I’m not interested in fighting you either, I was just asking, perhaps the interesting conversation still could’ve occurred. (Admittedly that other reply to you is really good and extensive, and I wouldn’t have much to add after that.)
This is not the first time I hear someone singling out French for this and I kind of wonder why.
Yes, there is a prescriptive institution “Académie Française” and yes it has had an influence on the normalisation of French in the past (like, 400 years ago).
No, linguistically, it does not work that simply (French is not prescriptivist), and it’s been a while since anyone gave a damn what this institution says. French marches on, and the Académie is largely regarded as an illegitimate group of old men who try to force a classicist and artificial version of the language of their own making. They also have other missions which aren’t about prescribing usage, but that’s not what you usually hear about.
Also no, this institution no longer dictates what “proper” French is, and by that I mean it does not dictate it “legally” anymore. It never did, linguistically speaking.
And finally, I don’t know why it is that French is the language always used when it comes to descriptivism vs prescriptivism. From my admittedly limited knowledge, it looks to me like at least in western Europe, English is the exception rather the rule regarding this. Other countries and languages have had prescriptivist institutions propped up in the past to try and dictate usage of the language.
In all cases, whatever they say does not automatically become gospel. You can make a point that such institutions can suggest usages, but they can’t force them. Like the other commenter said, this is not how languages work. Ultimately, whatever the institutions say, if the people don’t use it this way, then the institution is wrong.
Lots of French creoles and patois across the ex-French-empire.
The French authorities can define it as not “French” if they don’t like it, but I doubt the speakers care.
Damn right. Also, to the address of my far too numerous fellow Frenchmen from metropolitan France who are irritated by your post and mine above: Swiss French is French, Belgian French is French, Quebec French is French, Cajun is French, and so are the multitude of other ones the post above mentions, and if you don’t accept it, please listen to “La ballade des gens qui sont nés quelque part” from Georges Brassens. He has something to say about you.
I thought that certain languages (I want to say French?) do not work this way.
They all work the same way. Some institution saying otherwise doesn’t chance that.
Well that rather shuts down that potentially interesting conversation thread.
What would the conversation be about exactly? Legitimacy of language institutions, or?
I’m not interested in fighting you.
I’m not interested in fighting you either, I was just asking, perhaps the interesting conversation still could’ve occurred. (Admittedly that other reply to you is really good and extensive, and I wouldn’t have much to add after that.)
This is not the first time I hear someone singling out French for this and I kind of wonder why.
Yes, there is a prescriptive institution “Académie Française” and yes it has had an influence on the normalisation of French in the past (like, 400 years ago).
No, linguistically, it does not work that simply (French is not prescriptivist), and it’s been a while since anyone gave a damn what this institution says. French marches on, and the Académie is largely regarded as an illegitimate group of old men who try to force a classicist and artificial version of the language of their own making. They also have other missions which aren’t about prescribing usage, but that’s not what you usually hear about.
Also no, this institution no longer dictates what “proper” French is, and by that I mean it does not dictate it “legally” anymore. It never did, linguistically speaking.
And finally, I don’t know why it is that French is the language always used when it comes to descriptivism vs prescriptivism. From my admittedly limited knowledge, it looks to me like at least in western Europe, English is the exception rather the rule regarding this. Other countries and languages have had prescriptivist institutions propped up in the past to try and dictate usage of the language.
In all cases, whatever they say does not automatically become gospel. You can make a point that such institutions can suggest usages, but they can’t force them. Like the other commenter said, this is not how languages work. Ultimately, whatever the institutions say, if the people don’t use it this way, then the institution is wrong.
Lots of French creoles and patois across the ex-French-empire. The French authorities can define it as not “French” if they don’t like it, but I doubt the speakers care.
Damn right. Also, to the address of my far too numerous fellow Frenchmen from metropolitan France who are irritated by your post and mine above: Swiss French is French, Belgian French is French, Quebec French is French, Cajun is French, and so are the multitude of other ones the post above mentions, and if you don’t accept it, please listen to “La ballade des gens qui sont nés quelque part” from Georges Brassens. He has something to say about you.