LL-L "Language politics" 2007.07.07 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

L O W L A N D S - L  -  05 July 2007 - Volume 03

=========================================================================

From: Kevin Caldwell <kevin.caldwell1963 at verizon.net>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2007.07.06 (04) [E]

In English, 'patois' is just a way of saying 'the local way of speaking' (as
opposed to what is considered the standard). I've never considered it to
have any sinister connotations.

Kevin Caldwell
----------

From: Mike Wintzer <k9mw at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2007.07.06 (04) [E]

Hi all,
Ron you wrote:

"In older French, patois denoted "incomprehensible, vulgar gibberish," and I
believe that much of this meaning remains, implying French language
superiority and supremacy. "

Dismaying as it is, you hit the nail on the head, Ron.

Would you believe that in 2007 there are still people who comment, when I
tell them that my children attend a bilingual French/Occitan school: "so
they learn to speak patois there."

Not what you think, this doesn't come from a French chauvinist (although it
may well do), but from someone whose mothertongue is...Occitan and who
firmly believes that her language is a despicable "déformation" of French,
her "patois". This an indication of the degree to which the French
state-organized brainwashing has worked in Occitania - and in the Bretagne,
Euskadi, etc., even in the Rossello, whose Catalan speakers have millions of
compatriots, enjoying some language rights, right across the border. Not LL,
so I stop.
Kumpelmenten, Mike Wintzer

----------

From: Mike Wintzer <k9mw at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2007.07.06 (07) [E] Hi all,

Elsie wrote:

"You might not know this historical Afrikaans titbit but Afrikaans
was called a 'patois' for centuries."

Any significance that the word "patois" originated from *FRENCH?*!!!

Mike Wintzer

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Language politics

Thanks, Kevin and Mike!

Kevin, I know that "patois" does not necessarily carry sinister connotations
when used in English, especially by Americans. But I have a feeling that
there's a lot of variation, particularly when some speakers refer to contact
varieties (e.g., Mauritian Creole or Jersey Norman) as "patois," when it
tends to comes with this color of déformé or dégradé, this idea of
"uneducated gibberish."

In the case of France and in the speech of strongly Francophile English
speakers it is, in my opinion, a different matter, because, as Mike
explains, patois is everything that is not Standard French. This includes
any variety of, for instance, Basque, Breton, Catalan, German and Occitan.
Breton and Occitan are languages based in France, and this includes
varieties that are or approach standard. Obviously, Breton, being a Celtic
language, is not some sort of français déformé.  Nor is Occitan, though this
is admittedly less obvious to the average person, since it belongs to the
same Gallo-Romance branch with French (as well as with
Catalan-Valencian-Balearic, Emilian-Romagnol, Franco-Provençal/Arpitan,
Ligurian, Lombard, Piedmontese and Venetian) and thus comes with lots of
cognate vocabulary (though more with Catalan).  But it is still not a French
offshoot and thus can not be considered déformé; it is derived from an old
language of which the Provençal (Occitan provençau) of the medieval
troubadours (Occitan trobadors) became the best-known dialect group.  We are
dealing with old and proud traditions of separate languages here, which
makes talk about patois and déformé rather degrading and insensitive.

However, in many cases incessant talk of patois in combination with
Francocentric education came to be adopted by native speakers themselves.
In the case of Franco-Provençal this (patouès) spread to Italy where now the
largest speaker community lives (mostly in the Aosta Valley) and Italian
picked it up (*patoà*).

Let's not forget that France is not the only member of this club. Examples
of this, complete with native speakers adopting the derogatory terminology
(as Mike mentions above), has traditions all over Europe.  It took the
European Language Charter to make countries and regions make up their minds
and finally recognize as languages varieties that previously were considered
dialects (or patois) of the "real" languages of the countries, where these
were related.  Thus, for instance, Walloon was no longer a subset of Belgian
French, Low Saxon no longer a group of Dutch dialects in the west and a
group of German dialects in the east, and Kashubian no longer a dialect
group of Polish (though many still don't agree with all of the above
examples).

Mike, the attitude of a native speaker you mentioned is nothing new to me.
I have come across it plenty of times in the case of Low Saxon.  Also, I
have now spoken with the third Scottish person that grew up with Scots and
still refers to it as "slang."  You could take the position that this is the
natural progression of language death and "survival of the fittest."
Alternatively, you could take the position that this is the result of a
strategy in which derogation eventually comes to be internalized by the
native speaker community, which results in "voluntary" abandonment of its
language (i.e., not passing it on) -- but then you'd run the risk of being
laughed out of the room as a subscriber to conspiracy theories.  Whatever
position you take, it seems to me that it all boils down to non-recognition
sooner or later bringing about language death in that it amounts to denial
of opportunities to maintain language confidence, pride and love, leave
alone opportunities to develop the language.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20070707/cb1f739a/attachment.htm>