> Depends what you mean by Parisian French. The informal dialect spoken by
> Parisians, say with their friends, isn’t the standard dialect of French. But the
> French language did start as the language of Paris only and was exported all
> over the world, so in that sense Parisian French is the standard and original
> dialect of French.
I’ll accept that. Usually what is meant by saying that the standard dialect of a language is that of city X or of region X is that it’s closer to the dialect of X than of anywhere else, but some of the kinks in the dialect of X are removed.
Or it was just poetic license to fit with the other airlines that matched cardinal directions.
That’s how it sounds to me too, but so does the inverse! Listening to Bob Hartley on RDS and TSN, when he speaks French, his accent is reminiscent of an anglophone’s, but when he speaks English, he sounds like a francophone!
FWIW I heard a representative sample of Canadian French* and what immediately struck me about it was that it seemed to be less melodic than European French. It even reminded me a little of upper Midwestern American English in its tonal quality.
Going back to the OP here, I’d say that if the official Quebec government website calls the language French, then it’s not a separate language (see the link in the upper-right of the main English portal).
The point is that it’s arbitrary. The Quebec government and all of Francophone Canada could change their minds tomorrow (and it’s not such an outlandish hypothesis) and you’re right back to square one.
And the U.S. government could decide that the main language spoken in the U.S. is the “American language”, and could assert that it’s not the same as the “English language”. However, that would not change the linguistic facts about whether these are dialects or separate languages.
That’s not necessarily true. Linguistics isn’t always able to draw a hard line. Where linguistics is fuzzy, politics and other factors can take over. That’s why we consider Danish and Norwegian to be separate languages. Or Urdu and Hindi. Or Malaysian and Indonesian. These lines aren’t justified by linguistics alone.
Having gone through the first page (50 posts) of this thread and not seen this addressed, except in passing by Wendell, defining “language” vs. “dialect” is much like “lumpers” vs. “splitters” in biology taxonomy. There’s no one right answer held by consensus across experts; there are varying opinions as to what constitutes separate languages vs. dialects of a language.
Scots is very much an unusual case even in this situation. It evolved from Anglo-Saxon roots (with significant Celtic vocabulary contributions) to be a distinct language, insofar as such a thing exists, in the 1400s, barely if at all intelligible to the typical speaker of English, and has since converged to the point it is for all practical purposes a dialect of English today. Visualize it as a sine wave over time, with standard English as a baseline, diverging and then reconverging. Burns was perhaps the last major writer in Scots as a distinct language form; Scott and others since wrote in Scottish dialect English. (Two caveats: 1. Note that Lallan(d)s is dialectal and many writers intentionally stress its distinctness. 2, Distinguish Scots, a West Germanic language, from Scots Gaelic, a Goiledic (Q-) Celtic language most closely related to Irish, and spoken mainly in the Shetlands, Hebrides, and a few Highland areas on the mainland of Great Britain.)
As I said earlier, sarcasm is lost on some people.
The Parisian French is real French based on the golden rule - “he who has the gold, makes the rules”. As the center of the French universe, with the official bodies that set the standards for the language, they get to dictate what is right. Oddly enough, they are right, according to them.
No, lyin’ Brian knows perfectly well how to speak real French, but like Sarah Palin and her “ya” and “betcha” instead of “you” or “you bet”, Lyin’ Brian’s French when he speaks to Quebeckers is a put-on; to make a guy with a closet full of Gucci suits and shoes appear to be one of the common folk. Fortunately, he still came off better than the pretentious snobs he replaced in 1984.
Unlike, say, Jimmy Carter’s souther accent which does not sound like a put-on. They raked Hillary over the coals for trying to sound “black southern” during the last campaign - actually, IIRC she was quoting something written in that dialect. There’s nothing like Fox taking news out of context.
I have never heard the word Metis pronounced with the final “S” unless the person is trying to sound Quebeçois. Since the homeland of the Metis are mainly the eastern half of the Canadian prairies, and have been since 9 months after the white man arrived, I defer to their pronunciation - “mey-tee”. (Sort of like Quebeçois is pronounced “Key-beck-kwah” not …"-kwass". Pate a fois gras is “fwah grah” not “fwass grass”. Mardi gras? etc. etc.)
So to sum up in non-offensive, non-sarcastic way, Quebec French is an accent or dialect that can vary from totally unintelligible (like hillbilly Appalachian) with its own incomprehensible grammar, accent and colloquialisms, to a mild accent on Parisian French - no different than say, Oxford English vs. mid-Atlantic English and equally comprehensible. The degree to which someone chooses the degree of the accent and dialect helps determine the content of their message.
Or as Pa Clampett would say, “Hooo dawggie, thet there’s more simpler than a possum in a smokeshed with its britches a-burnin’!”
TWA’s demise unfortunately ended a really good joke.
The TWA stewardess says to the passenger, “Would you like some fo our fine TWA coffee?”
He replies"No thank you, but I’d love some of your fine TWA tea."
md2000, what does your post have to do with my post? I can’t figure out what point you’re making. My point is that Québécois French and Parisian French are both dialects. Parisian French is considered the standard dialect. That doesn’t make it a “real” language and Québécois a fake one (or whatever you want to call it). Let’s make a real effort to communicate here and not use sarcasm in the rest of this thread.
I’ll address the rest of md2000’s post later, but I can address this now. From the Trésor de la langue française’s definition of métis:
So /metis/ is the most common pronounciation. Passy and Barbeau-Rodhe apparently also recognize /meti/, but if I look at the morphological information they only mention /metis/. You can even hear someone pronounce the word by clicking on the small loud-speaker icon.
Should we try to get some Parisian French speakers to come to this thread so they can describe how they pronounce métis? Kobal2, clairobscur, someone else? If md2000 thinks it’s some sort of retarded Quebec yokel pronounciation, perhaps he’ll change his mind when some “real French speakers” come here and certify that they pronounce it the same way.
Oh, and don’t try to tell me how to speak my own language when you can’t spell Québécois or pâté de foie gras correctly.
Or my favorite obsolete profession: Romanian-Moldovan translator. One quick and dirty way of distinguishing between languages and dialects is that the former have national states and armies.
I’ll reiterate - sarcasm is lost on some people. In case it went over your head, I was making fun of the Parisian French institutions’ self-importance, not Quebecois. The Pa Clampett reference was to point out that we have even more heavily variant forms (I assume) of North American English that nobody seems to give a second thought about, because due to cultural exposure - TV, Hollywood, etc. - we (or the English we) are familiar with it and it’s very understandable.
I have the experience and open-mindedness to enjoy any and many varied cultures, and the ability to make jokes about them all, especially my own culture (there’s another thread here thread on IQ and Jokes, if you’re interested). Just because I can crack jokes does not mean that I do not appreciate Quebecois French as an integral part of Canada. After all, I am neither Monnaie nor Ethnique. I just can’t figure out the damned accent marks and don’t have the right keyboard. *Mon Oncle Antoine *was a fascinating slice-of-life film when I saw it in high school, and I bought the DVD several years ago. I’ll have to watch it again to see “local” pronunciation, but my high-school level French is such that unless it’s television announcer pronunciation, I often need subtitles.
I lived several decades in the heartland of the Metis and heard the term frequently, and oddly enough it was pronounced without the final “S”, often by the representatives of the Metis Federation when on the news. The very first cbc.ca radio clip I find when searching for Metis, the announcer pronounced it without the final “S”. So I guess the CBC adopts the Parisian pronunciation to be formal - no surprise.
This goes to my basic point - the choice to speak in a dialect or accent when you have the ability to speak the formal generally accepted world-wide “standard” language (I won’t be funny and say “real”) is in itself a statement and part of the message.
Interestingly (well, to me), according to a guy I know who was a Peace Corps Volunteer in Moldova, Moldovans do not pretend that their language is unique, and a lot of them would actually like to unify with Romania. They mourn being ripped away from the Mother Country by the Soviets.
I’m French and never ever heard here someone pronounces métis without the s, including people who work on anti-racist/diversity issues, or who are themselves métis.
Heck, the dictionnaire de l’académie française stresses:
(1)MÉTIS (s se fait entendre), -ISSE adj. XIIIe siècle, mestis. Issu du latin mixticius, « né d’une race mélangée ».
And Croat-Serbian-Bosnian translators. I think the problem with that language is that it was called Serbocroat (or Croatoserbian) instead of the more neutral Yugoslavian.
Serbo-Croatian. Calling it “Yugoslavian” would be a bit confusing, since all the languages spoken in the former Yugoslavia are not mutually intelligible. Macedonian being at least one outlier.
As was pointed out to you, the “formal” French pronunciation uses the final S, just like the Quebec pronunciation does.
Of course, cbc.ca is an English website, and “Métis” is usually pronunced without the final S in English. The (correct) English pronunciations of borrowed French words are not a good guide to how those words are pronounced (or even spelled) in French.
OK, which bring up the peripheral interesting question, why? I might see English saying “May-tiss” instead of “Meh-Tiss”, english pronunciation being what it is, but why do English adopt a French pronunciation that is not correct in French?
