Home > Arts & Humanities > Languages > French Language
Results so far:
| Yes | 29% | 261 votes | Total: 892 votes | |
| No | 71% | 631 votes |
Yes
Created on: March 24, 2008
As individuals, the French do not have better language skills than other citizens of other countries. However, there are some fundamental differences between the way French society considers its language and the way anglophone countries treat their language.
The French academy, as an institution, is there to regulate French usage, and acts as a censor of words, especially those which come directly from English. Therefore, where the Oxford English dictionary tends to include new words according to usage, the dictionary published by the French academy (which is rarely used by the general public - we tend to use the Larousse or the Robert dictionaries) banns some words despite strong usage.
We might think that such a tendency to keep the language "pure" would help its evolution, not tainting it with foreign influences which might distort the language. But that argument doesn't stand when we consider language as a living thing. Something that people use all the time, and which changes with the different needs of the population.
In English institutions, the rule has always been to include foreign influences in order to enhance the language, and make it as universal as possible. This probably greatly helped English to become a widely spoken language.
In French institutions, as well as in Quebec, the rule has mostly been to preserve the language. But doesn't preservation mean that what we preserve is ultimately dying?
Fortunately, the French speakers are far off from the French academy, and use diverse and eclectic vocabulary. Between "verlan" slang and English words that have been converted into French, there is a wide choice to let the French language live and be as close to its society's identity. Yes, it is true that some verb tenses are dying because they are not used anymore (such as the past tense of the subjunctive form - "imparfait du subjonctif"). This might be detrimental to the richness of the language. However, some words that come from English are taken into the French language, but ironically belonged there from the very beginning since their origin comes from middle French! The dialog between languages, this capacity to steal and borrow words is fascinating!
Let's not forget the French spoken in Africa, which also mixes various influences and creates a rich, full french language, which go beyond the rigid rules of ancient institutions such as the French academy.
French is a somewhat rigid language, partly because of its institutionalization with the french academy. But, the French speakers seem to love their language, enough to accept foreign influences and incorporate them in the fabric of French.
Learn more about this author, Manu L.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Created on: January 10, 2012
If the language skills of a nation were to be measured by the percentage of its population who speak a foreign language, the answer in the case of France would certainly be that, yes indeed, they do have better language skills than many other countries. The foreign language skills of the French, and the native speakers of many other nations, are born out of a necessity to be able to communicate in English, which is, for now, the world’s foremost international language. However, there are many ways of measuring language skills, and the ability to speak English as a foreign language is only one of them.
Consider, for example, the relative complexity of each of the world’s languages, and the difficulties each one poses for its own native speakers. Imagine being a child learning to speak Xhosa, the African ‘click’ language, for example, or Estonian, with its fourteen noun cases putting Latin’s six into the shade. The citizens of either of these countries might well be considered to have greater language skills than the general population of France, simply because they have mastered their native tongue.
Generalization is, in any case, a dangerous practice. Clearly a French professor of linguistics is very likely to have better language skills than a German hotel porter or even a US nuclear physicist. However, either of these latter two may well have acquired the ability to speak or read many languages in the course of both work and leisure. It would be much more revealing to examine the education system of various countries to find out whether foreign languages as well as the grammar of the native language are a standard part of the school curriculum. A detailed investigation might reveal the age at which formal study of native language grammar and foreign languages typically begins, how many languages are offered and the number of weekly hours and school years usually devoted to them. Only then would it be possible to truly say whether the general population of a single nation, such as France, is likely to have greater language skills.
Anecdotal evidence or personal observations about language skills are usually confined to the expertise demonstrated by individuals or a small group, who are not representative of the general population. The French people one is likely to encounter traveling outside their own country, for example, will probably have taken the trouble to learn another language because, unlike native English speakers, they do not expect that foreigners will be able to speak their own language. So they may appear to have greater language skills than either a stay-at-home or a linguistically arrogant English speaker. However, a French person on home ground is a different kettle of fish altogether, possibly declining any knowledge of foreign tongues until the visitor makes at least some attempt to communicate in French.
In spite of the attempts of eugenicists and racists of previous centuries, it has never been scientifically proven that any ethnic group within the species homo sapiens has greater intellectual ability than any other. In any case, as a result both of France’s colonial history and the more recent mobility of the world’s peoples, the population of France is multi-racial and multi-ethnic. If it is not possible to say that any single nation or race has a claim to greater intelligence, how much more difficult will it be to say that the people of France, or any other country, have something as specific as better language skills?
Language skills are not innate but are acquired through education. Educational standards and curricula, particularly with regard to the teaching of language, can vary greatly from country to country. Skill in language can refer to proficiency in one’s native tongue as well as to the ability to communicate in one or more foreign languages. Linguistic expertise is more easily observed and measured in individuals rather than in national groups. For all of these reasons it is virtually impossible to make any assumptions about the relative language skills of the French when compared with other nations, and it is more prudent to say that, no, the French do not have better language skills than other countries.
Learn more about this author, Rosetta Taylor.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.