And it came to pass that Ben Bucksch wrote:
> Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. wrote:
>
>>Its not the system is bad. Its just different.
>>
> Some things are objectively bad. "I don't have no car" (for
> "I have no car") is just logically wrong. And "Your out of
> luck" instead of "You're out of luck" is, by the definition
> of the language, wrong. I admit that the latter error is
> easy to make. But the former is, I think, a genuine
> American symptom.
>
>>French and French Canadians speak French. But it may not be
>>the same french.
>>
> Are you just guessing or do you know that this is the case?
> French is a very tightly and centrally controlled language.
> (And I shows, in a positive way.)
>
Canadian French IS different than that spoken in France:
Following the French Revolution and Napoleon, much of the
language structure shifted; prior to these events, there was
"Court French", and "Common French". Court french was reserved
for the aristocracy, and common french, was, well, for the
commoners.
Following the fall of the monarchy, and the "rise to the age of
Reason", all French in country took up Court French. The theory
being that if all are equal, then everyman should speak as a
king.
Quebec mostly stayed with Common French, though over time there
has been a shift towards the language as used in France today.
A similar thing happened between the US and England; Common
English gave way to the King's English. One of the most notable
facets of this shift is the dropping of "thee" and "thou" for
the royal "you". There are others.
>>The point is people are different is all no one country or
>>race should be any better than the other, they are just
>>different.
>>
> I didn't mean to say that Englishmen were "better" than
> Americans.
>
> What you can objectively test is if Englishmen are better
> educated than Americans. But let's not get into that
> discussion :-).
>
>
>
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( Dionysian Reveler
Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana.
To reply: xjahnATyahooDOTcom
