Which has worse condition? Belgian Dutch or Afrikaans?

I just want to get your opinion about the status of these two languages.

It looks like that the 2 languages have similar problems. Dutch in Belgium is in battle with French and Afrikaans is in subtle fight with English in South Africa for survival. Many experts observed that.

<< It looks like that the 2 languages have similar problems. Dutch in Belgium is in battle with French and Afrikaans is in subtle fight with English in South Africa for survival. Many experts observed that. >>

-- What "experts"? The situations cannot compare:
- Afrikaans is more and more a minority language in front of the English lingua franca
- Dutch is majority language in Belgium and conducts a very agressive policy against the minority.

It shows again that the strongest language always wins:

- Dutch in Belgium

- English in South Africa

<< the strongest language always wins:
- Dutch in Belgium >>

-- Dutch is inherently weak. The unparalleled linguistic oppression of minorities in Belgian Flanders bases on the awareness of that weakness.

<<Dutch is majority language in Belgium and conducts a very agressive policy against the minority. >>
<<-- Dutch is inherently weak. The unparalleled linguistic oppression of minorities in Belgian Flanders bases on the awareness of that weakness. >>

FRENCHIFICATION OF BRUSSELS

A bilingual French and Dutch street sign in BrusselsThe Frenchification of Brussels is the transformation of Brussels, Belgium from a Dutch-speaking city to one that is bilingual or even multilingual, with French as both the majority language and lingua franca. The dominant aspect of this transition was the shift from Dutch to French among the local Flemish residents over several generations, though immigration of French-speakers and international immigration also played a role.

The transition began gradually in the 18th century, but accelerated after the Belgian Revolution, with Brussels as the capital of newly independent Belgium. In spite of the Dutch-speaking majority, French was made the sole official language, and French was the language of the government, the courts, culture, the media and education. The Dutch language had a low social prestige in Belgium at the time, and knowledge of French was considered necessary for social advancement. The massive shift from Dutch to French was underway by the late 19th century. At first there was a surge in the number of bilingual residents, mostly native Dutch speakers who had learned how to speak French, at the expense of monolingual Dutch speakers. As Dutch was often not passed down to from generation to another, the number of monolingual francophones in Brussels grew considerably. Halfway through the 20th century, the number of monolingual French-speakers surpassed the number of bilingual French/Dutch speakers.[1]

In the 1960s the Belgian language border was fixed, limiting official bilingualism to the 19 municipalities of Brussels. As Flanders prospered economically and Dutch regained its prestige, the Frenchification of Dutch speakers effectively ceased.[2] Nonetheless, during the second half 20th century, Brussels became an increasingly prosperous and international city, and this internationalization brought an influx of foreign immigrants who favored French or foreign languages rather than Dutch.[3] Simultaneously, as Brussels expanded, a further number of formerly Dutch-speaking municipalities in surrounding Flanders became majority French-speaking.[4][5][6] This phenomenon is, together with the future of Brussels, one of the most controversial topics in all of Belgian politics.[7][8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francization
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenchification_of_Brussels

<<Dutch is majority language in Belgium and conducts a very agressive policy against the minority. >>
Most of Francophones ignore Dutch language in Belgium. Flemish don't claim to speak Dutch with them in Wallony.Maybe it is Flemish opposition to Frenchification of Flanders?

<< It shows again that the strongest language always wins:

- Dutch in Belgium

- English in South Africa >>

It shows again that the strongest language always wins:

- Guarani in Paraguay

- Quechua and Aymara in Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador

- Quiche in Guatemala

- English in Puerto Rico, Costa Rica, Guam, Marianas, and the Philippines

It shows again that the strongest language always wins:

- Guarani in Paraguay

- Quechua and Aymara in Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador

- Quiche in Guatemala

- English in Panama, Puerto Rico, Costa Rica, Guam, Marianas, and the Philippines

- English in Equatorial Guinea and Western Sahara at the expense of Spanish

It shows again that the strongest language always wins:

- Guarani in Paraguay

- Quechua and Aymara in Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador

- Quiche in Guatemala

- English in Panama, Puerto Rico, Costa Rica, Guam, Marianas, and the Philippines

- French in Equatorial Guinea and Western Sahara at the expense of Spanish

Most people from Brussels I know:

1. have a Flamish last name
2. have French as their 1st language
3. speak Dutch as their 2nd or 3rd language (it's important if you want a nice job, if you are a waiter or cleaning lady you can skip Dutch)
4. consider themselves pure Belgian (and not Waloon)
5. know the lyrics of their national anthem

In Brussels as well as on the Carribean Island of St. Marteen
French and Dutch speakers get along.

<<-- Dutch is inherently weak. The unparalleled linguistic oppression of minorities in Belgian Flanders bases on the awareness of that weakness.>>

Francophones are NOT oppressed in Flanders!

It's more an opposition to the linguistic imperialism some francophones threaten Flemish towns with. You know, a party like the FDF is in cartel with the MR and has unofficial support of all major francophone parties.
Also compare this with the self-victimization in the main newspapers and television, a hate campaign unseen in Flanders.

Not too long ago there used to be town with majorities of Flemish in Wallonia. These Flemish people spoke Walloon or Picard with their colleagues and all assimilated more or less to their new home. This was an exodus of more than 500,000 million Flemings and it was in a time when Flanders struggled to keep itself alive.
At that same era the Walloon movement urged for a unilingual Wallonia and a bilingual Flanders, because they feared the appearance of Dutch-speaking islands in Wallonia (even though these Flemings spoke the local language).

PARISIEN. Throw your television out of your window. You know nothing about the situation in Belgium nor about Flanders.

PARISIEN, read this,and you will know what is "linguistic oppression of minorities ":
<<One argument[by whom?] against was the fear of the break-up of France "one and indivisible" leading to the threat of "babelism", "balkanization" and then ethnic separatism if the charter were to be implemented, and that therefore there should be only one language recognised in the French state: the French language. This was also linked to a wider debate about how power should be apportioned between the national and local governments[citation needed].

Another was that in an era where a widely spoken language like French was threatened with becoming irrelevant in the global arena, especially in economic, technical and scientific contexts, officially supporting regional languages was a mere waste of government resources[citation needed].

As an example of what proponents of ratification considered racist and scornful, here is a sample quote from an article in Charlie Hebdo, a well-known satirical journal:

The aborigines are going to be able to speak their patois, oh sorry, their language, without being laughed at. And even keep their accent, that is their beret and their clogs.[cite this quote]
Likewise, President Jacques Chirac, putting an end to the debate, argued that it would threaten "the indivisibility of the Republic," "equality in front of the Law" and "the unity of the French people," since it may end by conferring "special rights to organised linguistic communities."

France, Andorra and Turkey are the only European countries that have not yet signed the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. This framework entered into force in 1998 and is now nearly compulsory to implement in order to be accepted in the European Union, which implies France would not qualify for EU entry were it to apply for membership now[citation needed].

[edit

The non-French Oïl languages and Franco-Provençal are highly endangered. The other languages are still spoken but are all considered endangered.

In the 1950s, more than one million people spoke Breton as their main language. The countryside in western Brittany was still overwhelmingly Breton-speaking. Today, about 250,000 people are able to speak Breton (one-sixth of the population in the region), most of whom are elderly. Other regional languages have generally followed the same pattern; Alsatian and Corsican have resisted better, while Occitan has followed a still-worse trend.

Accurate information on the state of language use is complicated by the non-recognition of regional languages and the inability of the state to ask language use questions in the census.

Since the rejection of ratification of the European Charter, French governments have offered token support to regional languages within the limits of the law. The Délégation générale à la langue française (General delegation of the French tongue) has acquired the additional function of observing and studying the languages of France and has had "et aux langues de France" (...and other languages of France) added to its title.

The French government hosted the first Assises nationales des langues de France in 2003, but this national round table on the languages of France served to highlight the contrast between cultural organisations and language activists on the one hand and the state on the other.

The decentralisation programme initiated by the Jean-Pierre Raffarin government has not extended to giving power in language policy to the regions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_policy_in_France
<<[edit] Policies of assimilation
A policy of assimilation is one that uses strong measures to accelerate the downsizing of one or more linguistic minority group(s).The ultimate goal of such policies is to foster national unity inside a state (based on the idea that a single language in the country will favor that end). The measures taken by States enforcing such policies may include banning the social use of a given language, the exclusion and social devaluation of a language group and in extreme cases repression by force and even genocide. [3]

These policies are to be distinguished from all other policies which it could be argued favor or lead to assimilation of members of minority groups as a result of non-intervention or insufficient measures of protection. In practice, all States enforce, implicitly, policies leading to assimilation with regards to immigrant groups and in numerous cases aboriginal groups and other national minorities.[3]

Jurisdictions having such a policy:
Burma - Indonesia - Iran - Iraq - Thailand - Vietnam - France - Slovakia>>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_policy

<<At that same era the Walloon movement urged for a unilingual Wallonia and a bilingual Flanders, because they feared the appearance of Dutch-speaking islands in Wallonia (even though these Flemings spoke the local language). >>

Now, this situation is very complicated. During that era workers were treated as animals. Common Walloons are no to blame, but it's true that Flanders was exploited by the early regime in Belgium by using their workers for slave labours.
The Flemings living in Wallonia lived in ghettoes with high crime rates. Common Walloons didn't even dare enter some areas because it wasn't rare to end up in a knife fight with these Flemings.

This is why there it was VERY easy to stir up the public opinion in Wallonia to act as virulently anti-Flemish in that very era (compare to other minority groups in most European countries). It's also no coincidence that the socialist movement was started by Flamingants (Jacob Kats, who was befriended with Lucien Jottrand)

I told you about throwing out your television, but that may be too drastic (;-)) this is an interesting docu about this era: http://video.canvas.be/arm-wallonie
Sadly it's only a preview.

A French language version will appear on February on RTBf under the name 'La Terre Promise' and it's made with the help and cooperation of the Walloon region and RTBf themselves, so it's no self-victimisation by Flemings. In fact, my grand-parents have never uttered a bad word about Francophone Belgians nor Walloons.
If you look at the complete series you'll see that every Fleming over there knew to speak French and many even Walloon (mine workers in Charleroi).

Now the title 'Arm Wallonië' may seem insulting, but it's a parody to the book 'Door arm Vlaanderen' by the journalist August De Winne, nothing more. People of course do realize Flanders can become poor again tomorrow with its quickly ageing population, while I don't deny the existence of arrogant Flemings.