Wallonia must be part of FRANCE

Nous ne voulons pas les Wallons dans notre pays !!!Ils veulent seulement notre argent...

Jordi,

Yes, exactly, the accent of the bruxellois sounds a bit flemish, because the first inhabitants in Bruxelles were flemish but then adopted the french language (oh I have forgotten to precise that I live in Bruxelles...). But more and more bruxellois use a "standard french".
For the french people, this accent represents what they called the "belgian accent". Maybe you know some french comics, such as Coluche, who make a mistake by considering that it is the "typical belgian accent" (the walloons don't speak like that..). Actually the walloon have their own accent(s) (especially in the lower class...) which are a little bit different from "the parisian one".

What's more it would be wrong to think that the "regional language" of wallonia is only walloon. The walloon language is just the first regional language, but Picard, champenois, Luxembourgeois dialects and others "langues d'oïl" used to be spoken in Wallonia as well.

Today, Less than 10% of the young people in Wallonia can speak walloon.
The waloon is just an oral language (even if a spelling was defined); people have always written in "standard french".
I can't say that today we use a "different french" compared to France, when speaking. Maybe except for the numbers.
For example for 70, a french would say "soixante-dix", whereas a walloon would say "septante". For 90 a french would say "quatre-vingt-dix" whereas we say "nonante". I think there is the same phenomenon in swiss french. But there is no big differences. Maybe, some walloons stilll use "patois expressions", but the more educated people are, the more they speak a standard french.

PS: As for the "manneken pis" (japanese tourists are crazy about him), its true name in the bruxellois dialect is "menneke pis". In french, it means "le môme qui pisse" (the "peeing kid")

"Mathieu Rousseau",

You are hilarious!! Are you trying to find the totality of the typical french name??First Tessier, Rousseau...What's next?? Dupont, Martin, Leroy, Duchemin...???

You know, your french doesn't sound real. I mean it's like someone reciting its french lesson!!

@ Pierre and all Walloons

In place of going further on French Surnames you should better answer to our questions! You are hilarious you know that.

Mathieu Rousseau / Tèssier/ etc.

Maybe you and Louvain-La-Neuve are the same persons too :s

That makes no sence! In West-Flanders or Whole Flanders there live persons with the surname Dupon, etc.

GIVE ANSWERS TO OUR QUESTIONS OR CAN'T YOU GIVE ONE ???? WE ASKES MANY QUESTIONS WERE YOU HAVEN'T GAVE AN ANSWER!!!!

ASKES = ASKED :-D

Jean: <<Brussels, the capital, is mostly French speaking, but officially French/Dutch bilingual as it evolved from a Dutch-speaking place when the Belgian state became independent in 1830 to its current dominantly French character being the capital of the central administration of the federal country that for a long time massively favoured French...

Does this answer any questions ?>>

For me it does, but it also raises some (together with some other recent posts). I have a feeling that Flemish is underrepresented in public (especially central) administration and in education, and still has a somewhat unequal status within Belgium as a whole (not in Flanders, of course), although the Flemish are the more numerous language community. I think it would only be fair to make Flemish compulsory for at least some years at Walloon schools (at least in high school). For me it seems schyzophrenic if you can't speak with the other community within your country in their mother tongue, even if it may not be so aestethically pleasing to your ears. I am aware that the Flemish-Walloon issue is more than just a linguistic one (mostly emotional, as I can see), but I know from the example of my native town Subotica in Serbia (having a local Hungarian majority) that there was less inter-ethnic tension when Serbian students were also encouraged to learn Hungarian at school. If you can speak to people in THEIR mother tongue (especially if they live within your own country), you will learn more of their mind than if they accomodate and speak to you in YOUR own language. That may be just my philosophy, but it has worked for me so far.

Kenny,

In your post, I can't see any question...
Tell me which questions I didn't answer.

Easterner,

Belgium doesn't exist!! There is not any "belgian nation". This country was created without taking the linguistic realities into account!!
What's more, the two peoples are really different: Germanic/Roman.
It doesn't mean that we can't be friends but we definitely can't be compatriots. Each decision in this country is taken by one community against the other!! It will never change (unless we split...).

<<Belgium doesn't exist!! There is not any "belgian nation". This country was created without taking the linguistic realities into account!!>y

I tend to agree with that, at least after reading the posts on this thread. On the other hand, do the Flemish and the Walloons consider themselves a "nation", or do they perceive themselves as part of the two larger nations accross the border? (I ask this out of curiosity) I am also curious about what becomes of Brussels should there be a separation (somebody has already asked this earlier). By the way, as a strictly personal opinion, I do not consider Brussels the appropriate European capital. For me, Luxembourg (and the Luxemburgians) represents more ideally the cosmopolitan nature of Europe (although Luxembourg is some sort of a "capital" too, being the seat of the European Court). It would also be a good symbolic gesture to move the centre of the EU to the smallest member country.

Pierre caroit ,

you should hear yourself talking ... There IS a belgian nation !The germanic world just happened to overlapp with the Roman one here! Same thing in Switzerland , Italie ... EVEN IN FRANCE ! ( does Strassbourg ring any bells ?) . Even in france there are dozens of languages spoken (native languages!) ! BELGIUM ISN'T AN EXCEPTION !!!

I do think a have a pretty good arguement here...

do you even do the effort to read OUR answers to your questions ...
As far as I know, you don't seem to give a shit

Strange......................

These are posts from louvain-la-neuve and Pierre Caroit :

Louvain-la-neuve Wednesday, January 19, 2005, 17:33 GMT
Louvain-la-neuve Wednesday, January 19, 2005, 17:36 GMT
Pierre Caroit Wednesday, January 19, 2005, 17:55 GMT
Pierre Caroit Wednesday, January 19, 2005, 18:11 GMT

Louvain-la-neuve Wednesday, January 19, 2005, 21:08 GMT
Louvain-la-neuve Wednesday, January 19, 2005, 21:13 GMT
Pierre Caroit Wednesday, January 19, 2005, 21:33 GMT
Louvain-la-neuve Wednesday, January 19, 2005, 21:38 GMT
Louvain-la-neuve Wednesday, January 19, 2005, 21:46 GMT

Pierre Caroit Saturday, January 22, 2005, 11:09 GMT
Louvain-la-neuve Saturday, January 22, 2005, 11:35 GMT
Pierre Caroit Saturday, January 22, 2005, 11:52 GMT

hmm, bit odd that you always seem to be online at the same time...

Maybe , they are the same person ...

I think the difficulty in defining a Belgian nation lies in the fact that if there is one, it definitely consists of two distinct reprsentative communities. The issue, as I perceive it, is mostly a lack of acceptance of the other community's being different, the language problem is just a symptom. I feel Belgium is not a nation in the same sense as Switzerland is, although it does show some distinctive national features on the European palette, in spite of its linguistic diversity - I would say it has the potential of becoming a nation, if it survives at least for one more century, or at least some more decades. At any rate, in Switzerland there seems to be less friction between the various linguistic communities, although as I know, there used to be in the past. Back to Belgium, perhaps the Bruxellois identity is an example of what a Belgian nation could be like, but that definitely is not a pattern to follow for the whole of Belgium. So the Belgian nation may be largely confined to the capital.

Sorry, I have to correct myself. Luxembourg is not the smallest EU country any more, that title goes to Malta. So I will call it the smallest continental EU country.

Tiste,

Sorry, Belgium is not what I call A nation. In Belgium, we live totally separately each others (except in Bruxelles).
For me Switzerland is not an example to follow. Italia, taken as a whole, is linguistically unified (except the small occitan and german minorities...)

In France, there are of course a lot of regional languages and dialects, but there is ONE official language (The language of the Republic), and the french don't fight against each others (in spite of their regional particularities) as we do, because they have a strong national feeling which doesn't exist in our small belgium!!! Plus in France the composition of the population is very wide in each region, whereas in Belgium it's almost 50/50. You can't make a serious comparaison.

Belgium is composed of Flanders and...a part of France!!Yes FRANCE.
Obviously, THe walloons are not a nation. They are just a part of the french nation forgotten by History!!

Of course belgium is not an exception...it doesn't mean it's an example to follow. We have been living since 1830 in community conflicts!! GREAT!!