[lg policy] Canada: Bilingualism is no burden

[Harold Schiffman]

Bilingualism is no burden


By Graham FraserNovember 13, 2009Comments (9)


The Citizen has called for a renewed discussion on language. According
to last Saturday’s editorial, “Bilingualism revisited,” the question
raised at the University of Ottawa is a larger one: “whether the time
has come to give unilingual anglophones a break and free them from the
burden of learning French.”  The Citizen assumes that language
requirements are a burden for anglophones alone, and that the time has
come to give them a break, to liberate them. But learning French is no
more of a burden for anglophones than learning English is, for
francophones. Language policies do not exist to impose a burden. They
represent a value: the ability to serve people in the official
language of their choice.


Lester B. Pearson wanted a climate that would allow English-speaking
and French-speaking Canadians to work together, using their own
language and cultural values but with each fully appreciating and
understanding those of the other. This reflected Canadian values:
respect, democracy, public service, inclusiveness and generosity. And
in 1969, those values were translated into legislation; this year
marks the 40th anniversary of the Official Languages Act. Until 1969,
the only language requirements were for French-speaking Canadians, who
had to function in English. Every prime minister since, including
Stephen Harper, has worked to ensure that bilingualism is a two-way
street. Over 90 per cent of positions in the federal government that
are designated bilingual are filled by people who meet the language
requirements.


Unfortunately, most Canadian universities have been slow to respond to
this reality. Even though the federal government is Canada’s largest
employer and needs bilingual supervisors and executives, most
universities treat French as a foreign language to be taught in the
literature department rather than as a key to understanding Canadian
history, journalism, political science, public administration or law.
The University of Ottawa, Canada’s largest bilingual university, is
one of the great and honourable exceptions. Making bilingualism a
value rather than a burden has attracted students as varied as Senator
Hugh Segal, Premier Dalton McGuinty, former Supreme Court justice
Michel Bastarache, and current rector Allan Rock.


In order to attract immersion graduates, the university has a program
that supports English-speaking students who choose to take some of
their courses in French. Canada has never required bilingualism of its
citizens. Similarly, one does not have to be bilingual to be a student
or a professor at the University of Ottawa. Some study or teach in
English; others study or teach in French. Many are unilingual — a
reflection of the country, where 20 million speak no French and four
million speak no English. It is only natural that the university
administration should be able to serve professors and students in
either English or French. When it was suggested that a similar
requirement was a burden on the union, there was no quorum to debate
the policy. Does this mean, as the editorial suggests, that the
language policies had discouraged participation and weakened the
union? This is unlikely. Nothing generates dissent like injustice,
real or perceived.


It is disappointing that the largest daily newspaper in Canada’s
capital sees language policy only through the narrow perspective of a
debate on how unilingual anglophones could be “freed.”  The issue is
how the value of linguistic duality can be better understood, so that
all Canadians can feel represented and be served by their government,
whatever official language they speak.


Graham Fraser is Canada’s Commissioner of Official Languages.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/Bilingualism+burden/2220347/story.html

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents.
Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal.
(H. Schiffman, Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************

_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list