From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance for this Project's importance scale.

Contents 1 Canadian English 2 Charter of the French Language 3 Much to cover 3.1 English-French bilingualism 3.2 Knowledge of French 3.3 Knowledge of English 3.4 French mother tongue 3.5 English mother tongue 3.6 Serious work 3.6.1 Individual bilingualism 3.6.2 Institutional bilingualism 3.7 Help 4 Merge, Delete or Major Overhaul 4.1 A picture of a bilingual sign

[edit] Canadian English

The artical Canadian English, is not mentioned in this artical or Language in Canada. Can it be useful? Cafe Nervosa | talk 17:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Charter of the French Language

Nice cleanups today -- thanks. I wonder, though, if we should still put "Bill 101" in parentheses after "Charter of the French Language", since the latter name is not well known, at least not outside of Quebec. -- Dpm64 00:20, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sure, I agree. But I'll make it "so-called Bill 101", because bills cease to be bills after they're passed, and bill numbers are reused in later legislatures. Indefatigable 02:45, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Perfect -- thanks for making the change. Dpm64 14:26, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Much to cover

There is much to cover on the history of bilingualism in Canada. I was wondering if the original author wanted this article to deal with the federal policy of bilingualism in Canada since 1968 or with the much broader topic of the coexistence of a French-speaking and an English-speaking community inside Canada. The current title suggests the later.-- Mathieugp 06:20, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

We need statistics on bilingualism. The best picture of the current situation is to be found in the Atlas of Canada:

http://atlas.gc.ca/site/english/maps/peopleandsociety/officiallanguages

[edit] English-French bilingualism

http://atlas.gc.ca/site/english/maps/peopleandsociety/lang/officiallanguages/englishfrenchbilingualism

[edit] Knowledge of French

http://atlas.gc.ca/site/english/maps/peopleandsociety/lang/officiallanguages/knowledgeoffrench

[edit] Knowledge of English

http://atlas.gc.ca/site/english/maps/peopleandsociety/lang/officiallanguages/knowledgeofenglish

[edit] French mother tongue

http://atlas.gc.ca/site/english/maps/peopleandsociety/lang/officiallanguages/mothertonguefrench

[edit] English mother tongue

http://atlas.gc.ca/site/english/maps/peopleandsociety/lang/officiallanguages/mothertongueenglish

-- Mathieugp 19:11, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Serious work

If this article wants to live up to its name, it will have to be significantly expanded. Currently, the article only deals with certain laws passed by the federal government in recent years to promote bilingualism or laws that were passed against French in the past. The legal aspect of Canadian bilingualism is very important, but there is a lot more than that. Here is what needs to be covered in my opinion:

[edit] Individual bilingualism

People speaking two languages practice individual bilingualism. Historically, when speaking of French-English bilingualism in Canada, we see that it is francophones who would become bilingual. English-speakers who are fluent in English and French are a relatively new phenomenon. In the past, it was limited to Quebec where the French-speaking community is important enough to have an influence on non-francophones.

As far as individual or personal bilingualism goes, we need to consider these factors to get the measure of it:

• First language (variable level of fluency)
• Second language (variable level of fluency)
• Usage (does the person speak it at home, at work, in public? How often?)

[edit] Institutional bilingualism

Institutional bilingualism began in Lower Canada in 1792 when it was decided by the Legislative Assembly that the debates were going to be conducted in either French or English, that the Speaker of the house would have to be able to speak both languages and that the journal of debates should be written in French and English. The house also decided that the civil laws were going to be written in French and the criminal law in English, however this was overruled by the British Parliament which decided that English should be the only language with a legal value. (This is still true today in Canada. The French version of the laws still is only a translation of the official English laws except in Quebec.)

As far as the institutions of society go, we can observe bilingualism in these places:

• Language of legislation
• Language of public administration
• Language of government branches (federal, provincial, municipal)
• Language of instruction
• Language of work relations
• Language of business and commerce
• Language of public signs
• Language of media (electronic, television, radio, newspapers, magazines)

[edit] Help

When I look into this article, I'm at loss to know where to start to fix it. The first sentence is "Bilingualism in Canada refers to laws and policies of the federal government – and some other levels of government – mandating that certain services and communications be available to the public in both English and French."

Then shouldn't the title be "Institutional bilingualism policy in Canada"?

If really this article is meant to cover this subject, then I suggest we change the title. If the subject we are trying to cover is "Bilingualism in Canada", then the whole history section needs to be expanded a great deal and we need to start discussion how we are going to cover all aspects. For example, we need to cover what the linguistic situation is in each province, the various studies that were conducted by public bodies, the goals of the policies of Ottawa and Quebec, how they try to do it and the effets they have had in practice.

Then there are inaccuracies such as "These communities frequently use their own languages locally and amongst themselves, although they normally adopt the majority language of their province as a second or third language." That's not true right now in Quebec. Allophones adopt French and English 50/50 and before Quebec gave itself a language policy, it was much lower for French.

What should we do? -- Mathieugp 16:50, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge, Delete or Major Overhaul

I suggest deletion of this article with possible transfer of some of its more salient contents. Here are my reasons:

1. In this article, the notion of "Canadian Bilingualism" is in fact called "state/gov't/institutional bilingualism" or in French "bilinguisme étatique" in linguistic, government and scientific circles. The technical terms are semantically transparent and, therefore, should be used. Also, the notion of institutional/state/gov't bilingualism should not be confused with individual bilingualism and the ranges of balance between two different language proficiencies of an individual. The article drifts to individual bilingualism, which is an entirely different subject from the summary paragraph. I, personally, do not believe that these two very different forms of bilingualism should be compared in an article for they would be better linked to Language in Canada. So, "Canadian Bilingualism" should be deleted.
2. The catch-phrase "Canada is a bilingual country" has spawned numerous myths, including the myth that anywhere and anytime both of the two official languages can and will be spoken by any Canadian. The presence of a myth should not justify the existence of an article based on the myth unless that article portends that the subject is indeed a myth. Citing this lore, I am for deleting the article.
3. (To fathom my next statement, please try to view the CBC documentary "French Kiss") P.E.T's wetdream of every Canadian being Eng./Fr. bilingual was not only pretentious but also dated even at the time of its birth for one well-known reality: a huge percentage of Canadians, regardless of what generation, First-Nation or immigrant status, speak languages other than the official languages. Tens of thousands of people, respectively, are Innu-French bilingual, Chinese-English bilingual, or Spanish-French-English trilingual, or Armenian-Arabic-French-English multilingual. When you add them up, this makes _millions_ of today's Canadians. "Bilingual" is, thus, misleading when referring to Canadians. This is a third reason to do away with this article.
4. Although I haven't checked the article entitled simply "Bilingualism", I'm wondering if there might be a paragraph on Canada as a case-study particularly to show the contrast between institutional bilingualism and individual bilingualism, not to mention language minority rights. If there is no such paragraph, maybe some of the information here would be of use in writing one. This is my fourth reason for deleting this article.
5. In my book, this article seems to have a purpose other than just presenting facts. Although not explicitly political, I feel that it is trying to establish an identity or a supposed distinct feature of Canada instead of simpling summarizing a case study for either state or individual bilingualism. Bilingualism is not Canadian and Canada is not bilingualism. Holding on to either of these views leads people to imply an underlying identity issue. Also, there is no mention that Francophones as a whole are a minority within Canada, not to mention within North America. Is this a convenient oversight or just a lack of objectivity? Although not overtly violating the NPOV per se, this article does not resemble an encyclopedia article nor any other objective description of the Canadian case-study. Again, I suggest it be deleted.
6. Neither Canadian nor Quebecer, I have no identity issues at stake in this debate. However, as a researcher in sociolinguists who specializes in French/English territory and contact issues, this article has plopped itself into armchair linguistics. I therefore urge it be deleted.

Is there anyone else who'd like to work on what can be gleaned?

CJ Withers 06:11, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I would favour a renaming of the article, from Bilingualism in Canada to possibly Language policy of Canada. Otherwize, I really don't know where this article is going, and my second choice would be deletion, for reasons most similar to CJ Withers's. -- Mathieugp 19:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Echoing Mathieugp's ideas, my inclination is to salvage what we can and use it for Language Policy in Canada. I prefer "in Canada" because of provincial legislation be it fairly recent (Bill 101) or one hundred years ago (like in 1910 in the Prairies). -- CJ Withers 23:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I also agree. The confusion between bilingual policy and individual bilingualism lead to ridiculous statements like "The population of the country itself is by a large majority monolingual as only 18% of Canadians can speak both English and French." Not being able to speak both English and French does not make you bilingual, as long as you can speak some other language. -- TheMightyQuill 13:32, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A picture of a bilingual sign

It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

I've been to Canada for like alot of times, and I think a picture of a blingual sign in Canada would give good visual respresentation on the bilngualism over there. Can anyone do it, I can't do it myself because I live in Texas and I don't have a digital camera.

The best I could find in terms of bilingual English/French signage images in wikipedia or in wikimedia commons image banks was the Preston Street (Ottawa) sign that I have added to the article a few moments ago. It would be good to have a bilingual English/French stop sign for the article. --Aquarius Rising 22:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Well I would like any kind of bilingual signs. There's alot of Canadian Products in both English/French. I'm guessing we need more than just one picture to prove how much bilingualism over there is to have at least 3 pics. One being the one up already, one a road sign in both English/French, and one picture of a Canadian product in both English/French. It would be best if someone Canadian or a Canadian visitor to take a picture of the remaning 2 pictures we need.

We definetly need some pictures.... Falconleaf

The sign shown is a good example of French/English, not Italian as it indicates. The reference to "corso italia" underneath is not part of the bilingual rue/ Preston/ St. If it were, it would read "corso Preston". On another note, a good example would be the ubiquitous cereal box. 207.6.233.239 22:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)