|
 |
The development of French in Africa | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5434 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes  Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 129 of 135 21 November 2011 at 11:00pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Really, some more outlandish statements. Much has been written about this and I suggest that people read up about the politics and economics before making wild statements. Here is a quote from a Canadian magazine: "In the wake of the genocide, Rwanda’s main donor became the United States. Meanwhile, thousands of exiles returned to their homeland from Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda—neighbouring English-speaking countries where many Rwandans picked up the language. Then, in 2006, a French judge dropped a bombshell. He accused Rwandan President Paul Kagame, a Tutsi, of helping start the genocide because of his alleged complicity in the rocket attack of April 6, 1994, that killed Rwanda’s Hutu president Juvenal Habyarimana—the spark for the massacre. Furious, Kagame shut down the French Embassy, kicked out the ambassador, ordered Radio France Internationale off the air in Rwanda, and closed the local French cultural centre. Two years later, in 2008, Kagame announced that English—which became one of Rwanda’s official languages in 1994—would replace French as the official language of instruction in the country’s schools. In the wake of that momentous step, thousands of Rwandan schoolteachers were fired because they couldn’t teach the new language. According to Nkusi, there has been very little public resistance to the government’s pro-English campaign. Kagame has a firm grip on power and Rwandans are not known as protesters. In fact, most citizens are reluctant to give their opinions even in private. But during an interview with a group of Rwandan teacher-trainers, some of them open up. “French flows in my veins,” says Ladislas Nkundabanyanga. “My father taught me French and my friends all speak French.” Nowadays, though, he knows kindergarten students who don’t understand the word “bonjour.” As a result, he’s convinced the French language in Rwanda is doomed. Nkundabanyanga’s colleague, Beatrice Namango, agrees. The new policy, she says, is “like telling me to keep quiet. It’s stopping me from talking.” The teacher-trainers’ boss is a Canadian named Mark Thiessen, from Williams Lake, B.C. He likens the slow demise of French in Rwanda to the death of Aboriginal languages in Canada. “Slowly, French in Rwanda will disappear,” Thiessen says. “It might take one or two generations, but it will.” Nkusi says he’s partial to French, too, but he sees the language change as an economic necessity. “French is the language of the heart,” he says, “but English is the language of work.” And Rwandans are working hard to show they’re competitive in an emerging African market. Every building in the country looks like it just got a fresh coat of paint, and the GDP is growing by an average of five per cent a year. “The country’s wealth is not in the soil, it’s in the minds of its citizens,” says Nkusi. “The leadership is smart enough to know that and develop an information technology sector like India’s.” Nkusi also parrots a popular line of Kagame’s. “Rwanda isn’t becoming unilingual,” he says, “it’s simply making room for new languages.” Rwanda’s capital only has one private French school left, but a Chinese school just opened up, too." source What I find interesting is that, not surprisingly, all this talk of French-speaking Rwanda does not once mention the indigenous official language, Kinyarwanda. Indeed, more people (the entire country) speak this language than French, yet Rwanda is called French-speaking. The real common language isn't changing at all. One former colonial language is being replaced by another, with a number of advantages. Edited by s_allard on 22 November 2011 at 12:28am 4 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5434 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 130 of 135 22 November 2011 at 12:27am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
Is Burundi next?
I think this decision by Rwanda to switch to English is going to have more implications for all of the African francophonie than most people think. With a population of 14 million, Rwanda is not a small country. Unlike most African countries and despite ethnic differences, there is one common language for country, kinyarwanda. This is the maternal and primary language of the entire population. French had the usual status, official language of government, education and business. It should be pointed out that Burundi, the neighbouring country to the south, with a population of about 9 million, resembles Rwanda very much from a linguistic perspective. A common national language, Rundi, and French, as official language. Burundi is nominally francophone of course, but how many people actually speak French? Here is a quote: "Si le kirundi est la langue nationale des Burundais, le français et le swahili constituent des langues véhiculaires importantes. Le français, en tant que langue co-officielle avec le kirundi — en réalité, c’est la première langue officielle —, est essentiellement appris à l’école et utilisé dans des situations formelles ou officielles. Seule une minorité de Burundais peut s’exprimer en français. Selon le sens qu’on accorde au mot francophone, on estime que les locuteurs du français oscillent entre 3 % et 10 % de la population. Cela signifie que les premiers sont des «francophones réels» (environ 170 000 locuteurs en incluant les coopérants européens), alors que les seconds ne connaissent que superficiellement cette langue. En réalité, la langue française constitue une langue véhiculaire uniquement pour les Burundais très scolarisés (les «lettrés») ayant terminé leurs études secondaires ou encore ayant poursuivi des études supérieures. Eux seuls maîtrisent les deux langues officielles. Dans les petites entreprises commerciales, le swahili reste aussi une langue importante. Il est enseigné dans les universités, utilisé dans les médias électroniques et parlé par un nombre non négligeable de jeunes urbains, de musulmans ou d'étrangers, notamment les «étrangers» d’origine africaine." source As we see, and have seen time and time again, the presence of French is quite superficial but enough for the country to be called "francophone". What are the cost-benefits of switching from French to English for Rwanda and presumably for all the other "francophone" countries watching? Yes, there are certain costs related to changing many official documents and language training for government employees and people who had previously had to use French extensively. Is this cost enormous? I have no idea. Who is most angry about this decision? Who had the most to lose? It turns out that it was teachers, and especially teachers of French. It seems that quite a few teachers were actually fired. And now there is a massive effort to recruit teachers to teach English. There are some costs there. What about the general population that used kinyarwanda for most of its daily activities? There probably isn't that big a change after all. Those government employees that the public dealt with still speak kinyarwanda as before although the forms to be filled out are now in English. What are the advantages? The dominant one is of course economic integration with the neighbouring countries and South Africa not too distant that all use English. Just as in Europe English has become the de facto lingua franca of the European Union, English is the language of regional integration in that part of Africa. And of course as a language of global communication, English is the way to go. I think this lesson will not be lost on the other "francophone" countries of Africa as they see how the results in Rwanda. Burundi will probably be the next to go. The linguistic situation of the other countries is very different from that of Rwanda, but a country like the Cameroons could possibly make the switch. Remember that right in the heart of West and Central Africa is the powerhouse, Nigeria, that dwarfs all of the francophone African countries. (In passing, I would like to point out that I'm seeing the more and more reference to la francophonie as "pays qui ont le français en partage"). And why could the Républqique démocratique du Congo not switch to English? As unlikely as it might appear, it probably would not be that difficult, and the advantages would be quite tangible. Edited by s_allard on 22 November 2011 at 4:39am 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5434 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 131 of 135 22 November 2011 at 5:02am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
As a final post on the topic, unless I am provoked, I would like to look at some of the advantages on a purely linguistic level of switching from French to English as official language.
As much as I love my mother tongue, I will be the first to admit that it is unnecessarily complicated and highly intolerant of regional differences. Just consider the fact that the final arbiter of proper usage is the Académie française, a group of 40 old men and and few women who call themselves immortels and parade around in fancy green suits. It should be noted that membership is reserved for French citizens. There are no Québécois and no Africans. The only African who served on the Académie was Léopold Sédar Senghor, an ex-president of Senegal who had French citizenship. If you look at the language itself, French is full of all kinds of complicated rules that, I think, are there just to allow certain classes of people to display their knowledge of the language. It is interesting to see what elements of the language are eliminated when it comes into contact with other languages and is simplified. French has a very complicated verb system with all kinds of exceptions and spelling idiosyncrasies. The gender system (feminine and masculine nouns) and the gender agreement system is complex. Something like the agreement of what is called pronominal verbs is a nightmare even for native speakers. It's no wonder that French has this long tradition of books on the difficulties of the language. I think it is totally absurd to attempt to teach such an arcane system to young Africans. English has its complexities but they are nothing like French. English verbs are simple compared to the intricacies of conjugating French verbs. No grammatical gender. And, above all, the English-speaking world is more tolerant of differences. No language academy. No centralization of language standards in one country. See the existence of many different varieties of English throughout the world. 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| lecavaleur Diglot Senior Member Canada Joined 4781 days ago 146 posts - 295 votes Speaks: English*, French Studies: German, Spanish | Message 132 of 135 22 November 2011 at 7:17pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Outlandish? You sure do throw that word around quite a lot. You might do well to look it up. There is nothing I mentioned that hasn't first been mentioned elsewhere in the press, so there is no outlandish character whatsoever to those statements. Now, if I had simply made something up, that would be a different story, but you yourself admit that such ideas have been disseminated elsewhere. You can say that they are incorrect and explain why; that's another story, but outlandish is a pretty strong and kind of insulting way to describe something and in this context, it's just plain wrong. Edited by lecavaleur on 22 November 2011 at 7:22pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Spanky Senior Member Canada Joined 5960 days ago 1021 posts - 1714 votes Studies: French | Message 133 of 135 23 November 2011 at 2:09am | IP Logged | ||||||||
|
OMGoodness, I am so late to this thread, and have almost missed all the fun. I was attracted here just now as a result of feeling a disturbance in the Force so deeply profound that it could only be explained by either:
1. the destruction of an entire planet; or (as here) 2. the practically unprecedented instance of two Canadians defiantly playing against our politeness stereotype by actually disagreeing with each other!
Just to keep the thread derailed for fun, I see wikipedia notes that Montreal (a city inconveniently located neither in Europe nor Africa) is the second largest primarily French-speaking city in the world, after Paris. Is it too late in the thread for me to express outrage on behalf of the frequently snubbed country of Canada? Probably. But I was disgruntled when I read this just now, and I am keen to regain a gruntled frame of mind, so there ya go. Edited by Spanky on 23 November 2011 at 2:27am 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| s_allard Triglot Senior Member Canada Joined 5434 days ago 2704 posts - 5425 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish Studies: Polish | Message 134 of 135 23 November 2011 at 6:03am | IP Logged | ||||||||
Let me demonstrate why I believe these statements are outlandish. I won't argue with the first paragraph of lecavaleur's statement except I would disagree with the part about the "cost...in terms of teaching quality." Is this a statement of fact or a value judgment. But this is a minor point compared with the rest. The second paragraph, like earlier statements about the workings of the Charter of the French Language" are just anecdotal statements without any supporting evidence. As I have shown in my own posts, I like facts and I tend to quote extensively--I apologize for this--because I don't like to imagine things. Let's start with " Also, the choice to switch to English was not so much an anti-French political statement..." The contrary would seem to be true. The decision was made after the president Paul Kagame was indicted by a French court for the murder of three French citizens who were on a plane carrying the previous Rwandan president and that was shot down by a missile as it approached the airport of the capital. This was the incident that led to the genocide of 1994. Many observers believe that the actions of the French court are what precipitated the decision to get rid of French. Here is a passage I actually quoted earlier: "Then, in 2006, a French judge dropped a bombshell. He accused Rwandan President Paul Kagame, a Tutsi, of helping start the genocide because of his alleged complicity in the rocket attack of April 6, 1994, that killed Rwanda’s Hutu president Juvenal Habyarimana—the spark for the massacre. Furious, Kagame shut down the French Embassy, kicked out the ambassador, ordered Radio France Internationale off the air in Rwanda, and closed the local French cultural centre. Two years later, in 2008, Kagame announced that English—which became one of Rwanda’s official languages in 1994—would replace French as the official language of instruction in the country’s schools. In the wake of that momentous step, thousands of Rwandan schoolteachers were fired because they couldn’t teach the new language." Relations between France and Rwanda were tense until 2010 when French president Sarkozy made a reconciliation visit to Rwanda and Rwandan president Paul Kagame visited France in September 2011. I suggest people have a look at this BBC article Kagame Reconciliation Visit to France So, the switch to English was very much an anti-French statement. Now let's look at "...as a capricious expression of the President's Americanophilia." On what grounds is the statement true? A capricious expression? What Americanophilia? Where's the proof? Kagame received military training in the US and considerable military assistance. But the fact of the matter is that Kagame's connection with the English-speaking world is through his long exile with thousands of fellow Rwandans in neighbouring Uganda. He experienced first-hand the advantages of using English. And why does switching to English have to be an expression of Americanophilia? Why can it not be a combination of anti-French sentiment and a rational decision based on personal experience of all those former exiles and an analysis of the advantages of English. And the statement that I find really outlandish is this, "... but I'm not sure that Americafrique is any better than Françafrique. In the end, it all comes back to the same thing." This is portraying the decision as something in the interests of the US and not in the interests of the Rwandan people, after all it will be just as bad as before. I find this very insulting to Rwanda. As I argued in previous posts, there is a lot to be said in favour of replacing French with English. It won't be all the same thing. In fact, I have even suggested that Burundi in particular and other so-called francophone countries would find it advantageous to make the shift. In fact, I am willing to go on record as saying that all of so-called francophone Africa should seriously consider substituting English for French. But this is not the focus here. The fundamental issue is that the change of official languages was a decision made in the interests of the country. Of course, it was facilitated by the existence of an English-speaking cadre of prominent persons who had lived in English-speaking Africa for many years. It was only normal that they should see the advantages of English. The incident with France only precipitated the decision. 2 persons have voted this message useful | |||||||||
| Haldor Triglot Senior Member France Joined 5619 days ago 103 posts - 122 votes Speaks: Norwegian*, English, Swedish Studies: French, Spanish | Message 135 of 135 23 November 2011 at 8:39pm | IP Logged | ||||||||
Yes, but is Montreal a sizeable city compared to others? Say, like Paris, or Kinshasa, which is indeed bigger than Montreal, if we can call it 'francophone', which it may not be but still might become! Québec has what, ten million inhabitants, give or take a few. Even if French is spoken in parts of Belgium, Switzerland and Canada, it's not the sole or most important language in these states, which are in fact not very populous. Let's take German, people speak it in Switzerland and Austria aside from Germany, but how many people learn German? In Noway it used to be the common second/third language, but today nobody speaks it. It's been replaced by Spanish, Chinese etc.. Important languages by the numbers of speakers. All I wanted to discuss in this thread was whether French is on the rise or decline in Africa, which will probably determine whether it loses (all) importance or not. I guess there's a reason why they created l'Association Francaise or La Francophonie. I mean if Africa were to speak French, it would have a huge impact on the importance of French, and the role of France internationally.... 1 person has voted this message useful |
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
