Talk:Quebec French

Missing image Cscr-former.png Former featured article candidate

This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates (where the individual nomination does not exist) please check the archive. Once the objections have been met you may resubmit the article for featured article status.

Template:IPA notice

Contents

1 Rhotic 2 The third ê 3 Maurician lect?? 4 A good read for all those contributing to this article 5 Refactoring 6 Phonology & phonetics 7 morphologic gender 8 Hypothetic infinitive 9 Epenthesis 10 Lenght opposition 11 Re: bus lines and highway numbers 12 Linking? 13 Archiving 14 IPA completed 15 Reorganization and separation 16 On the Quebec French norm 16.1 On the Quebec french "ear" and "mouth" 17 Interintelligibility 18 pronunciation samples

Rhotic

Could someone confirm what rhotics are used in Quebec? Some previous contributor and I thought it was a uvular anyway, but according to Uvular_R#Québec this is false – they don't say what is true though. (¿) --Valmi 04:05, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I do think some dialect (at least in some social groups) have a rolled r /r\/, most noticeably in Montreal. It might have disappeared more or less, though. Personally, I've heard mostly uvular trills and uvular voiced fricatives. And I'm from Quebec city.--Circeus 19:09, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thinking about it the /r\/ doesn't seem untrue, but I don't hear it that often (anymore, anyway). And I'm from Montreal. Considering User:Gilgamesh wasn't so positive after all, I understand that we agree on uvular trill/uvular v fric and I remove the "dubious". --132.204.183.87 15:33, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC) (unlogged User:Valmi)

I base part of my assumption on a song by Beau Dommage (Marie-Chantal):

"Tu dis qu't'aimes la manière

Que j'ai d'rouler mes r

C'est frais, montréalais pis juste assez vulgaire"

Which is sung with audibly rolled r's. The song having been produced in the 70s, and from info gathered here and there, I assumed at least a "popular" pronounciation up to that point still had rolled r's. --Circeus 16:59, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

That would be on a vynil, and mine are quite out of reach right now. ;-)

I found some documentation about all varieties or R's found in Quebec though, and they indeed document an uvular trill [r] that was used in Montreal and Outaouais and has been fastly declining lately in favour of of [R] (among other things – they were actually documenting 12 different rhotics used in Quebec, I'll have to read that more carefully later and update the article). --Valmi 17:54, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The third ê

French has a third phonemic "e" vowel, always, usually in words with orthographic <aî> or <ê>. It is also the rendering of all /e/ and /E/ before a final [r]. Minimal pairs include 'bête'("beast")/'bette'("beet") and 'maître'(master)/'mettre'(to put). I have had trouble putting a finger on it and used X-Sampa /E\/ (old IPA E), or and approximated /E_q/ to represent this vowel. --Circeus 19:15, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Quebec French has, I mentionned it in the small paragraph I wrote about its phonology as /E:/ as opposite to /E/. I never heard [E_q] but I suppose that might very well exist. The most important point anyway is France French doesn't recognise this pair. --Valmi 05:03, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

¿What is /E\/ by the way? --Valmi 05:05, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

/E\/ is the X-Sampa symbol I use to represent the deprecated IPA E (Small capital e), which represented a lax /E/. My point was that there is a difference in quality (very audible to me) in addition to the difference in quantity. Neither distinction is made in Europe, AFAIK. --Circeus 16:54, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Glad we agree on the fact that it doesn't exist (anymore) in Europe. I couldn't really hear the quality difference, or then I would have guessed perhaps that it's (xsampa) [E_+], but I just found a book where the phoneme itself is described as (xsampa) /3/ (open-mid central). {sample} (http://en.wikipedia.org/upload/f/fb/Vow-18a.wav) What do you think? I think it sounds weird. It would be quite important to agree on a notation for this phoneme though, since we agree it is a phoneme in Quebec French. By the way, huge shame on the Quebecer Robert for refusing to note it. --Valmi 18:07, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Maurician lect??

This entry should be deleted. I hear/have heard "cossin" and "la bus"(Decried all across the province) regularly in both Quebec and Montréal. "Patente" is a bit more common for "Gizmo", though. AFAIK, "cossin" means "a small undetermined thing, usually in numbers". --Circeus 19:24, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I spent my teenage years in Trois-Rivieres and I can tell you that, first, Montrealers underline a difference and second, that cossin is well known as a Mauricien expression. Now, it may have crossed to other places throughout the territory, like Boston English expressions in the rest of the american territory or British English expressions in the US and Australia, for example. But I believe it does not remove the legitimacy of the mention. I have also been met with surprise from Montrealers when I spoke of the la bus expression (I'll note that I do not use it) ;) and, among Trifluvians, is is renown as a local term. Salutations. --Liberlogos 05:31, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

A good read for all those contributing to this article

http://www.uqac.uquebec.ca/~flabelle/socio/normecajo.htm (on the Quebec French norm)

The rest of the site is also excellent:

http://www.uqac.uquebec.ca/~flabelle/socio/ (on Sociolinguistics)

http://www.uqac.uquebec.ca/~flabelle/ (on Linguistics)

-- Mathieugp 02:45, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It seems we are a 2 decades behind in the way we treat the subject. This article is comparing Quebec French to the French of France, making it a regionalism of this language, rather than considering it as a national variant of French (with regionalism all to itself) much in the same way we compare British English and American English. -- Mathieugp 02:52, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well, this article is about a dialect, right? and it doesn't make any linguistic difference whatsoever whether Quebec is a "region" or a "nation", or really even if it would be just one person that wouldn't change anything to the way the lect is to be described.

A variety of a language spoken in some specific geographic place is called a "dialect", I hope we agree on that. Quebec French is a dialect of French. France French is a dialect of French.

No, this is not correct. Do not confuse dialect with accent. Britons, New Zealanders or Australians spending time in English-speaking Canada have no problems communicating because there's no such thing as a Canadian or Australian dialect; it's a case of different accents, not dialects. The difference between the French of France and Canada is somewhat greater, but do not confuse, misuse amd abuse the term 'dialect.' - User:82.68.46.46

Just to clearify the idea (or maybe confuse things more), see Dialect, List of dialects of the English language and American English. The words variety and dialects are used interchangeably in theses articles. - Sepper 18:25, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Now, how do you want us to describe the Quebec French dialect? If we were trying to make a Quebec French dictionary or grammar to the use of Quebecers, then you would be right, it would be innapropriate to describe Quebec French based on France French. But now we're writing an article about Quebec French in an encyclopedia that already has an article about France French (considered as standard French). So why describe Quebec French independantly when 95% of the material will be redundent and we could describe it differencially?

If you want to make an article describing Quebec French on its own, just copy this old article to Differences between the French and Quebecer dialects of French and go for it, but it will be a hard task as Quebec French short of its lexicon is not standard.

--Valmi 16:37, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Refactoring

No, I am not suggesting we duplicate all things in French language to here. That would not make sense. :-)

Quebec French and France French are two varieties of the same language. And yes, we are dealing with dialects, but more than that because we are dealing with normalized languages which are references by themselves. There is a France French norm to which regional dialects (marseille etc.) are compared to. There is also a separate Quebec French norm to which regional dialects (Gaspesie, Saguenay etc.) are compared to.

I am proposing that this article be refactored so as to cover more than what it currently covers. This could lead to a breaking down into other articles. Obviously, the differences between Quebec French and the French of France is going to be an important part of the subject, especially since it seems this is all that people are interesting in knowing! :-) Also popular are the regionalisms that exist inside Quebec. I think that introducing elements of sociolinguistics will help clarifiying a number of things and eliminate a number of generalizations and imprécisions currently in this article.

Also, nowhere does this article speak of the French that was spoken by the Quebec clergy, the one which was taught in Classical colleges until recently and of the important transformations in the French spoken since the education reforms of the 1960s. There is clearly an important rupture there. On top of that, I think we should cover the topic of the normalization of Quebec French that began in the 1960s and (probably in an article all to itself) of the Quebec debate over the quality of its spoken language.

What do you think?

-- Mathieugp 22:18, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think we agree in the first place to define the lect itself differentially to the France French dialect? I agree with you to defining the Gaspésie and Saguenay dialects based on the Quebecer dialect, that makes much sense. See further post.

As of major additions to be made to the article, I agree to most of your suggestions. Here is how I was already getting everything organised in my mind:

1. New subtitle right after History, something like Normalisation, that would necessarily include information about the perception Quebecers have of their dialect. That would discuss both the linguistique and sociale norm as they are called in this article you wanted us to read. (I reckon this is where Quebec debate over the quality of its spoken language would belong.)
2. Sociolectal information spread across the article. Whereas information about regional variants can be kept to a separate subtitle (that used to be Lects nonetheless), social variants should be inclded in the differential description itself, that is basically stating right away the context in which a "difference" is considered acceptable.
3. Obviously the subarticle about History of Quebec French requires serious work; this is where I reckon information about the clergy would belong.

By the way, what about creating a WikiProject for French dialects? --Valmi 18:25, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You're right. Most of what I was talking about would make sense under History of Quebec French. Right now, the equivalent article I started on fr.wikipedia.org is more complete. The best online source I found for this is here :

http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/francophonie/histfrnqc.htm

Although not a primary source, it is very complete and up to date. What I wrote so far is evidently mostly taken from what I read there. :-) It has a political bias however. I am trying to make mine more objective, even if it means leaving out certain parts and even if I agree with most parts of this political bias. ;-)

Creating a WikiProject for French dialects seems like a good idea, although I am honestly not qualified to write much on the dialects of Acadia, Louisiana, Belgium, Switzerland etc. I guess I could start reading and learn. Meanwhile, you'll have to find more knowledgeable people than me. Do you know any good online sources on this subject?

-- Mathieugp 19:18, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I just had a look at French language for the first time since I started working on Quebec French, and it made me reconsider some things. More when I'm done with Phonetics & phonology. --Valmi 21:40, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yes, TLFQ @ ULaval are great as far as lexicology is concerned, they are the best source.

As I have just written, I hadn't read French language for a long time, and hadn't noticed how incomplete it is. That makes me reconsider my position that Quebec French should absolutely be defined differentially, and I'm suddenly thinking we could take some extra freedom, finally.

I'll have to read more of that FL article though. After I ate. (I indented your signature too, hope you don't mind.)

--Valmi 22:32, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject French dialects --Valmi 00:29, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I think we should also create this projet on fr.wikipedia.org. This might attract more people than just on the English side. -- Mathieugp 22:06, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Phonology & phonetics

It is likely that I made mistakes in the big lot of stuff I wrote about Quebec phonetics today, please feel very very free to have a close look. Also, I worked with HTML entities, so some API may be totally wrong. --Valmi 22:18, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I honestly wouldn't be able to know without comparing what you wrote with a reference manual (which I don't have). I trust you on these things. I will focus on history for now since I already started. -- Mathieugp 22:06, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

morphologic gender

Seems good to me, however something other than "auto" will have to be used as an example as both "auto" and "automobile" are in fact feminine words... :-) Maybe "une avion" instead? That's the most common 5-year old type mistake most francophones do when they grow up. I know I did. ;-)

-- Mathieugp 12:17, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yuk! I would say I was probably very tired when I wrote this little bit. Very tired. :-) --Valmi 17:26, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Is it possible that naming the bus routes by their feminine numbers be influenced through analogy by the same habits of naming highways? La 20, la 40 are only a short way to l'autobus 7 -> la 7.--Circeus 12:22, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• points out* It seems to me like we don't necessarily need to "weaken" the article to make them identical. An important cause might also simply be the loss of nasalization before a pronounced nasal. I personnaly pronounce a distinct /y/. --Circeus 14:38, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hypothetic infinitive

I don't have time for an addition right now but someone should write something about the use of the hypothetical infinitive used instead of si+past subjunctive. Maybe to avoid use of the (wrong) conditionnal? Is the use of conditionnal in clauses starting with "si" widespread? --Circeus 18:51, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I can't understand what you mean by hypothetical infinitive, nor see any case where using si+past subjunctive is considered correct. Could you just show some examples?

Si + conditionnal is a rather frequent error, but it's not exactly widespread as most people are conscious of its agrammaticality. --Valmi 23:47, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

My bad, should be past indicative after "si", subjunctive is used after "que", mea culpa. "Avoir de l'argent, je t'en prêterais", "Pouvoir t'aider, je le ferais" are good examples. Regular form would be "Si j'avais de l'argent, je t'en prêterais" etc. --Circeus 15:22, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Aow, yyyyes, that is a most interesting thing I had never reflected about. I would bet tis an archaic construction [I mean, in "standard" French], but shall try to find documentation about it. --Valmi 20:57, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've read it is a grammatical innovation specific to Quebec (as is the use of surcomposed tenses (Ce couteau, il a eu coupé.) in Swiss or southern european French)--199.202.104.120 21:14, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I've quickly overread an article on the subject today, and that's what it seems like, although other languages have the same -- there was an example with Italian, but I cannot remember now. Anyway I added a (very) short paragraph on the subject. And I'm not sure whether embeddable is an appropriate translation for enchâssable. --Valmi 20:32, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Epenthesis

I'm thinking more and more of adding a small section on epenthesises specific to Quebec such as the change of /Re/+stop into /aR/ (which I've heard extended to verbs like "rentrer"!)and /EksipRE/ from /EksprE/. Any remarks on it?--Circeus 17:50, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

That would be very interesting indeed. As of /EksipRE/ though I doubt that is is specific to Quebec. Also I think this /a/ is more probably an open /@/. For instance, I would personally pronounce <rentre> [@_0Xa~t] (bad example I think), or <regarde> [@_0RgaRd]. --Valmi 18:15, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I agree that most of the time, the added vowel is weak, bordering /@/ or /9/ (/6/ is not impossible, but that vowel sounds more like /E/ to me), it tends to strenghten in joual-type talks. I've seen "Quebec dictionnaries" include verbs starting in ar- (artourner, arparler, arvenir). Off course these were "hard-core" dictionnaries arguing that Quebecois is a separate language and using joual as a rhetoric tool, but the orthography is quite descriptive of some talking you'll hears.

The same phenomenon often occurs with the article "le" in the same positions, albeit the vowel usually remains a schwa. --Circeus 20:49, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This sort of epenthesis is also a feature of Norman language ( e.g. èrpâler, èrv'nîn, èrgarder) and Picard language (e.g. éd = de, él = le) so it is probably one of the langue d'oïl features inherited by the language of Quebec. There are more examples of 'èr-' prefix in Jèrriais article -- Man vyi 06:33, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

That is a possibility, albeit I'm not sure there were that much speakers from these regions amongst Quebec colonists. I'm not a linguist but my hunch is toward parallel evolution. THe oddest epenthesis you will often find in Quebec remains the addition of a parasitic "s" in verb ending in -ouer(louer) or -uer(puer), mostly at indicative present or imperfect tense (y lousent, vous pusez). Any other hearings of this one?--Circeus 00:23, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

loûser means louer (praise, worship) in Jèrriais; the mainland form is loser. Can't help with pusez without research into neighbouring languages. On the colonist question, from our side of the Atlantic we tend to believe that similarities between our langues d'oïl and the language of Quebec is explained by the influence of oïl speakers. -- Man vyi 06:49, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)

On a totally unscientific note, both louer and puer were derived in Latin from nouns with a nominative in S. I'm not saying it's related – but I'm probably meaning it. (By the way, never heard pusez.) --[[User:Valmi|Valmi ✒]] 08:15, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The louer I'm talking about is the "rent" one. IIRC, it has a different origin in latin. Will have to look into that. My sister will often say puser, though she is no reference, I occasionnaly hear louser here at Cegep.--Circeus 11:47, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Lenght opposition

I think it is relevant to mention that whenever the A/a, O/o and 3/E peirs occur they are opposed in both lenght and quality.--Circeus 01:02, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

EG? --[[User:Valmi|Valmi ✒]] 02:57, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

/pat/ & /pA:t/ (NOT /pAt/), /cOt/ & /co:t/ (NOT /cot/), /mEtr/ & /m3:tr/ (NOT /m3tr/). While short /A/ and /o/ do occur, they never do in contrasting position with /a/ and /O/ AFAIK and by such are not phonemes.--Circeus 13:48, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I see what you mean. I think the [A:] isn't specific to QF, but the difference in quantity of /o/ could be worth mentionning. At that, you could add a note about /ø/ and diphtongs. As of /3/, I don't think there is any kind of convention, so feel free to write /3:/ if you fancy since all allophones are long anyway. --[[User:Valmi|Valmi ✒]] 20:19, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Re: bus lines and highway numbers

Answering Circeus: Is it possible that naming the bus routes by their feminine numbers be influenced through analogy by the same habits of naming highways? La 20, la 40 are only a short way to l'autobus 7 -> la 7.

I doubt your hypothesis, but I must honestly admit I shouldn't know how to prove it wrong. If only commuter train lines were numbered, we'd know if le train 4 is le 4 or la 4. I think it would be le 4 though. ;-)

It seems to me that those metonymies follow quite a logical serie anyway: le numéro 42 -> le 42, la route 132 -> la 132, l'autobus 7... [?]

I would also like to provide a more formal counter-example from France, but the only one I can think of is in Queneau's Exercices de styles, which I cannot find now because I'm repainting and my flat is a real chantier de construction, and I'm not even sure whether it's l'autobus, l'omnibus or just le bus S.

--[[User:Valmi|Valmi ✒]] 00:58, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Linking?

Could someone please clarify that Quebecois lacks most "linking"? Do they mean liason? So does this mean that beaux-arts has a glottal stop in the middle instead of a voiced sibilant? Or what? Please be specific and use examples, I'm confused.

Ok it's clearer now but still not entirely clear. When one "avoids linking", one has a vowel clash. Is the clash resolved by blending the vowels, or by inserting a glottal stop? Someone who knows please answer...

Steverapaport 15:07, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

or nothing. All solutions are possible AFAIK. That phenomenon is probably one of the most complex in French. I'll have to check my books when I get home. --Circeus 17:15, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

By inserting a glottal stop, I'd say... See fr:Liaison for a correct definition of the linking, and for the mandatory vs. optionnal cases of linking. In QF, optionnal cases are almost never observed. --Valmi ✒ 19:36, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Archiving

This talk page is extremely long. Maybe parts of it should be archived or deleted? --Circeus 22:00, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Done. Moved old or irrelevant discussions to Talk:Quebec French(archives), and appropriate ones to Talk:History of Quebec French or Talk:Quebec French lexicon. ALso deleted a few bits. --Circeus 15:15, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

IPA completed

I completed the IPA-ification of the article. --Circeus 15:20, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Reorganization and separation

I'd like to have opinions on the possible moving of the Phonology article to a separate one, much like Lexicon. Merging the subsections in Regional variations should also be considered IMHO, until we have enough materials to actually separate them. --Circeus 19:07, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

On the Quebec French norm

For those interested in the subject, there is currently a very interesting series of two articles by Marie-Éva de Villers (author of the Multidictionnaire de la langue française) in Le Devoir. The articles present the results of a study which tried to establish the real norm of Quebec French by comparing all the words used in newspaper articles published in Le Devoir and Le Monde for the year 1997. The second and last article was published today (January 5, 2005). Very interesting read. -- Mathieugp 22:17, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

On the Quebec french "ear" and "mouth"

I'd love to note somewhere the obvious difference between the location in the mouth of Quebec French vs. France French, and the related difference in how a Quebecois hears foreign sounds. Unfortunately I'm not really qualified to do this in detail. All I know is that the foreign "th" sounds come out very different in the different French accents when speaking English:

sound	English	Quebec	France
[θ]	"think"	"tink"	"sink"
[ð]	"this"	"dis"	"zis"

Obviously the two languages are either differently placed in the mouth, or have a different "ear" for consonants, or both. Anyone understand the linguistic terminology here well enough to comment on this?

Steverapaport 20:20, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

While the fact has been widely aknowledged (I've seen numerous references to it), I have yet to see a suggested hypothesis. Maybe Quebecois are more exposed to English slang /t, d/ for [θ, ð] than European French speakers? --Circeus 20:42, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

First, my qualifications to comment: I lived in Ottawa (near the Quebec border) for a year, and in Northern Quebec for a summer. I've also spent a bit of time in France and in other parts of Europe where I have had business dealings with Frenchmen. In English and in Parisian French, which I studied for 7 years.

The difference is definitely not due to slang English influence, because in the remote parts of Quebec there isn't any to speak of. It is rather due to an entire way of speaking. To my ear the Quebecois speak a version of French that is spoken further back in the mouth -- their "R"s retreat almost to the uvula, the mouth is held further open, and the words alternate between sounding swallowed and sounding flat. The articulation points are further back on the tongue. There's also a bit of an adenoidal sound, as if the speaker has a cold.

The Parisiens speak closer to the front of the mouth, with more closed mouth, and most of the articulation done near the tip of the tongue and lips. I'd love to say all this with authority but all I have is my own eyes and ears for this.

I'm pretty sure that the difference in the "th" sounds is related to the different articulation points or the adenoidal thing, but I don't have much to back it up. But I'd love to hear from someone who does! Steverapaport 23:37, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Interintelligibility

In my own humble personal experience, as a French person:

• Fast, colloquial Québec French can be difficult or impossible to understand (e.g. Lynda Lemay when she gives her "Québécois lessons").
• In normal situations, while the Québecois accent is easily recognizable, there is no problem understanding Québécois speaking. David.Monniaux 18:31, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I have a question. If the discussion page is not an appropriate page for the question, apologies. Could someone add a section to the page on the adoption of (American) English phrases in Quebec French? I live in Montreal and my French isn't good enough to tell whether this is true, but I was at a party several months ago where a number of academics from Belgium were making fun of the claim that Quebec French is "less English" and "more pure" than European French. They weren't being mean and they weren't suggesting that Quebec French is inferior. But they said, basically, if you're fluent in English it's much much easier to understand Quebec French due to the adoption of wholesale phrases from American English. Actually it's not just that. It's the use of verbs in ways that match their English counterparts. Examples: Ca fait du sense. Je sympathise avec toi. The Belgians had a long and very funny list of these but I can't remember them. I think it is interesting from a linguistic viewpoint to look at what (in terms of language "purity") can be controlled by force of will and force of law. It seems that noun substitutions can be controlled to a point, but I'm wondering how Quebec, surrounded by, what, 250 million? anglophones can keep hold of a version of French that is less anglisized than European French. MySamoanAttorney 08:15, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

They can, and they do, precisely because they're surrounded by 310 million Anglophones. It leads to a siege atmosphere which allows them to do almost anything, including pass questionable laws (see Bill 101), to prevent the encroachment of English into their language. France has no such reason to worry about Spanish, German or English, so France borrows occasional words and constructions, and is none the worse for it.

Bill 101 provided, for some time, that commercial signage MUST be in French. Lawmakers also concerned themselves with making up new French words to replace English borrowings like "hot dog" (chien chaud). Joni Mitchell said "You don't know what you've got till it's gone", but the Québecois have been determined since 1977 to make sure they keep it instead.

Both Quebec French and European French have anglicisms, but different ones (there are many cases where Quebec French uses a French word while European French has borrowed an English word, and there are many other cases where Quebec French borrows an English word where European French uses a French word). Neither one is more "pure" than the other. The difference is that Quebec French has absorbed English vocabulary as a gradual process through 250 years of contact with English-speaking populations within Quebec, while European French with very few exceptions (spleen, clown, etc) did not borrow much from English at all until very recent decades when it became faddish and fashionable to use English words as slang. -- Curps 23:32, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Curps is correct too. In summary then, France has anglicisms from the late 20th century on, but few from before that. Quebec has anglicisms (and nativisms) from the 17th century until the late 20th century, and then they stopped (mostly) taking in more. Steve Rapaport 12:30, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

French is my second language, and I have little difficulty understanding either Québécois or European French as long as it's not too fast or too full of colloquialisms, but this may be because I was taught by European French speakers while living near Quebec. Anyhow, that's not why I'm making this comment. I wanted to bring up two seemingly contradictory statements in the section about interintelligibility with other dialects. It says "European pronunciation is not at all difficult for Canadians to understand; only slang expressions present any problems". Then in the very next sentence it says "Television programmes and films from Quebec often must be subtitled for international audiences, which some Quebecers perceive as offensive, although they themselves sometimes can hardly understand European French pronunciation and slang." I don't feel I'm qualified to make a judgment on this issue, not being a native French speaker myself, but at least one of these sentences needs to be changed. — Ливай | ☺ 21:56, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

pronunciation samples

The section describing pronunciation is prety techincal. It would be extremely nice to have contrasting pronunciations of a word or two (perhaps petit). --Andrew 03:52, May 18, 2005 (UTC)