# racaille



## brendan

the BBC's news website has a report on the current disturbances in France where they transate Nicolas Sarkozy's recent use of the word 'racaille' as 'rabble'.

Do you think this is appropriate? I thought 'racaille' was a lot stronger than that - certailnly given the public and press reaction in France.


----------



## Danse Macabre

Well, in this context the word "racaille" refers to the equivalent of member of a gang in USA.

It is used to design people living in "ghettos" (well, this word is not really appropriate as that word has a much stronger sense than it refers to in France).


----------



## Kelly B

Si, ghetto en anglais, quand il s'agit d'un endroit où vivent beaucoup de gens d'une minorité ethnique qui ne sont pas des African-Americans, "ethnic ghetto,"  est pareil au mot français. Tu as bien raison que le mot employé tout seul, sans adjectif, a des connotations plus fortes et péjoratives.
Désolée - je ne m'adresse pas à la question posée...


----------



## xav

To Brendan : In good French, certainly. But I've the impression the term is softening in the banlieues, where it has become "caillera" (the local slang, dating from the XIXth, puts the first syllable of words at the end), with a (light) touch of sympathy. The condemning moral meaning is disappearing, so that I think a young boy of a banlieue may call himself a "caillera" and even, if he wants to be understood by classical speakers, a "racaille" - what a more classical speaker certainly wouldn't do, especially if he is.

This is part of a general mouvement I've noticed and find very interesting : despite all the violence, drug and dispair you can see and feel in those banlieues, the language remains very soft, much softer than French itself. The most commonly used insults are "bâtard" and "bouffon", which are rather soft, especially when compared to German or English ones. It certainly comes from the Arabic, so I came to the theory that verbal violence decreases from North to South in Europe. 
What do you think of that ?


----------



## geve

The word "racaille" recently came up in this thread on the word "lowlife" ; as you'll see my idea of "racaille" was : _young boys wearing trendy sweatpants and baseball caps and hanging out in front of McDonald's with very loud rap music..._
But then Agnès kindly corrected me with a TLFi definition  

So I've been thinking about it and came to this conclusion :
> "la racaille" in its original definition, to be used at the singular form exclusively, could translate into "lowlife"
> the more recent use "une racaille" used to describe one person ("des racailles" for several) would be closer to the picture I had in mind... and seems to fit with what Xav said (one can possibly want to be a _racaille_, but nobody likes being called a _lowlife_... and here the problem is probably that the same word doesn't have the same meaning depending on who says it. And the debate is about what the word means when pronounced by Sarkozy...)

This is only a personal deduction, I will appreciate any other advice on that !


----------



## xav

Bonjour, Geve

Je ne crois pas que "une racaille" soit plus récent que le collectif "la racaille", qui en dérive à mon avis : dans son sens individuel fort, le terme est ancien, je me demande même s'il ne vient pas de l'araméen via l'Evangile (Mat. 5,22 : "celui qui dit à son frère "Raca" est possible du Sanhédrin" - le tribunal suprême).


----------



## geve

Effectivement je crois que vous avez raison Xav, ce n'est pas un usage récent... d'ailleurs je viens de remarquer la dernière ligne de la définition du TLFi :


> [Désigne un, des individu(s)] *Synon. de *_*canaille*. __Ils ont mis une machine derrière le mur, ces racailles!_ (ZOLA, _Assommoir_, 1877, p. 788).


 => mea culpa  

Il semblerait tout de même que le terme collectif et le terme appliqué à un individu ont un sens différent... non ?

And concerning the question that started the thread, according to WordReference dictionary it seems that "rabble" can have both meanings too, depending if it applies to a group or a person. Am I wrong ?


----------



## xav

Tout à fait d'accord pour dire que le collectif "la racaille" est très péjoratif, et vulgaire, au point d'ailleurs de risquer de dégrader l'image de celui qui l'utilise ...


----------



## brendan

thanks for all the replies. But I still can't help feeling that in English, rabble just doesn't do justice to the word - it seems very similar to the common and _very_ deragatory use of the word 'knacker' in Ireland - to hear a politician refer to a section of the community as a 'bunch of knackers' would be outrageous!


----------



## Ratona

When I read the news a few days ago, M. Sarkozy's 'racaille' had been translated as 'scum' - which I thought was an extremely strong and low register word for a politician to use. I did notice that the latest article had softened his word to 'rabble'. The power of journalists, eh?


----------



## emmap

racaille: pej. ensemble d'individus louches, craints ou meprises. 

I would have translated bad guy, my dictionnary riffraff.

Hope it helps: in france there is actually a lot of social problem in ghettos aka cites where lots of socially unfavoured people are put. Hence problems add and violence grows up.


----------



## zam

With such words as 'racaille', 'scum', etc. whatever their origins, we have to be very mindful of 3 factors, mainly how 'strong'/'insulting' (for want of a better term) the word is in one's given language, the register of language of course and who exactly the intended target is.

For instance, 'rabble' is not particularly strong in terms of register of language (standard English) even if its intended target can be just as undesirable as the French 'racaille'. But is not always that derogatory, e.g teachers sometimes use it jokingly in class to address a group of rowdy kids and it is not uncommon to hear people joke about other noisy folks behaving like 'the rabble' or 'the Victorian rabble'. Think of 'rabble-rouser' ('fomentateur de troubles') as well, a rather academic term. We could thus say that 'rabble' is a weak-ish word but is intended, by and large, to define a rather unpleasant group of people. 'Racaille' is not in this category, as the word itself is 'strong' and has much stronger connotations and racist undertones to boot. 
Best standard equivalent to 'racaille' to me is: 'scum/scumbags'  with 'riffraff' as second best choice.
'lowlife'= 'moins-que-rien', 'voyou', and why not use Boudard's 'cloportes', after all they were exactly the sort of 'lowlifes' he was writing about.
As for 'rabble', in its use in British English, best equivalents are probably: 'les parasites', 'la plèbe', etc.


----------



## SoupleCommeLeVent

So are we saying that M Sarkozy used "la racaille" with the knowledge that this word refers not only to "individus louches, craints ou meprises" but more specifically to "ensemble d'individus louches, craints ou meprises" of Arab descent?


----------



## DDT

xav said:
			
		

> But I've the impression the term is softening in the banlieues, where it has become "caillera" (the local slang, dating from the XIXth, puts the first syllable of words at the end), with a (light) touch of sympathy. The condemning moral meaning is disappearing, so that I think a young boy of a banlieue may call himself a "caillera" and even, if he wants to be understood by classical speakers, a "racaille" - what a more classical speaker certainly wouldn't do, especially if he is.



Let me respectfully disagree...as far as I heard it used "caillera" is not that nicely used...IMHO it denotes a sort of further scorn towards the "racaille"...

DDT


----------



## HistofEng

et "un caille"?

Est-il un mot qui est similaire? Je l'ai entendu dans une chanson, main il est un peu difficile a trouver un definition.


----------



## geve

I don't quite agree on the racist connotation of "racaille"... Of course you could say that the term applies to people living in _cités_ and therefore a kind of "ethnic ghetto" as has been said previously. But still, the word "racaille" itself does not apply exclusively to a particular ethnic population. In the movie "La Haine" for example, I think one could depict the characters as "racailles" warning: in its plural form - see my post #7) ; Vincent Cassel as well as the others...

As for Sarkozy's use of the word, well, the man is known for harsh sentences... He can say stuff like "il faut nettoyer ça au karsher"... He might be targeting a certain category of voters - but let's not enter in a politics debate here  
The point is, now that the word has been heard in his mouth, he managed to launch a debate of the kind that we find a lot on this forum : what is the real connotation of the word and the intent of the person who said it... And this thread testifies how different the word can sound to one ear or another !

Now I had another thought about that, let me share with you an hypothesis  : one can accept to be called a _racaille_ by sb who is part of the same group ; but will understand it pejoratively when it's said by someone who clearly belongs to a different social category. 
Like the English word "nigger" I think ? which (as I've been told once) is OK between black people, but not from a white one ? (English natives correct me if I'm wrong !)
What do you think of that, am I totally _à côté de la plaque_ here ??

As for the word "caille", I'd say it's an abreviation of "caillera" which itself comes from "racaille"...


----------



## bongbang

Here's what I found:


> It appears that Nicolas Sarkozy was deliberately demonized in the TV reports of him using his strong language earlier in the week. In fact, there was footage available showing Sarkozy using the word “racaille” (riff-raff) while speaking to an inhabitant of Clichy-sous-Bois who herself had just used the word while expressing how fed up she was with local crime.
> 
> Sarko answered her using her own words. In politics, that’s a way of communicating empathy. Her words were edited out and never shown in the insuing days. His weren’t. “Arrêt sur Images” showed the whole exchange today.


----------



## xav

DDT said:
			
		

> Let me respectfully disagree...as far as I heard it used "caillera" is not that nicely used...IMHO it denotes a sort of further scorn towards the "racaille"...
> 
> DDT


Cher DDT

scum
This is about "racaille", but "caillera" is certainly weaker.

J'adhère pour ma part aux idées de Geve. 
It's the well-known phenomenon of "recuperation" of an insult into part of one's identity. "J'suis ptêt' une caillera, ma is moi j'suis honnête !"


----------



## Lizamichael

geve said:


> I don't quite agree on the racist connotation of "racaille"... Of course you could say that the term applies to people living in _cités_ and therefore a kind of "ethnic ghetto" as has been said previously. But still, the word "racaille" itself does not apply exclusively to a particular ethnic population. In the movie "La Haine" for example, I think one could depict the characters as "racailles" warning: in its plural form - see my post #7) ; Vincent Cassel as well as the others...
> 
> As for the word "caille", I'd say it's an abreviation of "caillera" which itself comes from "racaille"...


Tout à fait d'accord! Absolutely! and that's why as a responsible politician, he should not have used this term...


----------



## wildan1

Getting back to the original question, the famous Sarkozy term _racaille _is being widely reported in the US media this week as _scum_ -- indeed very derogatory.

_riff-raff_ is almost a silly-sounding term for people that elites consider below them
_scum _is a serious insult--it implies less than human _(pourriture ?)_


----------



## klodaway

This post is getting pretty long, but I'll add my 2 cents.

My choice of translation would be "scum".

On the word "racaille" :
I believe that the important thing in the use of the term "racaille" is WHO is using it.
i totally agree with Polaire that there is a similarity with the N-word in AE in the sense that the kids and youngs who are supposed to fit the term "racaille" are know using the term in a proud way or for bragging purposes.
But  - even in the mouth of these youngs - the context of use is important, it can be positive or negative.

What is important is that in the mouth of a politician (even more so for Sarkozy who is known for being tough on crime in general) it is obviously used in a pejorative way.
The exact phrase was "on va vous débarasser de cette racaille" (refering to people yelling at Sarkozy because he was touring a "cité" at night with a group of policemen and invited journalists). Even if used in a specific context, answering to a person who had used the word first, that phrase could only be understood as a blanket statement.


----------



## SFguy

I agree that the English translations for racaille are lame! It's great to see some discussion about this. 

Wildan's right about "scum" being too strong. And "riff-raff" well, that's something old ladies might say and sounds silly.

I've also seen "hooligans" as a translation, but at least in the U.S. that word belongs to the 1950's and films like Blackboard Jungle.

In conversational use, I think "punks" gets closer--despite the extra associations that aren't relevant here. 

Maybe a better, more contemporary choice would be "gangbangers" which alludes to both look and lifestyle.

I first read Sarko's comment translated in English on the BBC site, and had no idea he had used the word "racaille" which I already knew from a previous trip to France. 

If I'd read this instead:  "We're going to get rid of these punks/gangbangers for you," I think I would have had a much better understanding of the anger generated. 

That said, I don't think any of the English choices work in the same way described where les racailles can use the word among themselves without insult. 



wildan1 said:


> Getting back to the original question, the famous Sarkozy term _racaille _is being widely reported in the US media this week as _scum_ -- indeed very derogatory
> 
> _riff-raff_ is almost a silly-sounding term for people elites consider below them
> _scum _is a serious insult--it implies less than human _(pourriture ?)_


----------



## KaRiNe_Fr

"Racaille" a été utilisé à dessein, celui qui l'a employé savait très bien ce qu'il disait.
cf. TLFi : 
"Péj. Partie du peuple la plus pauvre, considérée comme la plus méprisable."


----------



## Mloun

Je comprends mieux maintenant pourquoi la sorcière Maléfik avait dit "la racaille" en parlant des 3 fées, dans la Belle au Bois Dormant de Disney (en même temps ce film est trés ancien^^).


----------



## daisymax

I think a close translation to racaille, in terms of connotation, is thug.  Sarkozy said that people had had enough of "ces racailles"; wouldn't it have been just as shocking in English for a politician to refer to a collective group of people as "thugs"? There is a lot of _mépris _attached to the term, as there is to racaille. What does anyone else think?


----------



## sixty

To me, "riffraff" is a good translation of "racaille".

I think that the sense of the French term "racaille" is different from the one of the English term "rabble". 

Indeed, "rabble" and "riffraff" both refer to low social classes, but it seems to me that "riffraff" strongly includes the notion of "ill-behaved", what "rabble" does not (?). If my statement is correct, then "riffraff" is the good word.


----------



## wildan1

sixty said:


> To me, "riffraff" is a good translation of "racaille".
> 
> it seems to me that "riffraff" strongly includes the notion of "ill-behaved", what "rabble" does not (?). If my statement is correct, then "riffraff" is the good word.


Not a good choice--see others' comments above. It's not a word that a "tough guy" would choose--more the choice of your slightly snobbish upper class grandmother who has to deal with the common class in the street (not for a crime, just even to be around them).

But _thugs_ may indeed be a better match. Nobody told the media that here--_scum _is the word everyone reports--highly derogatory.


----------



## klodaway

But isn't there in "thug" a connotation of being part at some level of organised crime? (which is not the case for "racaille")
Or of carrying weapon, having a criminal record (even petty crimes), etc.? (which is not the case either with "racaille")


----------



## wildan1

klodaway said:


> But isn't there in "thug" a connotation of being part at some level of organised crime? (which is not the case for "racaille")
> Or of carrying weapon, having a criminal record (even petty crimes), etc.? (which is not the case either with "racaille")



Merriam-Webster says:


> Main Entry: *thug*
> Pronunciation: 'th&g
> Function: _noun_
> Etymology: Hindi & Urdu _thag,_ literally, thief
> *:* a brutal ruffian or assassin.


 ...interesting; I didn't know it was a word from South Asia.

_brutal ruffian_ is what I understand _racaille_ to be--nothing about being armed; but certainly ready for a fight. 

A _gangster_ would be organized, but not _a ruffian._


----------



## geve

To sum up on the word "racaille", in my understanding it can be used in various ways: 

*to tease *- among a group of peers. It can even be used as a compliment or an acknowledgment that the person is part of the group.
*to disapprove/criticize a general atmosphere* - to describe (as a whole) the population of a place for instance. Eg. _C'est pas un endroit pour une fille le soir ici, y a toujours de la racaille qui traîne_. Meaning "dodgy people, layabouts, potentially source of nuisance".
*to condemn/vilify a group of people*. _Les immigrés, c'est tous de la racaille, il faudrait tous les renvoyer dans leur pays._ (not displaying any personal opinion here!! )
When the word is said by a politician, the third meaning comes to mind. BUT - and that's where Sarkozy is being foxy - in the specific context that started a worldwide debate (even in France) on the connotations of this French word, he was replying to a woman (a dweller of some _quartier sensible_) who had used the term (she asked Sarkozy something like "quand allez-vous nous débarasser de toute cette racaille ?"). So his defense was that he was merely re-using the term with the same intent than that of the woman - which could have been meaning #2.

The thing is that the average citizen is entitled to use whatever word suits his liking, ça n'engage que lui (I'm not sure how to say this in English ). A representative of the state has more responsibility in his choice of words, and as we well know on this forum, le choix des mots n'est pas innocent.


----------



## ran

Mais il faut absolument différencier, comme dans de trop rares posts précédents. Pour les francophones ces différences sont assez évidentes parce qu'on entend ces mots régulièrement dans des contextes différents, mais je doute que ce le soit tout autant pour des personnes ne vivant pas en francophonie.

1) _*la* racaille_ et _*une *racaille_ d'une part 

2) _une racaille_ et _un(e) caillera_ d'autre part

Dans le sens 2), le terme me fait penser à *Rude boys* dans la Jamaïque des 60s/70s. Les jeunes chanteurs de reggae (issus des ghettos de Kingston pour la grande majorité) se proclamaient _rude boys_ avec fierté dans certaines chansons mais critiquaient aussi les mauvaises mannières des _rude boys_ dans d'autres...cf Bob Marley & Cie


----------



## ayupshiplad

daisymax said:


> I think a close translation to racaille, in terms of connotation, is thug. Sarkozy said that people had had enough of "ces racailles"; wouldn't it have been just as shocking in English for a politician to refer to a collective group of people as "thugs"? There is a lot of _mépris _attached to the term, as there is to racaille. What does anyone else think?


I am quite surprised that no-one has brought this up yet, but I always thought that the word 'racaille' in Sarkozy's speech was best translated as 'chav'?


----------



## wildan1

_Chav_ is quite specifically a British term--not understood over here. It could only work for a British audience...if it works.


----------



## ayupshiplad

Yes, I know it takes some explaining in America, but I didn't want to declare it as a British term because I don't know if they use it in Ireland, but presumably so. 

I've always understood 'racaille' as the closest you get in French to 'chav', and that's how I was told to translate it, but the fact that so many British people have posted on this subject and none of them suggested it, has made me doubt my translation!


----------



## windeatt

Further to the word "chav" in the UK - I'd never heard this expression till I moved up to the North East in the early 90s.

However, up here, it's pronounced CHARVER or CHARV with a long 'A' as in the word 'far'. But when the word moved down south it was pronounced CHAV with a short 'A' as in 'Alice' - very strangely the opposite pronunciation of most words from north to south, e.g. bath (pronounced BARTH in the south but with a short A in the north).

If you type CHARVERS into the BBC website search box you will find some very good illustrative articles.


----------



## DrD

SFguy said:


> One thing is certain: "babble" is a poor translation, and should have been corrected long ago.


'Babble' would, indeed be a terrible translation. Rabble however, is OK - in BE it refers to the idea of a crowd of people who are causing trouble, but, in general, more as a spontaneous outbreak of lawlessness rather than an organised gang.

I quite liked the suggestion of 'thugs'. Chav however would not work at all. Apart from the fact that our American cousins would not understand (it is a BE term, but actually comes from India), it doesn't fit. A chav is someone who is common and has bad taste, but not necessarily someone who is a trouble-maker.

I think when translating something like this, you have to take into account not only what is the closest equivalent of the word, but also what would be said in an equivalent situation in the language into which you are translating. I cannot imagine a British politician using the term 'scum' in this context. If it were translated as that, I think it would give a false impression to anglophone readers of the severity of what Sarkozy said - in BE this would be completely unacceptable


----------



## SFguy

DrD said:


> I quite liked the suggestion of 'thugs'.
> 
> I think when translating something like this, you have to take into account not only what is the closest equivalent of the word, but also what would be said in an equivalent situation in the language into which you are translating. I cannot imagine a British politician using the term 'scum' in this context. If it were translated as that, I think it would give a false impression to anglophone readers of the severity of what Sarkozy said - in BE this would be completely unacceptable


"Rabble" may be too BE for AE ears, though we certainly are used to hearing it in old films where "rabble" was used by either a Brit. actor or Amer. actor pretending to be Brit., usually in the context of an aristocratic disdain for the masses.

However "thugs" might be the best fit yet.

Interesting to hear the BE connotation for "gangbangers" (LOL!). I'll have to watch what I say if I ever get back to London. So yeah, cross that one out. 

You make a good point about trying to find an equivalent situational choice. Some situations though seem so specific to a country or culture where they occur. That makes it tough, when, say, here in the U.S. we don't sense a close match.

I do think that Sarkozy's use of "racaille" upset and surprised people not used to hearing a president employ that word. It was not terribly politically correct--and more like something one would expect from the Front National, no?


----------



## wildan1

SFguy said:


> "Rabble" may be too BE for AE ears, though we certainly are used to hearing it in old films where "rabble" was used by either a Brit. actor or Amer. actor pretending to be Brit., usually in the context of an aristocratic disdain for the masses.


I agree on _rabble_ being strange-sounding to an AE ear, but we do say/hear _rabble-rousers_. The problem is that it is a haughty-sounding term that would not upset anyone if a government minister used it.



> You make a good point about trying to find an equivalent situational choice. Some situations though seem so specific to a country or culture where they occur. That makes it tough, when, say, here in the U.S. we don't sense a close match. I do think that Sarkozy's use of "racaille" upset and surprised people not used to hearing a president employ that word. It was not terribly politically correct--and more like something one would expect from the Front National, no?


But Sarkozy wasn't president when he made this infamous comment. (Even though it didn't seem to prevent him from becoming president !)


----------



## SFguy

True, wildan. Sarkozy was a contender for the throne at the time, and still Minister of the Interior.

But in that position and given the media limelight he enjoyed, his use of the term provoked pas mal de shock because it was an uncommon franc-parler for someone in high office? 

And did it raise the unsettling question whether there's now a tacit acceptance of commonly used terms like _racaille_ to express marginalisation and social disapproval?


----------



## Chimel

SFguy said:


> And did it raise the unsettling question whether there's now a tacit acceptance of commonly used terms like _racaille_ to express marginalisation and social disapproval?


I do not think so. _Racaille_ is still closely associated with Sarkozy's statement and I think most French-speaking people would use it now "au second degré", as a sort of quote ("as Sarkozy said", whether you agree or not).


----------



## SFguy

_Racaile_ thus becomes "Sarkozy-speak" - lol! 

I noticed the Wikipedia entry has some interesting discussion about the word that enlarges its scope:


> "On parle de  _la racaille de la société_ pour désigner une frange non intégrée, dont les valeurs sociales ne s'accordent pas avec celle de la majorité, ou à laquelle la société refuse d'accorder un statut plein et entier de "partie du tout ."



All the more difficult to find a good match in English. At least not with any one word.


----------



## wildan1

> _la racaille de la société pour désigner une frange non intégrée_


That sounds like _the lunatic fringe_--as originally used by US President T. Roosevelt_. _But somehow it doesn't have the shock value of _racaille_... at least nowadays.


----------



## SFguy

With this context in mind, I was thinking_ social rejects_ though one would have to add the social fear factor back in, like _bullying bunch of social rejects_. 

A U.S. highschool kid might oversimplify with the broad catchall _losers_.


----------



## sarathepom

having lived in france for 18 years I would tend to percieve "racaille" as being a reference to people who tend to wear sports clothing all the time, hang out in front of mcdonalds, listen to rap and tend to hang out in gangs (hence the criminal/'scum' connotation the word has despite not all of them being criminals!!)

I'm trying to write an essay for uni and need to try and define a 'racaille' to an english person and I thought that a 'chav' was a similar thing: ie not completely politically incorrect but generally not percieved to be a compliment either  !

Does anyone have any clues as to how to best describe a "racaille" briefly ?


----------



## Gerard Samuel

I think "rabble" is too literary and does not convey the connotation. I have seen various French personal ads in which "la racaille" are considered a turn on, so given that fact, I would translate it as "thugs" or "toughs."


----------



## Bielsa

geve said:


> The word "racaille" recently came up in this thread on the word "lowlife" ; as you'll see my idea of "racaille" was : _young boys wearing trendy sweatpants and baseball caps and hanging out in front of McDonald's with very loud rap music..._
> But then Agnès kindly corrected me with a TLFi definition
> 
> So I've been thinking about it and came to this conclusion :
> > "la racaille" in its original definition, to be used at the singular form exclusively, could translate into "lowlife"
> > the more recent use "une racaille" used to describe one person ("des racailles" for several) would be closer to the picture I had in mind... and seems to fit with what Xav said (one can possibly want to be a _racaille_, but nobody likes being called a _lowlife_... and here the problem is probably that the same word doesn't have the same meaning depending on who says it. And the debate is about what the word means when pronounced by Sarkozy...)
> 
> This is only a personal deduction, I will appreciate any other advice on that !


Helpful. Thanks. I was trying to translate je me suis fait voler mon sac par des racailles. Lowlife fits very well I think. 

Lowlives or lowlifes plural? (It’s good to come here and find straight translations and not pontifications on sociology or demographics)


----------



## Louis XI

Bielsa said:


> Lowlives or lowlifes plural?


*Lowlifes*


----------



## Aristide

In 2005, the minister of police Sarkozy let the rioters set fire to hundreds of cars, but because he used the word "racailles", the media gave him the reputation of a super tough politician. That's how he was elected president two years later!

Racaille means rabble, and it used to be an uncountable noun, like rabble.
In the past, saying "une racaille" would have been seen as an uneducated grammar mistake. You could not imagine a top politician saying that.

But at some point, that word started being used humoristically as a countable noun to describe suburb dwellers who lack manners. In that sense, it can be translated as lowlife, but I think lowlife is much more derogatory, since it means "low life". By contrast, White people who get called "racailles" are unlikely to take offense. It's actually a funny word and it's a very weak word to use against thugs who attack people and set fire to their cars.

By the way, Sarkozy didn't say "on va vous débarrasser de cette racaille", which would have been the traditional use of the word. What he said was: "Vous en avez assez de cette bande de racaillles ? Ben on va vous en débarrasser !".



sarathepom said:


> having lived in france for 18 years I would tend to percieve "racaille" as being a reference to people who tend to wear sports clothing all the time, hang out in front of mcdonalds, listen to rap and tend to hang out in gangs (hence the criminal/'scum' connotation the word has despite not all of them being criminals!!)


That's what the word now means.


----------



## iuytr

Ce n'est pas facile à traduire car c'est un mot chargé de sens en français, en partie grâce ou à cause de Sarkozy qui l'a très largement popularisé.

Le mot est aujourd'hui clairement associé aux quartiers, à la banlieue et ethnicisé si je peux utiliser ce terme. Ce qui d'ailleurs a provoqué une appropriation du mot par les personnes ainsi désignées, par exemple dans les textes de rap. On trouve parfois la notion de culture racaille.


----------

