Places with the most multilingual people.

[JoseB]

Originally Posted by Nava

And there will be one involving Spain's borders?

Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe XD

[LavenderBlue]

Many of my older relatives were fluent in Yiddish, Hebrew and English and a serious smattering of Polish or Hungarian. We met a South African woman on the bus in Paris. She lamented that her son "only" knew Africaans, French and Spanish. She told us she was pushing him to gain English fluency. My next door neighbors when growing up were from Russia. Their little girl spoke Russian, English, Yiddish (from the grandmother), Hebrew from her yeshiva and was studying French seriously for their planned trip to France. She would occasionally struggle slightly for the quite the right word in English, apparently going through at least three different possibilities in her head first.

[hibernicus]

Originally Posted by Nava

It's very rare to find someone who remembers Andorra, Morocco (hello? Ceuta and Melilla? troubles at the border every few weeks?) and the UK.

To be very nitpicky, Spain does not border the UK, as Gibraltar is not part of the UK.

[Nava]

That depends on your definitions, the language being spoken and your politics. Let me put it this way: from our PoV, if we say we have a border with "Gibraltar", that's akin to saying that Gibraltar is independent, and why the fuck are we not bursting that pimple in our ass if it's independent? Oh that's right, because they're not independent: they're a UK domain which the UK got from the Napoleonic wars and they're protected by the Royal Navy; actually, if the territory was a historical one and not perceived as war payment it wouldn't bother us (nobody has a problem with Andorra). If Spain pulled a Perejil in Gibraltar, London would be... extremely fast at expressing their displeasure.

So it is not part of "the UK" in the same way and with the same exact rules, laws and standing as England or Wales, but from our PoV they are part of the UK. And what the hell: Ceuta, Melilla and the Canary Islands also have some laws which are different from the rest of Spain (no VAT for example), but anybody who claims they're not "part of Spain" should be careful to avoid being heard by Spaniards. We don't distinguish between "American territories" and "the US" in everyday conversation, either; only if the distinction is somehow essential to the conversation.

[hibernicus]

Originally Posted by Nava

That depends on your definitions, the language being spoken and your politics.

No, it's a matter of (legal) fact and isn't determined by argument from analogy. Ceuta and Melilla are part of Spain, Gibraltar is not part of the UK.

I feel like we've had this discussion before, but you seem to be basing your viewpoint on an excluded middle, where either a place is "part of" another country or it's independent. That is simply not the case for many places in the world, and historically it was the case for far fewer.

[JKellyMap]

Ok, Hibernicus, technically you're right. But in practice, all of us thin of, and refer to, every piece of land on Earth as being part of one country or another, and this works fine for ordinary discourse.

I suggest that one way we could be more accurate, but with minimal extra effort for the nitpickers, is to use the phrase "belongs to" to refer to pieces of land whose exact status isn't obvious. But I'm with Nava on this one -- "is a part of" (and "borders") is fine for normal discourse. Like she said, a good practical test of whether Country A "borders" Country B is to consider what would probably happen if Country A decided to forcibly occult the piece of Country B in question.

On an unrelated note, I just wanted to offer a compliment to Nava on her English. She uses idiomatic English phrases with erudition, precision, and grace better than most native English speakers, in my opinion.

[hibernicus]

Originally Posted by JKellyMap

Ok, Hibernicus, technically you're right. But in practice, all of us thin of, and refer to, every piece of land on Earth as being part of one country or another, and this works fine for ordinary discourse.

Not all of us (especially in the British Isles, where people tend to be more alert to the legal status of different regions). In any event, "technically right" is the currency of GQ, if not of ordinary discourse.

Your suggestion of "belongs to" is correct.

[JKellyMap]

Okay, fair enough. I agree that the SDMB is a good place to employ an unusually high level of factual precision. Even here, though, this might not be so true when we are talking about interactions with people in real life.

[clairobscur]

Originally Posted by Nava

That detail was one chick, but she was entering Tourism School in Spain, and they had a placement test. One of the multiple choice questions was about which countries does Andorra border: she chose France and Portugal.
It took us upwards of a quarter of an hour to walk her through "ok, what country are you now in? Did you cross Portugal to get to Barcelona from Andorra?" until she finally grokked it (showing her a road map hadn't helped, she was one of those people who refuse to even look at a map saying "oh, I can't read maps!" - looking at it won't make your eyes fall off, promise).

(Bolding mine)


Tourism school? Good luck.

Mind you, if you want to pull a Spaniard's leg, just ask which countries we have borders with and refuse to accept the blurted out "France and Portugal". It's very rare to find someone who remembers Andorra, Morocco (hello? Ceuta and Melilla? troubles at the border every few weeks?) and the UK.

I was congratulating myself for knowing Spanish geography better than Spaniards, until I come to the last country. I would have forgotten the UK.


A trick question for French people : With which country France has the longest border?

SPOILER:

Brazil

[RickJay]

Originally Posted by JKellyMap

Africa, in general, is famous for this. Most people (no cite, but this was mentioned by linguist John McWhorter in The Power of Babel) speak at least three languages: 1. The "tribal" language, spoken just in their part of their country, 2. The "national" African language of their country (or one of the several such), and 3. The language of the European country which formerly colonized the place. Many speak several examples of "1", because they married into, or work with, people from another "tribe".

Africa was actually famous for these even before colonization; it's often noted in histories of English, when talking about the influence of Africans on the development of English, that Africans kidnapped into slavery spoke an astounding number of languages. 2-3 per person was the usual number, and some spoke more.

[Dr. Drake]

Originally Posted by hibernicus

. . . Gibraltar is not part of the UK.

I think part of the difficulty with this is that there is no easy name for the entity that includes the UK and British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies and whatnot, since "British Empire" is apparently no longer okay. Certainly something that is identified as a territory and has only 30 K people is part of another country, and that country should by rights have a name, but what is it? You can hardly say "Spain borders the British Crown," and Gibraltar is clearly not part of the island of Great Britain or the British Isles. I think "Britain" is the best you can do for "that country ultimately governed from London, England", but inaccurate confusion with Great Britain and the UK is bound to happen.

[hibernicus]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drake

Certainly something that is identified as a territory and has only 30 K people is part of another country

This is the point where we disagree. To pick an example closer to home (for me), are you aware that the Isle of Man, for example, is not part of the UK?

The reason there is no name for the entity you describe (UK and its overseas possessions) is that there is no such legal entity.

It all becomes much easier if you accept that the world is divided into places that are sovereign independent countries and places that are not, Gibraltar being an example of the latter. Then you can just say "Spain borders France, Portugal, Andorra, Morocco and Gibraltar".

Otherwise you are led to the absurdity of claiming that Spain borders Britain. And when your logic leads you to absurdity, you have to question your premises!

[mattomic]

Over two-thirds of Montreal residents are bilingual in both English and French to some degree, with a growing number of immigrants also fluent in a third language (Italian, Arabic, Chinese, etc.)

It's not uncommon to hear conversations between people in Montreal (and the rest of Quebec, to a lesser extent) slip in and out between English and French

[Dr. Drake]

Originally Posted by hibernicus

This is the point where we disagree. To pick an example closer to home (for me), are you aware that the Isle of Man, for example, is not part of the UK?

Yes. The Isle of Man also has a distinct languge, culture, and history, and for a number of reasons I don't think it's strictly comparable to Gilbraltar. For one thing, it isn't a British Overseas Territory, but a Crown Dependency, which is a different animal altogether.

Originally Posted by hibernicus

The reason there is no name for the entity you describe (UK and its overseas possessions) is that there is no such legal entity.

It all becomes much easier if you accept that the world is divided into places that are sovereign independent countries and places that are not, Gibraltar being an example of the latter.

So you are arguing that the people of Gibraltar are not British. Huh. According to Wikipedia, the people of Gibraltar use British passports (which identify them as Gibraltarians). They are defended by the British military. I know they are not part of the UK, but I don't see how you can make the argument that there is no entity legal encompassing both the UK and the territories it governs; I'd say parliament is a legal entity.

[Rhaegar]

Originally Posted by bengangmo

"Almost everyone" is a bit of an exaggeration,(based on my anecdotal experience) but certainly a very good proportion.

Looking specifically towards Malaysia, a Malaysian chinese will normally speak his dialect (Mandarin, Cantonese and Hokkein being most common) + English and Malay being taught at school.

In Singapore, since 198? all school leavers are expected (under pain of failing their primary school leaving exam meaning they cannot proceed to secondary school) to be bi-lingual in English and Mother Tongue (Mandarin, Malay or Tamil) + many will also speak their cradle dialect. (my wife, as an example, is fluent in Mandarin and Cantonese)

Yeah, Singapore for sure. When I visited there, the road signs were all in English, Chinese and Malaysian? or something. I was told that there were 3 official languages in Singapore.

[bengangmo]

Originally Posted by Rhaegar

Yeah, Singapore for sure. When I visited there, the road signs were all in English, Chinese and Malaysian? or something. I was told that there were 3 official languages in Singapore.

There's 4
English (Lingua Franca)
Malay (national language)
Tamil
Mandarin

[Voyager]

Originally Posted by Maastricht

ETA: it is nice to see that English has replaced Latin as the international language of science. (Is that the case all over the world, by the way)? The Dutch school system used to have gifted classes in highschool where kids were also taught Greek and Latin ("the Gymnasium") . I still had those on my curriculum. Never had much use for them. That has been replaced by classes, not about English, but about other subjects (physics, for instance) where the class is given IN English.

Not just science, but business also. My daughter just got a Masters in International Business in Germany - all the classes for that program were taught in English.

[Voyager]

Originally Posted by JKellyMap

Africa, in general, is famous for this. Most people (no cite, but this was mentioned by linguist John McWhorter in The Power of Babel) speak at least three languages: 1. The "tribal" language, spoken just in their part of their country, 2. The "national" African language of their country (or one of the several such), and 3. The language of the European country which formerly colonized the place. Many speak several examples of "1", because they married into, or work with, people from another "tribe".

Not a cite, but when we lived in the Congo the guy who worked for my mother (who was smart but not well educated) spoke both French and Bakongo, the local dialect. I'm not sure many west African countries have national languages, since they were stitched together by the European colonizers. Maybe the East is different.

[Voyager]

Originally Posted by Iggy

Lots of people I dealt with in Malta spoke Maltese, English and Italian. English thanks to British colonial rule. Italian thanks to proximity and getting a lot of television from Italy.

That's a good example. In my experience those in countries too small to have a self-supporting entertainment industry learn their native language and at least one other, usually English these days. In Estonia older people learned Russian and Estonian, but I think they've stopped teaching Russian for obvious reasons - German seems next most popular.

[hibernicus]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drake

So you are arguing that the people of Gibraltar are not British.

No, I made no claim of any kind about their nationality.

They are defended by the British military. [...]I don't see how you can make the argument that there is no entity legal encompassing both the UK and the territories it governs; I'd say parliament is a legal entity.

Parliament is precisely what distinguishes the UK from its overseas territories, not a unifying factor. If Gibraltar elected members to Parliament and was governed by its laws, it would effectively be part of the UK.

[Dr. Drake]

I'm seriously confused, then. British nationality was conferred on the Gibraltarians by parliament; how is that not parliament passing a law that effects Gibraltar?

I don't get the distinction you are making. We agree that Gibraltar is not in the UK. We agree that Gibraltarians are British: they are British Overseas Territory citizens. Where we seem to disagree is that you think British Overseas Territories are not British, despite the name, the passport, and the fact that Parliament in Westminister passes laws that effect them. Gibraltar does not elect members to parliament as far as I know, but it is indeed subject to its laws, like the British Nationality Act of 1981.

[hibernicus]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drake

I'm seriously confused, then. British nationality was conferred on the Gibraltarians by parliament; how is that not parliament passing a law that effects Gibraltar?

I don't get the distinction you are making. We agree that Gibraltar is not in the UK. We agree that Gibraltarians are British: they are British Overseas Territory citizens. Where we seem to disagree is that you think British Overseas Territories are not British, despite the name, the passport, and the fact that Parliament in Westminister passes laws that effect them. Gibraltar does not elect members to parliament as far as I know, but it is indeed subject to its laws, like the British Nationality Act of 1981.

Gibraltar certainly is British territory, although it is not Britain (as I suspect any Gibraltarian would confirm).

However I think a new point of disagreement has arisen - Gibraltar is not subject to laws enacted by the UK Parliament. The example you chose of a law that "affects" Gibraltar is a slightly slippery one; Parliament can enact a law that confers citizenship on anyone, wherever they live.

[Dr. Drake]

Okay. I'll leave parliament aside. "British but not Britain" is the sticking point. It's not Great Britain, because that is the name of a specific island, but "Britain" on its own is a pretty good name for the entity encompassing both Gilbraltar and the UK. If you insist there is no such thing, fine. Let's agree to disagree.

[Nava]

Is there even an official way to reference "the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, plus any and all overseas territories, crown domains and others"? I said "the UK" originally as the polite shorthand in English - but it's not enough for hibernicus. OK, so what is the correct expression? Is there one that wouldn't be a mouthful?

[Full Tilt Boogie]

In my experience, The Netherlands is the place where it is commonplace for most people to have more than a schoolboy command of at least five languages: typically Dutch (obviously), English (as they learn it from being under ten years old), German (they're neighbours with a contiguous border), French and either Spanish, Italian or a Scandinavian language.

[suranyi]

Originally Posted by Voyager

Not just science, but business also. My daughter just got a Masters in International Business in Germany - all the classes for that program were taught in English.

Indeed. I have spent much of my career working for multi-national companies based in Belgium and The Netherlands. They had offices all over the world. All corporate communications were always in English, and everyone was expected to be able to work in that language.

[even sven]

West Africa, for sure. West Africa began with some of the greatest diversity on earth (Cameroon alone has 250 ethnic groups, each with their own language) and it's spent the last millennia caught in the rise and fall of empire after empire, meaning that they've had many chances for foreign languages and trade languages to become important.

In the village I lived in Cameroon, your average Joe would speak at least five languages. The language on the street was Fulfulde, which has become the widespread West African trade language during the period of the Fulbe conquests in the mid-1800s. Fulfulde was the lingua franca of the area, and basically everyone has to know it to conduct daily life. People in my village would also speak Hausa, because the traditional leadership was derived from the Borno Empire (1300's-1893) and Hausa culture was still a hegemonic force. People would speak Guidar, the language of my particular town (which is completely unrelated to the other two, being an older, indigenous language) which, for example, would be what kids playing in the street, friends drinking at the bar, or church services would be in. Everyone also had their "maternal language" that comes directly from their ethnic group and may only be spoken in a tiny remote village somewhere. This would be used for talking with your close family members. In some cases this might be Hausa or Guidar or Fulfulde, but more likely it was one of the many, many, many tiny ethnic groups dotting the region. FInally, anyone with any education could get by with a smattering of French, and anyone with a high school education would know at least some English. Additionally, many people pick up side languages from nearby villages and trading areas, especially if they are involved in cross-regional trade or had spent time in another village.

Thanks to the history and geography of the region, many of these languages are from completely different language groups that have nothing in common with each other. In parts of Africa that speak primarily Bantu languages, all of these languages are going to have similarities and may be somewhat mutually intelligible. But in West Africa, a village may speak languages originating in places are far flung as Senegal and Sudan.

[even sven]

Originally Posted by Voyager

Not a cite, but when we lived in the Congo the guy who worked for my mother (who was smart but not well educated) spoke both French and Bakongo, the local dialect. I'm not sure many west African countries have national languages, since they were stitched together by the European colonizers. Maybe the East is different.

In most of Africa, the "national language" refers to a European language (usually, but not always, of a colonizer.) This language is often used by government, media, and the education system because it is considered "neutral" (as in not favoring a specific ethnicity) and allows mass communication with people who would not otherwise share a common language. Most people will have some proficiency with this language, but you generally wouldn't expect to ever hear it in private homes, especially outside of the larger cities. Pretty much nobody speaks this as their first language.

Additionally, most areas are going to have a widespread language that is used in trade, informal business, and non-official public life. These languages probably don't map exactly on to national boundaries, but rather follow long-established trade routes and cultural corridors. None the less, the function essentially like a national language, and that is the language you will use for most of daily life. In some places, such as South Africa, they have been enshrined as national languages. In other cases, it remains a de facto thing. A country can and usually does have a few of these running through it.

Then you have local languages, which may be local to a region as large as a state or as small as a village.

[bdcochran]

I went to an Argentine Milonga last night. I spoke in English and French. I understood what was being said in Spanish. If necessary, I could have conversed with the German consulate employee. Almost 1/2 of the people in my city do not speak English as the primary language at home. Multilingualism is more widespread than people might think.

[Nava]

And you are in?

[hibernicus]

Originally Posted by Nava

Is there even an official way to reference "the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, plus any and all overseas territories, crown domains and others"? I said "the UK" originally as the polite shorthand in English - but it's not enough for hibernicus. OK, so what is the correct expression? Is there one that wouldn't be a mouthful?

It's just not a cohesive entity of the kind that usually gets a name. We are talking about a semi-random collection of disparate locales, scattered all over the world, sharing nothing in common except that by historial accident their foreign affairs and defence are looked after by the UK. It's like coming up with a name for all the countries whose capital city begins with N.

Suppose you had a name (say, "Greater Britain") for an entity that includes London, the Falkland Islands and Montserrat? What could you possibly want to say about it?

If you went to Montserrat, you would say "I went to Montserrat", not "I went to Greater Britain". Similarly if a volcano erupted in Gibraltar or a ship ran aground in Port Stanley.

Anyway, if you insist, I think "British territory", or "the UK and its overseas dependencies" would work depending on context.

[robert_columbia]

Originally Posted by hibernicus

...I feel like we've had this discussion before, but you seem to be basing your viewpoint on an excluded middle, where either a place is "part of" another country or it's independent. That is simply not the case for many places in the world, and historically it was the case for far fewer.

And there are places like Puerto Rico where there is a confusing set of statutes and court rulings about its exact relationship with the United States. There's a court ruling that it is not truly a part of the the US but is only a foreign possession, but effectively it is treated as part of the US, you can travel between the US and PR without needing to show a passport, and the passport and/or visa requirements for entering PR from, say, the Dominican Republic are exactly the same as traveling directly from there to the US afaik.

[Sandwich]

Originally Posted by hibernicus

Gibraltar certainly is British territory, although it is not Britain (as I suspect any Gibraltarian would confirm).

However I think a new point of disagreement has arisen - Gibraltar is not subject to laws enacted by the UK Parliament. The example you chose of a law that "affects" Gibraltar is a slightly slippery one; Parliament can enact a law that confers citizenship on anyone, wherever they live.

Equally, Gibraltar is subject to the laws of the European Union. Which member state do you think it is part of? That's right, according to the laws which apply on both sides of the border, Gibraltar is part of the UK.

If you're going to be pedantic, the UK is not governed by laws enacted by the UK parliament - laws are enacted by the Queen. For bonus points, an Order in Council on Gibraltar matters would be in the same form as one on UK matters, and be made on the advice of UK ministers. Contrast that to an Order made on say Canadian matters, which would be unambiguously Canadian.