haven't they anything better to do? Isn't there anything more to worry about than picking the profane from their pretentious palaver?
...why, we must be talking about the French.
haven't they anything better to do? Isn't there anything more to worry about than picking the profane from their pretentious palaver?
Nice use of the underused "palaver."
Man, banning is all the rage, isn't it?
Jesus. Why do I run into this same goofy shit on every forum I frequent?
Look--the French Cultural Ministries have, since the 1960's, pressed for something called "linguistic purity"--they want to keep colloquial bits from other languages, including English, out of "official" government-related communication. This has been going on for decades, and is nothing new.
What is new is hair-trigger American tempers going off like crazy over stupid shit like this. Used to be, we'd just shake our heads and laugh at the goofy-ass Old World foolishness of conceited social snobbery as practiced by the French and move on. Such things make the French what they are. So what? It's a McGuffin.
Dennis Miller was right, oh-so-many years ago--with all the death, destruction, and insecurity we encounter in the modern age, rather than try to wrap our brains around those bigger problems, like Gladys Kravitz in "Bewitched" we latch on to the stupid bullshit and make a big deal out of the word "email". /rant off...(sorry )
Obviously you're the one whose temper is going off. Maybe next time you feel like opening your pie hole you should take a walk in the park and cool off.Originally Posted by triggercut
We're not the ones making the big deal about 'e-mail', Those weenie French are. Yes, those that speak that bastardized mumbling version of latin are so pious as to believe that foreign words are corrupting their precious tounges. So holy is their speak that they cannot allow another 'american-ized' word to violate the sacredness of their already vulgar vocabulary.rather than try to wrap our brains around those bigger problems, like Gladys Kravitz in "Bewitched" we latch on to the stupid bullshit and make a big deal out of the word "email". /rant off...(sorry )
How many countries use fucking slang in government matters? Which e-mail is, except in English. And I can almost assure you that there is a perfectly valid French version of the word.Originally Posted by bmulligan
And glad to see you're not making a big deal out of it.
First off, Ig, I wasn't j'accusing you or anyone specific in this thread of getting in a heavy twist over this story--rather, I was making an observation that *in general* (you know, the mouth-breathers in the "general public") this is the kind of stupid shit that makes a news story requiring comment on a national stage now...(and then someone had to pop in and take a mulligan and make my case for me. Huh...)
My point was along the lines of "Where was the story on MSNBC when the French Cultural Ministry came up with a suggested new name for 'walkmen' fifteen years ago?" That the French do silly, culturally snobbish stuff used to be a given, and gave comedians ample fodder. It's why they're so much fun to laugh at. Now though, they do the same thing they've always done to a word like "email", and if the talking heads on the news networks are to be believed, defaming that hallowed word is equivalent to taking a big Gallic national dump on the American flag.
It's such a non-news story.
They probably had to form a committe to address the problem , then another committe to come up with a replacement, then a study to determine the impact on the public. At least that's what they would do here in our congress. Government dictating the evolution of the language can be equated with doublespeak, a term no doubt you are familliar with even in Sweeden. It's almost like the non-written ban for our millitary not to use the term 'guerrilla warfare' or 'mujahadeen' during or after the war. It's ridiculous. Many words start out as slang and gradually work their way into accepted speech, there's nothing wrong with that. It's the will of the people, democracy at work, isn't it?
Besides, I was just having an exercise in americanized latin words. If they really want to purify their language, maybe they should go back to speaking latin.
.....and then Miller started showing up at Bush rallies and mocking the French!Originally Posted by triggercut
There wasn't an MSNBC 15 years ago, and if there had been, they would have run the story.Originally Posted by triggercut
It's just fun to make fun of the french. Almost as much fun as mocking the morons in the House who changed the name of french fries to american fries during the pre-war shenanigans. They've got nothing better to do either, except maybe start fistfights and namecalling.
The 'ban' applies only to official government documents and communication.
The word on the street (which is really all that counts where accepted language usage is concerned) is that 'email' has already become the accepted word for, er, email. Just as people still call a walkman a walkman depite the Académie Française's best efforts.
SMS usage has skyrocketed here. ES KE TU KOMPREN DE KWA JE PARL?
Didn't the french also ban the use of the term "Internet" a couple years ago in official communication?
SMS and internet chat will fuck up spelling (or help evolve the language) in every industrialized country the next 20 years. I hate it.Originally Posted by deanco
WTF!!! OMG STFU U N00B!Originally Posted by Anders Hallin
Don't forget to eat your FREEDOM FRIES! Everybody's stupid.
I 've not heard of that but I wouldn't put it past them.Originally Posted by Guido Jones
The point is, total effect on real life caused by this decree=0
You may have noticed that France resisted American war efforts on Iraq.Originally Posted by triggercut
They used to be just the silly French who were America's allies (when America needed them). Now they are the silly French who are becoming America's foe.
Its one thing for your ally to change your words... its another thing entirely for your foe to do it.
France is in America's doghouse.
Well hell, warm up the tanks then, because we've got nearly an entire world to conquer! Most all the world opposed our invasion and occuption of Iraq, so are they all are foes? Or are you just singling France out because they're, well, the French, and Jacques Chirac is an unlikable asshole?Originally Posted by Brian Koontz
Once again, I'm going to call you on your bullshit. Allies disagree about things. Allies disagree strongly about things on many occasions. France has been ornery for years (NATO command structure? Pfft. You want to fly over France to bomb Libya? Pffft., but sitting there and acting like France, a Western democracy that does large amounts of trade with the US, is an enemy of the US because they were the public face of diplomatic opposition to the US invasion is just complete and utter lunacy.
Then again, I'm talking to a misogynistic fruitcake from another planet, so why am I surprised...
Actually, since you misrepresented my post you aren't really talking to anyone. But I'll present some things...Originally Posted by XPav
To comfort you and add some inner smiles, I'll say that other people agree with me. That should allay your deepest fears on the matter.
France, in particular, is concerned about the rising power of the US. The US's primary power is cultural, and France's primary perpetual concern is culture. France sees the US as a cultural dominator, and they must avoid or subvert that at all costs. What France wants to avoid is being dominated.
So its a political game at this stage. France subverts and dissipates US foreign policy. Of course, they can't afford to stand alone so they'll have to build a kind of alliance which if successful will result in a Containment policy against the US.
France needed (politically) to be seen as leaders in the resistance against the US in the Iraq situation, and they achieved that goal. If a resistance coalition can be formed France is positioned to be its leader.
There a bunch of people that think that a hidden planet was going to sail by the earth and destroy everthing. Aliens told them this. Yes. People believed that too. Whooptydo.Originally Posted by Brian Koontz
Rising power of the US? Look around. The US is the strongest economic, military, and cultural force the world has ever seen. We are the world's only hyperpower.France, in particular, is concerned about the rising power of the US.
A resistance coalition alliance to US culture.France needed (politically) to be seen as leaders in the resistance against the US in the Iraq situation, and they achieved that goal. If a resistance coalition can be formed France is positioned to be its leader.
Actually, Brian (finally) has a point. The French get completely histerical about losing their culture. They are terrified of the "homogeneity" they associate with us. So they do their damnedest to counter American influence over the world. It can seem pretty petty and pointless at times, though, as in official policy against using words like "email". God forbid they should refer to something using the term used where it was invented. I think maybe we should go back to saying "cresent rolls" again in retaliation. You know, just to demonstrate the hypocracy.
But to treat the French government and their shenanigans as the actions of the French people as a whole is just as stupid as thinking that all Americans are born again Christians who have no qualms about unilaterally invading other countries.Originally Posted by Brad Grenz
Yes -- France doesn't like the fact that our culture is dominant. Neither do the Chinese, neither do all the arab countries, and neither does a good portion of the world. The fact that they can't seem to stop creeping American influence doesn't mean that they're about to enter into an "alliance" to counteract American culture.
Now, if you want to talk about France and Russia and China and other countries trying to find some way to balance out the current American hegemony over the world, then yes, of course they're doing that. However, its a hell of a lot more complicated than "You're either with us or against us", which is a simplistic idea that bears absolutely no relation to real life.
FYI : I'm french, and we (at least I can speak for myself, the people I work with, most of my friends, what I can read on message boards etc) find it as dumb, stupid and laughable as you do.
But that's not a "quick, get rid of the english evil", that's the way it has always been. We're (ie the government) very protective of our langage, so be it. At times it's necessary (we have a langage, let's keep it :)) but it can also lead to this sort of dumb decisions - it is dumb, the french langage won't be better off with "courriel" instead of "email", which was not a particular threat to our culture ;)
As for the usual "french cliches", well, what can I say... you can do better than that. And most do, on this topic, thanks to them :wink:
Excuse me but where does your langage (english) come from ? Not out of thin air, I'd say.Originally Posted by bmulligan
Well, as long as you're fine with grouping Time writers, Richard Perle, Ennio Di Nolfo, and British aides in that category...Originally Posted by XPav
From that article...
Still, Chirac sees the risk of falling too far inside America's gravitational pull. "Any community with only one dominant power is always a dangerous one," he says. "That's why I favor a multipolar world, in which Europe obviously has its place." Not everyone accepts that explanation. "The sinister part is a wish to be the leader of the anti-American world," says an aide to British Prime Minister Tony Blair. "[Chirac] is trying to see the world in bipolar rather than unilateral terms, which is absolutely at odds with Blair's vision of Europe and America working together." Ennio Di Nolfo, an international relations expert at the University of Florence, concurs. "Chirac's position is manipulative and Machiavellian," he says. "France is taking the opportunity of a clash with the U.S. over the war to seek preeminence in Europe."
That view has become scripture in Washington. "It is French policy to diminish our influence in Europe and in the world, and to shape the European Union as a counterweight to the United States," says Richard Perle, chairman of the influential Defense Policy Board and a superhawk close to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The current crisis will fuel the resolve of many U.S. leaders to bypass the U.N. on important matters, including attacking Iraq with a "coalition of the willing" instead of the Security Council's blessing. It would be ironic if France, by flexing its muscles in the U.N., helped weaken the venue in which some of its last real power resides.
It doesn't take a partisan eye to see a desire to check American power motivating France's recent maneuvering at NATO. Last week, the corridors of the alliance's headquarters in Brussels resembled the waiting room of a hospital emergency ward, as packs of officials and journalists heard that the 19 member states failed to resolve one of the most serious disputes of its 54-year history. France, Germany and Belgium balked at their treaty commitments to deliver antiaircraft missiles and surveillance aircraft to defend Turkey against a possible assault by Iraq. The trio argued that their agreement would amount to sanctioning a war by the back door. Now that U.N. arms inspectors Blix and ElBaradei have made their reports, a compromise could be reached as early as this week. But the credibility of the alliance is in tatters.
That doesn't mean US power cannot rise further. The US will only truly be satisfied when they totally dominate the world. Part of "the world" is France, which is why France is so concerned.Originally Posted by XPav
Good.Originally Posted by XPav
To quote Bush Jr. "The French have no word for entrepreneur"Originally Posted by Prodigy
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D
Freedom Fries, E-mail... different sides of the same damn stupid coin.
People who get fussy either way are just linguistic masturbators.