausch]