PM’s French Adventures in the Matrix

Continue or start your personal language log here, including logs for challenge participants
DaveBee
Blue Belt
Posts: 952
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 8:49 pm
Location: UK
Languages: English (native). French (studying).
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... =15&t=7466
x 1366

Re: PM's French Target: C1 2018

Postby DaveBee » Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:30 pm

PeterMollenburg wrote:I read the ohter night about French language disappearance in Vietnam, and how those who know the language their (older generations) are quite fond of it and proud to speak it. Yes they didn't want to be a French colony, but learning the French language for most seems to have been something enjoyable. Then, according to the information I was reading, post Vietnam war, the French just dropped the language from Vietnam altogether almost overnight, despite it being well received (again- according to what I was reading). Then soon after English language schools started appearing and the Vietnamese are now all too happy to attend, when it's provided free of charge (I would too). Are we deliberately pushing a global language here? I think so. France backed off imo, because it was likely instructed so (whether publicly known or not).
I'm a little confused by this. France was the colonial power in Vietnam, and driven out by force by the Vietnamese.

After Vietnam they would have been occupied with the collapse of their position in North Africa, and their new focus of establishing a customs union in Western Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_co ... lonization

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_em ... lonisation
0 x

User avatar
PeterMollenburg
Black Belt - 2nd Dan
Posts: 2267
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 11:54 am
Location: Australia
Languages: English (N), French (B2-certified), Dutch (High A2?), Spanish (~A1), German (long-forgotten 99%)
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=784
x 4470

Re: PM's French Target: C1 2018

Postby PeterMollenburg » Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:13 pm

DaveBee wrote:
PeterMollenburg wrote:I read the ohter night about French language disappearance in Vietnam, and how those who know the language their (older generations) are quite fond of it and proud to speak it. Yes they didn't want to be a French colony, but learning the French language for most seems to have been something enjoyable. Then, according to the information I was reading, post Vietnam war, the French just dropped the language from Vietnam altogether almost overnight, despite it being well received (again- according to what I was reading). Then soon after English language schools started appearing and the Vietnamese are now all too happy to attend, when it's provided free of charge (I would too). Are we deliberately pushing a global language here? I think so. France backed off imo, because it was likely instructed so (whether publicly known or not).
I'm a little confused by this. France was the colonial power in Vietnam, and driven out by force by the Vietnamese.

After Vietnam they would have been occupied with the collapse of their position in North Africa, and their new focus of establishing a customs union in Western Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_co ... lonization

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_em ... lonisation


I'm not surprised by your confusion, as I was being both unclear and pretty vague. I don't deny the French were driven out by force, nor that they were busy/occupied elsewhere post Vietnam War. Their language didn't have to be eradicated from the land was my main point, and why was it, really? I'm not looking for answers here, the question there is rhetorical. Although with rhetorical questions, the answer is meant to be rather clear, again i'm being vague-ish. And why was it replaced with English? There were English speaking forces in Vietnam who were also seen as the enemy. Yet English language instruction followed, while the French were 'occupied'. It's suspicious imo. Let's just say I'm a little suspicious of official narratives when it comes to world history/events and that includes how English has (miraculously <-sarcasm) become a global language. Reading Wikipedia isn't not going to enlighten me. You're welcome to respond, but part of my lack of clarity was due to the fact I don't want to upset the moderators with politics. It's hard sometimes where language often is soaked in politics. My main idea here is that I do not believe what we're told when it comes to how English has become a global force, while languages like French simply disappear or 'fall out of favour'.
0 x

User avatar
Ani
Brown Belt
Posts: 1398
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2016 8:58 am
Location: Alaska
Languages: English (N), speaks French, Russian & Icelandic (beginner)
x 3570
Contact:

Re: PM's French Target: C1 2018

Postby Ani » Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:47 pm

Is English really objectively worse as lingua franca than French or Latin? You don't need to answer that, but I just can't agree with you on the global language conspiracy. Common language will spread wherever people have trade, and the larger and more robust the trade, the more it spreads.
I certainly think it is nice to protect minority languages where that is even possible but my distaste on the spread of English is definitely more because I am already a native speaker. Not as much fun when everyone already speaks your language. :lol:
2 x
But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake.

DaveBee
Blue Belt
Posts: 952
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 8:49 pm
Location: UK
Languages: English (native). French (studying).
Language Log: https://forum.language-learners.org/vie ... =15&t=7466
x 1366

Re: PM's French Target: C1 2018

Postby DaveBee » Mon Jun 19, 2017 11:50 pm

PeterMollenburg wrote:
DaveBee wrote:
PeterMollenburg wrote:I read the ohter night about French language disappearance in Vietnam, and how those who know the language their (older generations) are quite fond of it and proud to speak it. Yes they didn't want to be a French colony, but learning the French language for most seems to have been something enjoyable. Then, according to the information I was reading, post Vietnam war, the French just dropped the language from Vietnam altogether almost overnight, despite it being well received (again- according to what I was reading). Then soon after English language schools started appearing and the Vietnamese are now all too happy to attend, when it's provided free of charge (I would too). Are we deliberately pushing a global language here? I think so. France backed off imo, because it was likely instructed so (whether publicly known or not).
I'm a little confused by this. France was the colonial power in Vietnam, and driven out by force by the Vietnamese.

After Vietnam they would have been occupied with the collapse of their position in North Africa, and their new focus of establishing a customs union in Western Europe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_co ... lonization

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_em ... lonisation


I'm not surprised by your confusion, as I was being both unclear and pretty vague. I don't deny the French were driven out by force, nor that they were busy/occupied elsewhere post Vietnam War. Their language didn't have to be eradicated from the land was my main point, and why was it, really? I'm not looking for answers here, the question there is rhetorical. Although with rhetorical questions, the answer is meant to be rather clear, again i'm being vague-ish. And why was it replaced with English? There were English speaking forces in Vietnam who were also seen as the enemy. Yet English language instruction followed, while the French were 'occupied'. It's suspicious imo. Let's just say I'm a little suspicious of official narratives when it comes to world history/events and that includes how English has (miraculously <-sarcasm) become a global language. Reading Wikipedia isn't not going to enlighten me. You're welcome to respond, but part of my lack of clarity was due to the fact I don't want to upset the moderators with politics. It's hard sometimes where language often is soaked in politics. My main idea here is that I do not believe what we're told when it comes to how English has become a global force, while languages like French simply disappear or 'fall out of favour'.
The Vietnam war continued for 20 years after the french left. Supported by China/Russia in the north, and the USA in the south.

As I understand it the french administration was the only institution pushing french, and it was principally used by urban civil servants. They presumably would have adapted to Chinese/Russian/English as the times required.

It would be interesting to see a timeline for the rise of english in Vietnam, and the rise/fall of Russian and French in the country too. :-)

As to the rise of english, a common L2 is a useful thing. The colonial powers of europe exported their languages/cultures the British just seeded theirs more widely, and the dominant commercial, political and military power since WW2 has been the USA, another english speaking nation.
1 x

User avatar
PeterMollenburg
Black Belt - 2nd Dan
Posts: 2267
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 11:54 am
Location: Australia
Languages: English (N), French (B2-certified), Dutch (High A2?), Spanish (~A1), German (long-forgotten 99%)
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=784
x 4470

Re: PM's French Target: C1 2018

Postby PeterMollenburg » Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:12 am

I could very well be completly off on my suspicions, be completely disconnected from understanding the Vietnam conflict and well, and could just be plain wrong. I am not saying that in jest, I do mean, I really could be wrong.

It doesn't matter so much in the end as I can't change history or global forces, seen or otherwise. But it does make for interesting subject matter. It's difficult to discuss here, but I think those who have commented so far, are likely to agree, that it's at least interesting.

In my view, humanity was doing fine without globalisation. Cultures were more insular, but therefore less influenced by a gradually emerging global culture, and more protected. Difference and diversity creates a thriving world. Sameness, is boring, and one-dimensional. Having a truly global language like English encourages globalisation and makes the management of a global culture much easier when people from all over the globe view the world through the prism of that one culture. I think this is why France has refused to fully acknowledge regional languages, whereas Spain, supposedly in an effort to keep their country from breaking apart post Franco, has been much more sympathetic to regional differences in language and culture. Which country today struggles more with separatist movements? Which country has dying regional languages and are adopting the national culture more and more? So, on a grander scale, a French approach to a global language- that is, if we all speak the one language and at least for the moment acknowledge diversity but promote a global culture (English is so useful because of X,Y,Z), we'll be much easier to control through the prism of a one world view.

So, do we arrive at our own conclusions? Oh English is so useful because of ... ... ... (there are so many reasons today). Was this accidental? Absolutely not, imo. Oh French is dying out, it used to be... bla bla bla. Is this accidental, abslutely not. Yes, events occur and super-powers will try to exert influence. However the extent to which we believe world events, and changing culture are NOT engineered, is vastly incorrect, imo. We are living in a matrix. I wouldn't mind English so much, if I saw it as a natural rise to the top. I don't, and I think the future we are headed for is a dangerous one. One in which we'll be wishing for the langauge diversity we have today to come back!
0 x

User avatar
Elenia
Black Belt - 1st Dan
Posts: 1891
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:22 am
Location: London
Languages: English (N), Swedish (C1), French (Massively Atrophied) German (lowly beginner, somehow learnt to read)


Finnish?!
Language Log: viewtopic.php?t=708
x 3227
Contact:

Re: PM's French Target: C1 2018

Postby Elenia » Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:47 am

I think (as usual!) I have a different view of things. Without diving too much into politics*, I'll try to explain the way I see it.

The fall of French and the rise of English both have pretty much the same cause, which is WWII. As DaveBee says, the USA was pretty much the only country that left the war stronger than it started out. The economy received a massive boost and they were probably the strongest nation post-war. This means the language was in the stronger position, as they were the people to negotiate peace and aid with - or at least to attempt to negotiate with. Having a huge population and being less hit by the war with regards to population also meant they were in a better position to export culture (books, films etc.) than, for example, France. If the language of the USA was Chinese or Igbo, it's entirely possible that we'd all be pushing those languages now.

On the other side France experienced the same destabilisation of power base as the British Empire: French colonies were dissatisfied with the status quo and in addition to this, French influence was understandably weakened. Now, I wouldn't call that necessarily a 'natural' cause for the shift in language dynamic, but it hardly seems like anything more suspicious were happening. Perhaps if the foothold of French as an official language in Africa, the Carribean and/or North America was weakened and replaced by English I would be more superstitious - but it wasn't, and it hasn't been. From a more linguistic point of view, I think that the rigidity of French as administered by the French Academy doesn't help the situation. As I understand it, rigidity was one of the reasons Latin died out. On the other hand, I always view English as a bit of a mongrel (or a sponge, or a never satisfied gaping maw) in that it quite happily absorbs new words and structures, which I imagine makes it easier to use in times and fields of huge change.

To end, I'll say that I'm not resentful of English as lingua franca. I don't know what a 'natural' rise means for a language, but I don't think that any has been the result of natural spread. Both Latin and French were spread by imperialism and colonialism, just as English was. None were picked up wholesale by another country just because they seemed like neat languages - and I would find even that case sad because I value diversity just as much as you do. The thought of any language dying out because of another language, whether by force or not, is upsetting, but what upsets me most about how so many languages receive local or global dominance is that they seem to push out entirely other languages rather than allowing for them to live side by side.

Anyway, that's enough talk for me now. I hope you haven't minded my long post. I don't expect to convince or convert you, but I do hope you find it interesting. I particularly would like to see what you think with regards to the last paragraph, although I won't be able to answer as I am away over the next ten days. And, because I haven't really said it, I really enjoy reading about your new way of studying. Just reading it made me feel like you've found something you can really stick with and which really suits you. I hope it continues that way :)

*hopefully!
5 x

whatiftheblog
Orange Belt
Posts: 222
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2016 3:29 am
Location: France
Languages: English (N), Russian (N), French (C2?), Spanish (~B1)
x 717

Re: PM's French Target: C1 2018

Postby whatiftheblog » Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:15 pm

A Natixis study found that by 2050, French is likely to be the most commonly spoken language in the world due to fertility rates and changes in corresponding development patterns in sub-Saharan Africa. Provided wars end, infant mortality goes down, health outcomes go up, and GDP per capita goes up, etc (there are multiple vectors of causality interwoven within that set of factors), more children will be surviving past age 5 and becoming francophone through consistent school attendance, so this is a perfectly reasonable projection. It's just the natural flow of human history.

That said, I do find your anti-globalization stance curious, given that all of us here, on this forum, in cyberspace, learning each other's languages, we're basically poster children for it :D
1 x
Books completed: 5 / 20 5 / 20

User avatar
PeterMollenburg
Black Belt - 2nd Dan
Posts: 2267
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 11:54 am
Location: Australia
Languages: English (N), French (B2-certified), Dutch (High A2?), Spanish (~A1), German (long-forgotten 99%)
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=784
x 4470

Re: PM's French Target: C1 2018

Postby PeterMollenburg » Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:50 am

whatiftheblog wrote:A Natixis study found that by 2050, French is likely to be the most commonly spoken language in the world due to fertility rates and changes in corresponding development patterns in sub-Saharan Africa. Provided wars end, infant mortality goes down, health outcomes go up, and GDP per capita goes up, etc (there are multiple vectors of causality interwoven within that set of factors), more children will be surviving past age 5 and becoming francophone through consistent school attendance, so this is a perfectly reasonable projection. It's just the natural flow of human history.

That said, I do find your anti-globalization stance curious, given that all of us here, on this forum, in cyberspace, learning each other's languages, we're basically poster children for it :D


I disagree that we, or at least than many of us are poster children for globalisation. Sharing of cultures, interest in other cultures does not mean that you support globalisation. A world can be (inter)connected, but with each individual part remaining unique in its identity. That is not globalisation in our world. In our world the lines are being (deliberately) blurred under the guise of moving forward, the butter is being mixed with the margarine, the tomato sauce is being mixed with the margarine, meat is being drenched it margarine and margarine is supposedly just the way of the future.

We can all be very interconnected, very respectful, not racist at all, but still very much individual identities in terms of culture. Countries borders do not need to be wiped off the map to ensure a peaceful and interconnected world, just as immigration policies needn't be indicative of racism. Stop creating wars and stealing poor countries wealth while keeping them downtrodden. A peaceful world, full of unique cultures that do talk to each other is a posssibility, but the puppet masters don't want it that way. Conflict is beneficial to their objectives, and social engineering occurs in a way that has us perpetuating it believing we're evolving and improving and that they're our own ideas- they're not, we just think they are. We're being engineered. I enjoy other cultures immensely, but i'm not a globalist, at least not in terms of how I see it playing out currently, and i'm sure there are many of us on the forum here who absolutely adore other cultures but don't want to necessarily see them diluted or becoming just another margarine flavoured blurr.

Btw, I find that biased study on the French language completely, well, biased. First of all all the countries who have French listed as an official language, had their entire populations counted as Francophone, that's hardly realistic. Not only do they assume that these populations by 2050 will be 100% French speakers, they ignore population growth in other languages to a large extent, ignore the fact the Europe is anglicising (as is the rest of the world) and that Africa will not succumb to this. Many of these African countries use French as a languge of instruction. It wouldn't take much necessarily over time to shift that to English, particularly in a world of English dominance. The powers and influences behind the English language are only growing stronger, so much so English language courses at French universities are also becoming more common, VO programs are becoming more frequent in France (netflix for ex), and English language advertising is becoming (forced) to the point of normalisation. If this keeps going, more African countries will drop French in favour of English, particularly when a good number of African countries already illustrate the power of English for doing business in the world today. French will leave them apparently alarmingly cut off from the rest of the world, and at a disadvantage (that's how it will 'appear' or sold and it will be accepted). I hope the world changes direction instead.

Most of us here are going against the grain of globalisation in terms of languages, particularly those who study minority languages, as we are learning languages other than English and thereby creating diversity and respect for other cultures. Of course if I didn't speak English, I'd likely be learning it. I'm not against the learning of English per sé, nor the language itself, I'm just against a world in which we're becoming increasingly the same by design.
1 x

User avatar
PeterMollenburg
Black Belt - 2nd Dan
Posts: 2267
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 11:54 am
Location: Australia
Languages: English (N), French (B2-certified), Dutch (High A2?), Spanish (~A1), German (long-forgotten 99%)
Language Log: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=784
x 4470

Re: PM's French Target: C1 2018

Postby PeterMollenburg » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:01 am

Recently I started a new group; 'The French C1/C2 Group', for those in French wanting to push on to higher levels of French from an intermediate or roughly B2 base. So from here....

my French C1 mission begins!
5 x

User avatar
tastyonions
Blue Belt
Posts: 864
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2015 5:39 pm
Location: Dallas, TX
Languages: EN (N), FR, ES, IT, PT, DE, NL
x 1616

Re: PM's French Target: C1 2018

Postby tastyonions » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:57 am

C'est sûr que tu vas réussir. Tu bosses comme un fou. :-)
4 x


Return to “Language logs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests