Discusses on the standard of Québécois French

The debate on the standard of Québécois French opposes two camps: that of the endogenists (term forged by Lionel Meney) or Aménagiste S and the other, which one could call that of the exogenists . The first consider that the French inhabitant of Quebec must have its own standard, distinct from the French standard, the others consider that by doing that, the French Québécois “ ghettoïserait ”. This debate points out the quarrel of regionalistic and the exotists, in the Québécois Littérature.

There exist two principal “battle fields” for this debate: the Québécois dictionaries and the Media.

Terminological note

Some synonymic expressions can be used for to indicate this concept:

debate on the joual
debate of the joual
quarrel of the joual
quarrel on the joual
controversy of the joual
debate on Québécois French
debate of Québécois French
quarrel of Québécois French
quarrel on Québécois French
controversy of Québécois French

Origin

According to the amenagist Jean-Claude Corbeil, the debate would go up up to 1760, but would have intensified since 1955, that is to say little before the beginning of the Quiet revolution.

Discusses on the existence of the debate

The existence of the debate on the standard of Québécois French does itself the object of a debate. In a article published in the Duty, Jean-Claude Corbeil writes that “three consensuses emerged” on Québécois French. In another article, Lionel Meney answers that “or there is consensus, and then there is no more debate, or there is debate, and then there is no consensus”.

Arguments employed by the two camps

Position of institutions and notable people

Position of the Québécois Office of the French language

The Québécois Office of the French language appears to lean side of the amenagism. Lionel Meney writes that

the Aménagiste S invested the places to be able: secretariat in the linguistic policy, the Council and Office of the French language, Minister of education… One can measure their progress by comparing two official definitions twenty-five away years: “The standard which, in Quebec, must govern French in the administration, teaching, the courts, the worship and the press, declared the Office of the French language in 1965, must, essentially, coincide about entirely with that which prevails with Paris, Geneva, Brussels, Dakar…” In 1990, the Conseil of the French language one amalgamated a part with the Office in [[2002]] affirmed that there is now “consensus in Quebec as for the existence of standard French from here which description constitutes the next stage obliged Québécois collective project of Installation of the language”. Actually, there is no consensus. The Council listened to only those of agreement with the creation of a “Québécois standard”.

Like another indication of the favor that with the endogenism with the Office, one can quote the fact that Helene Cajolet-Laganière, one of the writers of the French at the office of the Office is also one of the authors of Oui… to Québécois French standard .

Position of the Editions the Robert

The publisher the Robert gives an opinion in the foreword of the the Petit Robert 1993 :

These data do not claim to replace specific and more exhaustive descriptions Belgian-French phrases, and even less to replace dictionaries of French describing the use and the standard of this language in a given social community (the Robert has just made of it the very serious attempt in Quebec, by the Québécois Dictionnaire of today .)” The Nouveau the Petit Robert , although it basically describes a standard of French of France, includes certain regionalisms of France and to stress besides that there exist several “good uses”, definite not by a decree from Paris, but by as many spontaneous adjustments or of group decisions which there exist communities living their French identity.

The Québécois Dictionnaire of today has as a principal writer the “endogenist” Jean-Claude Boulanger.

Position of the French Academy

The French Academy seems to tighten side of the exogenism. Its perpetual secretary, Maurice Druon, makes statements the January 15th 2006 on the waves of Radio France Internationale which then make run much ink in Quebec. These declarations cause to rejoin for the occasion the Québécois media under the banner of the amenagism.

Dictionaries “endogenists” and “exogenists”

to also see Québécois Lexicography

Certain dictionaries fit clearly in one of the two camps, but of others are more difficult to encircle. The distinction is usually the following one: the dictionaries endogenists have a Marque of use for the francisms (sometimes also for the “Québécisme S”, as it is the case of the Grand terminological Dictionary); the dictionaries exogenists provide a mark of use only for the Québécisme S.

The fact of omitting the mark “quebecism” is almost always voluntary; the fact of omitting the mark “francism” is often involuntary. Moreover, the concept of “francism” is not known in Europe, where one writes dictionaries exogenists without the knowledge, since that the tradition for the French standard is that the standard is dictated by Paris. According to this point of view, Paris can have its particularisms like the Argot, but not of “regionalisms” (francisms). One probably does not know very well besides the design “endogenist” or “exogenist” of French in Europe.

Dictionary inhabitant of Quebec-French

principal Article

The Dictionnaire inhabitant of Quebec-French (1999) of Lionel Meney forms part of the dictionaries exogenists clearly. With the manner of the dictionaries published since the XIXe century in Quebec, it compares the French inhabitant of Quebec and the French standard, but contrary to them, it is satisfied to describe the Québécismes without never condemning them. It is of descriptive, and nonnormative nature. One of its innovations is to propose equivalences of register corresponding, and not only of register neutral or constant. It is a specialized dictionary, it thus does not treat a general language with the manner of a Robert or of a Larousse .

Dictionary of French more and Québécois Dictionary of today

The Dictionary of French more (1988) of Claude Poirier and the Québécois Dictionnaire of today (1992) of Jean-Claude Boulanger are dictionaries general practitioners clearly making to part of the camp “endogenist”. They slice with the tradition established with the XIXe century in lexicography according to which one marks the Canadianisme S or Québécisme S, and not the “francisms” (mark of use disputed by the “exogenists”). They do not provide a Marque of use indicating the Québécois regionalisms, contrary to the dictionaries usual general practitioners ( Robert , Larousse ).

Here what says Mireille Elchacar of the Université of Sherbrooke:

the Dictionnaire of French Plus to the use of the French-speaking people of America (DFP) is appeared in 1988. It is about an adaptation by Claude Poirier and equips it with the Trésor of the French language in Quebec of a dictionary of the house Hachette. This dictionary well was initially accommodated, as a first general dictionary of descriptive orientation (there had already been more normative general dictionaries), since it met a need for the Québécois public to have a reference book for the standard language spoken in Quebec. But the public changed opinion when it realized that Québécois employment was not identified like such. Indeed, in its leading policy, the DFP chooses not to mark the quebecisms but rather the francisms. The Québécois Dictionary of today (DQA), adaptation of a dictionary of the house Robert by Jean-Claude Boulanger, appeared in 1992 went even further in the description of the spoken French language to Quebec. It was judged that too many employment and familiar words, very familiar, even vulgar strewed the nomenclature, whereas no work describing the standard language acted yet as reference book as regards language in Quebec. This, coupled with the fact that the quebecisms were not clearly identified, as in the DFP, was the cause of little business success of this dictionary.

Large terminological Dictionary

The Grand terminological Dictionary is a Data bank terminological endogenist. It always does not give a mark of use for the quebecisms, and often gives some for the “francisms”.

Franqus

The project Franqus is directed by the endogenists Helene Cajolet-Laganière and Pierre Martel, professors with the Université of Sherbrooke. Their dictionary, in version paper and electronic version should know marketed about 2008. One will find there the mark S FQ (French inhabitant of Quebec) and FE (French European).

Some “endogenists” and “exogenists”

The debate and the question of the quality of the language in the writings and the media

French of France
French inhabitant of Quebec
Sacring (swearword)
Joual
Lexicon of Québécois French
Francisme

Random links: