jbergeron@watvlsi.UUCP (06/21/87)
In light of the recent discussion about can.* newsgroup and their low number and traffic, I would like to propose the creation of a new one. (How does one go about this ? Do I have to go through news.group with a 'can' distribution ???) I propose the creation of 'can.french'. Its purposes would be: 1) Discussion on general topics (much like can.general) in French. I personnaly do not follow-up to many articles simply because my English is not good enough and might lead to misinterpretations. I wouldn't have this problem with a discussion held in French. 2) Discussion on topics (still in French) of interest to French-Canadians from coast to coast. The Meech Lake accord would be a good example. The official bilinguism of Ontario (or _any_ other province for that matter), etc... 3) A chance to non-native French speakers to improve their French language. I improved my English a lot by reading USENET. I, for one, swear that I will not flame the grammar of a non-native French speaker as the French grammar is a lot more difficult that English grammar and does not lend itself very well for free-style writing. 4) A chance for French speaking foreigners to discuss with their Canadian counterparts. We (Quebecers) are very different from French(wo)men. It would be a good place to discuss about those differences and share common bounds. 5) I, personnaly, do not view this news.group as a place for enflammed discussions about Quebec's independence. That's seventies' history... If votes are required to create a new news.group, I volunteer to collect and count them. For an all Canadian USENET, Janick Bergeron -- Bergeron's First Law : In a locker room, if two (or more) persons happen to be in the same row, their lockers will be adjacent.
clarke@utcsri.UUCP (06/22/87)
In article <3506@watvlsi.UUCP> jbergeron@watvlsi.UUCP (Janick Bergeron) writes: >In light of the recent discussion about can.* newsgroup and their low number >and traffic, I would like to propose the creation of ... 'can.french'. Its >purposes would be: > >1) Discussion on general topics (much like can.general) in French. Why not just discuss things in French in the present newsgroups? News items are supposedly grouped by content, not by language, and it seems to me better, not worse, for the French-Canadian and English-Canadian views to appear side by side in the same group. I expect that even the rare reader as old as I am will be able to read French well enough to understand. If you get flames from the (English) rednecks -- or if the French traffic is overwhelming, I suppose -- then separating the groups might be a good idea, but for now.... > [much sensible stuff in the original article omitted here] >For an all Canadian USENET, -- and let it replace the traditional corn flakes box! >Janick Bergeron >-- > >Bergeron's First Law : In a locker room, if two (or more) persons happen > to be in the same row, their lockers will be adjacent. ^^^ Uh, is that "row" or "row"? A kind of fight, or a rotated column? And can I needle you like this in French? (Answer: no.) -- Jim Clarke -- Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 (416) 978-4058 {allegra,cornell,decvax,linus,utzoo}!utcsri!clarke
lamy@utegc.UUCP (06/23/87)
La suggestion de Jim (messages en Francais) semble interessante.
Pas besoin non plus de passer par news.group pour un groupe canadien.
Je sais que McGill et Montreal recoivent UseNet, mais comme ils sont
passablement silencieux je ne crois pas qu'il soit necessaire de creer
un groupe separe.
Quelqu'un a une traduction decente pour "posting"? "Afficher" sonne faux
a mes oreilles, mais je n'ai pas une tres bonne ouie...
Jean-Francois Lamy lamy@ai.toronto.edu (CSNet,UUCP,Bitnet)
AI Group, Dept of Computer Science lamy@ai.toronto.cdn (EAN X.400)
University of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 {seismo,watmath}!ai.toronto.edu!lamydraskoy@ubc-ean.UUCP (06/23/87)
I would welcome discussion in French in any newsgroup, provided the french was kept fairly simple. In my experience, most English Canadians understand a little french, but not enough to compose an involved letter. Discussion in French of familiar topics is likely to be easier to understand than other French text, and could be considered a kind of simple immersion programme. As an example, (I think) I understood Jean-Francois Lamy's article, but had he been talking about building a dam instead of creating a newsgroup, I would no doubt have been totally lost. After reading lots of similar postings, I would eventually feel confident enough to inflict some mangled French on the net. Considering the number of people on the net who complain about simple spelling mistakes, perhaps we should think about a seperate group for this purpose, so as not to upset people who can't handle terrible grammar and spelling. Andrew
flaps@utcsri.UUCP (06/23/87)
lamy@ai.toronto.edu writes: >Quelqu'un a une traduction decente pour "posting"? "Afficher" sonne faux >a mes oreilles, mais je n'ai pas une tres bonne ouie... certainly a word must have evolved in france; someone with contacts there who read news should ask them. -- // Alan J Rosenthal // \\ // flaps@csri.toronto.edu, {seismo!utai or utzoo}!utcsri!flaps, \// flaps@toronto on csnet, flaps at utorgpu on bitnet. "To be whole is to be part; true voyage is return."
lamy@utegc.UUCP (06/23/87)
In article <4972@utcsri.UUCP> flaps@utcsri.UUCP (Alan J Rosenthal) writes: >certainly a word must have evolved in france; someone with contacts there who >read news should ask them. I would guess they would use "postigne" :-) The French Ministere de l'Education Nationale has suggested brilliant translations like "une spoule" for spool space, "une bogue" for a bug. Jean-Francois Lamy lamy@ai.toronto.edu (CSNet,UUCP,Bitnet) AI Group, Dept of Computer Science lamy@ai.toronto.cdn (EAN X.400) University of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 {seismo,watmath}!ai.toronto.edu!lamy
lamy@utegc.UUCP (06/23/87)
In article <2022@ubc-ean.UUCP> draskoy@ubc-ean.UUCP (Andrew Draskoy) writes: >complain about simple spelling mistakes, perhaps we should think about a >seperate group for this purpose, so as not to upset people who can't handle >terrible grammar and spelling. Shouldn't that be "separate"? :-) :-) Just kidding... Lets see this as an experiment in tolerance, and urge those with a short fuse to use mail and be gentle. I for one appreciate when someone points out a mistake - privately. Jean-Francois Lamy lamy@ai.toronto.edu (CSNet,UUCP,Bitnet) AI Group, Dept of Computer Science lamy@ai.toronto.cdn (EAN X.400) University of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 {seismo,watmath}!ai.toronto.edu!lamy
clarke@utcsri.UUCP (06/23/87)
In article <2022@ubc-ean.UUCP> draskoy@ubc-ean.UUCP (Andrew Draskoy) writes: >I would welcome discussion in French in any newsgroup, provided the >french was kept fairly simple. In my experience, most English Canadians >understand a little french, but not enough to compose an involved letter. >Discussion in French of familiar topics is likely to be easier to understand >than other French text, and could be considered a kind of simple immersion >programme.... NO! We should *not* consider postings in French as part of a language training program for English Canadians. We should "welcome discussion in French" be- cause discussion in French is one of the standard modes of communication among Canadians, and this is can.general. We should expect postings in French to be kept simple only if we expect the same of English postings. Mind you, knowing a few French-Canadians, I feel fairly safe in predicting that they'll be pretty tolerant of us English-Canadians if we do use postings in French to help us learn the language. That way, we could learn two things: (1) French, and (2) how to be polite when correcting people who misuse a lan- guage in public. A point of etiquette: Jean-Francois Lamy posted a query in French, Alan Rosenthal responded in English, and Jean-Francois responded in English. I can think of two rules that make sense here: Follow up in the language of the original posting, or follow up in your own language. Either way, shouldn't Jean-Francois's second posting have been in French? There are other possible rules, of course, such as: Use the language most people will understand, or use a language you're sure the other fellow will understand. I consider neither of those is acceptable, because both would kill discussions in French if even one English speaker commented in English. Anyone got any better ideas? -- Jim Clarke -- Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 (416) 978-4058 {allegra,cornell,decvax,linus,utzoo}!utcsri!clarke
jdd@utcsri.UUCP (06/23/87)
I think a good rule of thumb for can.general postings is simply
to reply to a posting in the language of the original posting, where at all
possible. That would allow french discussions to remain french and English
discussions to remain english. In this way, the spirit of an originating
article can best be preserved.
I do feel that there should be one notable exception to this rule -
In my (unfortunately limited) experience with french, I have found that
some things in French just cannot be adequately expressed in English and
similarly for some things in English. There should be no problem whatsoever
with a french phrase in an English posting or an English phrase in a
french posting.
If an anglophone posted a french article or a francophone an
english article, it is likely that many spelling and grammar mistakes will
be made. I think that any corrections should be confined to private mail
messages, and not posted on the net for everyone to see. Such public
correction would scare anyone (especially me!) from posting an article
in a language he/she is unfamiliar with.
Tell me what you think of these suggestions.
Repondez S.V.P dans le sujet de les regles.
John
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John DiMarco Disclaimer: The above message is flowery poetry.
It may have a typo or two.
jdd@utcsri.toronto.edu Nobody takes responsibility for typos.
jdd@db.toronto.edu Please direct all flames at the typos.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------bfcockburn@watdragon.UUCP (06/23/87)
Je ne voudrais pas inclure la langue francaise dans les "newsgroupes" deja etabliees seulement pour donner plus de chances aux anglophones de pratiquer leur deuxieme langue. Soit tous les groupes devraient etre bilangues, ou nous devrions etablir des groups francophones pour touts les groupes anglophones. Les "postingues" francais ne doivent pas etres simplifies par rapport a ceux qui sont en anglais. Un long message peut etre accompagne d'un sommaire dans l'autre langue. Bruce (pas le chanteur)
clarke@utcsri.UUCP (06/23/87)
In article <4975@utcsri.UUCP> jdd@utcsri.UUCP (John D. DiMarco) writes: > I think a good rule of thumb for can.general postings is simply >to reply to a posting in the language of the original posting, where at all >possible. That would allow french discussions to remain french and English >discussions to remain english.... Nyet, as we say in English. I disagree, because (at least in the English sector) too many potential respondents would be cut out. Lots of us read French well enough to struggle through an article but don't write it even well enough to make embarrassing mistakes. And -- eager though we may be to improve our second language -- the real purpose of this network is communication, not language learning. -- Jim Clarke -- Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 (416) 978-4058 {allegra,cornell,decvax,linus,utzoo}!utcsri!clarke
jbergeron@watvlsi.UUCP (06/24/87)
In article <4977@utcsri.UUCP> clarke@utcsri.UUCP (Jim Clarke) writes: >Nyet, as we say in English. I disagree, because (at least in the English >sector) too many potential respondents would be cut out. Lots of us read >French well enough to struggle through an article but don't write it even >well enough to make embarrassing mistakes. And -- eager though we may be >to improve our second language -- the real purpose of this network is >communication, not language learning. That's the very reason why I proposed can.francais. I could not follow-up to every discussion simply because I feared misinterpretation in English. And I bet discussion will be brought back to English after a few postings. And those who could not read the French portion of a discussion might miss some good points. For an all Canadian USENET, Janick Bergeron
clarke@utcsri.UUCP (06/25/87)
In article <3516@watvlsi.UUCP> jbergeron@watvlsi.UUCP (Janick Bergeron) writes: >In article <4977@utcsri.UUCP> clarke@utcsri.UUCP (Jim Clarke) writes: >>Nyet.... [and more stuff by me] >That's the very reason why I proposed can.francais. >I could not follow-up to every discussion simply because I >feared misinterpretation in English. Well, just for example: Couldn't you have followed up here in French instead of English? If you prefer French, use it! and let me sweat through a dictionary if I have to. >And I bet discussion will be brought back to English after a few postings. It sure will if everybody thinks English is the default language. One of the reasons for having this country is that there are *two* standard languages, and you're supposed to be able to use either at will. You can't, yet, but if you act as if you could then we advance a little bit. >And those who could not read the French portion of a discussion >might miss some good points. They'd miss them for sure if there were a separate can.francais! (By your rules for inserting accents, shouldn't that be "can.franc/ais" :-? ) >For an all Canadian USENET, Da! -- Jim Clarke -- Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 (416) 978-4058 {allegra,cornell,decvax,linus,utzoo}!utcsri!clarke