weinstein 1989 - francophonie

7/27/2019 Weinstein 1989 - Francophonie

1/14

, ..52 Manfred Henningsen

(

Hitler's Secret Conversations, 1941-19441961 With an introductory essay by H.R. Trevor-Roper, New York: Signet.Kasaipwalowa, John1972 Priorities in Melanesian Development: The Sixth Waigani Seminar .Port Moresby (PNG).Krauth, Nigel .1978 Politics and Identity in Papua New Guinea Literature, in: ManaReview,2.2.

Levine, Lawrence W.1977 Black Culture and Black Consciousness: Afro-American Folk Thoughtf rom Slavery to Freedom. New York: Oxford University Press.Mller-Hill, Benno1984 Todliche Wissenschaft. Die Aussonderung von Juden; Zigeunem undGeisteskranken 1933-1945. Hamburg: Rowohlt,. Nek itel, Otto M:-' - -1980 Language Planning in Papua New Guinea: A Nationalis t Viewpoint.Paper presented a t Linguis ti c Soc ie ty of Papua New Guinea Conference,Lae, PNG 1980.Report on the conference1984 Pacific languages: directions for the future. Held in Vila, Vanuatu,August 27-30 1984. Vila: Komuniti Printeri, for the Pacific LanguagesUnit, Univers ity of fue South Pacifico

Stevens, W.K.1985 Language Gap Grows For Black Americans, in: The lntemationalHerald-Tribune. Paris Edition, March 20.Thiong'o, Ngugi Wa1972 Homecoming: Essays on African and Caribbean Literature, CultureandPolitics. London/lbadan/Nairobi: Heinemann.von Polenz, P .1967 Spr achpurismus und Nationalsozialismus, in : Germanistik-eine deutscheWissenschaft. Beitrage von E. Lammer t-W. Killy-K.O. Conrady-P.v. Polenz. Frankfurt: edition suhrkamp.Waiko, John1972 The Place.of-Lterature n Papua New Guinea Education, in: Kovave:A Journal of New Guinea Literature, 4.1.Writersin Society1981 in: South, November.

Francophonie: purism at the internationallevel

Brian Weinstein

Francophonie is an in ternational language movement led by govern-men t and nongovernment el ite s in over thirty countries where Frenchis official or used by a significant population. The maintenance andextension of a standard spoken and written French language purifiedof unacceptable English language borrowings and loca l idiosyncraciesis one general goal. The other is the maintenance and extension ofFrench as an official or co-official language. For the most militantsupporters the corpus and status goals are inseparable. The move-ment, which is now two decades old, draws strength frorn the factthat it serves important but varying and sometirnes contradic torydomestic and external political, economic and social inte rests of allparticipants some of whom are relatively indifferent to the issue ofpurismo Those who contribute most to Francophonie and seem toga in the most from it live in Quebec Province of Canada and France.

Aspects of purismAccording to Wexlen (1974:2) purism] is an effort to "purge thelanguage of.clernents oonsidered to be nonnative ... " and nonstandard.Francophne purism did not emerge in reaction to a vague sense .ofdrift but, rather, frorn a perception of a conscious external attack omthe French language and its status from nonnative and nonstandardvarieties. Where is the attack coming from? Wexler (1971: 346) des-cribes how excessive borrowing' and the increasing use of a "rivalwritten form" lead to "the native speaker's fear that his languagecould be d isplaced as a politically recognized language of the cornmu-nity (and hence replaced by another language) ... " For the Flemishin Belgium (but not in the Netherlands) French is the rival; for thei rAfrikaner cousins in South Africa English is the rival. For 'Frenchthe writ ten r ival is English,


2/14

54 Brian WeinsteinTheorists of purism explain that the threat can also come from theow varie ty of language in a diglossic.situation, The user of the Highvariety fears that the Low variety will alter and ultimately re placerus own. Defenders of written Arabic who have felt challenged bythe spoken dialect forms used by lower classes are an example. Forthe French, the Low variety is the regional language such as Breton;in Quebec it is 'joual." In Africa it is Wolof, Pular and a host of other

languages plus local variet ies of French; in Haiti it is Creole.Replacement of one written prestige language by another is perceivedas changing the ethnic or national identity of the society, Replacemenof a High variety by a Low variety is seen as a loss in control ayerthe society by one class. Each change aIters the defining symbols of thesociety and affects access to power, wealth, and prestige.Purists know the enemy very well. As a result, there is probabfno such thing as absolute purism - only purism with respect to{he challenging languzgc. Reportedly, Catalan purists who struggleagainst Castilian inf luence, accept English borrowings. Greek de-fenders of Katharevusa could accept the French word for "tea"in order to remove the Demotic word for it (cf. Mirambel1964:4l5).What should be called "selective closure" is also at work among Frenchpurifiers who do not object to the study of German and are increasinglywilling to accept some contributions to the French lexicon from Lowvarieties of language as long as French dominance is assured. As Wexler(1974: 11, 32) points out, this apparent inconsistency is due to thenon-linguistic motivations behind pur ist movements. German is nowless of a threat than English beca use Germany is in no position tothreaten France polit ica lly or cul tura lly; Germany is France's mostimportant trading partner, and cooperation between the two countrieswithin the European EC0mHlliC Community is seen as mutually _. "~.beneficial and essential to peace and development. Wolof in Senegal

is also less of a threat than English because it has become clear thatthis African country is dependent on French assistance and becauseSenegalese people and others apparentIy feel that French is more usefulin important domains than their mother tongues. Real ization thatimportant elites outside of France are loyal to French and an under-standing that Africans and others are increasingly proud of their mother. tongues have wrenched Francophonie away from its orig inal xenophobicposture. Because America has a history since World War II of tryingto d ominate France politically; because of important economicrivalries between France on the one hand and the British and the

Francophonie: purism at the intemational level 55Americans on the other in Africa, the Middle East and Asia; and becauseof the extraordinary attraction of American popular culture, English,the instrument of American politicians, business people and singers, isperceived as the great threat. Thus, although since 1975 many suppor -ters of the movement believe that there are ways for French to coexistwith Low varieties of language, the struggle against English must beintensified.What are the specific polit ica l, social and economic interesty behindFrancophonie? For the French, their language is inseparable fromtheir identity and thus their sense of independence, which they believethey must defend vigorously since their defeat in 1940. FernandBraudel, eminent historian and member of the Acadrnie Francaise,

put it best:France is the French language. Insofar as it is no longer preeminent,the way it was during the 18th and 19th centuries, we are in thernidst of a crisis of French culture. Have we the means to reviveourselves? 1 am not sure, but 1 have some hope. The colonial empirethat we lost has rernained faithful to the French language. (Le Monde,24-25 March 1985:8)

This independence of the French colonies in the early 1960s leftFrench elites with the sense that they were being forced back intothe narrow confines of the "hexagon" or European France, therebyundermining France's ambition to be a world power which couldnot be ignored by the USA and the USSR. They also feared shrinkingmarkets because they imagined that American business and Sovietagents were poised to embark on an economic penetration cf Africa.The war in Vietnam anci {he war in Algeiia corning immediately afterthe devastating Second World War severely weakened the Frencheconomic systern .and undermined French prestige and power. Withoutdirect control over the educational systerns in the colonies, intellectuals,teachers, journalists and a large corps of former colonial officialsfeared that either English or African languages would quickly takethe place of French. Within Europe the entry of Great Britain intothe Common Market so frightened the Secretary General of theAlliance Francaise (1972: 15) that he proclaimed "England [has]certa inly decided to impose it s language on the continent."None of these dire predictions has proved to be true, but newdangers have emerged, Scientists have sounded a warning that in thedomain of advanced research, English is rapidly replacing French in


3/14

56 Brian Weinstein

(

France itself. Intellectuals at a 1980 colloquium debated the question"English, the Language of French Science?',One participant pointedout that at a 1979 meeting of physicists and chernists, held in France,73% of whom spoke French, all research papers, except for two,were presented in English (Le Monde Diplomatique, August 1980:28).Following the best Whorfian tradition, another observer comp1ainedthat French scientists could not possibly do their best work or expresstheir most cogent thoughts through English. French science wouldbe perrnanently inferior if English were used, no matter how brilliantan individual scientist might be. Furthermore, using English meantthat one was loyal to the Anglo-Saxons in this view.The prestigious Academy of Sciences published a more sober analysisin-l982-: This insti tut ion perceived a three-pronged threat to the Frenchlanguage: The first is the cultural and scientific dynamism of theUnited States of America, whose products have entered Europe, over-whelming and "weakening our cultural originality." One reason forthis, it said, is that the French government does not provide adequateresearch funds. Both the status of the French language in cultureand science and its corpus have been weakened by a subsequent mixingof French and Engl ish words producing the "franglais" which thewriter Etiemble first denounced in his vitriolic 1964 book Parlez-vous Fra nglais'i The second threat is more internal - "the result ofthe incapacity of our people to maintain the traditional.purity andstandard of their language." Blaming the laziness and carelessnessof the masses is a theme that recurs in France and in Quebec. Thethird and most serious threat is that with the further developmentof media of communication French speakers in France and Africawil1 be swamped with information, publicity and entertainment inEnglish during the coming years. Without a vital language the "genius 0(-our people" will be unab1e to express t se lf Icf. Acadmie des Sciences1982 :7-8).The Academy rejected any effort to isolate French science. Astrengthened French science must play its role in the world. Moresupport for research would be necessary; researchers must insist onusing French when they can; scientists must translate their worksinto English so that they will be known, but good journals must bepromoted as a vehicle for French articles. English articles must betranslated into French to provide access and to assist in the expansionof the French scientif ic lexicon. The Academy also insisted on theglobal aspect of the problem - an effort for French must be made

(

Francophonie: purism at the intemational level 57wherever French is an important 1anguage (Acadrnie des Sciences1982: 18-19).In Quebec, where French has been the most important language sincecolonial days, intellectual s needed no urging from France to take act ion,but they have been strengthened in their own efforts through theirties with Francophone French intellectuals and political elites all ofwhom feared that the sta tus of French in all public domains cou1d notbe assured. The entire political and cultural identity of the provincewas under attack through an attack on the French language.- As long as the approximate1y five million French speaking Qubcoiswere living in rural areas relative1y iso1ated from English-speakingcities and producing 1arge farnilies devoted to the French controlledRoman Catholic church and schools, French seemed well protectedeven though big industry and business in Montreal were controlledby native or foreign English speakers. A sense of threat ernerged whenpeople moved off the farrns into Montreal, gave up their regularpractice of religion and discovered that the urban based industriesrequired their employees to know English. They suddenly found thatas a group they were far behind other language groups in leve1 ofeducation and personal income; they found they were low on theCanadian "scale of regard."A brand new factor added to the growing political, cultural, andeconomic insecuri ty, namely the arriva1 of immigrants who spokeneither French nor English but who chose to learn English ratherthan French and to send their children to English speaking schoo1s.This development and the decline in their own birthrate convincedFrench-speaking intellectuals in the 1960s that eventually they mightbe outnumbered in their own homeland. The result wou1d be thedisappearance of Quebec's French identity and abso1ute cultural,economic and poltica! control by Anglophones.The anguish of elites sharpened when they discovered that thespoken 1anguage of many of their compatriots had evolved intoa mixture of Eng lish, slang, and French in place of what they acceptedas standard international French. Visitors from France also complalnedthey could not understand Quebec French. A book summarized thedistress: The author of Les insolences du Frere Untel accepted theepithet "joual" for the variety of 1anguage spoken by poor urbandwellers because that is how they seemed to pronounce the wordfor horse, cheval. He lamented that change in the 1anguage meanta decline in the group's status.

II

- iII

-J


4/14

58 Brian Weinstein

~.tf.

This absence of language, that joual represents, is an example ofour own non-existence, we French Canadians. We can never studylanguage enough. Language isthe focus of all meaning. Our inabilityto affirm ourselves, our refusal to look toward the future, ourobsession with the past, all that is reflected injoual which is trulyour language. (cited in Weinstein 1983:48)Some intellectuals and teachers insisted that standard internationalFrench, defined as the language of the "cultivated Paris bourgeoisie,"(Valdman 1983:668) must be used as a standard for correction inQuebec. Others 'inssted that Quebec experience dictated the accep-tance of words and some divergence in pronunciation from the Paris. standard. W!iter:. an400~ritic J acques Godbout (1975:48) complainedthat efforts to adhere rigidly to a Paris standard inhibited Quebecliterary creativity and spontaneity. The debate intensified, but everyoneagreed that language status and development goals could not be corn-pletely separated. The battle would have to take place simultaneouslyon two fronts, and all ies joined forces with the French and Qubcois.Like the Qubcois, French-speaking Belgians perceived a threatto their existence as the numerically superior Flemish speakers beganto assert their language rights and as the economy in the French heart-land of Wallonie.declined. French was obliged to giveup its previouslysuperior position officially, and people of Flemish ancestry who hadbeen using French shifted back to Flemish. In addition, linguistsworried about local Belgian expressions or "belgicismes" in theirFrench. They, too, fel t the parallel need to defend the status of Frenchwhile holding it to an international standard. An international standardwould link thern with other countries where French was used, thusgiving them a sense of strength when deaiing with tne Flernieh.In Lebanon, Hait, and in the Iormer French colonies of Africa,where educated minorities spoke French and used it in importantofficial, banking and commercial actvities, demands for the use ofArabic, Creole, and African languages became louder in the 1960s. and 1970s. Some leaders blamed school failures on the fact that Frenchhad been the medium of instruction; they said French threatenedauthentic indigenous values thus turning the French complaint aboutEnglish around; French economic and political influence was decried;and some critics said that Englishwould be more useful than French inany case. In Lebanon, French was perceived as helping insure Christiandqminance over Muslims. These complaints and demands were a directchallenge to French-speaking

oelites who were thus encouraged to

. .

Francophonie: purism at the intemational level 59

seek outside support. They also observed changes in French usageafter the departure of teachers from France and called for new waysto preserve the standard.In Louisiana, U.S.A., French had already lost its official statusto English, and two local spoken varieties of language, Cajun andCreole, incomprehensible to standard French speakers, were popularmeans of expression. In 1968, a Cornmittee for the Defense of Frenchin Louisiana or CODOFIL was founded in the midst of a generalethnic revival in the United States to promote French ethnic identi tythrough the revival of standard French as one official language. Itsfounders denounced Cajun in part icular as "red neck French" andbrought in teachers from France, Belgium, and Quebec to teachstandard French.Elites in all these countries felt personally threatened by a challengeto the status of French and by a divergence from the standard theyknew and used. They agreed with the ~rench linguist Alain Guilierrnou(1964:20) who said that only o "high quality French, free from a.collection of idiosyncracies, saved from English madness and respectfulof the rules. Only that kind of French can bring about the unity offrancophones." They also felt they could not do battle alone. Outsideassistance would be needed to insure homogeneity of neologismsand to provide money, teaehers and linguists. The French governmenthesitated to support all these efforts at the internationallevel at f irstbecause it feared accusations of neocolonialism and, in any case, hadmore faith in unilateral or bilateral efforts rather than the multilateralprojects proposed. As a result, linguists, historians, journalists, uni-versity administrators, legislators and others established nongovern-mental organizations with mernbers frcrn mcst cf these countries,Unity in favor of linguistic prcjccts, even ti it were in the form ofnongovernmental organizations would, rnany thought, encourage a webof contacts which would eventually lead to assistance of a fmancialand even political nature. Franee, Belgium and Quebec could supplyessential support. From the perspeetive of France a sense of l inguisticunity would help the French in their dealings with fellow membersof the Common Market, Ameriea and the Soviet Union. They couldclaim to speak in the name of almost 200 million people, the inhabi-tants of countries where Freneh was offieial even if only a minorityaetually knew the language. The Qubcois and Belgians, strugglingto assert or maintain their identi ties eould use the international eon-nection as a form of "oxygen," in the words of Quebec leaders.

I0 1

if

II

- . J


5/14

60 Brian weinsteinFrancophonie would give them an international identity. Recognizedoutside their countries, their position at home would be strengthened.

Institutions, organizations

(The nongovernmental organizations took on an increasing importanceas their members proposed terms to replace English terms at the sametime as, they promoted cooperation of a non-linguistic nature. TheConseil International de la Langue Francase proposed terms andgave linguist members encouragement to put pressure on their govern-ments for language legislation. AUPELF (Association of UniversitiesPartially or Entirely of French Language), founded by Qubco is,linked universities around the world and provided a framework forthe standardization of prograrns in French and French literature, forefforts to produce textbooks in areas where dependence on Englishwas particularly acute and for efforts to encourage student exchanges.The AIPLF (International Association of French Language Legislators)provided a link with the powerful.Governments created an intergovernmental francophone organi-zation, the Agence de'Coopration Culturelle et Technique or ACCT,in 1970. Altogether Francophonie is today institutionalized in over100 national, intergovernmental, private, and public organizationswhich work in partially coordinated fashion to maintain a standardFrench within their own countries and in international organizations- while promoting cooperation in politics, economics and culture amongall users of the French language. The interstate bodies work with'. local organizations. ," " "The multilateral ACCT, which atternpts to coordinate economicand cultural projects at the interstate level now boasts 30 members:Belgium, Benin, Burundi,' Central Africa, Canada, Comoro Islands,Congo, Ivory Coast, Djibouti, Dominica, France, Gabon, Guinea,Haiti, Burkina Faso, Lebanon, Luxembourg, Mali, Mauritius, Monaco,Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Seychel1es, Chad, Togo, Tunisia, Vanuatu,Vietnam, and Zaire. Six states regularly attend meetings but are notful1 members because of local opposition. They include Cameroonwhich is officially bilingual - French and English, Guinea-Bissau,Laos, Morocco, Mauritania, and St. Lucia. In order to provide fora representative from Quebec and New Brunswick without offending

(

I \


Canada, the two provinces participate as "governments" rather thanas states.The ACCT has evolved from an organization primarily concernedwith promoting French to one concerned with education problemsand general development, particularly in Africa. Beginning in 1975,this new orientation meant the promotion of African languagesalongside French as part of a larger effort to "promete and diffusethe cultures of the signatories and to intensify cultural and technicalcooperation among them" (ACCT, Convention et Chartre: 1, Art. 1).Subsequently the ACCT sponsored the introduction of modern audio-visual techniques for the teaching of Wolof and for teaching throughWolof in Senegal; it has paid for conferences on the use of Africanlanguages elsewhere alongside French; it has, run a business schoolin Bordeaux and has given subventions for the publication of materialson language and education questions in many francophone countries.It participates in rural development projects. Thus far, the ACCT, witha rather modest budget, is as far as these countries can go in institu-tionalizing Francophonie. Efforts in 1980 to set up a type of Common-wealth were aborted because of disagreement between Canada andFrance over the status of Quebec. In February 1986, 42 delegationsfrom 38 different countries finally assembled in France for the firstworldwide "Francophone Sumrnit." They agreed to intensify communi- - .cation among themselves using the most advanced satel li te and cabletelevision technology. In a book published on the eve of the conference,President Francois Mitterand reminded delegates that preserving Frenchis valuable for its own sake: "At a time of accelerating movementpushing people behind the strongest, a contrary force leads them to -cultivate their differences and to perpetuate what is unique aboutthcrnselves" (Le Monde, 31 January 1986:2) ...t\second summit tookplace in Quebec in September 1987.

Purifying effortsThese multilateral efforts are more important for maintaining thestatus of French than in purifying itfPurification ismanly a unilateraleffort by France and Quebec. France and Quebec coordinate theirresearch and proposals more closely than do any other states. Frenchexperience dates back to the thirteenth century when intellectuals

~.; , ~ ' ~ : r.~~


6/14

62 Brian Weinstein

and others promoted a standard for purposes of political and economicunity as well as for ease of communication. The debate on the meaningof "standard" has revolved around the issue of everyday usage by acertain elite or a frozen written language. The Acadmie FrancaiseIprobably represents the frozen written formo Founded in 1635fitspurpose was and is to "work with a11 the care and diligence possibleto give definite rules to our language and to make it pure, eloquent

and capable of dealing with the arts and sciences" (cited in Wolf 1983:114).It is fair to say thatfSppor ters of Francophonie rejected the slownessof the Acadernie] and moved sornewhat hesitantly toward a correctededucated usage as standard. Thus, France begarr-to create=dditionalinstitut ions to--purify the-standard by offic ial efforts. In 1966 PresidentCharles de Gau11e an d his Prime Minister Georges Pompidou createdthe Haut Comit p ou r la D f en se et l 'Expansion de I

Francophonie: purism al the intemat iona l level 63

according to the terms of the decree No. 72-19 of 7 January 1972"(Loi No. 75-1349.31 December 1975, 'relative a l'emploi delalanguefrancaise. Article 1, in JO RF 4 January 1976: 189). In other words,if the word appeared on lis t one, as provided by decrees coming outof the Haut Comit, it had to be used. lnfractions of this law wouldbe punished in the same way as fraud as ex plained in a la.w passed on1 August 1905. Moreover, alllabor contracts rnust be written in French,and they must conform to the rules concerning individual words.(Article 4). Any notice put on a public building must be written ina French free from foreign words although there may be a translationinto another la nguag e alongside the original French text. (Article 6)Any person or any organization receiving public funds must alsoabide by the rules concerning the use of pure Frenen.Ayear later Prime Minister Rayrnond Barre explained in a circularthat the parliament wanted to protect cor.sumers f rom misleadingand incomprehensible advertising or instructions. The use of foieignterms made it difficult for most Frenen people to understand. Hewas accused of weakening the thrust of the law by adrnitting theremay be no French equivalents for many words, however. He evengave examples: beefsteak, sandwich, spaghetti, toast, blue jeans, and soforth (JO RF 19 March 1977: 1483). On the other hand, the primeminister supported the use of anti-fra ud legislation to deal with in-fractions and named the persormel responsible for applying the law.Ministerial commissions had already been set up in 1972 in theMinistry of Health, the Ministry of Transportation, Minis try of PostOffice and Telecommunications, in the Office of French Radio andTelevision (ORTF) in order to pro pose words. These commissionsworked with linguists outside govemment, members of their ownstaff and others to produce lists specificaily and explicitly designento re pl ac e Eng lish words in common usage. A decree of 12 January1973 dealt with the "enrichrnent of audiovisual vocabulary" andconstruction vocabulary. A week la ter decrees conceming spacetechnology, nuclear vocabulary, and petroleum vocabulary appeared.Beginning in 1977 lists have appeared every year, wi thout regard towhich political party was in power, and these lists are fully sanctionedby the sta t e.In 1982, for example, the Ministry of Education issued wordsrelated to aerospace technology. List one or mandatory words includedcapteur for theEngliSh r em ote se nsor, epreu ve-minute for q u ic k: l ook("Terminologie de la tldtection aerospatiale" in JO RF 9 June 1982:

1

J


7/14

64 Brian Weinstein

(

5408). The Ministry of the Post Offiee and Teleeommunieationspublished a list the same month mandating canal banalis for CBor citizens band, tlmesure for telemetry, brouillage for interference(JORF 24 June 1982:5980). In 1983 the Ministry of Communicationissued a list ealled the "Enrichrnent of the voeabulary of the audiovisualand of advertising." Among the new and required words are ampli-ficateur de sonorisation for public address amplifier, baladeur forWalkman, partieularly diseouraged beeause it is a trademark, travailde terrain for fieldwork. The ministry published a very long list ofreeommended words, as well: cine-pare for dri ve- in cinema, retouren arrire for flash-back (JORF 18 February 1983: 1938).At the beginning of 1984, President Mitterand reorganized theHaut Comlt~putting mlts place a General Commissariat and anAdvisory Committee of the Freneh Language. The advisory eommitteenow undertakes studies of the use of Freneh, the Franeophone move-ment, the languages of Franee (a new feature since it is only reeentlythat any language other than Freneh has been recognized in any way),and Freneh poliey with respeet to foreign languages. The generaleommissariat has a mueh more important mission whieh is to "en-eourage and eoordinate all aetions and publie and private organizationsworking for the.spread.and defense of the Freneh language" (Deeret No.84-91 of 9 February, Article 6, in JORF 10 February 1984:555).The eommissioner specifically "coordinates work with respeet toterrninology, aetions aimed at edueation and the spread of Frenehby means other than sehool, as well as aetion in the internationalarena for the development of the use of French." (ibid.) This personhas',both status and corpus responsibilities. Like the old Haut Comit,the new eommissariat and eommittee are..attached to the offiee ofthe prime minister. -;In Mareh i8'?]the prime minister ereated a General Commission ofTerminology within the General Cornmissariat in order to speed upwork on terminology, particularly where no ministerial eommissionseemed to be active, and to eoordinate work being done in the minis-tries on language. At a meeting ealled for 28 November 1986 re-presentatives of various ministries, the Acadrnie Francaise, the newlyereated Secretariat for .Franeophonie, Larousse publishers, the non-governmental Conseil International de la Langue Francaise, theAeademy of Medicine and others diseussed the proposed sponsorat asa replaeement for the English word sponsoring. Most partieipantsseerned to approve of the new word, but it was brought to their atten-

Francophonie: purism at theintemational tevel 65tion that the Quebcois preferred commanditaire. Members expressedthe desireto maintain a high degree of eoordination with the Qubcois.Then, they agreed to aeeept sueh terms as surdose for overdose, andv tements sport for sportswear. Other words proposed by membersrequired further researeh. One rather amusing example was [un board:the Freneh Funboard Federation opposed a ehange beeause it isapparently aeeepted worldwide and beeause the world funboard eham-pionships were to take place in the Freneh Antilles in 1987.1President Mitterand ereated a third organization ealled the HautConseil de la Franeophonie to insure the partieipation of several re-presenjatives of Freneh speaking eornmunities. The purpose of theHaut Conseil is to "define the role of Franeophonie and the Frenehlanguage in the modern world .... I t distnguishesthe stakes and theurgent tasks and proposes aetions to be taken. Eaeh year, it preparesa report on the state of Franeophonie." Thus, even if there is noFreneh eommonwealth, a French organization will bring togetherrepresentatives of the Freneh-speaking world. The ehair of this bodyis the President of Franee, and the 28 members are divided amongFranee, the West Indies, Africa, the Indian Oeean, S.E. Asia, Arabeountries, Belgium, Switzerland, Canada, and Quebee. The viee ehairis the former president of Senegal, L.S. Senghor, who is now alsoa member of the Acadrnie Francaise. Other members are journalists,writers, a Nobel prize winner in ehemistry, lawyers, ret ired politicalfigures, and universi ty professors. (ef. Le Monde 18 January 1985and Deeret No. 84-171 of 12 Mareh, in JORF 13 Mareh 1984: 830)The original l is t of members did not inelude a Hait ian. After protestsfrom Haitian intelleetuals and the press of Port-au-Prinee that Hait was an outpost of Freneh eulture, a Haitian wrii.erwas added to theorganization. This gesture shows the importance aeeorded by elitesoutside France to any Franeophone organization. The Haut Conseilmet for the first time on 6 Mareh 1985 with the Freneh promisingnew support for "interfrancophone eo-operation" (Le Monde 7 Mareh1985:6).Reenforeing these trends in 1985, Belgiurn, Canada, Franee, Quebee,and Switzerland agreed to share a television ehannel broadeastingthrough ECSI, a European spaee satellite (ef. Le Monde 22 April1985 :22). Some eountries or states exehange representatives whospecialize in cultural and language matters. The Freneh eommunityof Belgium sends a "general delegate" to Paris as does Quebee (LeSoir 6 July 1985).

II,

I- 1ii- 1.j

.. . -'-.--


8/14

66 Brian WeinsteinOn its own the Quebec government has created institutions tomaintain the status of French and to purify it of foreign terms andlocal expressions which diverge signifi cantly from the educa ted Pari sstandard. Elections in 1960 brought to power a reformist LiberalParty which in 1961 created the Office de la Langue Francaise, Itsmajor purpose was to promote a French standard in Quebec basedexclusively on standard international French. The motto was to follow

France. The purpose was the removal of English and joual terms. Theystood firmly opposed to spoken Quebec usage. Although Qubcoiswanted their language to be lexically close to the French of France,they took pride in educated Quebec pronunciation (cf. Daoust 1983:23-24). These somewhat divergent tendencies be tween the governmen tand the educated poplton probably diminished the influence ofthe fitst Office. In other words, the re were signs tha t Qu bcois sawFrench as their propcrty, just as much as it was seen as the propertyof France.Law 63, passed in 1969, gave the OLF responsibi li ty for improvingthe status of French by expanding its use in both the private andpubl ic dorna ins. Fearful o f the cul tura l reviva l and a dynamic separati stmovement then deve lcping, the government of Canada made Frenchco-official with English for the whole country, insuring that federallaws and federa l court s would be bi lingua. This action al so encouragedFrench speakers to look for jobs in the federal civil service. The choiceof a Qubcois, Pierre Trudeau, as Liberal Party leader and then primeminister was made partly to undereut the separatismo Trudeau wasalso eonsidered to be an ext remely effect ive leader.Quebee eontinued to take its own initiatives. In 1972 its GendronCornmission reeommended, among other thi.~g:;,.that the only wayto safeguard Freneh was to transfcrrn it into the offieia1 language ofthe province. This legal aetion would help Francophones in theirplaees of work and would force Anglophones and "Allophones" orspeakers of third languages to learn Freneh in sehoo!. In 1974 theLiberal government responded to these reeornmendations by passingLaw 22 confirming Freneh as official and setting up a meehanismto force ehildren into the French 1anguage sehools. The law also insuredFreneh labeling of produets, French advertising, French in businessand a basic knowledge of Freneh to be lieensed - as a professionalnurse, for examp1e. The law further transformed the OLF into theRgie de la Langue Francaise whose purpose was to guard over thes tatus of French, bu t i t had corpus responsibil iti es as wel l:

Francophonie: purism at the intemational level 67Law 22 provided for the creation of terminology cornmiss ions tomake inventories of English technical terms in current use and topropose equivalents in Freneh that the Rgi e would standardizeand whose use it would make mandatory within the Administrationand within all texts and doeuments approved by the Ministry ofCooperation. (Daoust 1983: 23-24)

Departing from the attitude of the old OLF, "the Rgie declaredthat the francophones of Quebec and the Freneh were equal partnersin the matter of the evolution of the language" (Daoust 1983 :41).Since there was to be a politica! and possibly economic advantagefrom close ties with France, the Rgie and others insisted tha t Quebecand France should eoopera te as much as possible in l ingu isti c matte rs.In 1976 the separatist Parti Qu bcois took power and replaced Law22 with the Charte de la Langue Francaise, adopted as Law 101 in !977.The new legislat ion clarifi ed and st rengthened the status of Frenen asoffic ial : it f orced al l p riva te ente rprises ernploying f ifty or more personsto obtain a "Certificat de Franeisation" attesting to the fact thatFrench was being used in documents and in oral cornmunieation. NoFrench speaking worker could be denied the right to communicatein Freneh with factory owners and managers, many of whom wereAnglophones; no literate French speaking consumer would be unableto read labels, advertisements, instruet ions, street signs or cont rac ts.The Rgie was renamed Office de la Langue Franca ise which proceededto continue the idea of terminology eornmissions. The work of thesecommissions was diffused by the OLF in the form of two lists, requiredterms and recornmended terms, Diffusion took place and takes placetoday through the publicaton of broehures available to the publieand through the Official Gazette nf Quebec, Aecording to Article118 of the Charter: "Upon publieation in the Gazette Officielle duQuebec their use beeomes obligatory in texts, doeuments, s igns andposters emanating from the civil administration, and in contraets towhich i t is a party and in teaehing manuals and edueational and re-search works published in Freneh in Quebee and approved by theMinis ter of Edueation." The Charter set up a Conseil de la LangueFrancaise to undertake general studies of the language situation; andit set up the Commission de Surveillance de la Langue Francaise topunish those who failed to abide by the new law.An important extant lexical souree for the work of the OLF hasbeen the Banque de Terminologie of Quebee, created in 1974 forthe purpose of providing Freneh terms to the civil serviee, businesses

i,

tJjl


9/14

68 Br ian Weinstein

(

and schools. The Bank is actually a computer with forty terminalsarranged in different localities in the province. It works with thefederal terrninology bank. In 1982 the French set up their own com-puter containing technical terms: FRANTERM, which was linkedwith the Quebec bank, provides instant comparisons between technicalterrns and great1y facilitates efforts to adopt a common French wordin France and Quebec. Variation is still possible because the OLFrecommends that a Quebec French term may enter the Bank and maybe used legitimately if it is already widely used; if it does not affectthe accepted grammar; if it does not compete with existing Frenchterrns (Daoust 1983 :64). In other words, Quebec does not have towait for France to choose a term and, in practice, many Quebec terms- - remain with thesanctiorrofthe Ol.F'because they are perfectIy Frenchin form even though they were created in North America. The OLFalso has a telephone and postal service to answer questions aboutcorrect usage of French.Since English is a much greater threat to the status of French inQuebec than it is to the status of French in France, the OLF has pro-bably been more rigid in its refusal to accept English terms. The resultis that the French accept the word stop on signs at intersections whilethe Qubcois insist _onthe word ar rt, For CB radio the Qubcoisare supposed to use bande publique while the French accepted canalbanalis perrnitting them to continue to say CB (Bedard and Maurais1983 :443). The adoption of a new Canadian constitution with its billc:f rights has perrnitted English speakers to challenge successfully somestatus provisions of the law, and Francophones have also made thelaw .more flexible. Purifying efforts have not been affected by thesechanges (Rondeau 1983 :433).Belgium has a!so made an effort within the Francophone-populationto remove English terms, but since Flemish is the direct th'reat, Englishis often accepted as a neutral lingua franca in Belgium. From timeto time another country where French isimportant bans a non-standardor a nonnative word. When L.S. Senghor was President of Senegal,the country officially banned the expression mass media and replacedit with mediat iNew York Times I February 1976). Reportedly, thegovernment of Zaire, a former Belgian colony, has taken pains toremove Belgian French expressions from official French in favorof the Parisian standard (Nyunda ya Rubango 1985: 6).

'.', . , (--:

I

!'

Francophonie: purism al (he international level 69

ImplementationUnlike these other countries, France and Quebec have methods toenforce their purification decisions. The Qubcois are keen to forcecompliance to the use of French; the French are keen to force com-pliance to the use of a certain kind of French. Using the 1975 law andits provisions conceming the misuse of French to be a form of fraud,a nongovemmental organization brought a restaurant chain to court.The General Association of Users of French denounced the restaurantsfor using English terms to describe their dishes such as Kingfisn andBig Cheese; they claimed that because these terms were not French,Francophones would not properly understand them and thus they .could be deceived. The court fined the restaurant chain the equivalentof $370.00, and this decision, according to the press, was only oneof a series recently taken against private businesses which do notrespect the language legislation (Le Devoir 14 May 1984: 11). It is,however, difficult to believe that such a small fine will deter businessesif they consider English terms attractive and fashionable. In 1982officials of the Direction de la Consommation et de la Rpression desFraudes which is, among other things, responsible for the enforcementof the 1975 law, examined 8,442 documents and found 1,576 in-fractions (Le Devoir 21 July 1983:3).One serious problem is that many people consider enforcementof language purism to be a humorous anomaly. Even officials breakthe law, as do the media. In the French National Assembly one dputcomplained bitterly in 1984 that a television speaker had used theEnglish words sponsor and sponsoring. He demanded that this practicecease and that "they speak French on television" (Assembl Nationale,Dbats, 27 August 1984 entry 49054). Durfui~the month of July1985 France's leading newspaper, Le Monde, published a special studyon the entertainment world which it called Le Showbiz. A Frenchjournalist reported that French banks, which have been nationalized,"correspond among themselves in English or respond in that languageto some foreign customers who have written to them in French,"telecommunications enterprises have announced on large posters a"graduate training programme," and even the French Joumal Officielhas been found to use certain English words such as camping. Privatelyowned newspapers seem to make a point of ignoring prescriptions(Wolf 1983: 132). As aresult, there is a call for more legislation, evena type of 101 similar to Quebec's French (Proncel-Hugoz in Le Monde


10/14

70 Brian Weinstein7 March 1985 :6). The legislation which has already appeared is re-latively unknown in the general publico A recent survey of 204 lyceteachers in France showed they knew about the Acadmie Francaisebut that they had not heard about contemporary organizations set upto purify French. Moreover, the most popular dictionar ies, publishedby Robert, include English words in common use. Most people donot consul t prescript ive dic tionaries such as those published by theAcadmie Francaise (Wolf 1983: 131-132).The Qubecois have pro bably been more energetic about the en-forcement of the status of French under Law 101 than they havebeen about the use or avoidance of specific words. They cannot forgetthey are a srnall minority in North America, and they must protecttheir identity. Irdividual Eitizens ppear "te be more highly motivatedto report violations of the language legislation in Quebec than inFrance. From 1977 to 1983 individual citizens made a total of 15,400cornplaints to the Commission de Surveillance ccncerning the allegedlack of respect of the provisions of the law. On balance rnost businessesconformed to the law once their errors were brought to their attention,or there were compromises. One c ompany, called Warehouse agreed

to change the spelling of its name to Ouerasse, but the Park ViewRestaurant refused to Frenchify its name and "had to pay twopenalties of $500~"-Very few enterprises are actually fined, (Lvesque,in Le Devoir 28 November 1983: 3) but Francophone workers seemto know their language r ights better than ever before.Some people explicitly reject purism or particular forms of purismoIn Quebec the OLF proposed that hotels use the standard Frenchterm .comple t for the English terrn no vacan~y, and nothing at allwheri there was a vacancy. The word complet was accepted, butmanagers, accusrorned to putting up vacancysigns created the ex-pression incomplet, a legitimate French word which is not used in thisway in France (Bedard and Maurais 1983 :450). In 1981 the Senegalesegovernment rejected the CLAD (Centre de Linguistique Appliqude Dakar) method of teaching French which was designed to drawSenegalese pronunciation close to standard French. French speakersof Louisiana reject efforts to purify their language of Cajun expressions.Stanley Along found in a study of automobile technical schools inQuebec that although students were increasingly aware of new Frenchterms, they preferred to continue using "a mixture of English andFrench terms set in a French linguistic structure." The main reasonis that English continues to be important for these students because I

, 1


i1-

their favorite magazines are in English and many new automotivedevelopments around the world are described in the English language.They want to be "au courant" (Along 1982:47, 68). The continuingpopularity of Anglo-American te levision, magazine s and music putsa brake on terminological purity, and the purif iers know it. The classeswith the most prestige in Quebec and in other Francophone countriesfollow these media and pay less attention to purism than the supporter sof Francophonie wish.Another problem affects cooperation among Francophone areasand that is an alleged superior attitude by the French. Some Qubcoisbel ieve the egoism of Paris ian intel lectuals inhibi ts the reading of booksproduced by Qubcois or Haitians or Senegalese. During a meet ingof the World Congress of French Teachers in 1984 participants "de-nounced the 'cultural and li terary imperialism' of France, which forr-esother francophone countries to study only French authors" (Le Devoir17 July 1984: 8). What they meant is partly that French publishersseem uninterested in publishing and promoting bccks from Canada,Belgium, Haiti and Africa. Because the works of French authors areeasily available, schools outside France are tempted to depend on themexclusively, particularly in their French language and literature pro-grams. The Quebec Minister of Cultural Affairs took.advantage of hisattendance at the meeting to denounce the idea of one standard in-ternational French. He asserted "the need to conserve linguistic andcultural particularisms of each francophone country and no longer topromote a unificat ion of the means of communicat ion." (ibid.)Many supporters of Francophonie are sensitive to these cornplaints;and their growing understanding of the need to maintain and strengthenAfrican languages - partly to avoid the accusation of cultural im-per ialism - has encouraged them to undertake projects showing thatthe French do not wish to domnate Francophonie. African additionsto French vocabulary and Africanisms in French are being collectedand published (Brann 1983). In 1984 the Bordas publishing companyproduced a three-volurne Dictionary 01 French Language Literatures(plural) which helped legitimize French literature produced outsideFrance for the French literary publico Authors from France, Belgium,Switzerland, Quebec, Africa, the West Indies, North Africa, Egypt,and Lebanon were incJuded (Le Monde 21 March 1985: 18). Linguistshave collected regional expressions within France, and the ConseilInternational de la Langue Francaise has published them (Bguin, inLe Dev-oir 9 September 1980). The popular Petit Robert dictionary


11/14

72 Brian Weinstein

(

has a lready accepted some regionalisms as well as words from Belgiumand Canada. For example, they accepted a Belgian word for beer,gueuse (Le Devoir 14 Septernber 1977: 13).In those countries where French is not the mother tongue of themajority of the population supporters of Francophonie now say the"national languages and French must coexist in a complementary way,rather than in opposition, in a11 domains of life" tR evue des Parle-mentaires de Langue Francaise 1982,46: 15). This is in par tial responseto the call for [he use of mother tongues in education which is in-creasingly heard. In 1983, the Afr ican ministers of education in French-speaking count ries produced a "Methodology for the formation ofteachers in charge of the teaching of na tionallanguages." Meetings in1984 in Senega=and -Gabon, two countries very closely allied withFrance, called for African languages as media of instruction, at leastat the primary school level (Srninaire sur les Langues Nationales1984). Local pressures which include high rates of school fai1ure arepartia11y responsib1e for the new rhetoric, but results from the use ofAfrican or other national languages in Senegal, Guinea, and Madagascarhave not been promising. Guineasuddenly switched back to Frenchfrom African languages in 1984, and Madagascar, which proclairneda type of cultural revolu tion 10 years ago, is now increasing the studyof French in schools.

Other endogenous languages:-( Since the symbolic Deixonne Law of 1951, French regional languageswithin France itself. have -been giverrslightly more sta tus. Frorn thesymbolic teaching of Breton for one hour a week these languages havebeen given more time and attention. In 1985, the French government

created a National Council for the Languages and Cultures of Franceto advise the government and to coordinate activities promoting re-gional languages and languages of large rninorities without a regionalbase. The first category includes Basque, Breton, Alsatian, and thesecond includes Arabic (cf. Bernstein, in New York Times 18 August1985 :6E). In 1985 the government also announced that futuresecondary school-teachers, who need the CAPES or Certificat d' Aptitudeau Professorat de I'Enseignement de Second Degr, can offer the Bretonlanguage as a specialty at the same level as other subjects su.ch as French

Francophonie: purism at the intemationallevel 73or hi story. This action wiI l permit job openings for students who haveadvanced degrees in Breton language and li terature. However, theBreton teachers must al so have another specialty in the event thereare not enough students to study Breton. Other languages will soon beadded (Proncel-Hugoz Le Monde 9 August 1985: 15).These innovations are quite extraordinary in the heretofore highlycentralized state and culture in France, but some observers point outthat the reason may be the decline in the numbers of people whospeak the regional languages and thus the weakened threat to Frenchsupremacy (cf. Destrade, in Le Monde, 12 June 1985:2; Jacob andGordon 1985: 129). These 1anguages would be perceived as harmlessfolklore.

I\

1I ResultsThe results of the work on the corpus of French have probably beenmost vis ible in off icial documents, in books published with governmentmoney and in contacts in which the state is one party in both Franceand Quebec. The spoken language has not been very much affected,_1 suspect. Most interesting is the loyalty to French which has be comeclearer since Francophonie began, and this probably surprised theFrench people, lt is also essential to know that this loyalty is oftenexpressed to a local varie ty of French which shares a standard grammarbu t di ffers in pronunc iat ion and in some lexica l fea tures. In Cameroon,Senega l and Ivory Coast speakers of loca l varie ti es of French recognizethe differences and are loyal to them: "The French of Senegal hastherefore become .a concrete l inguis tic reality. This is to say that itcan be descr ibed and analyzed" (Dumont 1983: 192).Another possibly unexpected result of Francophonie is that coun-tri es like Guinea, which a decade ago rejected French as a mediumof instruction in primary schools and then returned to French, knewthey would receive help because of the francophone movement. Acertain in frastruc ture exists because of the movement.Purism efforts have intensified language consciousness in someenvironments although this does not seem to be true in France, asstated above. Whether the deba ters agree or disagree, the deba te abouta s tandard intemational French versus local var ieties has helped increasethe sense of francophone identity among francophone minorities.


12/14

74 Brian WeinsteinThe sense of a worldwide debate and thus a worldwide self-consciousFrench speaking community - no matter how loosely linked - hasencouraged French speaking minorities in Switzerland, NorthemItaly, Canada, Belgiurn, and the USA to assert identities and demandrights. The personal status of individual French speakers in Quebechas changed; French schools are stronger; the requirement that Frenchspeakers know English to get good jobs has declined in Quebec (Maurais1984:9). In this province more Anglophones and Allophones arelearning French, and jo b opportunities for French speakers in rnanage-ment have opened. The wage gap between English speakers and Frenchspeakers has narrowed as French speakers now occupy some of thehighest posts in private enterprises which must conduct their businessin French (Descteaux in Le D evoir 22 October 1983: 1). "Between1976 and 1982 the percentage of allophones studying in French inthe [primary and secondary schools 1 jumped from 18% to 45% ... "(Proulx , in Le D evoir 28 Sepfember -1983: 1) ~V~:1 though at the un-versity level the English largUige-insfitutions are most popular.Some linguists do not-beleve- there has been an improvement inthe status or the corpus- of-French, (Castonguay 1984). They are ex-asperated with compatriota who stilI use-English; they disdain popularchoices of entertainmen!;.i.t!1~~.,.,s:!airnto know what is best for themasses. The Quebec ligutst:MJcner:Arnyot presented a paper onlanguage planning in,.Qux~b-ec~a.ti!haJh WorId Congress of the Inter-national Association o~Applie~::LingUistics in 1984. He admittedthat his data showed anincrease i n " French use in factories and otherenterprises, but he was dismayed that francophones respond in Englishin shops and in the administration if thy are addressed in English.In other words, they are more govemed by their own rules of courtesythan by language ideclcgy. Ile blamed ordinary pecple for watchingEnglish .language 'prcgrams on television and for not using the pureFrench proposed by the Office de la Langue Francaise. He said thepeople must develop more loyalty to French, and he begged them tobe vigilant. Suspicion of the masses and a sense they are easily misledis typical of many purist ideologues, and there is an element of itin Francophonie (Arnyot 1984:7, 10, 18, 21). A 1986 poli of Frenchpeople showed great support (88%) for the idea that the Frenchlanguage should be developed in the world but very little support for orknowledge about francophone organizations (IPSOS 1986: 12, 16, 30).What are the tangible results of Francophonie in non-linguisticterms? Reaching the purely linguistic goals - even in part .- will be

"Francophonie: purism at the intemationallevel 75

inadequate motivation for maintaining a long term loyalty to French,or a certain kind of French. Francophonie has facilitated culturalexchanges between Quebec and France but has not provided manyjobs. From 1968 to 1985, 5,000 professors and more than 50,000students and young people have crossed the Atlantic either towardFrance or toward Quebec for visits, study missions, conferences,and so forth. During the same period there was no upsurge in thepurchase of Quebec books or television programs by the French al-though the Qubcois purchased French cultural products (de LaGrange,in Le M onde 7 March 1985 :7). One problem is that private Frenchbusinesses have not been swayed by francophone ideology and havecontinued to invest where they are sure of making a profit. However,after the nationalization of the Pechiney aluminum company a decisionwas made to build a huge aluminum plant in Quebec. Other possibilitiesare being investigated, but in the meanwhile the RenauIt companyannounced it was cIosing its only operation in Quebec. The econornicbenefi ts of Franccphonie to Quebec have not been very impressive,and over the years efforts have been made to improve them. In 1986,Michel Aurillac, Minister of Cooperation, called for the creation ofan industrial network among French and African private enterprises(de LaGrange, in Le Mond e 23 May 1986:4 cf. also Le Monde 18September 1986:2). France maintains a favorable balance of tradewith all but one or two of the French speaking states of Africa whileWest Germany and the USA are becoming more important importersof African goods. The Haitian economy is dominated by North America,and the United States is also Quebec's and Canada's single most im-portant trading partner.Unempioyrnent in France and growing racisrn directed mainly atblacks have disturbed workers and students from francophoneAfrican states. Francophone organizations are not in the forefront ofthe effort to combat racism although other organizations are strugglingto fight this disease. An example of the inability of linguisticallybased organizations to deal with very basic problems is the Inter-national Association of Francophone Mayors which met in July 1985in Kinshasa, Zaire. Twenty-six countries sent representatives showingthe hope they have for this organization. Mayors from very poorcities asked for help from the mayors of rich cities, but other thana few exchange visits, a few scholarships, what could be done, a Frenchjournalist asked: .


13/14

76 Brian WeinsteinOuld Cheikh Ahmed, governor of Nouakchott (600,000 inhabitants)begged Mr. Chirac [mayor of Paris) to help him crea te municipalservices which, as yet, do not existo The mayor of Paris promisedto send to Mauritania a 'high level envoy.' (Ambroise-Rendu, inL e M on de 28-29 July 1985)

Such a gesture is practically useless.

The future?(

(

Although France is by far the most important francophone state, itsown economic limitat ions prevent i t from providing the huge amountof aid that several states in Africa appear to need. Eventhough 1acquesChirac cannot resolve the problems of the capital of Mauritania, theleaders of that African state know that France maintains a long-terminterest in their country - while other European or North Americancountries do not - in large part because of Francophonie. That in-terest may from time to time make the difference between survivaland economic or political collapse. Even though France and Canadacannot offer to Hait i what the USAcan offer, belonging to francophoneorganizations gives the government a little leverage, room for maneuverand a small window to a world beyond the English and Spanishspeaking Caribbean. If support for Francophonie is a price for thatwindow, it is a very reasonable price to pay, and they will supportit as long as it is not too-rigid or purist.Ar ' increasing number of supporters of Francophonie are reforrnu-lating the language corpus and status goals in more modest ways.Not everyone agrees, but the voices are important ones. First, theyrealize that even those Francophones with mother tongues otherthan French are very loyal to French because of solid interest and anintangible affection. Second, they realize it is impossible to maintain arigid spoken standard French all over the world, and they are suggestingthere be a "teaching standard" to serve as the basis of standard inter-national French.Pronunciation would be less standard so that peoplewould never be ashamed of local variations which are inevitable inany case (Dumont, citing Corbeil, 1983:250-251). This a1so meansthe expansion of educational systems so that more children and adultsare exposed to French. More than anything else the emphasis should

Francophonie: purism at the intemationaJ level 77be placed on standard grammar, according to Valdman, who doubtsthat there will ever be mutually incomprehensible varieties of French(Valdman 1983:700). These suggestions by Corbeil, Dumont, Valdmanand others willnot please the rigid purists who dispair at any variation.Decisions about the medium of instruction in schools are moreimportant in the short run than purism decisions. As troublesomeas bil ingual education seems to many, i t is emerging as an acceptablesolution in those countries where French is not the mother tongue:the question then is where French and where Wolof, Arabic, Creole,Vietnamese? Even in Belgium and Quebec where French is a mothertongue, learning English and Flemish are obviously important forpersonal advance and national harmony. Purist ideologies, like otherideologies, must compromise with reality in order to be taken seriously.Francophonie is in the process of compromising and that is a sourceof its vitality. By sharing its status as official with otherlanguages thecorpus of French is bound to be influenced by these languages asit wil l continue to absorb English words. The struggle for a more purecorpus will continue at the international and national levels. but thelikely effect is to ensure the status of French as an official tongue andas an important method of international communication.

Not el. M. Lo c Depecker of the General Commissariat generously gaveme a copy ofthe minutes of the meeting. For the decree creatingthe Commission, seeJORF,16March 1986, p. 4255.

ReferencesAcadmie desSciences1982 Rapport de l'Acadmie des Sciences su r la langue francaise et la

rayonnement de lasciencefrancaise . Pars.Along, Stanley1982 "The role of the technical school in the knowledge and use of pre-scribed automotive te rminology arnong students in Quebec, Canada."lntemational JoumaJ of the Sociology of Language38 :4570.AIlianceFrancaise1972 "Allocution du Prsident et Rapport du Secrtaire Gnrale Sur laSituation d'Ensernble-Anne 1971." Assernble Gnrale, 26 March,p.15.


14/14

78 Brian Weinstein

. " . : .;

Arnyot, Michel1984 "La planification linguist ique qubcoise - bilan et orientation."Unpublished paper. Presented at the 7th World Congress of the In.ternational Association of Applied Linguistics, 7 August 1984, inBrussels.Bedard, Edith, and Jacques Maurais1983 "Rflections sur la normalisation linguistique au Qubec." Pp, 435.459 in Edith Bedard and Jacques Maurais (eds.), La norme linguistique.Quebec: Government of Quebec; Paris: Le Robert.Brann, C.M.B.1983 "French Lexicography in Africa: A Three-Dirnensional Project."Joumal of Modem African Studies 20(2):353359 .Castonguay, Charles1984 "The Anglicisation of Canada, 19711981." Unpublished paper.Presented at-the- 7th World Congress-of the International Associationof Applied Lnguistics, 5-10 August 1984, in Brussels.de Charnbrun, Noelle and Anne-MarieReinhardt1980 "Lascience en patois." Le Monde Diplomatique (August) p. 28.Daocust, De;L;,t;1982 "La planification linguistique au Qubec: Un apercu des lois sur ialangue." Revue Qubecoise de Linguistique 12(1): 9-75.Dumont, Pierre

1983 Le francais et les langues afraicaines au Senegal. Paris: Agence deCoopration Culturelle et Technique and Karthala.Godbout, Jacques, __. o1975 Le reformiste: Textes tranquilles. Montreal: Quinze.Guillermou, Alain1964 "La Fdration Intemationale pour la Sauvegarde et l'Unit de laLangue Francaise." Culture Francaise (2): 16-28.IPSOS1986 Les Francais et la Francophonie . Report prepared for Haut Conseilde la Francophonie. Paris: Ipsos.Jacob, Jarnes E., and David C . Gordon1985 "". -tangucge Poiicy in France." Pp. 106-133 in Williarn R. Ber andJames E. Jacob (eds.), Language Policy an d National Uniiy . Totowa,N.H.: Rowman and Allanheld.Maurais, Jacques1984 "Le bilinguisme de masse au Qubec." Unpublished paper. Presentedat the intemational symposium on "Problrnes de glottopolitique,"20-23 Septernber 1984, in Rouen.~ambel,Andr1964 "Les aspects psychologiques du puri sme dans la Grce modeme."

Journal de Psychologie Normale et Pathologique (4) (Oct-Dec): 405-436.Nyunda ya Rubango19085 "Le francas au Zaire: Langue 'suprieure' et chanees de 'survie ' dansunpays africain." Unpublished ms.

Francoph oni e: purism at the intemational levet 79Rondeau. Guy1983 "La normalisation linguistique, terminologique et technique auQuebec." Pp. 415434 in Edith Bedard and Jacques Maura is (eds.),

La norme linguistique. Quebec: Government of Quebec; Pars: LeRobert.Srninaire sur les LanguesNationales1984 "Dialectique des langues nationales et etrangre s." Unpublished do-cument. Prepared for Srninaire sur les LanguesNationales, 7-9 June,1984. Dakar: EcoleNormale Suprieure de Dakar.Valdman, Albert1983 "Normes locales et francophonie." Pp. 667-706 in Edith Bedard andJacques Maurais (eds.). La norme linguistique. Quebec: Governmentof Quebec; Pars : Le Robert.Weinstein, Brian19 83 The Civic Tongue: Political Consequences of Language Choices. NewYork: Longman.Wexler, Paul N.1971 "Diglossia. Language Standardization and Purism: Parameters fcra Typology of Literary Languages." Lingua 27 :346-354.1974 Purism and Language: A Study in Modem Ukrainian and E ; ! . : ; :- :ssianNationalism (1840-1967). Bloomington: Indiana UniversityPress.Wolf, Lothar1983 "La normalisation du Iangage en France: De Malherbe a Grevisse."Pp. 105-137 in Edith Bedard and Jacques Maurais (eds.), La normeIinguistique, Quebec: Government of Quebec;Paris: Le.Robert.

,jJ

weinstein 1989 - francophonie

Documents