We laughed a lot at the CAQ government’s advert for the Peregrine Falcon with its ‘sick’, ‘chill’, ‘fast’, ‘observer’, ‘skills’ and ‘sketch’.
But we have to admit that it worked at a hundred miles an hour: millions of Quebecers now think twice before using an English word! And every time I hear a host talk about the “vibe” of the evening, or hear a politician say they’re going to “shake up” the health community, I have a feeling I’m not the only one who cringes.
But while one becomes aware of Anglicisms and turns of English phrases, there are those who glorify them.
THE WORLD IS “SKETCH”
Do you know what “linguistic insecurity” is?
“Linguistic insecurity is what happens when outside influences make you feel so bad about the way you speak that you end up censoring yourself and stopping expressing yourself authentically. »
You don’t understand much of this explanation?
Nonetheless, it’s signed by a non-binary poet from Acadia and published in the March issue of the very progressive/bright/trendy Nouveau Projet magazine.
Here is another excerpt from Xavier Gould’s text entitled Euphoria in my Mouth…
“The term ‘linguistic insecurity’ can be used in many contexts. However, we usually use it when people in a privileged position in the French-speaking hierarchy make us feel like crap, the rest of us who don’t speak “good” French. But why would I use a term that promotes a victimization narrative that blames me for the ignorance of others?
I could spend a lifetime recounting in my native language the various microaggressions that have made me feel insecure, but the worst, which happens most often, is when Quebecers vomit bad cartoon impressions of me right in front of my face without that there’s a reason for it. Are you kidding me? However, when Quebecers are corrected by a Frenchman and worse, they feel frustrated, we don’t blame the victims, we acknowledge their microaggression. »
(…)
Henceforth ej leaves other traders with their own insecurities about the way ej speaks, and I lead ej with verbal euphoria. »
Louisianization?
Far be it from me to “puke” caricature images of people massacring the French. But trying to understand what Xavier Gould writes, I am faced with a fundamental question: if language is used to communicate, how can we understand each other if we don’t speak the same language?
I’m not talking about local expressions that can be explained to our interlocutor in a few seconds. I’m talking about sentence structure, I’m talking about words, I’m talking about pronouns, I’m talking about the actual meaning of your words that escapes the understanding of the other.
Xavier Gould claims the right to speak his “parlure” just as some Quebecers claim the right to speak Franglais because of “Tokébekicitte” and “I have the doua”.
But by speaking a language full of words that only we understand, we risk becoming folkloric.
Do we want that?
