# French in the year 2500



## RODGER

In a recent thread, Lucas, one of the moderators, stated "we have been using "envoyer une lettre " for centuries, why should we adopt "lettrer?" (or I would say "poster" ). I can see lots of reasons for doing so when I look at the evolution of the English language under the influence of North American speakers, but I see no similar francophone population (at least no similar one that is being listened to !) presently likely to exert such an influence. Indeed the excesses of xenophobia which induce some French people to ridicule the way in which Belgians, Swiss and Canadians express themselves and to insult their intelligence in this way could be argued as a way of preventing any such useful and enriching inputs to the French language, safely locked away in the vaults of the "Académie.

Discuss : You have 495 years 


 Rodger


----------



## Carlos Martínez Riera

Possibly for the same reasons no one has yet incorporated in english the verb 'to letter' instead of 'to post a letter' or 'to send a letter'.
Or am I wrong?
Carlos


----------



## DDT

RODGER said:
			
		

> In a recent thread, Lucas, one of the moderators, stated "we have been using "envoyer une lettre " for centuries, why should we adopt "lettrer?" (or I would say "poster" ). I can see lots of reasons for doing so when I look at the evolution of the English language under the influence of North American speakers, but I see no similar francophone population (at least no similar one that is being listened to !) presently likely to exert such an influence. Indeed the excesses of xenophobia which induce some French people to ridicule the way in which Belgians, Swiss and Canadians express themselves and to insult their intelligence in this way could be argued as a way of preventing any such useful and enriching inputs to the French language, safely locked away in the vaults of the "Académie.
> 
> Discuss : You have 495 years
> 
> 
> Rodger



I don't see what the fact that Lucas is a mod has to do with this thread.
Please consider that mods are WR members, first of all 

DDT


----------



## cuchuflete

Interesting topic.  In the Spanish forums conversations on this topic, very broadly defined, go on constantly, with impassioned arguments about the validity of a word used in one place, and not another.

I don't speak French, and so cannot engage in this conversation directly.  However, you have referred to 'any such useful and enriching inputs' without making it clear what these are.

Your opening line refers to Lucas according to his part time job.   The quotation, or paraphrase, whichever it is, certainly appears to be that of a forum member, and has nothing to do with his role as moderator.  What is your intent?

Do you wish to generalize this topic to the evolution of languages, and restraining forces, or limit it to the French language?  If it's the latter, perhaps you would elicit more and better responses in the French forums.  If you are interested in a broad discussion of how languages do and do not change, and why, you are surely in the right place for that conversation.

Saludos,
Cuchuflete--wearing the 'forum member' hat, unless clearly noted otherwise.


----------



## RODGER

Carlos Martínez Riera said:
			
		

> Possibly for the same reasons no one has yet incorporated in english the verb 'to letter' instead of 'to post a letter' or 'to send a letter'.
> Or am I wrong?
> Carlos


 
Well, what about "to mail" ?


 Rodger


----------



## RODGER

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Interesting topic. In the Spanish forums conversations on this topic, very broadly defined, go on constantly, with impassioned arguments about the validity of a word used in one place, and not another.
> 
> I don't speak French, and so cannot engage in this conversation directly. However, you have referred to 'any such useful and enriching inputs' without making it clear what these are.
> 
> Your opening line refers to Lucas according to his part time job. The quotation, or paraphrase, whichever it is, certainly appears to be that of a forum member, and has nothing to do with his role as moderator. What is your intent?
> 
> Do you wish to generalize this topic to the evolution of languages, and restraining forces, or limit it to the French language? If it's the latter, perhaps you would elicit more and better responses in the French forums. If you are interested in a broad discussion of how languages do and do not change, and why, you are surely in the right place for that conversation.
> 
> Saludos,
> Cuchuflete--wearing the 'forum member' hat, unless clearly noted otherwise.


 
Well, Cuchuflète if you must know, it's because this was a subject I was attempting to pursue, I thought quite legitimately, in a French forum, before I was ejected by another moderator, namely DDT, who told me I should take it to a "cultural" forum, so now i just wish you guys would get out of my hair and allow a little debate to happen. Ok ?

   Rodger


----------



## cuchuflete

RODGER said:
			
		

> Well, Cuchuflète if you must know, it's because this was a subject I was attempting to pursue, I thought quite legitimately, in a French forum, before I was ejected by another moderator, namely DDT, who told me I should take it to a "cultural" forum, so now i just wish you guys would get out of my hair and allow a little debate to happen. Ok ?
> 
> Rodger


Rodger,
If you were, as you suggest, "ejected" by another moderator, perhaps it was because you raised this discussion in the midst of another thread topic. Perhaps not. You can and should discuss that with the moderator in question.

As to your final remark here--I am addressing you in my role as a Moderator-- I strongly suggest that your tone is belligerent and out of place in this forum. Your debate is welcome. A nasty approach is not.

This is no place for whining and schoolyard brawls. Debate the issues with all the facts you have at hand. When your style becomes confrontational, take a deep breath and think before you write, please. 

At the moment we are some ten thousand members. Two or three individuals seem to enjoy engaging in personal battle with the moderators. You appear far too intelligent to join that group.

saludos,
Cuchuflete


----------



## RODGER

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Rodger,
> If you were, as you suggest, "ejected" by another moderator, perhaps it was because you raised this discussion in the midst of another thread topic. Perhaps not. You can and should discuss that with the moderator in question.
> 
> As to your final remark here--I am addressing you in my role as a Moderator-- I strongly suggest that your tone is belligerent and out of place in this forum. Your debate is welcome. A nasty approach is not.
> 
> This is no place for whining and schoolyard brawls. Debate the issues with all the facts you have at hand. When your style becomes confrontational, take a deep breath and think before you write, please.
> 
> At the moment we are some ten thousand members. Two or three individuals seem to enjoy engaging in personal battle with the moderators. You appear far too intelligent to join that group.
> 
> Cuchuflete,
> I'll take your points one by one. I did not raise the point in the middle of another thread topic, it was the topic ! As for discussing it with the moderator, what pray would be the point, since he has closed the thread and told me to come here ?
> 
> I opened a thread for debate and was immediately bombarded by moderators telling me what I could and could not do. Check out my posts. I consider that I have given some valuable inputs to this site in the last few days. I should like to continue to do so. Kindly allow me to !
> 
> Rodger


----------



## cuchuflete

Thanks for the reply, Rodger...
So...Is the topic limited to French, and its evolution or lack of same, and the driving and constraining forces?  Or is it more broad...involving all languages?

Cuchuflete


----------



## RODGER

Well, thanks for the change of tone, I certainly appreciate that. The topic is limited to the french language and concerns its prospects of evolution under the influence of the french spoken in other parts of the world. I quoted Belgium, Switzerland and Canada, but of course there are many more nations in "la francophonie" and meetings of the Council of this community are well documented. What interests me is to look at what happened to the English language under the influence of North American speakers and to see what are the cultural factors encouraging or preventing this with the French language,what examples of international French can we find, what are they worth etc... that's it briefly.

cheers, go in peace

Rodger


----------



## DDT

RODGER said:
			
		

> As for discussing it with the moderator, what pray would be the point, since he has closed the thread and told me to come here ?



So that you might notice that forums ARE NO CHATROOMS. You keep on ignoring rules I had kindly addressed you to.




			
				RODGER said:
			
		

> I opened a thread for debate and was immediately bombarded by moderators telling me what I could and could not do.



Stop whining. Mods just asked you to respect rules all the other members are respecting.

DDT


----------



## cuchuflete

Sounds interesting.  As you use the 'influence of North American speakers' as an example of what you seem to perceive as a salubrious growth or evolution of English, perhaps you could say more about that as background, and then look at the similarities and disparities in the changes in French.

Also, what about the influence, if any, of migrants from the French-speaking Arabic countries to France?  Has there been much change in European French as a result of this?  In other words, FR=>North Africa,
presumably with some local evolution there, and then, through immigration, N.A. French=> France.

Cuchu





			
				RODGER said:
			
		

> Well, thanks for the change of tone, I certainly appreciate that. The topic is limited to the french language and concerns its prospects of evolution under the influence of the french spoken in other parts of the world. I quoted Belgium, Switzerland and Canada, but of course there are many more nations in "la francophonie" and meetings of the Council of this community are well documented. What interests me is to look at what happened to the English language under the influence of North American speakers and to see what are the cultural factors encouraging or preventing this with the French language,what examples of international French can we find, what are they worth etc... that's it briefly.
> 
> cheers, go in peace
> 
> Rodger


----------



## Podd

Rodger,

In the previous thread of “ couriellez-moi” your comments were very interesting and I agree with you on most it. However, the English as you start in your exposé “ have let go of there language” to embrace new ways of communication to evolve to the international communicating tool that the English language has become…hmmmmm I don’t think so, Oxford English evolved not by choice but by necessity. 300 millions American distorting the pure English maid Oxford change.

As for oversea French there is about 7 millions French speaking north American and most of them are in the province of Québec. And I don’t think has any power over the Parisian French ruling. What is 7 millions vs 60 in France ! 

If you would switch the mass of French speaking people, French would have evolve or change as English did so rapidly. Also FYI, within North America there is many different French accents and different ways of expression in every region. 

I really enjoy your comments,

Regards


----------



## Cath.S.

The fact is that languages evolve "naturally" in the sense that only academicians and the like - who are a tiny minority of the whole population of speakers in any given language - ever get to sit around and decide which word is going to get in the dictionary etc. The majority, though, does not act that way : they just speak, using words without really being aware of the choices they make. New words and phrases appear either through necessity (appearance of new technological items, new actions that one wasn't able to perform before) or through trend, or even through a mixture of necessity and trend : for example, since the PACS exists, we French chose to create a pronominal verb "se pacser", while we could have just said "se mettre en pacs." or such like. So, Rodger, the evolution you deem necessary is going on. It is very slow, but the phenomenon could get much faster - history has shown us that when a war goes on, when a country is invaded for instance, its native language can undergo very swift changes ; that sort of alterations belong to the category of necessary ones I mentioned before.
Of course I am not saying this will happen - merely that it could.


----------



## Carlos Martínez Riera

RODGER said:
			
		

> Well, what about "to mail" ?
> 
> 
> Rodger


 
To mail... what? A letter, a parcel... It is like _envoyer_... It's transitive, and you need to say what do you actually send. No, you don't get any further than in french with that.

But this not your point, simply I think you broke up with a inadequate example.

Carlos


----------



## RODGER

Now, I ain't North american Carlos, so I can't really say, but it was an example, I could provide others, although extreme cases are not perhaps very instructive. Ok what about how the word for "rotorcraft" in french has evolved from "aéronef à voilures tournantes" towards "giravion" ? (albeit under much opposition and with "giravion" not yet fully accepted by the user community.)

à suivre

Rodger


----------



## RODGER

To get back to the body of what I'm trying to develop here, I was looking for the equivalent of "to weave a spell " in french this morning, looking for something to express the notion of "tisser" and so far haven't found it. Any ideas anybody incidentally ? Ok, you say "jeter un sort" and "cast a spell" same thing, but how acceptable or understandable is it to say "tisser un sortilège" in french , as opposed to the acceptability and understandabilty of saying in english, of a team which ones own has just soundly beaten "we rolled them flat" ("on les a laminés" ). I know the image would pass easily in english even though it's not in common use, as is for example "we hammered them" but I don't know how a french person would react to "tisser un sortilège." What I am trying to get a feel for is when and just how far you can get outside the envelope in french, how desirable it is to do so, what are the elements in society favouring this and what are the elements working against it. 

Another aspect is that while of course there is a natural reluctance in french to accept neologisms which derive from another language, the N.american influence produces neologisms from its own language. This does happen in french I'm searching for examples, Ok "se pacser" thanks egueule, and I recently saw the humourous "fessetivale de Cannes" , but what, for example would prevent "débitdoc", "fluxdoc" "or "fludoc" for "workflow", instead of "gestion électronique de documents" which is really "workflow management" or rather why couldn't the hypothetical "fludoc" have appeared before "workflow" ? As did "microfiche" which is "microfiche" in english (pronounced "microfish !!) Like t-shirt, which one of the trainers at our rugby club is convinced is "p'tit short!!) But that's getting away from the subject really.What I'm looking for is what is driving the search for new ways of expressing things in english and what is driving it in french.

Perhaps getting closer to it, I could imagine describing the "blondness" of a woman, as in french "sa blondeur" but I could also imagine nuancing it in english say, for example if I were describing a woman who paid a lot of attention to maintaining this blondness and had a lot of products to help her etc...and say something like "as she sat there, in front of her mirror surrounded by all her blondery", ("blondieuserie" occurs to me), in the same way, to be able to say "sa blonditude" in french would be gratifying to express a nuance of her attitude perhaps, or her splendid refinement. I can imagine an author like Philippe Djian using "blonditude" but could it be used generally ? Then again I realise that all the words ain't necessarily in the dictionary !

Another thought is the ability to decline metaphors, in english I could say (and it would be appropriate here !) "I'm going out on a bit of a twig here" yes I suppose you could say "je ne vais pas scier la brindille sur laquelle je suis assis" would you though ?

I often find american colleagues using language in imaged ways in order to grab attention, as in "well now I'd like to put the spotlight on....." or, at the endof an intervention "well, I"ll get off the stage now" and an embryonic theory I have is that in North America there is such a welter of communications, publicity, competing voices etc... that this is a way of distinguishing your voice from the "noise" that is going on. Especially in advertising of course where the rules are easily bent, where an airline could say something like "we'll glide you to Singapore in five dreamless hours" or some such. These things are linked to playfulness and irreverence and perhaps often driven by commercial pressures. Have to go now, and I'm afraid I'm not too sure what this has to do with french in 2500, any help welcome

Rodger


----------



## timpeac

Podd said:
			
		

> 300 millions American distorting the pure English maid


 
You leave our pure English maids alone!! 

Sorry Podd, I know it was just a typo!!


----------



## cuchuflete

timpeac said:
			
		

> You leave our pure English maids alone!!
> 
> Sorry Podd, I know it was just a typo!!



Seems like unfair odds, doesn't it?

Rodger...It seems that you are pointing us towards believing that French can evolve through the work of some authors, the pressures of changing technology, and other forces.  This appears to contradict your original theory.
Is the issue the lack of evolution, or the pace?

thanks,
Cuchu


----------



## Alejandra.

Well that's certainly an interesting topic, Rodger. A rather long-winded one too, I'm afraid... I think that the evolution of the English language in America was largely due to the fact that it is a nation that was inhabited by peoples of all nations and languages, who, although agreed to speak English in general (British Empire being predominant in those early days...), obviously learnt it with accents proper to their own original culture. Native English speakers were not really a predominant race in such a large country, especially not those that spoke Queen's English (I'm thinking of the large influx of Irish to the states which probably had a strong effect on how the "foreign" population at large learned to speak the language). As a result, it was inevitable that expressions and accents from diferent parts of the world "contaminated" the original language and it evolved into its present state. I'm not sure the same can be said for French in France, although perhaps it explains french in other countries. As the initial comparison was English v/s Americcan and French v/s Canadian (and others), I think you'd have to make a comparison between France and Britain. Although British English has also changed to some degree over time, the changes are fairy subtle and quite contained within the island - which is why many times American don't understand a word a typical British person says, because of the Brit's pride in their own language and their (subsequent) ridicule of other versions of the language (such as "American") - much like France, as you described. Have I gone off on a tangent, or i this the kind of discussion you were looking for?


----------



## Benjy

I think thats a rather large leap of imagination to say that americans don't understand british people (aside: can any americans reading this post actually understand it?), and to say that the imcomprehension would be due to pride and the fact that we as a nation ridicule/look down on other english speaking nations is a rather sweeping and derogatory judgement.


----------



## timpeac

Actually, despite what you might expect, I think that the English of America is less changed from the English spoken when the pilgrims left compared to that of England.

Look at this thread from post 7 on - it pretty much has this discussion already in it -

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=11067&page=1&highlight=american

Edit - this was more aimed at Alejandra's post rather than Benjy's - Benjy you jumped in there as I was typing!!


----------



## cuchuflete

Leaping Lizards!!!

Of course we understand the British...at least in writing...It's just that they have some very strange accents!

My first day in England, many years before Benjy came along to mangle the written language, I hitchhiked from London to Brighton.  A truck driver [lory? lorry?] driver gave me a lift/ride/transport.  He reached into his pocket, pulled out something crumpled and shook it in front of my face.  The sounds he made were something like,  "Arffuh dubbul dimeenmight."  Eventually I realized that he was offering me a cigarette, saying  "Have a double diamond, mate."  I'm quite sure he couldn't understand a word I said, either.  



			
				Benjy said:
			
		

> I think thats a rather large leap of imagination to say that americans don't understand british people (aside: can any americans reading this post actually understand it?), and to say that the imcomprehension would be due to pride and the fact that we as a nation ridicule/look down on other english speaking nations is a rather sweeping and derogatory judgement.


----------



## Alejandra.

Benjy said:
			
		

> I think thats a rather large leap of imagination to say that americans don't understand british people (aside: can any americans reading this post actually understand it?), and to say that the imcomprehension would be due to pride and the fact that we as a nation ridicule/look down on other english speaking nations is a rather sweeping and derogatory judgement.


 
Please allow me to clarify my comments.

I don't mean to say that nothing Brits say is understood by Americans - that's of course silly. But there are _many _words - commony used words - that are not understood. I speak from personal and others' experience, and as the Brit that I am. 

I'm not sure I understand your other comment, regarding pride, and I was perhaps not very clear on what I meant . Did you understand it that Americans had the pride? I meant the British, anyhow. And pride is not derogatory, at least it doesn't have to be and I certainly did not mean it to be. And although there are of course many British people that do not scorn or look down on other nations because of the tye of Enlgish they speak, many do; not, I insist in a derogatory fashion but rather in a haughty one - believing we (Brits) speak the "original language". Yes, the language has changed, as all languages do, but insularly. The point was, as this thread was originally regarding the French language, that several similarities can be drawn from the French attitude toward their language by taking a look at the British one.


----------



## Alejandra.

lol that's the kind of thing I was trying to talk about, cuchuflete, I didn't mean to hurt any sensibilities, my apologies...

Timpeac, that's a very interesting thread - and a lot lighter than this one lol However, I think you'll find that the english word autumn actually comes from the Latin occupancy, from autumnus (their August emperor and all that...). However, I'm not sure I could argue whether English or American English is truer to the "real MacCoy", but certainly both have evolved very separately (and the British dialects very thickly!). Just think, if those 5 votes had gone the other way, we would all be arguing in German....


----------



## timpeac

Alejandra. said:
			
		

> lol that's the kind of thing I was trying to talk about, cuchuflete, I didn't mean to hurt any sensibilities, my apologies...
> 
> Timpeac, that's a very interesting thread - and a lot lighter than this one lol However, I think you'll find that the english word autumn actually comes from the Latin occupancy, from autumnus (their August emperor and all that...).


 
Erm, yes I know. Thanks.



			
				Alejandra. said:
			
		

> However, I'm not sure I could argue whether English or American English is truer to the "real MacCoy"


 well no - what would that be? 





			
				Alejandra. said:
			
		

> , but certainly both have evolved very separately (and the British dialects very thickly!).


 
Not in my opinion. I think they are remarkably close for a language separated by a couple of centuries and a few thousand miles. I have much more trouble understanding a Glaswegian than a New Yorker.


----------



## te gato

Hola;
Yes everything changes..People, Places and things evolve..and sometimes not for the better... Language is one of the evolving items... Take different dialects..different meanings, different perceptions..then throw slang into the mix. Stir them all together and what do you get?? A learning tool..The mix keeps us learning and teaching and expressing ideas..We do not all have to agree....
I personally like the evolution of language..I'm sorry...all of the "thouest" and "betwixt" gives me a head ache....Or worse yet..We would all still be grunting and drawing pictures on the cave walls like the Prehistoric man...
te gato


----------



## cuchuflete

Alejandra. said:
			
		

> lol that's the kind of thing I was trying to talk about, cuchuflete, I didn't mean to hurt any sensibilities, my apologies...



No need to apologize for anything.  You offered a viewpoint.  If that hurts someones sensibilities...there may be a whiff of political correctitude in the air.  This is a forum of ideas, and not coerced agreements.


----------



## RODGER

Sorry i just lost a whole reply I was making, because of a keyboard screw up or timed out or something I don't know, will try again tomorrow !

cheers

Rodger


----------



## RODGER

Ok, I'll try again. I'll try to define what I am after a bit better and see if it interests people, if not we can drop it. 

Essentially, I want to look at the comparative ""receptivity" and "inventiveness" of fr and eng, related concepts being "irreverence", "playfulness" "language structure" or lack of it, and competitivity .

I am also interested in the influence of "globalisation" and "publicity-speak" and, in general, the pressure of "communications overload" on the language.

That is the meta-explanation. 

I gave 4 examples of avenues to explore in my post beginning "To get back to the body of what I'm trying to develop...." hoping they would spark some input from fr/eng contributors, but this has not yet happened. Indeed I was accused of being "long-winded" !

I think the subjects I raise above are important and worth spending time on, but my frustration with the random nature of these exchanges is rapidly reaching cut-out level. 

So, if anybody wants to play, I'll stick around for a bit.


 Rodger


----------

