# More accents in French



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Hi everyone,

may you please let me know how is it possible to edit the recorded accents section of the French/English dictionary? 

I would like to add for example:
- *a Southern French accent, 
- a Caribbean French accent, 
- a Polynesian French accent, 
- a Western / Central African French accent, 
- a Northern African French Accent, 
- a Madagascarian French accent, 
- a Belgian French accent, 
- a Swiss French accent*.

The above-listed accents have their own idiosyncracies which would justify their presence on Wordreference.

Unfortunately, there is currentely only French from mainland France and Canadian French, but French is much more diverse than that! 
I know that, contrarily to federal countries like Germany, Austria or Switzerland, France is centralised and thus obsessed with its Parisian-based standard French prononciation. Nonetheless, it would be reductive to boil French down to standard French from mainland France only. Adding those accents would be a substantial asset to Wordreference French/English Dictionary. 

There is a long list of accents in the English section: US, UK, UK Yorkshire, Irish, Scottisch, US Southern, Jamaican... But why the French recorded accents section is so barren , and how is it possible to amend that? 

Many thanks everyone, 
Cheers.
The USE.


----------



## mkellogg

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> may you please let me know how is it possible to edit the recorded accents section of the French/English dictionary?


Hi, this isn't something that you as a user can do. We would first have to get the words recorded.

My question for you and anybody seeing this is: what three French accents would be best to add?


----------



## merquiades

I'd say the places where the people are native speakers rather than second language learners.  Belgium, Southern, maybe Central/West Africa.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

A Southern French accent (South-West and/or South-East) at the very least seems a necessity to me. Belgian and Swiss would be good too (albeit these accents, in their standard form, are often difficult to distinguish from non-Southern French accents).


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

merquiades said:


> I'd say the places where the people are native speakers rather than second language learners.  Belgium, Southern, maybe Central/West Africa.


But then, why in the English version there are accents from Yorkshire or Scotland? French would thus be entitled of the same thing: Southeastern French accent, Northern accent, etc.



mkellogg said:


> Hi, this isn't something that you as a user can do. We would first have to get the words recorded.
> 
> My question for you and anybody seeing this is: what three French accents would be best to add?


Hi @mkellogg , would that be conceivable?

How much time would it take to see other francophone pronounciations?
What does the selection process of pronunciations entail?

Many thanks. 
The USE


----------



## Glasguensis

On previous occasions there has been a discussion such as this one on what accent or accents would be most valuable to add. Once there is a consensus there is a casting process to select a suitable candidate for the target accent. Once the candidate is selected they have to record the list of words. Finally Mike does the necessary configuration to add these new recordings. It’s a process which takes several weeks if not months. That’s why Mike is inviting suggestions on two or three priorities. I personally would agree that a Southern accent has to be top of the list.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Glasguensis said:


> On previous occasions there has been a discussion such as this one on what accent or accents would be most valuable to add. Once there is a consensus there is a casting process to select a suitable candidate for the target accent. Once the candidate is selected they have to record the list of words. Finally Mike does the necessary configuration to add these new recordings. It’s a process which takes several weeks if not months. That’s why Mike is inviting suggestions on two or three priorities. I personally would agree that a Southern accent has to be top of the list.


Hello @Glasguensis . Thank you very much for the very informative comment.

If we have to set priorities, and following the above-mentioned precept according to which accents recorded on Wordreference should only be from countries which use French as an official language, I would go with the list below, but again that's merely my humble opinion. *I tried to follow a scientific approach by basing my allegations on existing academic studies in phonology*:

*§ In mainland France:* Southern French.
*=> Why?* Its idiosyncracies are different enough from standard French to legitimise its relevance.
*- Study:*
Annelise Coquillong and Gabor Turcsan, Université de Toulouse 2 / Université d'Aix-Marseille: An overview of the phonological and phonetic properties of Southern French. Data from two Marseille surveys, in: Phonological Variation in French: Illustrations from Three Continents, edited by Randall Scott Gess, Chantal Lyche, 2012 (page 105 - 128).

*§ In mainland Europe: *Swiss (and Belgian?).
*=> Why?* There is academic work to ascertain the existence of this accent (such academic work would exist for the belgian accent too, I presume, provided that the belgian accent is different enough from standard French):
*- Studies and academic work:
=> Study which proved that Swiss people speak in average from 6% up to 20% slower than Parisians :* Le débit lent des Suisses romands: mythe ou réalité? Sandra Scwab et Isabelle Racine | Ecole de langue et de civilisation francaises, Université de Genève | French Language Studies, Page 1 to 15, Cambridge University Press | doi:10.1017/S095926951200021X
- Academic work of *Pr. Anne-Catherine Simon from the Catholic University of Louvain - Belgium* :
=> *The penultimate prominence* (emphasis on the second-to-last syllable),
=> *Archaisms:* Swiss francophones differentiate certain pronounciations which are undifferentiated in France, e.g.: Maux [mo] & Mots [mɔ] (in France both would be pronounced [mo]), brin [bʁɛ̃] & brun [bʁœ̃] (in French it would just be [bʁɛ̃], although [bʁœ̃] can be found in southern France too), patte [pat] & pâte [pa:t] (in France, there's only: [pat] for both), laid (lɛ) and lait (le) (in France: (lɛ) for both, except in the region of Lyon: (le)), the same would apply to the word: haie.
=> Such archaisms are used in Belgium too.

*Another study, perhaps interesting in order to narrow down the Swiss and Belgian accents:*
Mathieu Avanzi & Philippe Boula de Mareüil
April 2017Journal of Linguistic Geography 5(01):17-40
DOI:10.1017/jlg.2017.3
Identification of regional French accents in (northern) France, Belgium, and Switzerland

*§ Africa:
Western: *Mali, Ivory Coast & Senegal
*=> Why?*
Malian, Senegalian and  Ivorian French can be clearly differentiated.
- *Study:* Philippe Boula de Mareüil, Jean-Luc Rouas, Manuela Yapomo.  In search of cues discriminating West-african accents in French. Interspeech, Aug 2011, Florence, Italy. pp.725-728. hal-00664512

The Malian French accent was analysed in the study below:
- *Study: *Ingse Skattum & Chantal Lyche (University of Oslo), The phonological characteristics of French in Bamako, Mali. A sociolinguistic approach / January 2012, in: Phonological Variation in French. Illustrations from three continents (pp.73-101). Edition: Coll. Studies in Language Variation Chapter: 4 / Publisher: John BenjaminsEditors: R. Gess, C. Lyche, T. Meisenburg /
Project: Phonologie du francais contemporain

*Central:* Cameroun and Democratic Republic of the Congo (influence of Belgian French in the latter)
=> Study yet to be found.

*§Pacific: *
Polynesian & New Caledonian, provided that there is a difference between both.
=> Study yet to be found.

*§Austral Africa: *
- Madagascarian.
- Reunion &  Mayotte, provided that there is a difference between both.
=> Study yet to be found.

*§Carribean: *
- Haiti,
*- Study:* Efron, Edith (1954). "French and Creole Patois in Haiti". Caribbean Quarterly. *3* (4): 199–213. _doi:10.1080/00086495.1954.11829534. JSTOR 40652586._
- Carribean accent, provided that there are no discrepancies between Martinique and Guadeloupe.
=> Study yet to be found.

*Note:*
There are other parts of the world where French is an official language, but the exposure would be too low for WordReference users (that's just my humble opinion, please correct me if I'm wrong.): Wallis & Futuna and Indian French (official in Pondicherry). As for Acadian (Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon), I assume that their accent is too difficult to dissociate from their quebecker peers, ergo the already-recorded French Canadian accent would apply.

*Interesting study about vowels shift of the French Caribbean and the Francophone countries of Africa : /ɑ̃/ → [ã], /ɛ̃/ → [ɛ̃], /ɔ̃/ → [õ], and /œ̃/ → [œ̃]:*
Blumenfeld, Robert (2002). _Accents: A Manual for Actors, Volume 1_. p. 195. ISBN 9780879109677. 8 February 2014.

I hope that it will help, @mkellogg , @Glasguensis . 

Cheers, 
The USE


----------



## lauranazario

@TheUnitedStatesOfEurope 
Those are all very interesting points... but have you given any thought to the complexity of adding different pronunciations for every possible regional dialect?

We'd have to cast/try out speakers from every region (as well as recruit 'evaluators' who can certify that a speaker does indeed represent the regional dialect)... and that may just be the tip of the proverbial iceberg, as I'm guessing considerable programming changes could also be needed to implement multiple regional pronunciations for all (or selected) French words in our dictionaries.

What I mean to say is that the concept sounds great and potentially highly beneficial for users, but the implementation of such an idea could prove to be a titanic and maybe unfeasible endeavor.


----------



## swift

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> Study which proved that Swiss people speak in average from 6% up to 20% slower than Parisians


An interesting point, but that would be prosody, not general pronunciation of isolated words, I’m afraid.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

swift said:


> An interesting point, but that would be prosody, not general pronunciation of isolated words, I’m afraid.


Which point are you referring to please?  
I listed a few above regarding the idiosyncrasies of Swiss and Belgian French accents.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

lauranazario said:


> @TheUnitedStatesOfEurope
> Those are all very interesting points... but have you given any thought to the complexity of adding different pronunciations for every possible regional dialect?
> 
> We'd have to cast/try out speakers from every region (as well as recruit 'evaluators' who can certify that a speaker does indeed represent the regional dialect)... and that may just be the tip of the proverbial iceberg, as I'm guessing considerable programming changes could also be needed to implement multiple regional pronunciations for all (or selected) French words in our dictionaries.
> 
> What I mean to say is that the concept sounds great and potentially highly beneficial for users, but the implementation of such an idea could prove to be a titanic and maybe unfeasible endeavor.


Hi @lauranazario . Thank you very much for your pragmatic input.
I would have been surprised if recording new accents would have not been a lengthy process. 

*Unfeasabile endeavour?!*
  => if you managed to do it in English, why not in French?! 

It doesn't have to happen overnight. => Rome was not built in a day. 
=> Moreover, I have no influence in the decision-process of Wordreference nor in the definition of a timeframe to record francophone accents.

French accents are much more multifarious than one might think (alas, due to the overwhelming influence of standard French, people may think the contrary).
To me, Wordreference doesn't represent this diversity, especially compared to the wide range of recorded accents in English.

*Indeed, I just noticed that: 

- the English version offers a wide variety of accents,*
   => if you managed to do it in English, why not in French?
*- the variety of French accents is under-represented,*
   => southern French should be represented at the very least. Swiss and Belgian would be nice add-ons too.
* - Africa is not represented enough, *
=> with *141 million French speakers in Africa**, the most distinctive and most spoken accents should be available or partly available on Wordreference at the very least: Malian, Senegalese, Ivorian. (**source:* Observatoire démographique et statistique de l'espace francophone (ODSEF). "Estimation des populations francophones dans le monde en 2018 - Sources et démarches méthodologiques" (PDF).)
- *There is academic work to back the existence of other accents *
=> Those accents aren't always regional, but also *national* (Senegal, Ivory Coast, Mali, Haiti. Wether Swiss and Belgian French accents are national or regional, well I let you decide).

 *My wee recommendation* : if you read the research literature which I posted above *and/or* contact the Researchers / Professors who conducted this academic work. *=>* It may turn out to be very helpful in finding the right _locuteurs_ / speakers to record an accent, amongst other things. Moreover, some of these studies *already have their own recordings*, in which you may be able to tap into for free (less costs and less recording endeavour needed).  => *Potential low-hanging fruit here.*


----------



## Red Arrow

To be honest, I think Belgian recordings are a waste of time and money. If you want a Belgian accent, you don't need separate Belgian audio files on Wordreference. Well, at least I don't.


----------



## lauranazario

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> Thank you very much for your pragmatic input.
> I would have been surprised if recording new accents would have not been a lengthy process.
> 
> *Unfeasabile endeavour?!*
> => if you managed to do it in English, why not in French?!


Maybe because the pronunciations 'came along' (were included) with the English companion dictionaries we've used over the years (like Collins or Random House)???
I don't work directly with our dictionaries, so take this as an educated guess at best. 

Mike Kellogg, our administrator, has the last word in terms of what he wants to incorporate into this website's dictionaries.
He will ultimately decide if this type of endeavor is feasible and cost-effective for WR —which is basically a _free_ online resource (meaning, you don't have to pay a fee to subscribe and use our dictionaries).


----------



## merquiades

Red Arrow said:


> To be honest, I think Belgian recordings are a waste of time and money. If you want a Belgian accent, you don't need separate Belgian audio files on Wordreference. Well, at least I don't.


It makes no difference in that people have no qualms about hearing Standard Parisian French spoken to them in Belgium. They probably expect it even.  But it could be interesting for someone keenly interested in Belgian French and wanting to perfect its sounds, like the guttural R, long vowels, _houit_ for _huit_ and other specificities. I don't know if there are other sites online that have Belgian French accent as a possibility. It could be attractive for WR to have it.

That said, having Belgian accent as an option it would be great, but if money needs to be saved or spent elsewhere, it's probably not as important as having a southern French accent or upgrading some other feature for the site.


----------



## Penyafort

How 'official' are all those accents, though? By this I mean, is that accent the one you expect to hear in les infos, the way it happens with English and Spanish spoken in different countries, or is it not?


----------



## merquiades

Penyafort said:


> How 'official' are all those accents, though? By this I mean, is that accent the one you expect to hear in les infos, the way it happens with English and Spanish spoken in different countries, or is it not?


No, standard Parisian is used everywhere on the news in Europe, in French territories and is official.  They also use it in TV programs, radio, movies, announcements, dubbing... even if the setting is Montpellier, Brussels or Guadeloupe. In Canada it's a bit different but they still try to make their accent sound more standard, and don't use the variety naturally used by the inhabitants.
I don't know what happens in Africa, but I bet on TV they try to use standard French inasmuch as they can.


----------



## Penyafort

Ok, thanks. I was curious about it. That'd explain a bit why, apart from the Quebecois dubbing sometimes, I hardly hear much difference in formal broadcasting.


----------



## Red Arrow

More than half of the cartoons and series on Disney Channel are dubbed by Walloons. (proof) Some other popular cartoons like Pokémon and My Little Pony are also dubbed by Walloons and aired on French television.

I don't see how a Belgian R is more gutteral than a French one.


----------



## jekoh

It's not really true that "standard Parisian" is used by every news presenter, unless [gɔʃ] for _gauche_ for instance is now part of "standard Parisian".


----------



## Stéphane89

Red Arrow said:


> More than half of the cartoons and series on Disney Channel are dubbed by Walloons. (proof) Some other popular cartoons like Pokémon and My Little Pony are also dubbed by Walloons and aired on French television.


Well, like in every region of the world, some people have a stronger accent than others. And I suppose that if you aim for a dubbing career or any other job in an audiovisual environment you make an effort to lose or at least reduce your regional accent.



Red Arrow said:


> I don't see how a Belgian R is more gutteral than a French one.


If you listen carefully, you'll notice that the 'R' is much more audible in Belgium. You can really hear that it comes from further down the throat than what you generally hear in France. But again, this will be more obvious in some individuals than in others.



Penyafort said:


> How 'official' are all those accents, though? By this I mean, is that accent the one you expect to hear in les infos, the way it happens with English and Spanish spoken in different countries, or is it not?


You wouldn't expect news anchors in Belgium to have a thick Brussels or Walloon accent, but I bet their accent would still sound slightly different from their French counterparts to French ears. I sometimes watch the Swiss news on TV5 and I can hear the presenter's accent, even though it's far from being as strong as the caricatured accent you sometimes hear. I suppose it's the same for Belgian presenters.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Penyafort said:


> How 'official' are all those accents, though? By this I mean, is that accent the one you expect to hear in les infos, the way it happens with English and Spanish spoken in different countries, or is it not?


Hi @Penyafort , I have gathered a substantial list of academic studies which prove the existence of these accents, especially because they can be differentiated from French or other French accents, in my former comments above. Shall an accent not have a dedicated academic work to legitimate its existence and to substantiate its phonological idiosyncracies, then it should not be considered as a serious candidate,* if* we follow a purely academic- / factual-based decision-making process. => But that's not my decision to make, that's @mkellogg 's .


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

merquiades said:


> No, standard Parisian is used everywhere on the news in Europe, in French territories and is official.  They also use it in TV programs, radio, movies, announcements, dubbing... even if the setting is Montpellier, Brussels or Guadeloupe. In Canada it's a bit different but they still try to make their accent sound more standard, and don't use the variety naturally used by the inhabitants.
> I don't know what happens in Africa, but I bet on TV they try to use standard French inasmuch as they can.


@merquiades , I partly disagree. The goal of the media is to be understandable to the many. Indeed, there is an inclination for standard French, but archaisms (in Canada, Switzerland or Belgium), rolling "rs'" (in Polynesia for example) - to mention a few, are important markers *not* to be underestimated. There are francophone countries where those markers are a national pride and will be displayed with no coyness whatsoever during primetime.
I wouldn't generalise and/or merely base the phonological complexity of French speakers on an empirical blanket statement using the media as sole barometer.
If you are interested in more tangible features, I posted *academic studies* references which I gathered in my former comments above, which disprove at least partly, what you just said about Africa and about other francophone countries. Please have a look at those studies.  They're very insightful, contradict a so-called egemony of standard Parisian French and can legitimise the existence of an accent, and therefore its relevance to be recorded here on *WordReference*.

*And speaking of media, below, a timely example heard today on the radio:*
at around 07:40am (Central European Time), I was listening to the radio programme: _La Matinale_ on the RTS (Radio Télévision Suisse), during which *Guy Parmelin*, *President of Switzerland since 2021*, said : *peɪmɑ̃*, with *peɪ* pronounced the anglo-saxon way, instead of the standard French pronounciation: *pɛ*. Nothing to do with an anglo-saxon pronounciation though, but rather with an archaism (again ) - something Swiss, Belgians and Canadians are fond of. The podcast is available on their website via a wee Google search. __ I think that the pronounciation of a country's President can be considered a good *phonological marker* (knowing a Head of State's usual horde of communication consultants behind the scenes), just like Queen's English was a good phonological marker of Britain's aristocracy until recently, e.g.: *sympathy:*ˈsɪmpəθe (instead of the customary: ˈsɪmpəθi), *spirit:* spɪ'lɪt (instead of the common: spɪɹɪt), *often:* ɔfən (instead of the conventional: ɒfən), and don't even get me started with *vocal fry*, which still is a *marker of erudition* in nowaday's UK, when used sporadically and judiciously.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Red Arrow said:


> More than half of the cartoons and series on Disney Channel are dubbed by Walloons. (proof) Some other popular cartoons like Pokémon and My Little Pony are also dubbed by Walloons and aired on French television.
> 
> I don't see how a Belgian R is more gutteral than a French one.


Hi @Red Arrow , fair enough and very true.
However, gutturality is only one feature of Belgian French, at least in some rather old recordings (especially in Brussels).
Film dubbing can be a good barometer, but if we followed your reasoning, then the Jamaican, Southern USA,  Yorkshire, Irish and Scottish accents should be removed from Wordreference, as you will never experience their dubbing versions in films or cartoons. That is why I remain circumspect to deem an accent worthy to be recorded on Wordreference by solely analysing it from the angle of Media and Cinema/TV productions.

Not all phonological markers are dubbed, because it costs money for a film production and doesn't necessarily provides an added-value in terms of oral comprehension. Wordreference is a dictionnary, not a film production and thus I hope that the rationale here follow a more linguistic and academic approach, than mere financial motives like it would usually apply for a blockbuster. For the record, Wordreference is also used by linguists and scholars => I started using it when I studied English and Chinese at University, because it is such a powerful and well-documented tool (especially the French/English dictionary ).

Hence, I strongly disagree with the statement: the Belgian French accent would be a pure waste of money, if recorded on Wordreference. Furthermore, there is a wide array of phonological features which can characterise an accent. Gutturality is just one of many.
I think that reading the academic literature of *Pr. Anne-Catherine Simon *from the* Catholic University of Louvain - Belgium *and/or getting in touch with her, might settle our two different standpoints. * ... And *incidentally help with deciding on whether to record a Belgian accent or not. I would call in the sharps i.e.: phonological sholars before causing any controversy, and as people such as Pr. Simon may be able to provide *statistics,* *facts, recordings and recommendations* about other accents too. That would be a more factual and constructive approach, in order to underpin a decision-making process. **

Contact details on the Louvain University official website:
*Anne-Catherine Simon*

Although, at the end, @mkellogg has the last word.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

StefKE said:


> Well, like in every region of the world, some people have a stronger accent than others. And I suppose that if you aim for a dubbing career or any other job in an audiovisual environment you make an effort to lose or at least reduce your regional accent.
> 
> 
> If you listen carefully, you'll notice that the 'R' is much more audible in Belgium. You can really hear that it comes from further down the throat than what you generally hear in France. But again, this will be more obvious in some individuals than in others.
> 
> 
> You wouldn't expect news anchors in Belgium to have a thick Brussels or Walloon accent, but I bet their accent would still sound slightly different from their French counterparts to French ears. I sometimes watch the Swiss news on TV5 and I can hear the presenter's accent, even though it's far from being as strong as the caricatured accent you sometimes hear. I suppose it's the same for Belgian presenters


@StefKE , I notice the same thing when listening to the Swiss radio: RTS (Radio Télévision Suisse). Swiss phonological markers are not ubiquitous, but there are here, that's undeniable. In other words, the anchors' accent on air must remain understandable to the many, no matter if you come from a remote valley in the Valais Canton (notorious for its strong accent), or if you come from Geneva, the northern francophone Bern Canton or the bilingual city of Fribourg... However, as you said in your comment above, I can still hear that there is a difference from what I can hear in mainland France. These accent discrepancies are well-documented by researchers in linguistics and phonology (see the academic studies in my comment above).


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

mkellogg said:


> Hi, this isn't something that you as a user can do. We would first have to get the words recorded.
> 
> My question for you and anybody seeing this is: what three French accents would be best to add?


Hi @mkellogg ,

to answer your initial question, if we base ourselves on a scientific / factual approach, i.e. by using the existing research literature to ascertain the existence of an accent, and thus legitimise its relevance as a potential candidate to be recorded on Wordreference, *the following **three** accents* seem to be the most *substantiated* options:

*1. Southern French (from mainland France),*
=> Deemed by senior members in the comments above, to be the very least to be recorded, when it comes to French in mainland France.

Substantiating academic work:
- Annelise Coquillong and Gabor Turcsan, Université de Toulouse 2 / Université d'Aix-Marseille: An overview of the phonological and phonetic properties of Southern French. Data from two Marseille surveys, in: Phonological Variation in French: Illustrations from Three Continents, edited by Randall Scott Gess, Chantal Lyche, 2012 (page 105 - 128).

*2. Swiss,*
=> More idiosyncratic than Belgian French apparently?

Substantiating academic work:
- Mathieu Avanzi & Philippe Boula de Mareüil, April 2017Journal of Linguistic Geography 5(01):17-40, DOI:10.1017/jlg.2017.3
Identification of regional French accents in (northern) France, Belgium, and Switzerland
*and*
the academic work of: Pr. *Anne-Catherine Simon *about Swiss and Belgian accents, from the Catholic University of Louvain in Belgium.

*3. One of the three African accents below:*
=> With 141 Mil.*** French speakers in Africa, at the very least, one accent should be recorded.
- Senegalese,
- Malian,
- *Ivorian*.
=> In terms of exposure, Ivorian would be the best option, with a population of over 26 Mil.
Democratic Republic of the Congo is much more populous than Ivory Coast, but I couldn't find any research article in phonology analysing and quantifying a French accent there.
(***source: _Observatoire démographique et statistique de l'espace francophone (ODSEF). "Estimation des populations francophones dans le monde en 2018 - Sources et démarches méthodologiques"_.)

Substantiating academic work:
- Philippe Boula de Mareüil, Jean-Luc Rouas, Manuela Yapomo.  In search of cues discriminating West-african accents in French. Interspeech, Aug 2011, Florence, Italy. pp.725-728. hal-00664512
- Ingse Skattum & Chantal Lyche (University of Oslo), The phonological characteristics of French in Bamako, Mali. A sociolinguistic approach / January 2012, in: Phonological Variation in French. Illustrations from three continents (pp.73-101). Edition: Coll. Studies in Language Variation Chapter: 4 / Publisher: John BenjaminsEditors: R. Gess, C. Lyche, T. Meisenburg /
Project: Phonologie du francais contemporain


=> That's just my opinion when looking at the phonological research literature available.
I hope that other senior members can comment further about the *3 options* above.



*3*. Haitian (*optionaly*): *
=> a lot of academic work already available, although prevalence/exposure is lower than African French accents.

Substantiating academic work:
- Blumenfeld, Robert (2002). Accents: A Manual for Actors, Volume 1. p. 195. ISBN 9780879109677. Retrieved 8 February 2014.
- Piston-Hatlen, D.; Clements, C.; Klingler, T.; Rottet, K. "French in Haiti: Contacts and conflicts between linguistic representations". Pidgin-Creole Interfaces: Studies in Honor of Albert Valdman (John Benjamins Publishers, in Press).
- Etienne, Corinne (2005). "Lexical particularities of French in the Haitian press: Readers' perceptions and appropriation". Journal of French Language Studies. 15 (15 3): 257–277. doi:10.1017/S0959269505002152. S2CID 145721220.
- Schieffelin, Bambi B.; Doucet, Rachelle Charlier (1994). "The "Real" Haitian Creole: Ideology, metalinguistics, and orthographic choice". American Ethnologist. 21 (1): 176–200. doi:10.1525/ae.1994.21.1.02a00090.
- Efron, Edith (1954). "French and Creole Patois in Haiti". Caribbean Quarterly. 3 (4): 199–213. _doi:10.1080/00086495.1954.11829534. JSTOR 40652586._


----------



## Nanon

My two cents:
1) If I _really _had to choose between Swiss and Belgian French instead of keeping the two, I would choose Belgian:

Brussels (Belgium) is the _de facto_ "capital" of the EU. Therefore, when dealing with EU matters, one gets exposed to a significant deal of Belgian French.
Belgian presence exerted significant influence on several African countries - including RDC (Congo), the second biggest Francophone country in the world. Sorry, I did not search for any literature and this is based on mere population statistics. 
2) About including Southern French and at least one African accent, of course, I vote in favour.

------
But... wait. If we add more accents in French, shouldn't we do the same for other languages, too? If we plan to add further languages, how many variants shall we be able to include? To be specific, I am thinking of Portuguese. We currently have no recordings but if/when we do, both Brazilian and European Portuguese will be nice to have (variants spoken in Africa being closer to EP) - and maybe even more than one Brazilian variant. The question is, how many can the servers handle?


----------



## swift

Server capacity certainly is one of the considerations, but budget would be a bigger concern. Perhaps a phased approach could help.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Nanon said:


> My two cents:
> 1) If I _really _had to choose between Swiss and Belgian French instead of keeping the two, I would choose Belgian:
> 
> Brussels (Belgium) is the _de facto_ "capital" of the EU. Therefore, when dealing with EU matters, one gets exposed to a significant deal of Belgian French.
> Belgian presence exerted significant influence on several African countries - including RDC (Congo), the second biggest Francophone country in the world. Sorry, I did not search for any literature and this is based on mere population statistics.
> 2) About including Southern French and at least one African accent, of course, I vote in favour.
> 
> ------
> But... wait. If we add more accents in French, shouldn't we do the same for other languages, too? If we plan to add further languages, how many variants shall we be able to include? To be specific, I am thinking of Portuguese. We currently have no recordings but if/when we do, both Brazilian and European Portuguese will be nice to have (variants spoken in Africa being closer to EP) - and maybe even more than one Brazilian variant. The question is, how many can the servers handle?


Thanks for your invaluable input. I didn't think about the relevance of Brussels as the capital of the EU and its remaining influence in RDC.  Good point.  Although Geneva shouldn't be underestimated in terms of international and diplomatic aura, Belgium has a major asset: RDC - largest country in Africa, biggest francophone country in the world and which capital is Africa's largest city with an Urban Area accounting for almost 15Mil. dwellers, according to populationstat.com. In comparison, the Paris Urban area accounts for almost 11 mil. according to the _Comparateur de territoire: Unité urbaine 2020 de Paris (00851)" (in French) _of the INSEE_. _
=> This may weigh in with for RDC.

The hard part is to find a way to substantiate RDC's accent, in order to ascertain if it is worth a shot at all...
*We need the opinion of a scholar here*, but that's just my opinion.
If there is no easily retrievable study about it via a wee Google search, this may indicate something too: no phonological cues perhaps?  Or just a lack of interest from academia (although I cannot believe that...)? Just spitballing here. 
=> Hence the necessity of finding studies which define an accent, its idiosyncracies, prevalence and uniqueness.

To answer your question, I simply followed @mkellogg initial suggestion of *three* accents in his comment above.
=> Why three? I have no idea. Perhaps a matter of budget and capacity?


----------



## wildan1

Nanon said:


> including RDC (Congo), the second biggest Francophone country in the world





TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> The hard part is to find a way to substantiate RDC's accent, in order to ascertain if it is worth a shot at all...
> *We need the opinion of a scholar here*, but that's just my opinion.


I don't want to lay claim to the title of "scholar", but I am a trained linguist and have lived and worked all around French-speaking Africa.

The RDC may have the largest population of any French-speaking African country, but it is an ex-colony of Belgium, and therefore some of its style does reflect features of Belgian French that most other countries (ex-colonies of France) do not share.

For that reason I would say choosing a speaker of French from a former French colony would possibly reflect a more generalizable example.

Coastal and pre-Saharan styles of French pronunciation also vary quite a bit, mostly because of the influences of the various indigenous native languages of these African French-speakers. A notable example is that native Hausa speakers (Niger, Chad, northern Cameroon and also including some other Chadic language-speakers of those regions) actually pronounce the aspirated H of French as it is aspirated in English: _« la *h*ausse des prix ; le véhicule a *h*_eurté_ un mur..._ ».

The majority of West African French-speakers everywhere use a flapped R rather than the more predominant throated R of modern European French.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Penyafort said:


> Ok, thanks. I was curious about it. That'd explain a bit why, apart from the Quebecois dubbing sometimes, I hardly hear much difference in formal broadcasting.



French Canadian broadcasters use a standardized version of the local accent (and this can vary quite significantly between, say, Montreal and Moncton, New Brunswick). I dare say that there is more accent variation within Quebec, New Brunswick and Ontario (the centres of French-speaking communities in Canada) as regards television and radio broadcasts than in France where Parisian France pronunciation is pretty much enforced. The only time you'll hear Southern French accents used "as standard" on French TV is for things like rugby matches (rugby is mostly played in the south of France so the powers that be can't get away with mandating standard Parisian pronunciation).


----------



## Nanon

@wildan1, I was referring to choosing between Belgian and Swiss, not to selecting RDC among African variants.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Pedro y La Torre said:


> French Canadian broadcasters use a standardized version of the local accent (and this can vary quite significantly between, say, Montreal and Moncton, New Brunswick). I dare say that there is more accent variation within Quebec, New Brunswick and Ontario (the centres of French-speaking communities in Canada) as regards television and radio broadcasts than in France where Parisian France pronunciation is pretty much enforced. The only time you'll hear Southern French accents used "as standard" on French TV is for things like rugby matches (rugby is mostly played in the south of France so the powers that be can't get away with mandating standard Parisian pronunciation


@Pedro y La Torre , this would be too reductive to say that Southern French is only used by rugby anchorwo.men.
The latter can be heard on France 3 TV during the News at noon or on Radio broadcasters such as : France Bleu Radio or Sud Radio for example.

Speaking of which, having celebrities or a Head of State or a Prime Minister with an accent different from standard French (such as Guy Parmelin - President of Switzerland as mentionned above, or Castex - current French Prime Minister) is a social and phonological marker. Fair enough and very true.

However, to me, the above* are mere empirical evidences* (just like rugby anchorwo.men).
=> They cannot be used as the sole reason to decide wether the recording of a Southern French accent on Wordreference is judicious or not. *Academic studies* substantiate in a qualitative and quantitative way the existence of a given accent and *should therefore prevail* *as selecting-tool, as part of a decision-making process* (cf. the studies listed above). Why? Because they are factual and thoroughly documented/substantiated. Not to mention that they may provide already-available recordings in which Wordrederence may be able to tap into, along with thorough descriptions about a given accent characteristics, which in turn would help Wordreference in picking out the most befitting speakers / recordings.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

wildan1 said:


> I don't want to lay claim to the title of "scholar", but I am a trained linguist and have lived and worked all around French-speaking Africa.
> 
> The RDC may have the largest population of any French-speaking African country, but it is an ex-colony of Belgium, and therefore some of its style does reflect features of Belgian French that most other countries (ex-colonies of France) do not share.
> 
> For that reason I would say choosing a speaker of French from a former French colony would possibly reflect a more generalizable example.
> 
> Coastal and pre-Saharan styles of French pronunciation also vary quite a bit, mostly because of the influences of the various indigenous native languages of these African French-speakers. A notable example is that native Hausa speakers (Niger, Chad, northern Cameroon and also including some other Chadic language-speakers of those regions) actually pronounce the aspirated H of French as if it aspirated in English: _« la *h*ausse des prix ; le véhicule a *h*_eurté_ un mur..._ ».
> 
> The majority of West African French-speakers everywhere use a flapped R rather than the more predominant throated R of modern European French.


@wildan1 , as a trained linguist (and well-versed regarding African accents), may you please name a few studies about the phonological cues of the French accent in RDC?
I couldn't find any.  Thank you very much in advance for your invaluable feedback.


----------



## Nanon

If you want to hear a French broadcaster who is not a rugby anchor but does speak with a South-Western accent, look for Jean-Michel Aphatie. He deals with matters traditionally considered as "serious" (politics) being one of the few journalists who maintains a regional accent on national media. He even wrote a book about keeping his accent. But we should discuss speakers in general, not only journalists.
Of course, Southern French _is _a social marker - some variants of Southern French are even more socially marked than others. There are plenty of studies illustrating these nuances, such as https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00250273/document


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

For those still thinking that Belgian and/or Swiss and/or Southern French may be a waste of time/money, because it may be commonly (and wrongly) accepted that most words are pronounced the same way as in standard French, please refer to the study below, which analysed the prosody of several French accents. => Interesting source of information for WordReference, in order to select and control if the potentially recorded accents are representative or not.

*For those of you not familiar with the notion of prosody: *
In linguistics, prosody is concerned with those elements of speech that are not individual phonetic segments but are properties of syllables and larger units of speech, including linguistic functions such as intonation, stress (pitches), and rhythm. Such elements are known as suprasegmentals.

*Switzerland:*

Prosody in Swiss French Accents: Investigation using Analysis by Synthesis

(PDF) Prosody in Swiss French Accents: Investigation using Analysis by Synthesis

*Southern French (Occitan):*

https://benjamins.com/catalog/hsm.13.23baz

*Belgian and Swiss:*

https://clf.unige.ch/files/8914/4102/7370/28_Avanzi_309-323.pdf

*Other examples: *

Maghrebian French: 

https://perso.limsi.fr/mareuil/publi/inter.pdf 

Senegal, Switzerland, Central African Republic, compared to Parisian French:

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01161304/document

*Excellent book* (although not all French accents are represented): 
*Non-exhaustive list of accents analysed in this book:* Nizza, Belgium, Switzerland, Central African Republic, Algeria, Mauritius, Alberta, Ontario, Louisiana...

https://global.oup.com/academic/product/varieties-of-spoken-french-9780199573714?cc=ch&lang=en&#


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

*Another interesting phonological cue heard yesterday (15.08.2021) on the*_* Swiss Radio RTS Première : *_

*Quasiment* (at 12:35 pm) & *Quasi *(at 12:45 pm) both pronounced: /*kwa*.zi.mɑ̃/ and /*kwa*.zi/ (with /*kwa*./ pronounced like the "*qua*" in "_é*qua*tion_"); in lieu of the French or Canadian pronounciations: /ka.zi.mɑ̃/.

Cheers,
The USE


----------



## MaineAttractive

> In Canadait's a bit different but they still try to make their accent sound more standard, and don't use the variety naturally used by the
> inhabitants.


I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean. Not everyone, even in the working class with limited education speaks _joual, _and the accent and prosody of the reporter in the video available at the link is using a *Canadian *(Québécois, in fact) standard, because her speech maintains many, if not all, of the sound differences between Québécois varieties and French French even if it is more careful and would be placed in a different category than those of the people interviewed following William Labov & William Ashby's method of sociolinguistic corpus-building. Nevertheless, basically all of the people interviewed are intelligible to me as a non-native speaker.

As to the point about rugby versus the news, let's keep in mind that France 3 is regional television and France Bleu is less prestigious than, say, France Culture. 

That doesn't really change the point though. Belgian and Swiss speakers ought to be included, prioritizing words where the pronunciation is still different from that of French French; it's quite possibly true, if one were to look at the PFC data for example, that younger Swiss speakers are exposed to more Francophone media from France and therefore have less distinctive accents, but for now there are still distinctive markers worth adding to the dictionary, all in my very humble opinion.


----------



## Víctor Pérez

What an interesting discussion! Good job, @*TheUnitedStatesOfEurope* ! 

It reminds me that many years ago I watched at the cinema a Canadian French spoken film which, fortunately, had French subtitles… 

Just a couple of questions:

Does *a unique word* pronounced by a Belgian, a Swiss, a North African or a Marseillais will really sound very (and I mean *very*) different from a Parisien or a Bordelais? Will the listener really appreciate the différence?
People recording their voices would they be able to give their own accent *on just one word*? Would they be able to shaw their genuine accent without distorting it?
Would it be worthwhile to do that huge job?
Personally, I doubt about it.

However, to rekindle @*TheUnitedStatesOfEurope*'s suggestion, I think it would really be more convenient and effective to record *a bunch of different phrases or short dialogues* (20, 30, 50…) -all the same for every speaker- by people from different French spoken countries or areas. I know it would be a huge job too, but I guess we would really *appreciate then the different accents* from one French spoken area to another.


----------



## Red Arrow

The thing is: if you know how the Belgian accent works, you can completely determine how each word is pronounced based on *spelling*. You don't need a dictionary to look up the Belgian pronunciation of each word. If I don't know if a consonant is silent or not, or if it's ɛ or ɛ̃ or ɑ̃, I check the pronunciation and it doesn't matter if it's a French or a Belgian accent.

This is not like in English where the word "bath" has the TRAP vowel or the FATHER vowel depending on the accent, and there is no way to know based on spelling. So learning American English with British sound samples (and vice versa) is unhelpful.

Francophones can give hundreds of reasons why Belgian sound samples would be useful, but I as a learner of Belgian French simply don't need it.


----------



## merquiades

@Red Arrow  I might agree with you, but the Belgian pronunciation of "ui" as /wi/ really does stick out and gives a very different acoustic impression.  It's something which I think should be shown to learners, otherwise if they hear it they will be taken aback.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Víctor Pérez said:


> What an interesting discussion! Good job, @*TheUnitedStatesOfEurope* !
> 
> It reminds me that many years ago I watched at the cinema a Canadian French spoken film which, fortunately, had French subtitles…
> 
> Just a couple of questions:
> 
> Does *a unique word* pronounced by a Belgian, a Swiss, a North African or a Marseillais will really sound very (and I mean *very*) different from a Parisien or a Bordelais? Will the listener really appreciate the différence?
> People recording their voices would they be able to give their own accent *on just one word*? Would they be able to shaw their genuine accent without distorting it?
> Would it be worthwhile to do that huge job?
> Personally, I doubt about it.
> 
> However, to rekindle @*TheUnitedStatesOfEurope*'s suggestion, I think it would really be more convenient and effective to record *a bunch of different phrases or short dialogues* (20, 30, 50…) -all the same for every speaker- by people from different French spoken countries or areas. I know it would be a huge job too, but I guess we would really *appreciate then the different accents* from one French spoken area to another.


Hi @Víctor Pérez and thank you so much for your enthusiasm.*  

To answer your questions (and to answer some of the comments of @Red Arrow ): 

1. Not all words can be discriminated with phonological cues.*
Let's take the example of the English language, as Wordreference is well-furnished on that scene. For instance, the word "and" will sound identical although there are on Wordreference 7 pronounciations available: US, UK, UK-RP, UK-Yorkshire, Irish, Scottish, Jamaican (and US-Southern tags sometimes along too). Sorry to be somewhat provocative here, but why are we so tolerant with (the already-available) English pronounciations on Wordreference, but keep interrogating ourselves about the meaningfulness of French accents? 
Why should French accents be recorded on the sole basis of evidently discriminating phonological cues, whereas English doesn't even fulfil this criterion (see my example above with "and")?!  We want to be holier than the pope with French, i.e. "if there are no difference with standard French, then no recording *and that's it!*", while we remain laxer with English.  I don't understand this two-facedness which I have been reading here since I opened this Thread.  ... 

I sound like the typical French having a rant at the English language. Hahaha!  Please don't get me wrong, I adore English. I just deem legitimate and objective to assess French and English on the same basis. 

*2.* *Interesting question, but as I wasn't there for the recording... However, what I can say:* not everyone can carry out such recordings, that's for sure. Either Researchers in phonetics can give us access to their pools of vernacular candidates, or those research recordings are already accessible for free: *low-hanging fruit* for Wordreference, or we record our own, or we go for both: our own + already available academic recordings? I'm just spitballing here.
*If we go it alone:* either the recordings are carried out by ackowledged linguists specialised in a given accent/language, or by researchers themselves, as the phonetics need to remain genuine and accurate. That's just my humble opinion.
*What is sure:* as anyore can claim to be a native speaker from XX or YY vernacular language, a selection of the candidates needs to be done _de facto_, if we expect the recordings to be *relatable, reliable and genuine. 

3.* *Why don't you challenge the many recordings in English too?* There are on Wordreference and they are worth it (I deem them very important in my daily searches). Your third question makes me bounce back on what I was already saying above: French needs to be holier than the pope to legitimise its array of accents  or even the relevance of their existence , while the many English recordings (*up to 8 in total !!!*) will never be put into question. Ah the joys of globalisation.  

Short dialogues would be a big endeavour too: selection of the candidates, double-check of the phonological cues with the Scholars, what type of dialogues, which topic, who write them, where can we embed them on the website so it remains as visible as the accents scroll-down menu at the top of each word's page (=> which means new coding on the website just for French). *Speaking of which**, why should we make an exception with French?* French just needs to use what is already available: a longer scroll-down menu, *similar to what English already has*. In terms of digital footprint, you gain coherence and congruence too by using what is already available: a scroll-down menu, not to mention the cost drops it may trigger compared to starting something from scratch like dialogues. Moreover, most of the endeavour of recording dialogues would be unavoidable no matter if you go for dialogues or for a word-by-word approach.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Red Arrow said:


> The thing is: if you know how the Belgian accent works, you can completely determine how each word is pronounced based on *spelling*. You don't need a dictionary to look up the Belgian pronunciation of each word. If I don't know if a consonant is silent or not, or if it's ɛ or ɛ̃ or ɑ̃, I check the pronunciation and it doesn't matter if it's a French or a Belgian accent.
> 
> This is not like in English where the word "bath" has the TRAP vowel or the FATHER vowel depending on the accent, and there is no way to know based on spelling. So learning American English with British sound samples (and vice versa) is unhelpful.
> 
> Francophones can give hundreds of reasons why Belgian sound samples would be useful, but I as a learner of Belgian French simply don't need it.


@Red Arrow , *I utterly disagree!*

I don't know up to which level did you study English, and I don't know if English was at some point your major in your academic curriculum, but saying: *"So learning American English with British sound samples (and vice versa) is unhelpful."* is utterly generalizing and completely ignores the language subtelties which differ between someone who learned English as a linguist and someone who learned English to use it like a tool. I learned English as a linguist (It was my major at the University) and such accent differences are SUPER important! In France, in most Universities, a muddled English isn't tolerated by scholars: either you acquire a British English *or* an American English. I know that from personal experience, as I didn't get my final BA Thesis "suma cum laude" because of some pitched, tones, emphasis which I didn't use properly (I speak British English), and because I mixed up American and British English phonological cues (due to some months of cultural exposure with Americans abroad, prior to the Thesis). "Cum Laude" is not bad,  however I learned my lesson here. 

*Regarding your other allegation: *
"Francophones can give hundreds of reasons why Belgian sound samples would be useful, but I as a learner of Belgian French simply don't need it."

*And finally: *
"The thing is: if you know how the Belgian accent works, you can completely determine how each word is pronounced based on *spelling*." => that would be true, if we would ignore a pivotal feature of the French language: it isn't pronounced like it is spelled! To examplify my point: ask a non-French speaker to pronounce the words: "Bordeaux" or "écureuil".  French is *the* language _par excellence_, in which accents cannot be deciphered by their spellings. Other example: can you give me the spelling of a *"e" prépausal *or of a *penultimate prominence*? Pr. Dr. Anne-Catherine Simon (University of Louvain | *Belgium*) explains both of those two phonological cues very well in her research papers and academic work, as already explained a few comments above.

You might have not needed accents differentiation during your learning process of the English language, but I know that the vast majority of students abroad and in France which I met, needed it (and that includes myself too), not only to master them and being able to differentiate them, but also in order to pick one out / identify yourself to one of them. This helped me a lot, when I decided to go for British English instead of American English. Finally, go ask a non-Western student, e.g. an Asian beginer learning the English or French language and you will see how important recording accents can be for her/him - and I speak of experience too, as it served me well when I learned Chinese, Japanese and Korean.

You can also acquire an accent again. I had to work out my Southern French accent again, as French centralisation and uniformisation tried to get rid of it during my childhood. This untangible aspect of a Language is of utmost importance and should be documented in a dictionary too. Not to mention that in our modern era in which *the vast moajority of people* can*not* read phonetics, recordings will prove highly invaluable for Wordreference.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

*Another phonological distinctive feature, heard today during the Radio show La Matinale, on the Swiss Radio RTS, at 07:59 (topic: political marketing) *- this show is always podcasted, shall you be interested to have a listen :

"Trop" prounounced [tʀɔ], instead of its mainland French and Canadian version: [tʀo] .

This may apply to other words, such as in France "mot" and "maux", which are both pronounced [mo],
whereas in Switzerland "mot" is prounounced [mo] and "maux": [mɔ].

Cheers,
The USE


----------



## Red Arrow

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> @Red Arrow , *I utterly disagree!*
> 
> I don't know up to which level did you study English, and I don't know if English was at some point your major in your academic curriculum, but saying: *"So learning American English with British sound samples (and vice versa) is unhelpful."* is utterly generalizing and completely ignores the language subtelties which differ between someone who learned English as a linguist and someone who learned English to use it like a tool. I learned English as a linguist (It was my major at the University) and such accent differences are SUPER important! In France, in most Universities, a muddled English isn't tolerated by scholars: either you acquire a British English *or* an American English. I know that from personal experience, as I didn't get my final BA Thesis "suma cum laude" because of some pitched, tones, emphasis which I didn't use properly (I speak British English), and because I mixed up American and British English phonological cues (due to some months of cultural exposure with Americans abroad, prior to the Thesis). "Cum Laude" is not bad,  however I learned my lesson here.


You didn't understand what I wanted to say. I never implied that the differences between American and British English are unimportant. On the contrary, I implied the exact opposite.


TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> that would be true, if we would ignore a pivotal feature of the French language: it isn't pronounced like it is spelled! To examplify my point: ask a non-French speaker to pronounce the words: "Bordeaux" or "écureuil".


1. All differences between Belgian French and French French are marked in spelling. The difference between un and in/ein/ain, between ê/aî and ei and ai/è, between o/ot/os and eau/aud/aux, between i and ie, between u and ue, between ou and oue, between eu and eue, between é and ée etc. French spelling marks everything that Belgian speakers distinguish but French speakers don't. French spelling also marks what Frenchmen distinguish but Belgians don't: ui and oui.

2. Well, I have no problems saying Bordeaux and écureuil and I am "non-French". Furthermore, these words are pronounced as spelled. You just need to know how French spelling works. On top of that, these words sound the same in French French and in Belgian French so I don't know what this has to do with the topic at hand. Really, all you did was imply even more that Wordreference can be used for students of Belgian French.


TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> You might have not needed accents differentiation during your learning process of the English language, but I know that the vast majority of students abroad and in France which I met, needed it (and that includes myself too), not only to master them and being able to differentiate them, but also in order to pick one out / identify yourself to one of them.


But I do! But a dictionary is not needed for that in European French.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

*Regarding your allegation: "*_On the contrary, I implied the exact opposite._*"*
=> Please elaborate. 

*Regarding your statement: "*_Furthermore, these words are pronounced as spelled._*"
=> Sorry to disappoint, but in linguitics, they are not pronounced as spelled. *
An example which may come closer to your rationale is French creole in Louisiana, on Reunion Island or in the Caribbeans, where some words are pronounced as they are spelled: "Pas bon" in French, will give you: "Pa bon" in Creole. Same in English: "No one" will give you in Creole: "No wan" => *IN THIS CASE*, things are pronounced as they are spelled (at least in these cases I just mentionned).

Other examples (French versus Creole), in an attempt to come closer to what you mean:

Tremblement de Terre: Tranbleman de tè
gros: gwo
Téléphone: téléfon
=> Hence telling me that French spelling is straightforward in terms of pronounciation doesn't make sense. Danish or English pronounciations fall under the same category of languages which don't have a straightforward pronounciation at all. Take the word "riveting" or "hirsute" in English for instance. And the list goes on...

Incidentally, can you please give me the spelling of a *"e" prépausal *or of a *penultimate prominence*? 

_*As for*_*:*_* "*Well, I have no problems saying Bordeaux and écureuil and I am "non-French".*"*_
=> I am very happy for you.   However, some non-Western or Western beginers in French may certainly not share your opinion. And it is always easier to say "_I have no problems saying Bordeaux and écureuil_", once you already master the language.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Red Arrow said:


> 1. All differences between Belgian French and French French are marked in spelling. The difference between un and in/ein/ain, between ê/aî and ei and ai/è, between o/ot/os and eau/aud/aux, between i and ie, between u and ue, between ou and oue, between eu and eue, between é and ée etc. French spelling marks everything that Belgian speakers distinguish but French speakers don't. French spelling also marks what Frenchmen distinguish but Belgians don't: ui and oui.


@Red Arrow : makes even more sense to record a Belgians accent, as Belgian differentiate some features, as the ones you mentioned above, which their French counterparts don't. Thanks for pointing that out.


----------



## Red Arrow

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> *Regarding your allegation: "*_On the contrary, I implied the exact opposite._*"*
> => Please elaborate.


I said that if you want to learn British English, you should use British sound samples, and if you want to learn American English, you have to use American sound samples. You cannot deduct one pronunciation from the other like in French, not even if you know the spelling.


TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> Tremblement de Terre: Tranbleman de tè
> gros: gwo
> Téléphone: téléfon


If you know how French spelling works, you know how to pronounce these five words. You think French is more illogical than it actually is, which is typical for native speakers. Dutchmen and Swedes also think their languages have no logic.

There is not one illogical thing about these five words. Ph is always pronounced [f]. Final E and S are always silent. N always turns into M before B except in compound words. E is always pronounced like [ɛ:] before R. En is always pronounced like [ɑ̃] before a consonant or at the end of a word, except in loanwords. Words with ien, yen and éen have the [ɛ̃] vowel. The pronunciation of all of these words is straightforward.


TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> Incidentally, can you please give me the spelling of a *"e" prépausal *or of a *penultimate prominence*?


I don't know what this means. Do you mean a proposal?


----------



## Red Arrow

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> French needs to be holier than the pope to legitimise its array of accents  or even the relevance of their existence , while the many English recordings (*up to 8 in total !!!*) will never be put into question. Ah the joys of globalisation.


Typical Francophone exceptionalism?

-English: 8
-Spanish: 3
-French: 2
-Italian and Chinese: 1
-Catalan, German, Dutch, Japanese, Arabic, Swedish, Korean, Czech, Russian, Turkish, Greek, Romanian, Polish and Portuguese: *0*

The Swedish dictionary is not even usable unless you are a native speaker. There is no way to know the pitch accent or the pronunciation of the letter o based on spelling.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

@Red Arrow , you're telling me something I already know.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Red Arrow said:


> I said that if you want to learn British English, you should use British sound samples, and if you want to learn American English, you have to use American sound samples. You cannot deduct one pronunciation from the other like in French, not even if you know the spelling.
> 
> If you know how French spelling works, you know how to pronounce these five words. You think French is more illogical than it actually is, which is typical for native speakers. Dutchmen and Swedes also think their languages have no logic.
> 
> There is not one illogical thing about these five words. Ph is always pronounced [f]. Final E and S are always silent. N always turns into M before B except in compound words. E is always pronounced like [ɛ:] before R. En is always pronounced like [ɑ̃] before a consonant or at the end of a word, except in loanwords. Words with ien, yen and éen have the [ɛ̃] vowel. The pronunciation of all of these words is straightforward.
> 
> I don't know what this means. Do you mean a proposal?



Beginers would be tempted to pronounce the "t" at the end of tremblement, or "s" at the end of gros.
That's what I meant by non-intuitive spellings, amongst other things.

As for your statement: "_I don't know what this means._" => *Well you just put your finger on the very problem! *
Hence our meandering discussion...  I would suggest that you first have a wee dip into the research literature which I posted in some of my comments above dealing with phonological cues, amongst other things. 
Otherwise, you know the saying: "And round and round in circle we go." 

@wildan1 is a a trained linguist who has lived and worked all around French-speaking Africa. He can surely advise you relevant research material in linguistics too.  @Nanon seems also very well-versed in this topic.  I don't want to pretend to hold all knowledge.
Hope this helps @Red Arrow .


----------



## Red Arrow

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> Beginers would be tempted to pronounce the "t" at the end of tremblement, or "s" at the end of gros.
> That's what I meant by non-intuitive spellings, amongst other things.


They don't need Belgian sound samples for that. You can already hear that in the other two samples.


TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> As for your statement: "_I don't know what this means._" => *Well you just put your finger on the very problem! *




You don't give any arguments about Belgian French. All of your arguments also work for any accent and dialect of any language on the planet. This is not a meandering discussion, this is not a discussion at all. This is you talking about your fantastic grades at university and other off-topic stuff.


----------



## Peterdg

I agree with most of Red Arrow's comments. (I'm a native Dutch speaker too, but have always been living around Brussels, so French is kind of a second nature).

In first instance, about French spelling and pronunciation: I agree that when you see a written word in French, you know how to pronounce it if you know how French spelling works. There are exceptions, of course, like with everything. E.g. "oeufs" (and honestly, that's the only one I can come up with right now).

It doesn't work the other way around though; if you know how to pronounce a word, you don't necessarily know how to write it.

In second place: Belgian French pronunciation does not differ that much from standard French pronunciation. There are slight phonetic differences, but nothing so severe that it would make it unintelligible. 

And, in third place: if you would add a "Belgian French pronunciation", which one would you choose? Brussels, Liège, Namur, Charleroi,  Luxembourg???


----------



## Víctor Pérez

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> Hi @Víctor Pérez and thank you so much for your enthusiasm.*
> 
> To answer your questions (and to answer some of the comments of @Red Arrow ):
> 
> 1. Not all words can be discriminated with phonological cues.*
> Let's take the example of the English language, as Wordreference is well-furnished on that scene. For instance, the word "and" will sound identical although there are on Wordreference 7 pronounciations available: US, UK, UK-RP, UK-Yorkshire, Irish, Scottish, Jamaican (and US-Southern tags sometimes along too). Sorry to be somewhat provocative here, but why are we so tolerant with (the already-available) English pronounciations on Wordreference, but keep interrogating ourselves about the meaningfulness of French accents?
> Why should French accents be recorded on the sole basis of evidently discriminating phonological cues, whereas English doesn't even fulfil this criterion (see my example above with "and")?!  We want to be holier than the pope with French, i.e. "if there are no difference with standard French, then no recording *and that's it!*", while we remain laxer with English.  I don't understand this two-facedness which I have been reading here since I opened this Thread.  ...
> 
> I sound like the typical French having a rant at the English language. Hahaha!  Please don't get me wrong, I adore English. I just deem legitimate and objective to assess French and English on the same basis.
> 
> *2.* *Interesting question, but as I wasn't there for the recording... However, what I can say:* not everyone can carry out such recordings, that's for sure. Either Researchers in phonetics can give us access to their pools of vernacular candidates, or those research recordings are already accessible for free: *low-hanging fruit* for Wordreference, or we record our own, or we go for both: our own + already available academic recordings? I'm just spitballing here.
> *If we go it alone:* either the recordings are carried out by ackowledged linguists specialised in a given accent/language, or by researchers themselves, as the phonetics need to remain genuine and accurate. That's just my humble opinion.
> *What is sure:* as anyore can claim to be a native speaker from XX or YY vernacular language, a selection of the candidates needs to be done _de facto_, if we expect the recordings to be *relatable, reliable and genuine.
> 
> 3.* *Why don't you challenge the many recordings in English too?* There are on Wordreference and they are worth it (I deem them very important in my daily searches). Your third question makes me bounce back on what I was already saying above: French needs to be holier than the pope to legitimise its array of accents  or even the relevance of their existence , while the many English recordings (*up to 8 in total !!!*) will never be put into question. Ah the joys of globalisation.
> 
> Short dialogues would be a big endeavour too: selection of the candidates, double-check of the phonological cues with the Scholars, what type of dialogues, which topic, who write them, where can we embed them on the website so it remains as visible as the accents scroll-down menu at the top of each word's page (=> which means new coding on the website just for French). *Speaking of which**, why should we make an exception with French?* French just needs to use what is already available: a longer scroll-down menu, *similar to what English already has*. In terms of digital footprint, you gain coherence and congruence too by using what is already available: a scroll-down menu, not to mention the cost drops it may trigger compared to starting something from scratch like dialogues. Moreover, most of the endeavour of recording dialogues would be unavoidable no matter if you go for dialogues or for a word-by-word approach.


Thanks for your thorough answer, The USE. 

If my concern is about French it's because you suggested about French. In Wordreference, the French pronunciation section is still basic and, in my opinion, it might still worth to do a new project. 

To notice the accents, I insist that phrases or short dialogues would be much more convenient than isolated words. You certainly know better than I do that local accents are the result of intonation, sonority, modulation, musicality... I'm convinced you only can get these aspects when you hear the speaker for a couple of seconds, in a phrase. Without saying that for the speaker it's much more easier to preserve his own accent. 

Once again, I know it's a huge job. That's up to @mkellogg to decide. There is no hurry. If 50 sentences are too much, it could just be done with 20 and, instead to be in any dictionnary, it could be a separate special section (kind of French Pronunciations).


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Víctor Pérez said:


> ou certainly know better than I do that local accents are the result of intonation, sonority, modulation, musicality...


 Hi @Víctor Pérez . Thanks for your reply. 

Interesting. I didn't see it like that. Fair enough and very true regarding intonation, modulation, musicality, and so on. 
Not sure however, if that can be implemented for the reasons which I already mentioned: costs, coherence and congruence of Wordreference's digital footprint, i.e. I can't imagine every language having its own special layout. The way words are recorded, it seems that Wordreference is off to keep recording single words instead of dialogues. Just my assumption. If dialogues are recorded, I assume that this new functionality will apply to other languages too, and will not be solely specific to French. In turn, implementing such a new functionality to all languages may trigger a snowball effect of costs. Just spitballing / speculating here.


----------



## Víctor Pérez

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> If dialogues are recorded, I assume that this new functionality will apply to other languages too, and will not be solely specific to French.


Yes, why not?


TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> In turn, implementing such a new functionality to all languages may trigger a snowball effect of costs. Just spitballing / speculating here.


Probably, but let the owners to decide it. *In return, Wordreference will take a giant step.*


----------



## DearPrudence

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> We are curently in that era where we call alternative facts, the facts which we can't accept because they are not in agreement with our personal experience, belief or opinions (if Donal Trump could follow this conversation, he would have given you a thumb-up , just like @DearPrudence did ). Thanks for confirming and remiding me that this is symptomatic of our time.


Since the addition of voices would be for the benefit of the "man of the street", I didn't want to be dragged into this discussion which seems to have turned into a very lengthy exposé of your vast knowledge on linguistics.

But, since I have to justify myself, for instance, I genuinely don't understand how this question helps decide which accents would be worth adding? 🤔


TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> Other example: can you give me the spelling of a *"e" prépausal *or of a *penultimate prominence*?





TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> As for your statement: "_I don't know what this means._" => *Well you just put your finger on the very problem! *


[...]


----------



## merquiades

To summarize this thread before it went downhill, Marseilles, Brussels, Kinshasa, Geneva, would be great additions to the WR French pronunciation dictionary depending on the budget available to hire speakers and the desire people have here to make it happen.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

merquiades said:


> To summarize this thread before it went downhill, Marseilles, Brussels, Kinshasa, Geneva, would be great additions to the WR French pronunciation dictionary depending on the budget available to hire speakers and the desire people have here to make it happen.


Thanks @merquiades . 
That would be a great selection.  Especially happy to see Kinshasa in this list. 
Would be great if it turns out to be feasible. Otherwise, well too bad. That's life. 
Sorry to repeat myself : before hiring speakers, you might want to dig a bit into already-available recordings at Universities ([potentially free-of-charge] low-hanging fruit ). Hope it helps.


----------



## Glasguensis

It’s interesting how different this discussion has been compared to the discussions we have had about which varieties of English to include. In those discussions there was no consideration whatsoever of the phonological characteristics of particular accents : the choice focused entirely on whether they sounded different from each other and were frequently encountered.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Hi @Glasguensis , phonology *is* the study of what you just said: "whether they sounded different from each other and were frequently encountered". As part of a decision-making process, I deemed judicious to call upon science and facts, in order to evaluate accurately the representativity of an accent (i.e. its phonology). Sociology is often considered too, along with phonology: studying an accent is a thing; studying how, when, where, by whom and how often is it used is another. I don't know what is the decision-making process at WR, but I assume that for all deicsion-making procedures involving a cost evaluation, you want your facts to be as solid as possible. Hence I decided to come up with a bit of science.



TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> Hi @lauranazario . Thank you very much for your pragmatic input.
> I would have been surprised if recording new accents would have not been a lengthy process.
> 
> *Unfeasabile endeavour?!*
> => if you managed to do it in English, why not in French?!





lauranazario said:


> Maybe because the pronunciations 'came along' (were included) with the English companion dictionaries we've used over the years (like Collins or Random House)???
> I don't work directly with our dictionaries, so take this as an educated guess at best.



@Glasguensis, I didn't know that they were debates about the varieties of English accents.  I assumed that they were taken over "by default" from other companion dictionaries. @lauranazario educated guess sounded actually like a good explanation.

Thanks for the input.   
Cheers,
The USE


----------



## Nanon

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> @wildan1 is a a trained linguist who has lived and worked all around French-speaking Africa. He can surely advise you relevant research material in linguistics too.  @Nanon seems also very well-versed in this topic.  I don't want to pretend to hold all knowledge.


Neither do I, and I certainly don't want to claim any title - all the less so under pseudonymity!
I got interested in this topic and offered my two cents because, guess what? I am a French-speaking member of WR forums, period. However, I am pondering whether I should follow this discussion any longer.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

@Nanon , I have this terrible flaw of overestimating people.  That'll be my downfall. 
You're right, I should indeed take them for what they are.


----------



## Glasguensis

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> Hi @Glasguensis , phonology *is* the study of what you just said: "whether they sounded different from each other and were frequently encountered".


Yes, I am aware of that thanks. I was pointing out that we did not discuss the characteristics of particular accents: had we started discussing the characteristics of Scottish accents (to take an example), we’d never have got as far as selecting a voice, since we’d have got bogged down in a never-ending discussion as to what the most important markers were, given that there are in reality numerous different accents to be found in Scotland.

On a different theme, I can confirm that with the recordings of individual words in English, each accent is clearly identifiable. I think it would be the case in French also.


----------



## merquiades

This more or less what I had in mind by suggesting Marseilles, Brussels, Kinshasa, Geneva.   I think, for example, it's crucial to have a southern French accent, and we could discuss forever what is a true southern accent and which one is the best, but I thought by choosing a city like Marseilles at least millions speak like that and it has a lot of quintessential southern feel to it.  Same with the other places. I just decided to choose four important accent groups and cities that represent them because I take it funding is the most important issue.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Just add a southern French accent (southwest or southeast, who cares at this early stage) to begin with! Don't make the perfect the enemy of the good.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

merquiades said:


> This more or less what I had in mind by suggesting Marseilles, Brussels, Kinshasa, Geneva.   I think, for example, it's crucial to have a southern French accent, and we could discuss forever what is a true southern accent and which one is the best, but I thought by choosing a city like Marseilles at least millions speak like that and it has a lot of quintessential southern feel to it.  Same with the other places. I just decided to choose four important accent groups and cities that represent them because I take it funding is the most important issue.


@Glasguensis , @merquiades , @Pedro y La Torre , I agree.

I'm happy that we haven't been so far bogged down in deciphering which accent variation should prevail and which one shouldn't be selected within a given territory. 

Exposure was mentionned a bit earlier in the discussion. It should be a criterion too, as @merquiades said.
Marseilles is a large city and its accent is spoken in other parts of Southern and Southeastern France too.
If we take into account the population of the PACA region and former Languedoc-Rousillon (now called Occitanie), that gives us roughly 8 million inhabitants. And if we stretch that even further (PACA + Occitanie), that's: 11 million inhabitants more or less. More than 1 French out of 7.  Not bad.  And I'm not even counting the parts of the Region Nouvelle Aquitaine (Landes, Pyrénées Atlantiques, etc.) where this accent is endemic too.

If we consider another extreme: a French Polynesian accent would have made sense, but with a huge ecomic area of 4 793 620km2 (as comparison, the area of India is: 3 287 263 km2), the population is on the other hand a mere 281,674 and the archipelago is very remote. In terms of exposure not ideal (and it breaks my hear to say it )... The same could apply to New Caledonia, alas. In terms of exposure, not ideal, not to mention that recording accents costs money (to record *and* to keep on servers).
*Along those lines,* I can understand the fact that Jamaica is an accent listed in the English Dictionary, as it makes sense in terms of exposure: it's much less remote: in the heart of the Caribbeans (wink intended  / R.I.P. Bob  ), and it accounts more than 3 mil. inhabitants.

And speaking of islands: as one of the largest in the world (a bit bigger than mainland France), a population of *5,252,562 French speakers*, according to the OIF survey of 2018 (*20% of francophones / that's the same proportion of francophones in Switzerland*), Madagascar might be interesting to add on the list. In terms of phonology though, I don't know Madagascan French well. Scientific literature which may help us in understanding the features of this accent is scarce on the subject.

I could only find the following:
https://scholarworks.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9138&context=etd

*What do you think?*

Thanks for the input.
Cheers,
The USE


----------



## wildan1

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> I don't know Madagascan French well


My personal observations of Malagasy speaking French is that the phonology is not too challenging for native Malagasy- speakers, but there are some distinctive influences in intonation. However, a dictionary does not reflect those features when providing pronunciation for single words.

In the last couple of decades French is used less than in earlier times, and English is also promoted as another "official" language for the purposes of having closer relations with regional neighbors (for 3 years it was even written into the constitution, and then taken out).

Since Malagasy all speak a single language (with regional dialects, but mutually understandable), French is not as widely used there outside of big-city elites as it is in some mainland African French-speaking countries. It has no role as a lingua franca among people from different regions of the island; they all have the same native language, unlike countries on the continent like Congo-Kinshasa, Côte d'Ivoire, Senegal, etc.

I'm not sure what use there would be for adding this "accent" to a dictionary outside of Madagascar.


----------



## merquiades

Yes, it's worthwhile adding accents of French native speakers.  Second language learners with all their different accents can be from anywhere in the world.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

merquiades said:


> Yes, it's worthwhile adding accents of French native speakers.  Second language learners with all their different accents can be from anywhere in the world.


@merquiades , but French is not a second language in Madagascar.


----------



## merquiades

I know it is the official language of Madagascar but it's a learned language that a minority of people use as a second language in a formal setting. I've seen 15%. The native language of the Malagasy people is Malagasy. I wouldn't be for adding Maltese English as an accent for the same reason.
 In Kinshasa and perhaps in Abidjan and Yaoundé... it's become the native language of a majority nowadays. They could add one of these African accents in the long-term future.
Maybe there could be a poll conducted on what French accent(s) would be crucial to add and people could vote on them. I think something like this has been done before.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

After documenting myself and asking a bit around within the alumni network of the University where I studied languages, I could gather below the following testimonies and records from former classmates who are now expatriates in Madagascar (or who got back there after completing their curriculum in Europe):

- French is part of the Constitution as official language.
- English was recently removed from the Constitution as official language (it is well-explained on Wikipedia).
- English is not well-spoken on the island.
- French is the Lingua Franca (pun intended ) in the capital, but also in provincial Madagascar. Indeed, there a lot of ethnic groups on the island who cannot always understand each other very well, and therefore, use French as Lingua Franca (like English is used as Lingua Franca in India, so Notherners and Southerners can understand each other).
- In the capital, French is rather "neutral" (similar to what you hear in mainland France), whereas in provinces, French is spoken with a Malagasy accent, e.g. the s, c and ch are mixed together to form new sounds. The j tends to be pronounced like a z too.
- French remains the most common coporate language, i.e. if you want to have a career in Madagascar, French is inevitable.
- French is also used by the large Indian francophone diaspora (from Puducherry) who is settled in Madagascar and whose entrepreunarial network is wide spread and well-anchored on the island.
- In the capital, the vast majority of people speak French. The level of mastery hinges upon the social class considered (similar to India).
- French mastery decreases with the remoteness and the impoverishment of a region, i.e. the richer a region, the better the French level of its inhabitants.
- TV channels offer daily two succeeding evening News reports (prime-time): one in Malagasy and one in French.

Other records, testimonies or academic literature may underpin the (empirical) points above. 
Hope this helps.  

If you want to sample the flavours of the local Malagesy French accent further:
(During the news, you can hear that pitches and tones are different from standard French).

Tiako Be radio stream live and for free
Alliance 92 FM radio stream live and for free
RNA - Radio Ny Antsika Antananarivo | Live & for free
RNA Madagascar radio stream live and for free
La radio active!

Cheers,
The USE


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

I think this thread is now reaching the end of its natural life. What can be done? Can another accent be added or not?


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

merquiades said:


> I've seen 15%


@merquiades , from which OIF survey does this percentage come from please?
The OIF survey of 2018 mentions *20%, i.e. around 5,3 mil. French speakers.

That's more than 2.5 times bigger than the population of French speakers in Switzerland.*

(*In Switzerland:* 25,1% of the population, i.e. 2,1 mil. are French speakers, according to "Bilan de la population résidante permanente (total) selon les districts et les communes, Statistique suisse", 6th August 2011".).

As a Swiss French accent (from Geneva) was mentioned a few times as prime candidate for an add-on, then Malagasy French should also be scrutinised, if we want to be congruent in our approach, and as the latest statistics would suggest.

@Pedro y La Torre, the above answers your question.


----------



## merquiades

It's taken from one of the studies carried by Laval University. Madagascar
I guess it's 15% partially French-speaking and 5% French-speaking. At best 5% native speakers.

Cette notion de «francophonie» demeure bien aléatoire pour la majorité des Malgaches: les francophones ne forment que 5 % de la population, soit environ 1,5 million de personnes, ainsi que 15 % de francophones dits «partiels», selon les estimations de l’OIF. Part 3.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

*Heard today on the Swiss Radio RTS, at around 07:39 ~ 7:40am (CET): *
Vingt (20) pronounded /vɛ̃t/ instead of /vɛ̃/
This pronounciation is also common in *Belgium* and Eastern France.

*And heard a few minutes later, a very interesting expression I never heard before: *
"Sortir du bois pour débrancher l'accord cadre" (in reference to the Frameword Agreement between the EU and Switzerland which has been a very bumpy road so far...): "to get out of the woods in order to "unplug" the framework agreement."
In mainland France, people would have said on an national aired radio: "se manifester pour court-circuiter l'accord cadre" (if we keep using this electrical metaphor ): "to show up in order to short-circuit (circumvent or bypass) the framework agreement."

*And speaking of interesting words, often used during these politcal debates on the Swiss radio is the very Swiss word: *
"prétériter", which means "porter préjudice": to cause harm.

Food for thoughts. 
Cheers,
The USE


----------



## Stéphane89

TheUnitedStatesOfEurope said:


> *And heard a few minutes later, a very interesting expression I never heard before: *
> "Sortir du bois pour débrancher l'accord cadre" (in reference to the Frameword Agreement between the EU and Switzerland which has been a very bumpy road so far...): "to get out of the woods in order to "unplug" the framework agreement."
> In mainland France, people would have said on an national aired radio: "se manifester pour court-circuiter l'accord cadre" (if we keep using this electrical metaphor ): "to show up in order to short-circuit (circumvent or bypass) the framework agreement."



"Sortir du bois" is not a typical Swiss expression. It is also used in (Mainland) France and in Belgium. You can find it in articles from Le Monde and Le Figaro, for example, so I'm almost sure you could hear it on national aired radio as well.


----------



## TheUnitedStatesOfEurope

Stéphane89 said:


> "Sortir du bois" is not a typical Swiss expression. It is also used in (Mainland) France and in Belgium. You can find it in articles from Le Monde and Le Figaro, for example, so I'm almost sure you could hear it on national aired radio as well.


Good point.  Thank you very much.  
Although, to be frank, I never heard it.  => A new word a day, keeps illiteracy away. 

Cheers,
The USE


----------

