ELL: Re: Flemish vs. French in Brussels

[Niels Wijnen]

This is quite complicated, but I will try to answer.

> How, i.e. under what circumstances and when, Brussels became French-speaking
> (as far as I know, the presence of Flemish is quite reduced there in spite of
> official bilingualism, please correct me)?

This is certainly true, but there no statistics for this, because in Belgium
subnationalities are strict forbidden. (that means that on your identitycard
everything is in 2 languages, and for example that you can't have a seperate
ticket-window for Flemish- or French-speaking people in bilingual Brussels).

> How do you explain the fact that French-speaking Brussels is surrounded by
> Flemish-speaking suburbs?

Because Brussels is geograffically situated ín Flanders. There is a small area
of Flanders between the southern border of Brussels and the nothern border of
Walloon. Brussels used to be a Flemish city.

> Are the Bruxellois "francicized" Flemish (I don't know if the ethnic
> classification makes sense in the Belgian case, what about patronyms)? If
> Brussels became a French-speaking city when and because
> French had more prestige, why could French disappear from the major
> Flemish cities (after Flemish was officialized) but maintain its domination in
> Brussels?

In Flanders there is one official language: Dutch. And in the French community
(not the same as Walloon) there's also just one language: French. Only Brussels
is bilingual. But of course didn't the transformation of Flanders into a
monolingual area go very smoothly. The French speaking people in Flanders
didn't want to give up their language like that. In 1968, for example, there
were some major problems in Leuven (in the province of Flemish Brabant). The
famous Catholic University of Leuven was bilingual and because Leuven is not
far from Brussels, the Flemish students were afraid that the (Flemish) area
between Brussel and Leuven would become French. And when some French-speaking
professors of the university came out with the idea to make that area
bilingual, there were huge demonstrations of the Flemish students. And after
some time, the government decided to found a new city southern of Brussels and
to put there the French part of the University of Leuven. Louvain-la-Neuve
(French for "the new Leuven") was born.

This problem (the extention of the French language in Flanders out of Brussels)
is called the oilspot.

That oilspot is still a problem. Around the bilingual Brussels area (that are
19 municipalities) there are some Flemish municipalities that have so-
called 'facilities' for the French speaking people. That means that they may
communicate with the municipality in French (they have to ask, it is not
standard), and they can have some other things also in French (subsidiated
education, tribunal things, etc). This measure used to be a level crossing
accommodation, but has become a right. Note that this is only in a few
municipalities around Brussels and some municipalities near to the language
border (also two or three municipalities in Walloon, so with facilities for the
Flemish people).

This problem has recently come up again. The Counsel of Europe has, for the
second time, send a Swiss investigator (both of them spoke French, but no
Dutch) with the question if there are minorities in Belgium (now there aren't
any, except the German speaking people in Eastern Belgium). The first report
(yes, there are minorities in Belgium) was rejected by the counsel (well, it
wasn't rejected, but there were some amendments that minimalized the report).
The second report is a couple of weeks ago accepted by the commission, and will
be discussed in the counsel later this year (I will post the result then). This
report says that there are NO minorities in Belgium, BUT that the French
speaking people are a minority in Flanders. To me this looks a little bit
ridiculous because the minority treaty (which is not YET accepted in Belgium,
but it should become because of some agreements between the both language
groups) doesn't recognise regional minorities. And íf Belgium (Flanders
actually) should implement what the report says (recognise the French minority
with all the consequences), then all the Belgium compromises that are build the
last 50 years will be trown away. And this will certainly lead 'till the
indepence of Flanders. No wonder that the Federal ministers, and also the big
political parties in Walloon, minimalize the consequences of the report (all
the Flemish political parties rejected immediatly the report). They say that it
certainly can't destroy the language laws that are accepted by 2/3th of the
Belgium parlementaries ánd by a majority in the both language groups.


I hope it is a little bit more clear now. Otherwise you just ask.

Niels,


----
Endangered-Languages-L Forum: endangered-languages-l at cleo.murdoch.edu.au
Web pages http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/lists/endangered-languages-l/
Subscribe/unsubscribe and other commands: majordomo at cleo.murdoch.edu.au
----