language and accent question about Napoleon [Archive]

Louis VI the Fat

03-08-2010, 21:51

Napoléon spoke Corsu, not Italian. His family was originally from Italy, but had been living in Corsica for centuries.

Nobody spoke French at this time. :beam:
Perhaps 10%-15% percent of the population spoke French, the remainder some patois. Napoléon is exceptional for speaking French at all, for having learned it at an early age, more than for French not being his first language.

As for Napoléon not being 'real' French by virtue of distant foreign ancestry and peripheral birth: very few would qualify as Frenchman if these are the criteria, because the collection of loose territories with mutually unitelligable, or barely intelligable, languages WAS France. The Revolution came first, then the nation-state, which was created by it. Napoléon was not so much an outsider to France, as, rather, crucial for shaping a French nation. Napoléon helped make France, made it a unified nation by standardising law, education, conscription, and, above all, by spreading that most profound and prized possesion of French identity: language.

I suppose la paille au nez would've spoken English with a mixed Corsu/French accent.

Louis VI the Fat

03-09-2010, 02:28

What Napoléon sounded like, never mind his English, is difficult to reconstruct, except from what people wrote about his accent.

We do have, however, his personal writings. They help to establish his language. http://www.bmlisieux.com/curiosa/napoleon.htm

Here's a love letter he wrote to Joséphine:

Napoleon to Josephine, Spring 1797

To Josephine, I love you no longer; on the contrary, I detest you. you are a wretch, truly perverse, truly stupid, a real Cinderella. You never write to me at all, you do not love your husband; you know the pleasure that your letters give him yet you cannot even manage to write him half a dozen lines, dashed off in a moment!

What then do you do all day, Madame? What business is so vital that it robs you of the time to write to your faithful lover? What attachment can be stifling and pushing aside the love, the tender and constant love which you promised him? Who can this wonderful new lover be who takes up your every moment, rules your days and prevents you from devoting your attention to your husband? Beware, Josephine; one fine night the doors will be broken down and there I shall be.
In truth, I am worried, my love, to have no news from you; write me a four page letter instantly made up from those delightful words which fill my heart with emotion and joy.

I hope to hold you in my arms before long, when I shall lavish upon you a million kisses, burning as the equatorial sun.
See, this is why I adore him. What spirit! What a burning mind! What literature!

now to wait for Brenus, who abhors this terrible tyrant of a man...

Beskar

03-09-2010, 08:18

I love how he goes from one moment cursing her to hell, to "I shall alvish upon you a million kisses..." etc.

Azathoth

03-09-2010, 08:25

Napoleon to Josephine, Spring 1797

To Josephine, I love you no longer; on the contrary, I detest you. you are a wretch, truly perverse, truly stupid, a real Cinderella. You never write to me at all, you do not love your husband; you know the pleasure that your letters give him yet you cannot even manage to write him half a dozen lines, dashed off in a moment!

What then do you do all day, Madame? What business is so vital that it robs you of the time to write to your faithful lover? What attachment can be stifling and pushing aside the love, the tender and constant love which you promised him? Who can this wonderful new lover be who takes up your every moment, rules your days and prevents you from devoting your attention to your husband? Beware, Josephine; one fine night the doors will be broken down and there I shall be.
In truth, I am worried, my love, to have no news from you; write me a four page letter instantly made up from those delightful words which fill my heart with emotion and joy.

I hope to hold you in my arms before long, when I shall lavish upon you a million kisses, burning as the equatorial sun.

I'm pretty sure the outcome of such a correspondence today would be a restraining order.

Subotan

03-09-2010, 10:57

https://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll286/Phalanxia/Katebeaton1.png
***
https://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll286/Phalanxia/Katebeaton2.png
***
https://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll286/Phalanxia/katebeaton3.png
***
https://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll286/Phalanxia/katebeaton4.png

al Roumi

03-09-2010, 12:49

Napoléon spoke Corsu, not Italian. His family was originally from Italy, but had been living in Corsica for centuries.

Nobody spoke French at this time. :beam:
Perhaps 10%-15% percent of the population spoke French, the remainder some patois. Napoléon is exceptional for speaking French at all, for having learned it at an early age, more than for French not being his first language.

As for Napoléon not being 'real' French by virtue of distant foreign ancestry and peripheral birth: very few would qualify as Frenchman if these are the criteria, because the collection of loose territories with mutually unitelligable, or barely intelligable, languages WAS France. The Revolution came first, then the nation-state, which was created by it. Napoléon was not so much an outsider to France, as, rather, crucial for shaping a French nation. Napoléon helped make France, made it a unified nation by standardising law, education, conscription, and, above all, by spreading that most profound and prized possesion of French identity: language.

From thence (or the principles of the revolution) the French sense of social equality: everyone entitled to the same and to be the same. Very different to the British sense of social equality: everyone entitled to the same right to be different.

Napoleon(e) went to a military school, which is where he learnt the Lingua Franca (ha) of France: French.

Meneldil

03-10-2010, 10:31

Napoleon was Corsican and of Italian noble decent, so of course his native language was Italian. His family originally came from Genoa, and I have read that he started learning French at around age 9 when attending school. I also read that he never excelled at it and spoke the language with a heavy Corsican accent.

I assume he may have also spoken other languages, and did read that he learned a little English at some poiint in his formative years.

Of course, for English speaking audiences, when he is portrayed in film and TV, if his charater is speaking English, it is always with a French accent.

If he spoke English at all, wouldn't his accent have been Corcican/Italian, which was his native tongue, and not French?:inquisitive:

Tell a Corsican he's Italian and he'll probably blow up your house, your car, your dog and your office to avenge his honor :D

Strike For The South

03-11-2010, 16:49

So what did the French speak before "The Greatest Event In All Of Human History" ™ happend? German?

Flavius Clemens

03-11-2010, 17:17

So what did the French speak before "The Greatest Event In All Of Human History" ™ happend? German?

Lots of mututally incomprehesible dialects / languages.
See e.g. 'Langauge' in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Modern_France

Louis VI the Fat

03-11-2010, 17:41

So what did the French speak before "The Greatest Event In All Of Human History" ™ happend? German?In the periphery, non-Romanic languages like Flemish, Alsatian, Basque, Breton.

The big linguistic divide is that between the langue d'oïl in the north, and the langue d'oc in the South.

A bit simplified, the langue d'oc is the 'missing link' between Spanish, Italian and French. Almost a shame the Occitan languages have all but dissapeared. There is a huge cultural divide in France, separating the southern third from the rest. From the famous example of the rooftops, to the language, food and customs.

The langues d'oïl of the north are the basis of standard French. From theses languages, especially that of the Île-de-France, a standardised French was formed. Which only by the 19th century was understood by a majority of people, never mind their first language.

France was centralised to such an extent, that one would quickly forget that the linguistic divides of France are as complicated as that of Iberia. French languages differ as much as Portuguese from Castillian from Catalan. Even the oïl languages themselves differ as much as Danish from Swedish or Norwegian.

http://www.lexilogos.com/france_carte_dialectes.htm

TinCow

03-11-2010, 18:29

Napoleon was as French as Arnold Schwarzenegger is American. Both clearly originated in foreign cultures, but were so heavily integrated into their adopted culture that they actively help define it.

Louis VI the Fat

03-11-2010, 18:48

Napoleon was as French as Arnold Schwarzenegger is American. Both clearly originated in foreign cultures, but were so heavily integrated into their adopted culture that they actively help define it.Schwarzenegger? I'd say Napoléon was as French as Abe Lincoln was American.

Both had distant immigrant ancestors, both were born in the periphery of their country, in territories that had only shortly before their birth been accepted as part of their country.

TinCow

03-11-2010, 19:05

Schwarzenegger? I'd say Napoléon was as French as Abe Lincoln was American.

Both had distant immigrant ancestors, both were born in the periphery of their country, in territories that had only shortly before their birth been accepted as part of their country.

I completely disagree. Abe Lincoln was born into the dominant culture of his country. There was absolutely nothing about Lincoln that separated him culturally from the dominant American culture. You must remember that American culture did not instantly appear in 1776, it was around for far longer than that as a splinter of British colonial culture. Lincoln's ancestors came from that old British colonial splinter culture which became the American culture. Thus, even though Lincoln grew up in a provincial backwater area, he was still raised in dominant culture from the moment of his birth.

In contrast, Napoleon was born in a provincial backwater area that did not embrace French culture in any large manner. Corsican culture at that time was more closely related to Italian than French. Napoleon's parents came from Italian and Corsican cultures, not French cultures. While Corsica became part of France prior to Napoleon's birth, it was only very shortly prior to his birth and Corsican culture was still seen as foreign in France. Napoleon spoke with a non-French accent and was often mocked by his critics during his lifetime for being an outsider and a foreigner. That is not remotely like Abraham Lincoln. If you want other analogies that are more comperable, I will propose Cicero, Stalin, and Hitler.

Subotan

03-11-2010, 19:41

Austria isn't the periphery of German culture. Rather, it was the nucleus of it for quite some time.

TinCow

03-11-2010, 20:02

Austria isn't the periphery of German culture. Rather, it was the nucleus of it for quite some time.

True, all three of those additional examples are not quite appropriate for comparison with Napoleon, because their cultures of origin were more closely related to the dominant cultures they eventually became associated with. That's why I like the Arnold analogy; a clearly foreign culture that was so significant to his upbringing that it impacts his manner of speech even to this day. At the same time, Arnold has been so fundamentally embraced by American society (and worldwide perception of American society) that he is ubiquitous as an American icon, rather than an Austrian icon. That seems very similar to Napoleon to me.

Louis VI the Fat

03-11-2010, 20:19

Francophobic, anachronistic, and of decidedly non-French thought.

William the Bastard was 'really' some Viking, Jeanne d'Arc was 'really' some German, Napoleon was 'really' some Italian, and all the others who won wars were not true Scotsmen...erm...true Frenchmen either.

This loose collection of territories and tribes that was formed into a nation-state in the 19th century IS France. If not, then nobody is French, save for some nobility and the Parisian upper class.

TinCow

03-11-2010, 20:51

This loose collection of territories and tribes that was formed into a nation-state in the 19th century IS France. If not, then nobody is French, save for some nobility and the Parisian upper class.

You cannot be serious that Corsica was an integral part of France when Napoleon was born. Prior to 1764, Corsica was not remotely connected to France. It was, and always had been, oriented towards and ruled by various Italianate and Roman peoples. The Corsicans themselves actively fought a war to maintain their independence from France, and were only defeated a few months before Napoleon was born. Corsica may be an integral part of France today, but it most certainly was nothing of the sort in August 1769. As for Napoleon himself, it is a fact that Napoleon did not learn to speak French until he was 10 years old, and he spoke with a Corsican accent for his entire life. If he qualifies as part of French culture at the moment of his birth, I qualify as a kumquat.

Louis VI the Fat

03-11-2010, 21:23

TinCow

03-11-2010, 21:32

Are Americans who were born in the 1850's in Texas, Florida or California not American because these states were Spanish/Mexican shortly before they were born? Surely these states were, and always had been, oriented towards and ruled by various Mexicanate and Hispanic peoples?

It depends on the person. Many would qualify as part of American culture, but many would not. I don't think that analogy is accurate in any case, because all three of those areas were heavily colonized by American-culture immigrants prior to their entry into the Union. A better comparison is to Louisiana or Hawaii. Most people born in those states 5 years after they were taken over by the US would have been raised primarily with Creole and Hawaiin culture, which differs dramatically from the main American cultures of the time period.

To be clear, I am not talking about citizenship, I am talking about culture. Napoleon was absolutely a French citizen, but the culture he was raised with as a child was Corsican, not French. Corsican culture may be a sub-culture of France today, nearly 250 years after it was absorbed, but in 1769 Corsican culture was not related to French culture in any significant way. You might as well say that Quebecois were British or Canadian in 1763.

Louis VI the Fat

03-11-2010, 21:48

dang it, wanted to post a new reply but edited this one out instead. :shame:

TinCow

03-11-2010, 22:09

B..but, Napoléon was raised in French culture: his parents sent him to a French school, on the mainland, from the age of nine. That's how you get ahead, that's how the provincial becomes a Frenchman. Everybody has at some point in their family history made this decision, voluntarily or not. French culture is an imposed culture. Beat the patois out of the peasant by imposing the foreign language 'French' on him.

I agree with this completely. Napoleon became an integral part of French culture. In fact, I would say that Napoleon himself has influenced French culture more than French culture influenced Napoleon. That does not change the fact that French culture was not his culture of birth, which is the question the OP asked.

Citizenship precedes the nation in France. France is not a culture that formed a nation. That's the other model, so often contrasted with France, the model of Germany.

One is French, by being born in France. Regardless of your culture, etnicity or what not. This is what I meant with 'decidedly non-French thought'. If Napoléon is born in French territory, he is a Frenchmen. His story is the story of all those others. They all had to learn French at school or in the army. 'Citizens into Frenchmen' - that's the order, not the other way round.

Ironic then that Napoleon's own critics inside France during his life ridiculed him for not being born into a French culture. Times change, and France has changed a great deal since 1769. "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" was little more than an idea when Napoleon was born. During his life it changed dramatically. When Napoleon died, he was French, but that does erase the point that when Napoleon was born, he was Corsican.

Québec IS Canada. Not Anglo-Canada, no. But Canada IS this collection of French and English and native territories. To think that only whites or Anglophones are 'real' Canadians overlooks an essential element of Canada. :beam:

Certainly, except that Canada did not exist in 1763, just as the United States did not. Quebecouis culture in 1763 was a colonial sub-culture of French, just as American culture in 1776 was a colonial sub-culture of British. Quebecouis culture is part of Canadian culture now, just as Creole and Hawaiin culture are part of American culture now, but all of these are only after very long periods of absorbtion. Shortly after the territories had changed owners, there had been no opportunity for the culture to absorbed by the new owner, so it remained largely independent. Once again, you seem to be layering today's standards onto yesterday's peoples.

Brenus

03-11-2010, 23:27

“the others who won wars were not true Scotsmen...erm...true Frenchmen”: which precisely what it was intended.

I am not sure that the Lorrains would be happy to be Germans…

There are few (a lot) who don't accept the fact that France had conquered and won wars. The simple fact that France still exists should prove that the image they got from heavy propaganda is false, but no.
So, time-to-time, we have: ho, Napoleon was Corsican. Sorry Guillaume was William the Norman, so a Wiking. By the way Kellerman was Alsatian, and Vercingetorix a Gaul… Definitively the Franks were Germans and so was Charlemagne.

Point of History: Choiselle bought Corsica in 1740. So Napoleon, born in 15th of August 1769 was as much French than people from Lorraine, returned to France around the same time than Corsica was bought.

If not Zachary Taylor is not American, nor Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard (1818–93) or more recently Claire Chennault, all of them coming from Louisiana bought to France, sold by… Napoleon… in 1803.

Louis, I don’t hate Napoleon. I think he was not so good (leading a country/Empire as a Corsican Clan) but I give the man is due. He was a genius, achieved a lot and lost a lot.

Louis VI the Fat

03-11-2010, 23:39

Bonaparte spoke Corsu as a first language, and retained an accent throughout his life. We could've ended the thread at post one.

But there are hidden subtexts, discourses, different definitions and traditons to explore. For one, we stumble once more on different national definitions. A Japanse, when presented with an African-american, might ask for a 'real American'. Not realising that Americans do not have a racial definition of nationhood.
(To a large extent they do, as is also the case with the French republican ideas below, which are not absolute and often more theoretical too)

To an American, to non-French thought, culture makes a nation. Not so in France. French Republicanism, if not outright universal, does not consider birth or culture the essential quality of citizenship. To end just that is why France had a revolution in the first place. That everybody is a Frenchman. An equal citizen. In full possesion of every right of a citizen and of man. Regardless of birth. Regardless of religion (move over Catholics, Jews and Protestants are Frenchmen too, no matter what you say - see 'Secularism' thread in Backroom). The third estate are Frenchmen of full civil rights too. Corsica and the Vendée are Frenchmen too - whether they like it or not.The very notion that Napoléon is, and can be, a Frenchman in every and the full sense of the word is what the whole thing was about in the first place. For better or for worse, as my example of the Vendée shows.

One should not overlook this. Even if Napoléon by non-French standards barely qualifies as a Frenchman, one can not overlook this essential revolutionary and republican definition of what constitutes a Frenchman.
Should the non-French definition matter? No, because there are a thousand non-French definitions. For the English, only the upper class should've been French, not the people. For the nazi, the Jew was not a Frenchman. For the Russian and Austrian, only the nobility was. That's why we fought them all, or, rather, that's why they all fought us. France and her perfidious ideas. That's why I would've joined Napoléon. I don't care if he's a tyrant who betrayed the Revolution. He fights for the right to be free, to be a citizen and nothing but a citizen, without birth or estate or religion. He would've brought it to the entire world and Lord knows he nearly managed too!

When Napoleon died, he was French, but that does erase the point that when Napoleon was born, he was Corsican.
A lot of people were born but a Corsican, but a peasant, but a Jew, but a freemason. They died as free French citizens*. To live thus, if need be to die thus, that is the motto inscripted on their arms, that is why they fought the whole of Europe. If you wanted to be French, the Republic would confer French citizenship on you. It was not a matter of culture, or birth, but of ideology. Foreign radicals were elected into the National Assembly. Citizenship was conferred on American revolutionairies. They were French from that moment on. This is the universality, the revolutionary aspect of it. That is how one is a Frenchman. If you take up arms to fight to be a free French citizen, then you are a Frenchman. You have no birth. As for those who disagree and want to reduce a person to his birth, there's a Grande Armée that's willing to fight for this right against anything the entire world throws against it.

*goes to the attic, dons on grandpa's boots and rusty rifle and starts marching*

Here's the first thing our little 'Corso-Italian' saw of Italy, and Italy of him. :knight:

https://img715.imageshack.us/img715/9866/75595624610b5fb8d6bbn.jpg

*Or, in the case of that delightfully ambiguous Bonaparte, would die as emperor above the citizens if he had had his way.

Subotan

03-11-2010, 23:54

So anyone born on French soil is automatically a Frenchman? Does that include that periphery of France and French culture, Algeria?

TinCow

03-12-2010, 00:05

Louis, you mostly seem to be arguing with no one. I have no intention of debating the vast majority of what you just posted. The only issue I want to emphasize is that often history needs to be viewed from the perspective of the time in which it occurred. For instance:

That everybody is a Frenchman. An equal citizen. In full possesion of every right of a citizen and of man. Regardless of birth. Regardless of religion (move over Catholics, Jews and Protestants are Frenchmen too, no matter what you say - see 'Secularism' thread in Backroom).

That certainly didn't apply to the Huguenots in the 16th century. It's all a matter of timing and of placing a person and an event in the proper context. Without context, history is meaningless data. Napoleon cannot be understood by modern standards, he must be viewed as part of the world he lived in.

Louis VI the Fat

03-12-2010, 00:12

Louis, you mostly seem to be arguing with no one.Yes, but Louis, I meant Republican values, what happened after the Revolution. Among the first acts of the Revolution were the conferring of full citizen rights to Protestants and Jews.

So anyone born on French soil is automatically a Frenchman? Does that include that periphery of France and French culture, Algeria?Fully expecting that question, I started with the example of African-Americans, where the same tension between thought and practise is felt. :beam:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilizing_mission

Brenus

03-12-2010, 08:35

“That certainly didn't apply to the Huguenots in the 16th century.” They were sujet of Louis the XIV, not citizens.
The Nation concept that goes in pair with citizenship is a child of the French Revolution.

“So anyone born on French soil is automatically a French”: Yes. And all Algerians born before the Independence can still ask for French National Identity as you never loose your national identity…

Sarmatian

03-12-2010, 18:14

So anyone born on French soil is automatically a Frenchman? Does that include that periphery of France and French culture, Algeria?

See Zinedine Zidane.

Louis VI the Fat

03-12-2010, 18:40

See Zinedine Zidane.Not a true Frenchman. Just like Obama is not American and Churchill not British.

Even more worryingly, neither are those Italians Platini and Cantona. Petit is a blond Norman, thus not French either.

Édith Piaf is an Italo-Berber. Aznavour an Armenian.

Yves Saint Laurent is a pied-noir. Jean-Paul Belmondo and Jacques Derrida are pieds-noirs too, but of foreign ancestry no less!

Sarkozy's an Ottoman-Hungarian. De Gaulle a Ch'ti, thus really Flemish. Maréchal Joffre was born in a Catalan region, thus he's Spanish.

None are French. Come to think of it, I'm going to send this thread to the Front National headquarters. Le Pen was born outside of Frenc culture, and only learned proper French when he was send to boarding school, just like Napoléon. So he's not French at all. That'll teach those nationalists.

Kagemusha

03-12-2010, 18:57

Not a true Frenchman. Just like Obama is not American and Churchill not British.

Even more worryingly, neither are those Italians Platini and Cantona. Petit is a blond Norman, thus not French either.

Édith Piaf is an Italo-Berber. Aznavour an Armenian.

Yves Saint Laurent is a pied-noir. Jean-Paul Belmondo and Jacques Derrida are pieds-noirs too, but of foreign ancestry no less!

Sarkozy's an Ottoman-Hungarian. De Gaulle a Ch'ti, thus really Flemish. Maréchal Joffre was born in a Catalan region, thus he's Spanish.

None are French. Come to think of it, I'm going to send this thread to the Front National headquarters. Le Pen was born outside of Frenc culture, and only learned proper French when he was send to boarding school, just like Napoléon. So he's not French at all. That'll teach those nationalists.

So in the end the whole French thing is just a myth. There is no such thing?:smug:

Louis VI the Fat

03-12-2010, 19:38

So in the end the whole French thing is just a myth. There is no such thing?:smug:almost. You are getting to the heart of what I'm trying to say.

France is an imposed culture. France is a collection of lose territories, whose inhabitants all had to learn French in school or in the army, had to adopt French timezone, French metric system, French culture, standardised language. This centralisation and nation-building is the modern history of France.

One misses a fundamental aspect of France if one says that 'Oh, Napoléon spoke Corsu and was born in a remote region, with a culture that's not really French, so therefore he isn't truly French'. This fundamental aspect is, that this is the story of the whole of France. There was no such thing as a French culture on the mainland, to which Corsica was then an outsider. For the overwhelming amount of people Paris was but a distant city, sometimes several weeks travel away. It might as well have been Rome or Jerusalem. French was spoken by perhaps ten to fifteen percent of the people, less than half having any knowledge of it at all. The interior wasn't even mapped yet. Corsica's coastal regions were better known than most of the mainland - full of ancient tribes, were even a priest risked life and limbs if he dared to disrespect lingering ancient superstitions. Corsica did not differ much at all from all those other regions, each one so different and so remote and 'not culturally French'. Corsica was the norm, not the exception.

Napoléon was not exceptional for growing up outside of French culture, for learning French from the age of nine. Napoléon was exceptional because he did speak French and was part of French culture.

Vercors mountains in the east, close to the Alps so still largely undiscovered:
https://img169.imageshack.us/img169/2451/veymontaiguillemgkuj7.jpg

Rousillon in the southeast:
https://img131.imageshack.us/img131/600/roussillonub4.jpg

Saint-Cirq-Lapopie, typical Quercy architecture: houses with white limestone walls made of rough-hewn stones, and pointed roofs and turrets covered with reddish brown tiles.

https://img131.imageshack.us/img131/5375/366365579c22378ea24bqg7.jpg

The Basque country.
https://img254.imageshack.us/img254/9467/1455969146e28b0a22e1bzf1.jpg

Labourd. The French Basque Country is made up of three subprovinces. Labourd is the westernmost one. As you can guess from the plants in the picture, the coastal Basque Country enjoys balmy weather all year round. It is also a very wet area, with some of the highest levels of rain in France. The countryside is thus very green, and this green color contrasts lovely with the red and white tints of the houses. Green, red and white, after all those are the colors of the Basque flag.

These houses may look modern, but they are in fact very old, dating back to the 17th century.

https://img396.imageshack.us/img396/9725/ainhoajo8.jpg

Hondschoote, in French Flanders. This windmill is also known as the Moulin de la Victoire ("Victory Windmill") because it was used as a watch tower during the Battle of Hondschoote in 1793 when the armies of the French Republic defeated the British under the Duke of York thus lifting the British siege of Dunkirk and saving the French Revolution

Flat and windmills and flowerfields and Flemish trading towns.
https://img164.imageshack.us/img164/8265/phot635tq4.jpg

Back to the other side of France again.

https://img166.imageshack.us/img166/8366/img0105lv5.jpg

https://img166.imageshack.us/img166/666/img0106xg8.jpg

France, both Mediterannean....

https://img176.imageshack.us/img176/8668/cote5bv7.jpg

...and northern Atlantic in Brittany....

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2245/2043465411_bdfef3c1bd_o.jpg

...the fog of the West....

https://img522.imageshack.us/img522/3808/img0065wb3.jpg

...to the snow of the east...

https://img505.imageshack.us/img505/1913/img0978lx8.jpg

...to Prémery, typical of a thousand villages in the green centre...

https://img14.imageshack.us/img14/2594/prmery3.jpg

...and Gascogny in the southwest...

https://img152.imageshack.us/img152/1092/5848633gx2.jpg

...to the Loire river in the middle...

https://img696.imageshack.us/img696/3913/loire20valley.jpg

...and the valleys of the southwest.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2302/2139034222_3d75d59d02_o.jpg

And I have only barely scratched the surface of it all. I've got thirty six thousand more pictures like these. That's how many villages there are. All different.

France IS this loose collection of regions. As Karl Marx said: France is just a bag, that holds together a bunch of loose potatoes.
All have different languages. All are 'not really French'. Until one realises that there is no France, but that this collection of non-French regions is France.

Kagemusha

03-12-2010, 19:57

A Very Super Market

03-12-2010, 21:23

Louis VI the Fat

03-13-2010, 01:17

Breath taking sceneries there Louis. ~:)I think im getting a hint where you are coming from with yur point. While my comparison is quite lame. I think Europa Universalis game set it right when you dont have a "French" culture but "Cosmopolitan" culture is the word to used for central King governed areas that expanded and assimilated areas where populations associated themselves as Occitain, Gasgongnese or Normandese just to point few of them.That's a good comparison, methinks.

Western Europe is full of settled communities. If you cover a large area of it, you'll be an incredibly diverse nation. Ancient tribes, invaders, mongrels. Dozens of languages, legal systems, time zones, tax zones, building styles, climates. By the time of the aquisition of Corsica, there was a France, there were peoples, but was there a French nation? Somewhat, but to a very large extent not. Citizenship was a result of the Revolution. The nation was build mostly in the 19th century - although the process had been well underway in the 18th.
The story of Napoléon, Corsicans of his day, being French is a complicated one. Surprisingly, it is perhaps easier to put an exact date on Corsica becoming Fench than on France becoming French.

Of course, the problem with this thread isn't Napoléon. I don't care for the little upstart. No, why I get my knickers in a twist is, if Bonaparte is not really French, then Alizée isn't French either - she's from the same town as Nappy.
The thought of Alizée as anything but a little Frenchie would be an intolerable blow to my civic pride. :cry:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBxfi4-9xhc

I tried to convey a sense of variety and remoteness in the previous post. Different architectecture, cultures. A brief look at people here should show the same thing. I've always wondered why anthropologists fly to New Guinea by the planeful when a good eye can see so mcuh in Western Europe still.
A mishmash of peoples who based on some geography, some ancient Roman divisions, and most of all dynastic considerations from 843 onwards were slowly formed into a nation:

The tv series 'Napoléon'. Two of the main characters were played by very different looking Frenchmen, Clavier and Depardieu:

https://img341.imageshack.us/img341/9638/012c000000763636photoge.jpg

They played together as Asterix and Obelix too. Note the difference, from tall and blond to short and dark. Both are French. Frenchmen look so varied that one wonders how they became a single nation at all.

Depardieu was cast because it is impossible to finance a lavish period drama without him starring in it. Clavier was cast for Napoléon, because he's more resembling of the short Mediterranean type Napoléon was.

https://img412.imageshack.us/img412/2562/02713798photonapoleon.jpg

Clavier owns a villa in Corsica. It has been occupied by gangs of seperatists twice. So much for playing Napoléon. :laugh4:

Clavier's also a friend of Sarkozy, born in the same part of Paris even, so his villa is now under constant surveillance by an entire army.

As an aside, Depardieu's son is rather more handsome than daddy:

https://img341.imageshack.us/img341/8852/guillaumedepardieurefer.jpg

Louis VI the Fat

03-13-2010, 01:23

Louis, this is all fair and well, but how does this differ from the rest of Europe? Germany and Italy are both younger than France, both possessing their own centuries-old histories of squabbling boundaries, and no unifying monarch to give the slightest pretense of order. How well did the Ottomans fare with the disorderly Balkans? Perhaps to New Worlders, this is is an alien concept, but the whole of Europe right now is a stockroom of potato sacks. It's gloriously convoluted if you look deep into the pits and crevices of European history, and I surmise that Louis is just striking out at us from across the Atlantic as punishment for our less magnificent past.This is your past. Part of your past.

What's registered as 'Italian immigrant' in America, is not Italian at all. There are very few Piedmontese, Tuscans in America. Mostly Sicilians and Southern Italians. Your Spanish are mostly Galicians. Immigrants from the British Isles are Irish and Scottish. Frenchmen mostly from Brittany, or the north.
There is always a history why they left, when they left just then. Germans from rural areas left - from those rural areas where the eldest son inherits the farm. But not from those rural areas near early industrialised areas, the younger sons went to work there. Later in the 19th century, German migration shifted to Germans from east of the Elbe. Many left the Prussian millitarism for America.
Migration to the US back then was not different than it is now. In a hundred years time, few will realise their ancestor was a Haitian who left after an earthquake destroyed his home and livelyhood.

Only the Irish seem to remember the 1840s and the famine, remember when they left, when they left, what the circumstances of their emigration were.

Louis VI the Fat

03-14-2010, 01:30

Napoleon's transformation from a Corsican into a French Revolutionary:

From Corsican Nationalist to French Revolutionary: Problems of Identity in the Writings of the Young Napoleon, 1785–1793 Philip G. Dwyer1 1 The School of Liberal Arts, University of Newcastle, Australia

As a young man, much of Napoleon's time was spent trying to arrive at an intellectual and emotional understanding of his own life story and of his place in the world. He did so in part by embracing his Corsican cultural heritage, and by identifying with both the Corsican independence movement and its hero, Pasquale Paoli. The advent of the Revolution in Corsica blurred the lines between what it meant to be French and Corsican, but it was not until 1793 that clan politics on the island obliged Napoleon to rethink his cultural and political identity. After having embraced the Corsican cause for so long, he turned his back on it and wholeheartedly supported the French Jacobin cause. This article attempts to put Napoleon's transformation from Corsican nationalist to French revolutionary in a cultural, political and psychological context. It helps to explain not only how Napoleon saw himself in the world, but also how he came to define himself as a cultural and political entity.
http://fh.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/16/2/132Unfortunately, this is the one article in English I can find that describes the importance of Corsican Revolutionary fervour, and Napoléon's transformation from Corsican nationalist to French Revolutionary. Unfortunate, because it requires a subscription.

The Corsican nationalist cause would not end up the only revolution Napoléon would eventualy betray :wink: :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasquale_Paoli

The Wizard

03-14-2010, 15:41

Well Louis, you're right of course, but didn't all of that stop applying some 60-90 years ago? Somewhere in that timespan (1910-1945) Paris managed to largely stamp out the regional languages, a process begun by Louis Napoleon (or Nappy himself). At least, that's what I've read.

The process was largely artificial, though. Which gives to think. If France was able to create a more or less unified nation out of the proverbial sack of potatoes, why not all these African states?
:thinking2:

Louis VI the Fat

03-15-2010, 22:02

didn't all of that stop applying some 60-90 years ago? Somewhere in that timespan (1910-1945) Paris managed to largely stamp out the regional languages, a process begun by Louis Napoleon (or Nappy himself).

https://img707.imageshack.us/img707/3606/51322327349a7a79c02.jpg

Y'all work it out. :wink:

gaelic cowboy

03-15-2010, 23:29

Only the Irish seem to remember the 1840s and the famine, remember when they left, when they left, what the circumstances of their emigration were.

I would guess that it's because of the particular circumstances of the leaving that caused it myself Louis they didnt call them Coffin Ships (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_ship) for nothing you know something like that has a powerful effect on race memory.

Brenus

03-16-2010, 08:16

“Paris managed to largely stamp out the regional languages, a process begun by Louis Napoleon (or Nappy himself). At least, that's what I've read.”
I would put the start on the language unification with the levée en masse, the Conscription.
The hundred and thousand who went first in the Revolutionary Army then The the Imperial Army learned the language used by their commanders.
Kallerman (Alsatian) Augereau (Parisian) and Napoleon (Corsican) were able to give orders to their men without translators (which was proved an advantage in Auterlitz, see Austrian and Russian pb).

Then "le coup de grace" to regional languages (patois) was given by the Ecole Gratuite, Obligatoire, Public et Laic of Jules Ferry (free mandatory and laic education (1882).
This was reinforce by the Conscription and the melting pot constituted by the army where Youth Males were sent in the 4 corners of the hexagon, as would have say some journalists, better in clichés than in maths.

Fisherking

03-16-2010, 08:29

I don’t think you can say that Bonaparte was not French. He thought of himself as French and fought to extent its influence.

He was to France what Huston & Austin were to Texas. They were not borne there either but calling them anything else goes wide of the mark.

Even if Nappy talked funny he was still French. :grin2:

Tristuskhan

03-16-2010, 20:27

Then "le coup de grace" to regional languages (patois) was given by the Ecole Gratuite, Obligatoire, Public et Laic of Jules Ferry (free mandatory and laic education (1882).

Oh please, don't assimilate Breton, Basque, Corsican or Alsacian languages to "patois", it's just plain insulting*. "Patois" is to be used for local variations of french, that were definitely destroyed by compulsory education. Non-Romanic** languages (alsacian beeing somehow an exception, for obvious reasons) were "doomed" by the huge losses and traumas of WWI. Probably (certainly...) education would have done the job in the long term, but WWI was an incredible boost to the process.

*("is just plain insulting, parisian scum!":devilish:)
**yeah, Corsican is romanic, nevermind, you see my point.

Edit: and the school is Publique et Laïque, not Public et Laïc, my friend:beam: (or is it your patois that makes "école" a masculine word?)

Louis VI the Fat

03-16-2010, 22:25

Ha te, Tristus Tristérix, komz a rez brezhoneg? In daily life? To all the criticism of the onslaught on Breton, the usual rebuttal: how much is left of Celtic in the British Isles then?

Also, Brenus sounds Jurassien, not Parigot. More importantly, not patois, but English is undermining his French. It's deteriorating into franglais! See, this is why Toubon was right.
His oppressive imperialist English keyboard gives him tremendous trouble with his accents, so they are allways absent: Grâce, École, Laïque. The requirement to translate the sentence into English made Brenus mentally translate the phrase in his head already. It's not the masculine form, it's Englais that took over. That made him switch from French to Franglais to English midsentence.

Somewhat cool, really. :beam:

...if only it wouldn't tell of the inevitable demise of French into a patois like Breton. http://matousmileys.free.fr/tr42.gif

Brenus

03-17-2010, 00:04

“École”: No accent on a majuscule, d’abord, except for Québecois…:tongue3:

Then, no bad for Jurassien, not far, but La Dombes is better even if when I came to this life it was Les Dombes…
Grand Mother was a Jurassienne.

“It's not the masculine form, it's Englais that took over.” Unfortunately true. :embarassed:
I even speak to myself (schizophrenia under control) in English. I even dream in English… I am alone, as René Mouchotte above the Channel that I refuse to call English…
Mind you I even dream in Serbian, or perhaps in Croatian.

TinCow

03-17-2010, 00:37

What's registered as 'Italian immigrant' in America, is not Italian at all. There are very few Piedmontese, Tuscans in America. Mostly Sicilians and Southern Italians. Your Spanish are mostly Galicians. Immigrants from the British Isles are Irish and Scottish. Frenchmen mostly from Brittany, or the north.
There is always a history why they left, when they left just then. Germans from rural areas left - from those rural areas where the eldest son inherits the farm. But not from those rural areas near early industrialised areas, the younger sons went to work there. Later in the 19th century, German migration shifted to Germans from east of the Elbe. Many left the Prussian millitarism for America.
Migration to the US back then was not different than it is now. In a hundred years time, few will realise their ancestor was a Haitian who left after an earthquake destroyed his home and livelyhood.

Only the Irish seem to remember the 1840s and the famine, remember when they left, when they left, what the circumstances of their emigration were.

If you're talking about immigrants who went to America, you could not be more incorrect. Cultural identities and traditions are very strong here and specific regional traditions from small areas of Germany, Italy, Ireland, Scotland, Korea, Japan, China, etc. are all observed here on a regular basis by people who know exactly where their families come from. In fact, I don't know a single American who doesn't know what country their family originated in and have some personal cultural affiliation to that origin.

Louis VI the Fat

03-17-2010, 02:03

“École”: No accent on a majuscule, d’abord, except for Québecois…:tongue3:

On ne peut que déplorer que l'usage des accents sur les majuscules soit flottant. On observe dans les textes manuscrits une tendance certaine à l'omission des accents. En typographie, parfois, certains suppriment tous les accents sur les capitales sous prétexte de modernisme, en fait pour réduire les frais de composition.

Il convient cependant d'observer qu'en français, l'accent a pleine valeur orthographique. Son absence ralentit la lecture, fait hésiter sur la prononciation, et peut même induire en erreur. Il en va de même pour le tréma et la cédille.

On veille donc, en bonne typographie, à utiliser systématiquement les capitales accentuées, y compris la préposition À, comme le font bien sûr tous les dictionnaires, à commencer par le Dictionnaire de l'Académie française, ou les grammaires, comme Le Bon Usage de Grevisse, mais aussi l'Imprimerie nationale, la Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, etc. Quant aux textes manuscrits ou dactylographiés, il est évident que leurs auteurs, dans un souci de clarté et de correction, auraient tout intérêt à suivre également cette règle.

http://www.academie-francaise.fr/langue/questions.html#accentuation

Then, no bad for Jurassien, not far, but La Dombes is better even if when I came to this life it was Les Dombes…
Grand Mother was a Jurassienne.I pinned you down to within 50 kilometers. :jumping:
I've never been to La/les Dombes. One day etc...

Then again, I mistook Meneldil for a Toulousain. :shame:

Tristuskhan is obviously from Roazhon / Rennes. Urban Breton, dreaming of the ancient forests of Bretagne, teeming with life, with a life of their own, the trees whispering to you in half-forgotten tongues...

Another lost world in France, the Brocéliande forest, home of Celtic mysticism, of legend, of pre-Christian rites performed in ancient languages:

https://img718.imageshack.us/img718/2945/broceliande.jpg

https://img718.imageshack.us/img718/2184/27436924e497b61c0m.jpg

https://img201.imageshack.us/img201/9213/bienvenuenbretagnelogo.jpg

If you're talking about immigrants who went to America, you could not be more incorrect. Cultural identities and traditions are very strong here and specific regional traditions from small areas of Germany, Italy, Ireland, Scotland, Korea, Japan, China, etc. are all observed here on a regular basis by people who know exactly where their families come from. In fact, I don't know a single American who doesn't know what country their family originated in and have some personal cultural affiliation to that origin. Hrmph, you learn something new every day. :blank2:

I always had the impression Americans are very aware of their families homeland, but had little identity beyond that. That is, there are German Americans, but not Hannoverian/Silesian/-Americans.
Should make for an interesting Backroom topic, including a little poll.

TinCow

03-17-2010, 12:20

I always had the impression Americans are very aware of their families homeland, but had little identity beyond that. That is, there are German Americans, but not Hannoverian/Silesian/-Americans.
Should make for an interesting Backroom topic, including a little poll.

Not always, certainly, but regularly. I would also say that it depends on where inside the country a person was from. I would say that German-Americans are not likely to know which specific part of Germany that they are from, same with France and England. However, I would expect Italian-Americans, new-arrival African Americans, Chinese-Americans, Indian-Americans, etc. to be aware. In addition, many Americans who are unaware of their specific provincial origin may nevertheless still continue on provincial cultural traditions though local holidays and cooking trends. One of the reasons for this is that when people immigrated to the US, they tended to settle in groups with their fellow ex-pats. You can generally pick any state or city in the US and list a dozen or more specific cultural groups that have flourished there.

Kagemusha

03-17-2010, 12:27

I somehow enjoy reading this thread immensely. Thank you guys for sharing things witht the rest of us that ive known nothing about before.:applause:

Meneldil

03-17-2010, 13:01

If you're talking about immigrants who went to America, you could not be more incorrect. Cultural identities and traditions are very strong here and specific regional traditions from small areas of Germany, Italy, Ireland, Scotland, Korea, Japan, China, etc. are all observed here on a regular basis by people who know exactly where their families come from. In fact, I don't know a single American who doesn't know what country their family originated in and have some personal cultural affiliation to that origin.

I actually find all this retard, if you excuse the language.

I've studied in Canada for 1 year, traveled around in Ontario, visited New-England and stayed almost two weeks in New-York, and I've grown tired of all these people who label themselves as "Italian", "German", "Ukrainian", "Russian", "Irish", "British".
Most of them can't even properly point to said country on a map, don't speak a single word of "their country" language, don't have a clue about what the culture of Germany, Italy, Ireland or Russia is. Yet, they keep mentioning it every 10 minutes, like a buzz-word used to make them look cool. Ridiculous.

I remember a discussion I had at a bar someday. Some Canadian girl of chinese origins stated that she was Canadian, and not Chinese. Some other dude here got mad, told her she was Chinese before being Canadian, much as he was "Italian before being Canadian". He got really anal about it. Too bad the italian people I studied with kept making fun of his self-proclaimed italian-ness. He indeed couldn't speak a single italian world, and the only things he knew about Italian culture were "Pizza", "Cheese and Wine" and acting like a Guido-wannabe.

From an european perspective, it indeed looks stupid. I mean, I can understand Natives, Japanese, Chinese, Latinos, Haitians or even French-canadians. All those belong to "oppressed minorities", or have to deal with racism, or arrived in North America only lately. But man, if your family arrived in the US a century ago, if you can't speak italian and if don't know where Italy is on a map either, then you're not italian. Get over it.

Similarly, most people assumed I was a french-canadian when I introduced myself as a french. Newsflash, french-canadians aren't french, despite all their attempts to present themselves as such. They're canadians who speak french, whether they like it or not. What was even more sad was the way many french canadians idealize France as the new Israel (that is not true for Québecers though), as the promised land that should support their fight against the evil-anglo saxon imperialism. In Ontario, introducing you as a french immediately makes you a left wing radical.
Most people belonging to leftist student associations think of themselves as french, even if they hardly speak a single french word. Similarly, presenting you as a french likely means you're a leftist.

It feels like north americans indeed have an historical inferiority complex, and feel the need to belong to another national identity group. I know I was puzzled by this behaviors, and so were most of my foreign student friends, whether they came from Europe or from Asia.

Edit: Thinking about it, it's quite similar to the way many people whose parents came from Northern Africa label themselves as "Moroccan", "Algerian" or "Tunisian". They've never been there, hardly speak the language, and are frowned upon if not openly disliked by their supposed maghrebi country mates.
What causes this, I don't know. I would be interested to read any study or book about this will to identify to a foreign group, to a distant country.

TinCow

03-17-2010, 13:28

I actually find all this retard, if you excuse the language.

Needless to say, countries like the US, Canada, and Australia are made up almost entirely by immigrants. Since almost none of our families originated here, we have a different perspective on cultural diversity than elsewhere. I am thus not surprised to find this mentality amongst Europeans. In Europe, those who do not abandon their old cultural traditions and integrate into the national society are often criticized. In immigrant nations, the separate cultures are celebrated and maintained. It's simply a reality of how our nations were formed.

I'm happy to debate this further, but I agree with Louis that this is moving into strong Backroom territory and should be split off into a separate discussion.

miotas

03-17-2010, 17:25

Needless to say, countries like the US, Canada, and Australia are made up almost entirely by immigrants. Since almost none of our families originated here, we have a different perspective on cultural diversity than elsewhere. I am thus not surprised to find this mentality amongst Europeans. In Europe, those who do not abandon their old cultural traditions and integrate into the national society are often criticized. In immigrant nations, the separate cultures are celebrated and maintained. It's simply a reality of how our nations were formed.

Despite living in an "immigration nation" I also share Meneldil's annoyance. In Australia you would be more likely to hear people say that their parents or grandparents were Irish, English, Italian etc rather than themselves. Their cultural individuality is often maintained and encouraged, but they are Australian rather than (x) country.

Strike For The South

03-17-2010, 17:41

I really have no cultural affinty for England, this is an American who could care less about all that stuff.

I really think it matters how long you've been here, my family came from portsmouth in the 1600s. we've been in America probably longer than some of you Europeans have been in your countries. Most people who consider themselves "American" (myself included) are mostly of French huegonet, English, and Scots-Irish stock.

I don't care about yorkshire pudding, I care about apple pie but most of my friends families came here about 8 generations after mine did. I wonder how much affintiy my family had 8 generations ago....

TinCow

03-17-2010, 18:30

I really think it matters how long you've been here, my family came from portsmouth in the 1600s. we've been in America probably longer than some of you Europeans have been in your countries.

I think that's certainly correct. The fewer generations that your family have been in 'new' country, the stronger your cultural ties to the old country. That would explain why there is almost no cultural affinity in the US for England of any kind, while cultural identity is moderately strong amongst Irish, Italians, Poles, and Chinese, and extremely strong amongst Latinos, Koreans, Vietnamese, and Russians.

Brenus

03-17-2010, 22:46

“French Huguenot”: Er, no. The French Huguenots fleeing Louis XIV persecution and the Revocation of the Edit de Nantes (October, 18th, 1685) emigrate to Berlin, London, Geneva, Amsterdam or even to The Cape in South Africa. Few of them went to the English Controlled American Territory.
Emigration to America was developed very late in France. The French went to trade of Furs. When the need of peasants was recognised, Louis XIV sent population following the feudal system, so "volunteers" came from mainly Normandy and Brittany.
Girls was sent in supplement known as les filles du Roi, were prostitutes and orphan, most of the time both...
We can compare the 80,000 French in the nouvelle France with the 1.500.000 English in the 13 Colonies (18th Century).

Meneldil

03-18-2010, 15:15

Say that to Paul Revere :D

Strike For The South

03-18-2010, 16:30

The Wizard

03-20-2010, 00:24

Alexander the Pretty Good

03-20-2010, 06:11

Cool thread. I had gotten a shade of the French situation from Europa Universalis 3, but I didn't realize that the French nation coalesced so (comparatively) recently nor did I know about the languages stuff.

I'm sorry to hear that our habit of identifying each other by distant ancestors bothers you, Meneldil. :P I was asked recently "what are you?" and responded "I'm from [my home town]" - which got a laugh and a second question - "no, but where are you parents or whatever from?" It's interesting that we think this way. I think part of it (for at least some people) is that their ancestors how came over worked hard to integrate and become like everyone else. So my great grandfather Frederick came over from Germany (I think somewhere in the south or Saxony?) to dodge conscription, but my grandpa you couldn't tell was actually from German or anything. He may have learned a little German (and one of the closest connections we have to Germany is every generation so far has had someone learn a little high school German :P) but he was an American like everyone else, served in the Navy in WW2. Not having a real cultural connection to Germany makes knowing the little details that much more exciting, and the more little details you have the more bragging you can do. :D There may be some people who take it too far (your Italian example, though maybe he was just drunk :P) but when people say they're Italian, or German, or whatever, I don't think they mean nationally the way you or Louis say you're French.

And it may vary by ancestry (as the Irish are probably different than the Germans because the latter had to keep their heads down due to the two World Wars, among other things).

And beautiful photos, Louis.

Brenus

03-20-2010, 08:46

“The way Occitan is "patois" yet has a longer intellectual, written history than French...” Yes and no. Occitan is part of French. It is not 2 different languages, but Occitant participated in the building of Modern French.
It is like if you claim that the Gauls or the Franks had a longer History than the French.

Like populations, languages have history and are the product of mixtures, melting pots, influences, fashion, and books.

Meneldil

03-20-2010, 11:01

Cool thread. I had gotten a shade of the French situation from Europa Universalis 3, but I didn't realize that the French nation coalesced so (comparatively) recently nor did I know about the languages stuff.

I'm sorry to hear that our habit of identifying each other by distant ancestors bothers you, Meneldil. :P I was asked recently "what are you?" and responded "I'm from [my home town]" - which got a laugh and a second question - "no, but where are you parents or whatever from?" It's interesting that we think this way.

Well, I was mostly venting 12 months of frustration. I've actually learnt to live with this behaviour (I just ignore it :-P), though some people indeed push it too far. And tbh, it boastes our european (huge) egos.
Here, you only mention your foreign origins to show that you're family assimilated completely. As opposed to the newest immigrants from our former colonies, who can't seem to assimilate french culture and who keep refering to their so-called motherland. It's often a cheap argument brought up in conversations about immigration : "see, my family came from Poland, didn't speak french, was deeply catholic, yet we assimilated. Why can't they do the same?"

I, on the other hand, admit that most Europeans I've met in North-America (and me aswell) often have neo-colonialist mindsets. Such as "Oh well, these people aren't that bad. Sure, they don't have any history or old building, but they're not complete savages yet", which must be quite annoying to you (though I think this is in a way what americans expect from euros, and apparently makes girls horny :D).

The Wizard

03-20-2010, 22:18

Oh, you silly Frenchman. In Europe, we have our own governments and states to channel our tribal conceits into! ~;)

“The way Occitan is "patois" yet has a longer intellectual, written history than French...” Yes and no. Occitan is part of French. It is not 2 different languages, but Occitant participated in the building of Modern French.
It is like if you claim that the Gauls or the Franks had a longer History than the French.

Like populations, languages have history and are the product of mixtures, melting pots, influences, fashion, and books.

Occitan is not a part of French any more than Catalan is (or Spanish, or any other Romance language). It just happens to be spoken in an area ruled by the French state.

My point is really that it's kind of funny when Frenchmen (or Parisians, whomever you prefer) speak of their language as the light of the universal civilization while deriding a language such as Occitan as a patois. No more than that.