|
|
A French America
If the French had stayed in control of America then would English be as dominant today? The British would still have had an empire throughout the world and thus would be able to force the natives to speak English but maybe the USA(or whatever it would have been called) would still be as powerful and her influence would have been competition. With that scenario, Who would win in a fight of the languages?
English or French.......
>If the French had stayed in control of America<
The French wasn't the only colony empire in the Americas. There were the Spanish and the Portugese in the South, the French in New Orleans and Quebec, The English on the West Coast and later the whole north up the United States, the Dutch in New York also parts of on the East coast in South America, etc. It's quite hard to answer though.
the french were never in controll of America in the first place.They got beaten or sold their land.
>the french were never in controll of America in the first place.They got beaten or sold their land. <
But the point is: They had some form of control in the Americas at one point in history.
One of the reasons why the French really only had a tenuous link to their own North American possessions (and one of the reasons why Napoleon was so nonchalant about selling the US Louisiana) was that unlike the British and the Spanish, they did not send many settlers over. Even though they owned these huge tracts of land, they were very sparsely populated by actual French people, with the exception of a few areas.
So I tend to doubt that their language would have ever been able to compete with the other languages spoken by more prolific settler groups. You need more of a core group of speakers in the beginning if you're going to have that much linguistic competition.
All speculation of course.
The biggest problem for New France was that it was far too sparcely populated to ever successfully compete with the Thirteen Colonies in the long run.
French is still quite dominant in parts of Canada so is it not more likely that if the Brits were kicked out of North America the French would have landed more people to steal Indian land. They never got a real chance to do so with the English on their backs. It’s hard to persuade your own citizens to move from safe France to colonize land in the middle of a potential war zone. They did however move to Canada and therefore might have moved to the U.S. if given half a chance.
"French is still quite dominant in parts of Canada so is it not more likely that if the Brits were kicked out of North America the French would have landed more people to steal Indian land. They never got a real chance to do so with the English on their backs. It’s hard to persuade your own citizens to move from safe France to colonize land in the middle of a potential war zone. They did however move to Canada and therefore might have moved to the U.S. if given half a chance."
Well, as I said, it's all speculation but: 1. No, it is not likely; by the late 18th Century there were some 2.5 million colonists in the Thirteen Colonies as opposed to some 60,000 French habitants in Quebec. 2. Back in the 18th Century there was no such thing as a "citizen" (until the American and French Revolutions) - people were "subjects."
Brennus : tu ne crains vraiment pas de dire des inepties ! L'existence du Québec contredit chacune de tes paroles...
>French is still quite dominant in parts of Canada<
Correction: Quebec is the only province with dominant French speaking people while others are dominant with English speaking people. >Brits were kicked out of North America the French would have landed more people to steal Indian land.< Really? The British along with other empire powers have done the vert exact thing stealing land from Natives. Even the United States had their hand in the 'cookie jar' taking Indian land as well. >It’s hard to persuade your own citizens to move from safe France to colonize land in the middle of a potential war zone.< Haha well France was at war at the time with the constant threat of Britan across the Channel. Also Quebec or 'New Canada' was surrounded by English colonies so actually no place was safer other from the Planet Mars for the French. >They did however move to Canada and therefore might have moved to the U.S. if given half a chance.< Haha well ever wonder why Quebec remained in Canada? Because the early most French settlers fought to remain in Canada during the war 1812. The newly formed United States wanted to 'free' Quebec with disappointing results. The Quebec bloc should be thanking their stars their forefathers choose to remain in Canada not the United States. To suceed from the American union would be quite the drama as other states, the government and also the courts would have a say on the future of Quebec not the state/province itself. Canada on the otherhand empowered the provinces to status of 'semi country'. <No, it is not likely; by the late 18th Century there were some 2.5 million colonists in the Thirteen Colonies as opposed to some 60,000 French habitants in Quebec. > Well interms of land mass and a simple calculation. The French per 100 acre was higher than the English settlers. (Comeon! There were 13 fricking colonies along the East Coast compared to a smaller lump of land above the colonies!) If we swapped the colonies around the French and use the calculation this surely be a greater majority. But hey this is also speculation.
<<It’s hard to persuade your own citizens to move from safe France to colonize land in the middle of a potential war zone.>>
Really? No other country seemed to have any problems getting their citizens to move to North America. The Spanish, the British, the Dutch -- even the Swedes had a colony here! And by the time of the American Revolution, Germans were a huge minority. << They did however move to Canada and therefore might have moved to the U.S. if given half a chance.>> What do you mean, "given half a chance"? They lived in what is now the US anyway. And have you not heard of Cajuns?
<<< They did however move to Canada and therefore might have moved to the U.S. if given half a chance.>>
What do you mean, "given half a chance"? They lived in what is now the US anyway. And have you not heard of Cajuns? > Dearest Sweet Uriel, I'm sure he was referring to the French settlers not the Native Americans/ Canadians/ First nationals.
"It has also been proposed that if the French had driven the British out of North America entirely, the United States today might even be a country ruled by Indians and speaking one of their languages like Huron or Cherokee."
So a loss by Britain in the short term may have saved the language? |