[Brother Jonathan]

[QUOTE by lesouris]</b> … So why were languages of such historic importance just allowed to die out in Canada?<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> Perhaps they weren’t contemporarily recognised as being of historic importance? Maybe some of their speakers perceived some value in teaching their children one or both of the majority languages?<br /> <br /> [QUOTE by lesouris]</b> Is there any way to stop this loss of our linguistic heritage?<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> Sure — learn a language and communicate in it. Like so many other things, the buck stops with each one of us.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE by lesouris]</b> I would suggest adoption of a minority language charter (like the one used in the EU). I would also suggest new third language education in our schools.[/QUOTE]<br /> Curiously enough, France has signed the <a href="http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/148.htm">European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages</a>, but will not ratify it because its Constitutional Council declared that implementing it would be unconstitutional — their reasoning is that their constitution states that the language of the Republic is French. A report written for the French government stated that <b>75</b> languages would qualify for recognition under the Charter if it were implemented. If Canada cloned the Charter, how many minority languages would then qualify for recognition?

[lesouris]

[QUOTE BY= Brother Jonathan] Curiously enough, France has signed the <a href="http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/148.htm">European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages</a>, but will not ratify it because its Constitutional Council declared that implementing it would be unconstitutional — their reasoning is that their constitution states that the language of the Republic is French. A report written for the French government stated that <b>75</b> languages would qualify for recognition under the Charter if it were implemented. If Canada cloned the Charter, how many minority languages would then qualify for recognition?[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Well it depends on what minority legislation would say exactly. Perhaps it would only include indigenous languages or languages that have been in this country for a certain amount of time. Perhaps it would only include endangered languages. Maybe a hierarchy of languages entitled to different rights could be implemented.<br /> <br /> That being said, it would really depend on what the legislation would say. If it granted minority languages near-official status rights than the criteria that a language would need to meet would be strict. If, however, the legislation gave minority languages limited rights - say signage in areas with significant populations and government subsidized (though not funded to the degree of the public system) third language non-denominational schools.<br /> <br /> When it comes to the EU, France wouldn't be the best example; Spain, Germany, Sweden, and increasingly the UK are making strides to improve minority language rights. <br /> <br /> Take Sweden for example. The Swedish government does not recognise an official language at all (which is by no means unique, many countries have no official language), but Swedish is obviously the de facto official language. Five minority languages <i>are</i> recognised: Sami (40,000 speakers), Meänkieli (50,000 speakers), Finnish (+500,000 speakers), Romani (20,000), and Yiddish (4,000). Sweden's Minority Language Committee laid down certain criteria for inclusion as an official minority language:<br /> 1. It must have been spoken in Sweden for a significant amount of time (generally perceived to mean 100 years)<br /> 2. It must be spoken by a significant number of people centred around a geographic area (although what is considered "significant" is up for debate)<br /> 3. There should also be a cultural benefit to the group seeking out official recognition<br /> The Swedish government also feels compelled to protect languages of historical importance in the country like Yiddish or Romani.<br /> <br /> Sweden's minority languages are given education rights and judicial/administrative rights in municipalities with large minority language speakers.<br /> <br /> Could a similar system work in Canada? I believe so, although the criteria for recognition would probably cause some controversy (but what doesn't in this country, or any country for that matter?).

[Brother Jonathan]

[QUOTE by lesouris]</b> … Could a similar system work in Canada?<b>[/QUOTE]<br /> Could it? Yes, given sufficient political will — and as you said, depending upon the text of the legislation.<br /> <br /> Given the size and regional diversity of Canada, would such legislation be more effective at the provincial/territorial level rather than at the national level? (For example, should the protection afforded Cree in Newfoundland and Labrador be different than that of Québec?)<br /> <br /> It’s interesting that Yiddish is recognised in Sweden, given the “geographic centre” requirement. In this case, I’d imagine that it must be centred on a particular city (Stockholm?). If a similar requirement existed in Canada, I’d imagine that populous cities like Toronto and Montréal would become “language hothouses”, with the potential of protected areas every few blocks …

[lesouris]

[QUOTE BY= Brother Jonathan] If a similar requirement existed in Canada, I’d imagine that populous cities like Toronto and Montréal would become “language hothouses”, with the potential of protected areas every few blocks …[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> Have you been to Toronto lately? Every neighbourhood basically has its own language already. Of course, if similar guidelines were adopted in Canada (ie requiring a certain amount of time in Canada), I don't see many of these languages falling under this proposed legislation except perhaps Chinese and Italian.<br /> <br /> If schooling in a third language was part of this legislation, it would be negligent of the government not to teach english in english-majority areas or french in french-majority areas. Afterall, the purpose of schooling is to prepare students for the workforce, and how far can you get in the Canadian business world only knowing Ukrainian or Korean? There is a difference however between linguistic assimilation and just teaching a second language because it is the business world's lingua franca.