Talk:French language/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

/ʒɛ/ /ʒɛ/ /ʒɛ/

Why the /ʒɛ/ /ʒɛ/ /ʒɛ/ in the last rows of the pronunciation table towards the end of this article? They should be removed. Also, is this page protected? It would seem so. 207.112.67.79 (talk) 06:33, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I just fixed it; thanks and good catch. It looks like when someone added extra content to the table, they must have just copied and pasted it without removing the pronunciation from the previous one. I don't know the IPA pronunciations of those words/phrases, so someone else will have to fill in the missing information. Yes, the page is semi-protected, so you would have to be an established registered user to edit the page. Kman543210 (talk) 06:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Number of French speakers

In the references cited two say 115 millions + 60 millions (but are dated 2004–2005) and one says 128 millions + 72 (and is dated 2006-2007). I updated the page to the more recent figurs. Nakor (talk) 14:44, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes I wonder whether I am the only one in the world reading other language versions as well. The more I know, the more I know I do not know anything by reading wikipedia:

• Italian wiki: per circa 265 milioni di persone è lingua nativa.
• French wiki: Parlée comme langue maternelle, en 2008, par environ 184 millions de personnes.
• German wiki: Geschätzte 160 Millionen Muttersprachler.
• Russian wiki: Число говорящих на французском языке — около 130 млн. человек. = 130 million native speakers.
• Portuguese wiki: utilizada por cerca de 110 milhões de pessoas como língua mãe.
• Swedish wiki: Det talas av omkring 109 miljoner människor som modersmål.
• Spanish wiki: primera lengua para 90 millones de personas.
• Dutch and Afrikaans (FA) wiki: 87 miljoen moedertaalsprekers.
• Chinese wiki: 現時全世界有87,000,000人把它作为母语 = 87 million native speakers.
• Vietnamese wiki (FA): Cho đến nay, 2004, số người dùng tiếng Pháp như tiếng mẹ đẻ vào khoảng 77 triệu người = 77 million native speakers.
• Catalan wiki: parlen francès uns 77 milions de persones com a llengua materna.
• Indonesian wiki: Bahasa ini digunakan oleh lebih dari 77 juta penduduk dunia sebagai bahasa pertama. = 77 million native speakers.
• Polish wiki: Jako językiem ojczystym posługuje się nim ok. 65 mln ludzi. = 65 million native speakers.
• Finally, the Danes are the most careful: Fransk tales af mellem 90 mio. og 200 mio, afhængigt af hvem man spørger (between 90 and 200, depending on who you ask).

So we've got numbers ranging between 65 and 265, that is a difference of 200 million! I think the real number of native speakers must be somewhere between 90 (Spanish) and 77 (Indonesian), but who am I. Of course there is a substantial amount of fluent second language speakers, including me, but the number of native speakers is important. The Francophonie, however, always furtively blows up the number by adding second language speakers and calling them francophone, and then compares that number with the number of native speakers of other languages to show the position of French amongst other languages. --Hooiwind (talk) 13:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Usually when the Francophonie wishes to blow up the number of francophones, it gives the number of people (about half a billion) who live in countries where French is an official language. There are various reasons why the number may vary: 1) criteria and 2) date. In 2007, the OIF published numbers that were widely retaken by all diplomatic bodies afterwards: 175 francophones total: 110 million réels (mother tongue) and 65 million partiels (fluency as a second language). It must be possible to find a PDF of the source document. In any case, this article, which claims to have been updated on October 27, 2008, gives the number of 109 million francophones mother tongue total. It however also says that "in principle", the notion of mother tongue only applies to "those speaking it in France (82 %), Canada (23,2 %), Belgium (41%), Switzerland (18,4%) and Monaco (58 %)". I am not sure by what is meant by "in principle". In any case, when restricting to these countries, we get the number of ~77 million we often see. ~65 million probably is France alone. I think any 2007-2008 number above ~110 million francophones must be adding second language speakers. I hope this helps. :-) -- Mathieugp (talk) 16:39, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree, but I've been trying to find a pdf or a webpage of the Francophonie and I just cannot find any. I think about 77-99 must be close to the real number of native francophones. The Francophonie only gives us francophones réels, occasionels or partiels —without pour autant explaining the real meaning of those terms, let alone keeping things simple and giving us the number of estimated native speakers...--Hooiwind (talk) 19:04, 14 November 2008 (UTC) I thought France had 60 million inhabitants, but it seems to have reached 64.5 by now, Jesus, what a big country that is. Which country recently celebrated the birth of its 60 millionth citizen then? --Hooiwind (talk) 19:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Another issue is the number of speakers in the EU, supposedly 59 millions, which seems low compared to the population of France alone. Nakor (talk) 18:35, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Genders in German and French

I'm surprised that the word gender is mentioned only twice in this article, and one of those is in the external links section.

French long ago lost the neuter gender and, like Spanish and Italian, has only masculine and feminine. Modern German has all three genders. One thing that German and French share in common, in which French differs from Spanish and Italian, is that in German and French, nouns have genders only when they are singular.

Somewhere on the internet someone suggested (therefore, it must be true, right?) that that particular commonality between German and French is owed to the fact that the Franks were a Germanic tribe. Does that make sense? Michael Hardy (talk) 06:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

This is a general article about the French language. You can find details about the gender of French nouns in the French grammar article. What you say about plural nouns in French is not true: for example,bonnes idées is definitely feminine, and bons arguments is unambiguously masculine. It is true that some determiners (les, ces, mes, etc.) have no gender distinction in the plural; I don't know if this can be attributed to Frankish influence. CapnPrep (talk) 08:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, so the French are not as German as the Germans.

Thank you. Michael Hardy (talk) 21:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Comme ci comme ça

I've removed this from the examples given since, after 10 years of living in France, I have yet to meet a single French person who actually uses "comme ci, comme ça". Furthermore, whenever I've used it, it's been laughed at. As a result I've asked dozens and dozens of French people over the years about this expression, since I know from experience that it's taught in US schools, and ALL of them have told me that it sounds corny. As far as I can tell, the effect it has on them is roughly equivalent to the effect that someone saying "gosh golly gee whillikers" would have on native English speakers. Sure, it's a recognized expression... but practically no one actually says it any more, or not seriously! --fraise (talk) 09:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I would not necessarily remove the example, as you are only getting the input from one dialect of French. It seems to me that In Québec the expression is still used, as in when asked Comment ca va? It does mean the same thing as saying in English "So-So" when asked how's it going? France does not have the market on French, just as England does not dictate English throughout the world. The US as you know also has regional expressions, for example If you lived in Texas, and never visited anywhere else you might think that "pop" is the incorrect way to say "soda" or "soda-pop" or "coke" as these are all widely accepted regional expressions that refer to carbonated soft drinks in various areas in the US. It would be incorrect to expunge all references to anything other that what is local. --Mrboire (talk) 14:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

If it is still used in Québecois, but not France-French, then your own criticism can be turned on you. Why remove my edits entirely when they are correct for France, and only use an example that's correct in Québec? I have re-edited the example so that it reflects the truth for both situations, since I entirely agree that an expression commonly used in Québec should indeed be kept. I hope this is an acceptable compromise for you. --fraise (talk) 12:43, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry you took it as a criticism, but the article is about the French Language. Not all of the examples in this entire article reflect the usage of all people, they are just that examples. Most common, but not universal. Like I said it seems to me, but I am not a post doctoral graduate in Québec French, I am just going by what I have noticed as a Québec French user. But I do not have the market on the French language either. I was just pointing out that the article should be neutral in it's point of view, and just because one part of Francophonia does something it does not mean that everywhere does it. We have not heard from any other French speakers throughout the world, although it could be argued that France and Québec are the largest centers of French language. I simply stated that I would not necessarily remove the example just on one dialect, France and Québec have regional dialects, there is Swiss French (no not full of holes!), and so on. What is spoken in Paris is somewhat different than in other provinces, just as Montréal French is not the same as Québec city French, both because of the international (mostly English) influence, albeit differently in each city. Please accept my apologies if my remarks sounded like criticisms, they were not intended as such. BTW I have heard in Québec, assez bien, pas pire, ça va, très bien, mal et toi, and a miriad of other things but they are not all included here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrboire (talk • contribs) 13:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I wanted to report an error in your title you wrote: "Comme ci, comme ça" or the actual spelling is "Comme çi, comme ça". Moreover, this expression is used in French by or for older people because young people use very little. Etoilegirl010) 23:11, 21 Janvier 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.126.38.17 (talk)

Italy

French is an official language of the Vallée D'Aoste. There is no dispute that a large number of persons speak the patois of Franco-provençal, but in order to say that most people speak that patois needs to be sourced. According to other articles aprox 68,000 people speak Franco-Provencal as a second language, out of about 130,000 which is just over half, not most. Information must be verifiable, with a neutral point of view. --Mrboire (talk) 23:45, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Of course, here the source: if you understand Italian a bit: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valle_d%27Aosta#Lingue_in_Valle_d.27Aosta ... It deals with results of a research by Fondation Emile Chanoux: http://www.fondchanoux.org/site/pages/sondage_q1.asp (in Italian and French). In Aosta Valley people write in Italian or French, but speak Italian or Arpitan, almost never in French. French is official (not Arpitan) because once Arpitan was considered a variety or a dialect of French, but now Arpitan is recognized as a different language.--Pascar (talk)

Sorry, I do not speak Italian, read Italian, understand Italian, so what ever is on the Italian wikipedia page provided is useless to me. The other website you sent me to also demonstrates the point, a large number of people consider Franco-Provencal as their language, but to say most is still not correct. I agree that acording to the statistics more people say that their "mother tongue" is Franco-Provencal as opposed to French, but the facts are correct that French is an official language of the region. French is also understood by a large portion of the population according to the website you provided. The article is accurate as it reads right now, and does not need to be changed.You can also read the article Wikipedia:Avoid_weasel_words#Other_problems that relates to neutral point of view.--Mrboire (talk) 19:28, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

French in Canada

Although the largest number of French speaking people are located in Quebec, the introduction part of the article reads correctly. French is an official language of Canada. Please see the section further below on Canada, and the article concerning French in Canada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrboire (talk • contribs) 19:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

An acquired tongue

spoken (...) by 190 million as second language, and by about another 200 million people as an acquired tongue

What is this supposed to mean? What is an acquired tongue...? What that makes it different from "second language"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.163.2.232 (talk) 17:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

It's possible that acquired tongue is supposed to mean "foreign language" which is not the same as "second language". Aaker (talk) 17:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Dubious

According to the article, "French is understood by 23% of the UK population". This is supported by the reference, which says "French is the most commonly spoken foreign language in Luxembourg (90%), the United Kingdom (23%)...". However, I find this figure quite implasuible in any meaningful interpretation of "understood" and "spoken". Know a few words and can stumblingly piece together a very simple sentence, perhaps (though even this seems high at 23%). Speak or understand with anything remotely resembling fluency, no, I don't believe it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.129.59 (talk) 00:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

England was somewhat larger at the time before King John, and included lands now regarded as French speaking. Perhaps the article includes those lands as part of the UK. Or perhaps the writer did a survey of a few people in Yorkshire or somewhere: "Bonjour, monsieur. Parlez-vous francais?" "Uhh. Sounds like French t'me." Snezzy (talk) 17:39, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

The figure comes from a credible EU-survey based on self-assessment. See languages of the EU for more info. I once visited England together with French people and I was surprised of how many Englishmen there were that could speak French. If you there without speaking French you will not notice it. However since the survey is based on self-assessment it's possible that a lot of people exaggerate their foreign language skills. Aaker (talk) 20:16, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I agree that that the source seems credible. However, based on my own experience I simply do not believe the claim. It could be exaggeration on the part of respondents, as you say, or it could be reflecting different people's intepretations of the word "speak". To me, this implies "speak with a reasonable degree of fluency". Perhaps some people understand it to mean "can falteringly ask for two beers in a bar". 02:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC).

Obscure question Are there French speakers in South Africa still?

Know, that French Protestants went to South Africa. Wondering if French in some form is still spoken in South Africa,ceratin areas of that nation? Thanks! Merci'!(datedbyDr.EdsonAndre'JohnsonDDULCSat.Aug.292009,21stcent"X")ANDREMOI (talk) 15:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

French is today a big language in South Africa but that is because of recent immigration from Francophone Africa. The Huguenots were eventually assimilated linguistically. From the Afrikaans wikipedia:

Frans in Suid-Afrika
Danksy die immigrasie van 'n aantal Hugenote-gesinne na die Kaap is tussen 1688 en die vroeë 18de eeu 'n tyd lank Frans aan die Kaap gepraat. Suid-Afrika se Hugenote is oorspronklik Franse vlugtelinge, wat 'n toevlug in Nederland gevind het en later deur die Verenigde Oos-Indiese Kompanjie aangemoedig is om na die Kaap te emigreer.

Vir die kompanjie was 'n Franstalige gemeenskap in die Kaap egter nie wenslik nie, en hulle het maatreëls getref om die immigrante so vinnig moontlik te laat vernederlands.

Vandag is daar nog talle plek- en familiename van Franse oorsprong in Suid-Afrika. Franschhoek, een van die sentrums van die Franse setlaars, het selfs Franse straatborde. Sedert 1994 lei immigrasie uit die res van Afrika ook tot beduidende Franssprekende gemeenskappe in Suid-Afrika in plekke soos Muizenberg. Tans is daar sowat 100 000 Franstaliges in Suid-Afrikaanse, waaronder 7 600 Franse burgers.

Kaapstad beskik oor 'n Franse skool, die L’École française François-le-Vaillant du Cap. Verder is die Alliance Française teenwoordig in meeste groot sentra in Suid-Afrika en bevorder die Franse Instituut (Frans: Institut français d'Afrique du Sud (IFAS)) kulturele, navorsings- en taalbetrekkinge met die Franssprekende wêreld.
Mechanical translation:
French in South Africa

Thanks to the immigration of a number of Huguenot families to the Cape between 1688 and the early 18th century, a time at the Cape french spoken. South Africa's originally French Huguenot refugees, which has a stronghold in the Netherlands found later by the United East India Company encouraged to visit the Cape to emigrate.

For the Company was a French-speaking community in the Cape is not desirable, and they have taken measures to immigrants as soon as possible to let vernederlands.

Today there are many place and family names of French origin in South Africa. Franschhoek, one of the centers of the French settlers, even French straatborde. Since 1994 leading immigration from the rest of Africa also significant Francophone communities in South Africa in places such as Niagara. Currently there are about 100 000 South Franstaliges in Afrikaans, including 7 600 French citizens.

Cape Town has a French school, L'École française de-le-François Vaillant du Cap. Furthermore, the Alliance Française is present in most major centers in South Africa and promoting the French Institute (French: Institut français d'Afrique du Sud (IFAS)) cultural, research and taalbetrekkinge with the Francophone world.

French vigesimal system

The current claim that base twenty came from the coastal regions only during the revolution cannot be correct. I know when I took a course on Old French in college, we learned that the entire number system was base 20. The number 55 was "forty-fifteen" and 35 was "twenty-fifteen" and so on. Someone with expertise needs to correct this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seberle (talk • contribs) 04:45, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

creoles

This is misleading and seems like a mistake:

"many creole languages developed as a result of the mixture of French and native languages, including Yoruba, Spanish, Portuguese, and English."

I have edited the part about the specific languages, as it is probably unnecessary anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Markeilz (talk • contribs) 03:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

French Slang

Hi everyone, just wanted to point out something that could be good for this article, the mention of the importance of slang in french language, and the particularity of the "Verlan" which are the inventions of words by inversing and changing them. Its something important since most of the French youth but also olds use more or less french slangs. Important words like women, which is femme, has been since long time replace by his verlan; "meuf" and has himself a second version ; "femeuh"

It's a particularity in french and years after years, new words are created, with influences from immigrations ( lots of arab and french african speaking word or sound )

It would also be interesting to point out the sociological meaning of this phenomenon, because between the academic french, and the real french spoke by french, there is in fact a big difference. I just saw that there is already an article on Verlan, so maybe just a link would be enough

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.103.51.234 (talk) 22:13, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Rwanda

I have removed Rwanda. Whilst Rwanda is still a largely francophone country, although less and less, French no longer enjoys the status as an official language (since 2008 replaced with English), and therefore Rwanda should not be listed on this page but rather only as a country where French is spoken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rytc (talk • contribs) 19:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey, couldn't find any official source saying that French is no longer an official language. [1] and other sources state that they changed the language of instruction, but French seems to still be an official language and more known than English. I will re-add until you provide a credible source. You may be right however since the Anglophone élite resents the French language bitterly. Aaker (talk) 22:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

French in Switzerland

There is a mistake in the map: French, such as German and Italian (not Romansh) is an administrative language in the whole Switzerland, not just in the Francophone part of the country.--Pascar (talk) 12:58, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Not really, if I went to Zürich and went into the Police station speaking French, no one would understand me. Same would happen in Lugarno. You would have to wait for a translator to arrive. In the Italian part, Italian is the sole administrative language. The administrative language depends on the official language of the canton. In canton Obwalden, I doubt you'd find many people in the cantonal administration speaking French... --Île flottɑnte~Floɑting islɑnd ^Talk 01:02, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

No, you are wrong. Situation in Switzerland is similar to the Canadian one. German, French and Italian are official in the whole Switzerland, not the Romansh that is regional only. Independently of the mother tongues in the cantons. The school system tries to safeguard all these 3 languages too: you must study your tongue language and choose one of the 2 others official languages. They are administrative languages in the whole country, and streets, roads and squares are reported in the 3 languages.--Pascar (talk) 23:53, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Good, the Map of Francophone World was corrected. Now someone should corret maps of Germanophone World and Italophone World for Switzerland.--Pascar (talk) 22:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Article in French

I have a pdf article in French that I would like to use as a source for a dermatology-related article. Is there anyone that could help me translate it? ---kilbad (talk) 00:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

500 million speakers????

The number of French-speakers is severely exaggerated. If you look at the the List of countries where French is an official language you can see that the population of the entire French speaking world is about 400 million. Now, consider the fact that the population in many of these countries have an illiterate majority and that French is only the language of the educated, see: List of countries by literacy rate (the 6 worst performing countries are all French speaking). The number of speakers is of course difficult, if not impossible, to estimate and 500 million is probably the grand total of everyone who has ever studied the language, but that doesn't mean that they can speak it (do most English Canadians and Britons speak French fluently?). So what is the actual number? There are probably slightly less than 100 million native speakers (France 65, Canada 7, Belgium 4, Switzerland 2, Africa 10 (rough estimate)) and the number of second and foreign language speakers should be somewhere 100-200 million (considering the population of the Francophone countries and fact that the language is studied virtually everywhere, Flanders, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, UK, Romania, Israel, Syria, USA, India, Japan, Mexico et cetera), giving us a total of 200-300 million speakers (but who knows?). What do you think? Aaker (talk) 11:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Dubious tag added. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 00:01, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Writing

I read in this section "As a result, it is difficult to predict the spelling based on the sound alone." Er... Is their any language in the World where spelling can be predicted easily from the sound? I eliminate English which is completely impossible to predict. And frankly I never got any serious trouble to 'predict' any spelling except for the "famous word" 'femme', the verb 'faire' at the imperfect tense, and words starting with an 'h'. But perhaps it's because I am a native French-speaker? -- Silwilhith (talk) 04:08, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

You're right. English is even less phonetic. How do you predict the "k" in a word like "know" or the "b" in "lamb"? I don't think there's any living European language that has a 100% phonetic orthography. I'll delete it. Sorry, I mean dileet. Aaker (talk) 01:04, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Final consonants normally pronounced

"(The final letters c, r, f and l, however, are normally pronounced.)" Yes, I learned this in French class (from teachers who were non-native speakers), and from my father (not a native speaker either). But it's just not true for "r". The vast majority of words ending in -er, including the majority of verbs in the infinitive, have silent "r" at the end. So to say that final "r" is normally pronounced is simply not true. Most final r's are preceded by e's, and are silent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.154.253.45 (talk) 04:07, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

You mean lettre has a silent r? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 08:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

He said that final r preceded by e is usually silent, which is obviously correct (jetter, déjeuner, etc.). In colloquial French, final r preceded by t is usually silent as well (quatre, maitre, lettre), but that is to the best of my knowledge a non-standard feature. Unoffensive text or character (talk) 10:47, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

It's not a final "r" if it's followed by an "e"… As for the original objection, I agree that the statement in the article is an oversimplication, but if the only two options are "normally silent" and "normally pronounced", then it is more useful to say that "r" is "normally pronounced". This is primarily based on the pronunciation of unsuffixed words like cher, amer, enfer, hiver, cuiller, … because you have to learn those individually. It's true that there are thousands of infinitives ending in "-er", but you only have to learn the pronunciation of that final "r" one time, not thousands. CapnPrep (talk) 13:35, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

--"but if the only two options are 'normally silent' and 'normally pronounced', then it is more useful to say that 'r' is 'normally pronounced'." But those aren't the only two options. If they are the only two options, then another option is needed. It's not desirable to oversimplify it so much that it's not valid. That makes for a lousy article. There's no good reason to reduce the situation to only two options. A stupidly simple "rule" does not apply in this case, because reality is not stupidly simple in this case. Black and white thinking fails to qualify in this case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Having two options is not necessarily "black and white". "Normally pronounced" just identifies the general tendency (which is accurate, if you accept my reasoning above), while the actual rules can be quite complicated. And this article is not the right place for complicated rules. In fact, I think this statement about final written consonants should go in the summary section on French orthography and the full details should go in the corresponding main article. But if you feel so strongly about "r", you can just delete the whole passage on the grounds that it's not sourced. CapnPrep (talk) 23:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Are there any reliable sources for this topic? Something like http://french.about.com/library/pronunciation/bl-lettresmuettes.htm, but reliable. (I have a vivid memory of getting it wrong once, when trying to go to 'Rue Auber' in a Paris taxi.) William Avery (talk) 21:42, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

There is a very long history of such statements in French textbooks. And by "long", I mean going back to the 13th and 14th century. Thurot (vol. 2, p. 4–6) gives an overview of what grammars from the 16th–18th centuries say (followed by the necessarily messy details). The sources can only be as reliable as the language itself, and things like the "careful" rule are just a first approximation. (It works for "Auber", though.) CapnPrep (talk) 23:26, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Error

Bonjour, je suis français. Veuillez m'excuser de parler français, je suis très mauvais en anglais. Mais je suppose que vous êtes pour la plupart bilingue. J'ai remarquer une erreur dans la partie " Examples" ligne "Have a nice day", la prononciation française est totalement incorrecte. Voilà, si vous pouvez faire quelque chose... Thinks and nice day!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Fandubarca (talk • contribs) 12:49, 13 Apr 2010 (UTC)

Catalan is not a national language

As of today Catalonia is not a nation and therefore Catalan is NOT a national language, so I edited it. Hope we all agree on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.86.17.140 (talk) 16:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

In Andorra it is the only national language. Please sign your comments. Aaker (talk) 15:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

French Website

I think this French website should be added to the page as a link: http://french.jjl.liggettron.com. The site is very useful and looks professional. It has lots to offer to wikipedia. The content is very appropriate to French Language and is gaining information all of the time. Please look at the website and tell me what you think of it. Reply to this comment with opinions. I love the website, myself! 207.166.197.123 (talk) 20:50, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I have added this as a reference for some good content.  Tell me if anyone has any objections. 

207.166.197.123 (talk) 22:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

By what measure is that useful and professional website? Have you read WP:EL or WP:RS? For everyone's peace of mind I have requested that this domain be added to the spam blacklist (MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#liggettron.com). Hopefully this will put an end to things. --Simple Bob (talk) 07:56, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

No I have not read them, but do not know how this site is not a good resource for wikipedia. Please explain, because I am tired of posts of them being bad on my talk page. It does have information readily available. 207.166.197.123 (talk) 13:16, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I am very familiar with both and your site (which should never be posted under the principles of WP:COI) is far from being a reliable source. --Simple Bob (talk) 13:20, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

How would it meet the principles? 207.166.197.123 (talk) 13:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Did you read the policy yet? WP:COI is specifically implemented to limit the activities of people who seek to promote their own business or website. --Simple Bob (talk) 13:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

How would it meet WP:EL or WP:RS requirements? I want to fix the website, so that it is a very referencable website. It does have tons of information. Maybe, Wikipedia does not like PDf's or framed websites(website with frames). Please respond soon. 207.166.197.123 (talk) 13:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Your personal website doesn't come close to meeting our WP:EL or WP:Reliable sources guidelines. Read those policies. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

French in Egypt

What is the heck is that?! "French is considered to be a more sophisticated language by some elements of the Egyptian upper and upper-middle classes; for this reason, a typical educated Egyptian will learn French in addition to English at some point in his or her education"

Egyptian don't use french , both the upper and upper-middle classes don't speak or use it , they may know a little bit about it due to secondary school education "in case they choose french instead of german or italian" but it's not used at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.196.164.200 (talk) 13:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I've found many sources indicating that Egyptians use French. Like these: "The French came for conquests, but bought with them inventive ideas, the French language, still widely known in Egypt, French culture as well as social and diplomatic influences."[2], "Arabic is the official language in Egypt, although English and French are used in business" [3], "English and French are widely understood" [4]. Egypt is also a member of the OIF. Aaker (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I just got back from Egypt. I used English everywhere I went and had no problems communicating. Other languages widely spoken by Egyptians include Russian and German. Sorry no French. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.69.75 (talk) 12:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Did you try to speak French? No one claims that Egyptians don't know English. I've met Egyptians who speak French very well so they do exist. Aaker (talk) 13:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, yes, I'm an Egyptian btw; French's widely spoken by high-classes. And there are some French schools here, French's the second foreign language (Third language). Many of stores and shops have their names in French, and many books sold here in French. Upper classes can talk French well, as well as English. Mohamed Magdy (talk) 12:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, for you but it seems that you've never been to Egypt. English and Frenh are the most widely spoken foreign language there no Russian and German, you liar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.127.223.78 (talk) 11:17, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Really, the French spoken in Egypt is restricted to a tiny, TINY, shrinking, and aging section of the old upper class, who indeed used to learn it as a sort of opposition to the English. But that's not the case for the new bourgeoisie at all; they learn English almost exclusively, and not that many of them learn even English well. I'm sure there are far more Egyptians who speak french due to the tourist trade than the reasons given in the article...I think this part of the article should just be deleted, (as should Egypt's silly membership in La Francophonie, which is just a remnant of the colonial past too, and has no meaning there.)jackbrown (talk) 23:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Well add the info and source it! Aaker (talk) 12:22, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Keep on dreaming

Keep on dreaming, kids!

" ...French is spoken as a first language by about 136 million people worldwide. Around 190 million people speak French as a second language, and an additional 200 million speak it as an acquired foreign language... "

Woo woo woo ... Keep on dreaming...

In case you're interested in reality outside the Francophonie's masturbation reports: the number of native speakers of French is no more than 78 million worldwide.

In Africa there are no native speakers of French. Grow up! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.101.12.99 (talk) 14:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you've ever been to Abidjan, Libreville, or Tunis, but there are most definitely native French speakers who come from (and continue to live in) Africa. There certainly aren't hoards of them, but in several areas of West Africa, French is emerging as a native language in urban centers.

If you're still questioning the figure, you can add up all of the native French speakers in Canada, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Haiti, Monaco, Andorra ... furthermore, one can easily find native French speakers in other formerly French-dominated countries. I grew up with French as a native language (along with English), and I am from Lebanon. There certainly aren't as many Lebanese today who grow up with French as a primary language, but in many sections of East Beirut, such as Achrafieh, the French language still reigns supreme. Just one more example to add to the pile. Senatorgrey 00:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

We certainly need to have the details per country of these 200mio native speakers. I fear that some chauvinism has crept into the article :) Sijo Ripa (talk) 19:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

You could, for example, see the first cited source in the article, which accounts for 196 million of them. And, reading the note at the bottom, one can see that these figures include speakers in non 'Francophonie' nations, notably Algeria, Israel, and Northern Italy. Given that 57 percent - or 19 million people - of the Algerian population speaks French according to the 'African French' Wikipedia article, this number exceeds the 200 million first language speakers given in the introduction of the article. Second language speakers (especially in non 'Francophonie' nations) further increase this number.

I'm certainly not here to argue that French is the modern world's unchallenged lingua franca, or even that it retains the same prestige that it had a century ago. However, it is a highly useful language still widely spoken both across the world and in countless international organizations. It is used in business, science, government, education, and diplomacy, and is supported by an unparalleled body of culture - art, music, cuisine, and literature. For these reasons, among others, it garners so many native, first, and second language speakers =) Senatorgrey 18.18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Senatorgrey, we're not challenging your opinion that French is an important language, but the number of 200mio native speakers is just not realistic. See the list of languages by native speakers. This referenced list puts the number of native French speakers between 70mio (Encarta) and 77mio (Etnologue)...! The Brittanica seems to have an even lower figure if we make the sum of its separate figures: [5] (I think because it's taking into acount that a large part of the inhabitants of France do not speak French at home (mostly immigrants but also Basques, Corsicans, Catalans, Flemish...) and that almost no Africans have French as their mother tongue). Sijo Ripa (talk) 17:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

A third of the Libreville's population speaks French natively. It is also a common native language in Abidjan. Moreover, French is widely used all over Francophone Africa and its use is increasing (except in Rwanda). Aaker (talk) 12:32, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello Aaker. It is not that I'm questioning what you are saying, but have you got proof that the use of French is increasing? In fact, I have the feeling it is the contrary but it is just a feeling, so I can be wrong. Anyway, if you have any document showing this, please let me know. Monsieur W (talk) 19:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Luxembourg: Don't let the street signs fool you!

Though it is one of three official languages in the country, natives of Luxembourg do not speak French as a first language, but Luxembourgish, which is a Moselle-Franconian dialect of German on its way to becoming a standardized, national language. The primary language of the press, for instance, is Standard High German. While all the signage in the country is primarily French, the only place French is really obligatory is ordering in a restaurant -- most likely because the wait staff is Portuguese. Any monolingual French speakers will be "guest workers" from Wallonia (French Belgium). --Janko (talk) 07:13, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

French in Canada

I am concerned with the fact they use the self reported census as the only listed source because it is self reported and a large percentage of those who consider them selves to be french speaking as a second language would not qualify if evaluated by someone who actually spoke french. The problem is that apart from isolated communities in most of Canada people who take french immersion in elementary and junior high consider themselves fluent for the rest of their life but with no opportunity to speak it in daily life there ability deteriorates the longer they are out of school and even worse people who consider themselves french speaking that only took the mandatory french courses in school. They do certify people who are fluent with a second language when they finish university level french courses and immersion courses to completion of high school in Canada and those figures if they could be obtained would be at the very least more reliable then the self reported data since people who had that level of commitment to learning french would be more likely to have the opportunity or make an effort to retain it. 142.176.243.26 (talk) 18:55, 22 October 2010 (UTC)Anonymous

Broken inter-language link

Just to let anyone who is interested know one of the inter-language links (ISO code arc) was broken so I commented it out. – Allen4names in domus 97.115.141.17 (talk) 01:12, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Let's let this job for the bots. JackPotte (talk) 20:31, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

French is not spoken in the United Kingdom

neither Jersey or Guernsey are part of the United Kingdom. I changed it to channel islands Voucherman (talk) 15:46, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Native speakers estimate is ridiculous

The Ivory Coast alone has several million of native French speakers. If you add other natives speakers all over the globe, mainly Oceania/Carribbean and also the US (~2 million), it is clear that 75 is even below the lowest estimate that would be reasonable (~80 million).

The source that is given is also kind of dated. Since there is no official up-to-date data about the number of native speakers, and since nobody actually knows how many there really are because collecting data in Africa is difficult, an estimate range instead of a definite number should be given, for example between 80 (lowest estimate) and 110 (highest estimate) native speakers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.249.204.4 (talk) 22:31, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Ridiculous dispute

Why is someone so eager to only include a few countries in the infobox? It's really ridiculous to mention Monaco with a miniscule population, or the Channel Islands where French is practically dead as a native language, but not major French speaking countries in Africa. Why this eurocentrism? I think the solution is (like in the articles about other languages spoken in many countries e.g. English or Spanish) to link geographical distribution, both because it makes the layout more beautiful and because it's fairer. Aaker (talk) 20:07, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I fully agree. Those people who always revert the changes and neglect the African countries seem to be suffering from some racist tendencies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.249.255.190 (talk) 21:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Let's leave questionable insinuations of eurocentrism and racism out of this. Admittedly, on the other hand, the following explanation could have come sooner. It's clear that the vast majority of Francophones in Africa are second-language speakers. Even within French territory in Africa, for about 80% of Réunionnais the mother tongue would actually be better said to be Réunion creole (la langue d’usage des Réunionnaises reste, à près de 80%, le créole (the most frequently spoken language of Réunionnais is still, about 80%, creole)). Also, Monaco might have a small population but the majority of its population do speak French. Excluding it from this infobox would mean excluding it from all language infoboxes bsed on its population size. In any case, the list of countries with it as an official language is already in the infobox further down. I'm fine with just linking to geographical distribution though.

For the statistics, the article that is tried to be added as source for the 500 figure says "Selon les estimations de 2005 de l'Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, il y aurait 139 millions de francophones (langue maternelle et langue seconde), auxquels il faut ajouter 39 millions de «francophones partiels», ceux dont le français est une langue étrangère." (According to the 2005 estimations by the Francophonie there is 139 million French speakers (mother tongue and second language), as well 39 million "partial francophones", those for whom French a foreign language). So the article itself supports a figure of 178 million, not 500 million. The 500 figure only comes into things as a projection of those "en contact avec la langue française" (in contact with the French language). The 2005 figure for contact is given as 250-300 million. Also, "French is the official global language of Canada," is patently false. And it's sourced to a blog and blogs aren't RSs. And the French version of this article has 125 native, 220 total. Munci (talk) 23:39, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

"It's clear that the vast majority of Francophones in Africa are second-language speakers." => This is a fact that we all agree upon. "I'm fine with just linking to geographical distribution though." => Monegasque conflict solved. "500 million" => 500 million might be the total number of people in the whole world that have studied French. Anyway it not the number of speakers. "Also, 'French is the official global language of Canada,' is patently false." => Agreed! Aaker (talk) 11:50, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Funny edits...

So now there are 220 million native speakers. That's an estimation we haven't had before. We went from 125 to 75, then to 80-100, now we're at 220 million. What will the next edit be ? 50 million native, 40 million total ? :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.249.192.29 (talk) 02:03, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The latest edit was apparently due to a misinterpretation of the source provided. The current range between the 2 sources works fine. Munci (talk) 15:38, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Inconsistency?

Below the little map of Western Europe, it is written that:

"Note that around 40% of Belgium's population are native French speakers,[19] totalling 88%[20] of the country's population."

This seems contradictory to me. Either 40% are native French Speakers, or 88% are. Which is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.210.201.65 (talk) 08:15, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Minority language in ZA, EG?

The map in the infobox appears to show French as a minority language in South Africa and Egypt. Is this for real?--candyworm (talk) 15:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Native speakers

Some of the African countries such as Cote d'Ivoire and Gabon should be listed as countries where native French speakers reside in the leading paragraph. They have way more native French speakers than New Brunswick, Maine and Louisiana. Native French speakers don't have to be white.Kraikk (talk) 11:19, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Well the lede should definitely be changed anyway because it currently gives a very high estimate and only a high estimate as if it were absolutely the case. Munci (talk) 13:30, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I totally agree with you. All the people I know from these countries do not know any other dialect. They all speak french. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.68.102.53 (talk) 16:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

You know african people who know only one language, err, it's a joke ? You don't know Africa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.195.91.198 (talk) 15:23, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

What is a Native speaker ?

There is a lot of discussion about how many native speakers there are but very few about the meaning of "native speaker" ? This kind of article should explicitly specify the definition of NS used here ? Then you can count them easier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.195.91.198 (talk) 15:27, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Native : belonging to one by birth. I think that it's just before the school. JackPotte (talk) 17:34, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Number of speakers in this article, compared to the List of languages by native speakers

• The list on that page speaks of 68 million native speakers and 120 million total speakers.
• This article claims 110 million native speakers and 270 million total speakers.

One of the two articles is blatantly wrong and should be corrected. 193.190.253.146 (talk) 16:33, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Every figure is an estimation because nobody knows how many they actually are. Aaker (talk) 14:30, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Of course, that makes sense. Nevertheless, this difference is way too big to be explained comme ça. Where do these 42mio additional native speakers come from? In which countries do they live? Why are they not included in other estimates? Morgengave (talk) 18:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I guess they come from different estimates about the French speaking population in Africa. Some sources include them, others don't. I guess this is because it's difficult to asses who is a native speaker and who is a second language speaker and who shouldn't be counted at all. At the end of the day... does it really matter? Aaker (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and hence should be as accurate as possible, so yes, it matters. If there's no certainty, then Wikipedia should mention this. Like e.g., the English language article does - it says that there are between 309 million and 400 million native speakers, and between 199mio and 1.4bio second language speakers. But apparently, only one source is cited for the 110mio native French-speakers and that's the website of the Francophonie. We should be careful - such sites could have a tendency to inflate their numbers greatly. On top, source [3] in the article does not support the claim of 265mio total speakers, and the 270mio (source [2]) again comes from the Francophonie website... It would be better to limit ourselves to sources of which we are certain they are neutral. Searching around on the web, I am not able to find any neutral sites supporting any figure that comes close to the Francophonie's one. Morgengave (talk) 19:55, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Morgengave's concerns should be taken seriously. Furthermore, Wikipedia should at least be consistent with itself, even for estimates. --seberle (talk) 02:11, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually I don't think the Francophonie's estimation is inflated because they often base their estimation on how many people there are who are literate in French, although French is often more commonly known orally in many African countries. This being said, the Francophonie doesn't estimate the number of "native" French speakers nut rather the number of "real" French speakers. Honestly I'm not sure what they mean by this but I guess it means "daily user of French". When I asked whether it really matters, I did this because it's a matter of definition. Aaker (talk) 18:40, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I understand your point, Aaker, but if The Francophonie website counts "daily speakers" instead of "native speakers", we should clearly not use their count as a source for the number of "native speakers". At most, we could use the site as a source for the number of "daily speakers". Still, I would prefer that we use sources that are certainly reliable (another encyclopedia?) - for native speakers, for second language speakers and for the number of daily speakers. Do not forget that also for the total speakers, there's a huge difference between The Francophonie and neutral sources. Morgengave (talk) 19:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The source that provides 67.8 million native speakers clearly doesn't factor in the population of Francophones in Africa, like the others pointed out. Also, the same website states that French only has roughly 8 million more native speakers than Italian, which is not only ridiculous, but wholly inaccurate. I've already stated that the La Francophonie source is the most reputable, and that the current figures do not provide a large enough discrepency to constitute an overhaul of the figures. English, for example has a discrepency of over 900 million speakers, compared to the French figure's meesly 5 million. BalticPat22Patrick (talk) 17:22, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

It shouldn't. Most French-speaking Africans don't speak it as a native language. There was a lower limit of 75 million included but it was removed in the following edit:

[6]. I do not quite understand why. Munci (talk) 01:17, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

"Most French-speaking Africans don't speak it as a native language" -> True, but those who do should be included! (The only problem is that nobody knows how many they are and who should be considered a native speaker). Aaker (talk) 13:39, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

The point is the source that states 68 million native speakers and 120 million total speakers is grossly underestimated to the point of being laughable. It doesn't factor in Quebec/Canadian French, nor does it factor in African French, which should be included despite the aspect of alleged illiteracy in some communities. Furthermore, La Francophonie, a political and NGO which dedicates itself toward maintaining the French language and culture provides an abundance of comprehensive info on the varying demographics of the language, something which one obscure (and poorly constructed) source that was published six years ago doesn't do. BalticPat22Patrick (talk) 04:32, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry, BalticPat22, but Wikipedia needs to be build on reliable sources. Most likely many of you are confusing "native speakers" with "daily speakers". We talk here about native speakers - a chunk of the population of France, Wallonia/Brussels, Swiss and Quebec comprises immigrants or immigrant children (and historic minorities), whose mother tongue is not French. (The same for English with the large number of Hispanic (US) and Pakistani-Indian (UK) immigrants) The rest of the world has indeed a lot of daily speakers, mostly in Africa, but hardly any native speakers. If we look to the sources, there seems to be a consensus among neutral sources that there are about 68-72mio native speakers:

• Ethnologue: "Population total all countries: 67,838,450." This is the only neutral source as far as I know that gives a number of native speakers per African country. [7]
• The last version of Encarta 2009 mentioned 70mio native speakers. (Encarta is now discontinued/closed by Microsoft.)
• This is the division that the latest version of Yahoo encyclopedia gives: "spoken as a first language by more than 70 million people, chiefly in France (55 million speakers), Belgium (3 million), Switzerland (1.5 million), former French and Belgian colonies in Africa (5 million), and Canada (6.5 million)."[8]
• Merriam-Webster encyclopedia: "spoken as a first language by about 72 million people in France, Belgium, Switzerland, Canada (mainly Quebec), and many other countries and regions formerly governed by France."[9] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morgengave (talk • contribs) 08:04, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

So, basically the main issue is with the figure that states "native speakers," correct? If that is the core problem, then I do support a figure that states somewhere between 70 and 75 million native speakers. However, I also support the figure for "total speakers" to be untouched, because those sources are both reliable and can be corroborated from other references. I do not support the one that stated "500 million," because it is an overly inflated and frankly, ridiculous number. Additionally, the reason I had a qualm with the refs that stated 68 or 70 or 75 million native speakers is becase I believe them to be underestimated. However, I do appreciate the aspect that they come from reputable places. That said, I found a source from Berlitz that claims, "All told, it is the mother tongue of about 75 million people, with millions more familiar with it, to some degree, as a second language," here Lastly, I don't think the current source in place is "unreliable," per your statement. After all, I was one of the users that helped place together the sources/figures that you see in the article, today. Furthermore, if you believe that La Francophonie is an unreliable source, than practically every source provided is just as unreliable. Be careful not to mix-up reliable references with implicit ones. That said, I don't mind the "native speakers" figure to be revised, but I am highly against the "total speakers" figure being touched, per my explanations above. BalticPat22Patrick (talk) 16:32, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Patrick, could you please elaborate on your reversal of my edit to 68-72mio native speakers: I really thought you expressed your support for it ("then I do support a figure that states somewhere between 70 and 75 million native speakers."), while also expressing your personal disbelief. (Just between brackers: I am not able to judge the reliability of Berlitz, because it's a language learning website, that's why I did not take the 75mio as an upper estimate; this was not mal-intended). I do not mean this in a derogatory way, but your personal belief on estimates is irrelevant if it's not backed up by reputed sources. On La Francophonie: it is neither an encyclopedia nor an academic source; it's an organisation openly promoting French, which is its full right, but as such it has good reasons to make French look more important than it is. Encyclopediae, like the ones I mentioned, on the other hand, do not have such an ulterior motive and indeed give a much lower figure. Morgengave (talk) 05:03, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I find no mention about descendants of French immigrants in Spanish-speaking Latin America, probably the French language didn't thrived in usage as much there. It's true that Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela has second language French instruction courses, and French language student academies sponsored by the French government. 19th century Corsican immigration to Puerto Rico was noted to introduce elements of French or in particular, Corsican culture into Puerto Rico. The French briefly occupied parts of Argentina and Chile, also known as the Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia in the 1860s, a micronation with a self-claimed French citizen "king" and partly was from the region's French settlement at the time. 71.102.26.168 (talk) 16:15, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

POV on native speakers

As long as no reliable sources are provided that there are 110mio native speakers (remember that native speakers are different from daily speakers) and as long as the above reliable sources (Ethnologue, Yahoo encyclopedia, Encarta, Merriam-Webster) are ignored, I fear that there is some form of POV-pushing (POV is perhaps the wrong word, but how do we call the inclusion of incorrect data to further a view?). As a consequence, I had to put a POV-tag on the article. As the issue is on an infobox, I could not limit the tag to one section; my apologies for that. Morgengave (talk) 04:18, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I reverted the WP:NPOV tag because there is not basis for it all. There has never been an issue of a non-neutral POV on the subject, only on the issue of reliable sourcing. You just made that issue out of thin air above: "how do we call the inclusion of incorrect data to further a view?" That is not the correct way to go. If you have a specific gripe with the sourcing, that's another story, but since you went and added a tag where there was no visible basis to do so, I had no choice but to revert it. Also, there is no argument concerning the reliability of La Francophonie. It's an internationally-recongizned non-governmental organization and is more than a reputable source, per WP:IRS. Nor is there an issue with the Laval University source, again per WP:IRS. Just because you have a specific issue with the semantics or wording of what the reliable source says, does not mean you can paint the reference something it clearly is not. BalticPat22Patrick (talk) 15:06, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

How do you call completely ignoring *four encyclopedic sources* just because their numbers are lower? You revert my addition of their numbers because they are contrary to your personal ideas? For Christ's sake, that's POV and surely not the way to proceed on Wikipedia. And Eldamorie, since when it's reasonable to ignore encyclopedic sources and at the same time defend the numbers of a French-promoting organisation? Does not make sense *at all*. Morgengave (talk) 20:52, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

First of all, learn to be civil. I don't appreciate people using words like that to me. You can explain your case, but be respectful. First of all, this was never a question of having a specific POV. I suggest you read Wikipedia's policy on that before throwing the word around. Secondly, the source that has the "110 million speakers" was more than reputable, per my lengthy explanation above. Since you are extremely adamant in having the 68-72 million figure in the article, I won't argue, or risk being yelled at again. What I have done, however is edited the wording because it looks very sloppy. You'll also have to address what the words "real speakers" mean because to me, it doesn't mean anything, and if another user has an issue with that wording, you'll have to support your reasoning for it. BalticPat22Patrick (talk) 00:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

BalticPat22, please do not make assumptions on my intentions. I did neither insult you nor yell to you. Rereading my comments, I can not find any insults, upper case words or exclamation marks. If you do feel insulted, please have good faith that this is not my intention. I do know Wikipedia's POV policy and I think it is appropriate in this case, as numbers that were backed up by reliable sources were immediately removed from the article and replaced by other numbers that did not have such sources. On the "real" in "real speakers": it was a translation of the "véritable" in "véritables francophones" used by La Francophonie. I am not happy with that wording as said in my edit comment, but it was the only way I could avoid misleading the reader. By the way, how does La Francophonie gets to the 75mio native speakers? They say: "En principe, la notion de français langue maternelle ne s'applique qu'à ceux qui le parlent en France (82 %), au Canada (23,2 %), en Belgique (41 %), en Suisse (18,4 %) et dans la principauté de Monaco (58 %). Avec ces seuls pays, on ne compterait que 75 millions de francophones." Translation: "In principle, the notion of French native speakers only applies to those that speak [French] in France (82%), Canada (23.2%), Belgium (41%), Switserland (18.4%) and the princedom of Monaco (58%). With only those countries, we would count only 75mio speakers." If we use *their* percentages per country and the highest pop estimates available per country, we can never get to the 75mio... (calculation: France: 54mio, Canada: 8mio, Belgium 4.3mio, Suisse: 1.4mio, Monaco: 20 000 --> total: roughly 67.7mio)... I rstrongly prefer to leave this source out. If we find a reliable source mentioning the 110mio (or more) as native speakers, I will not object at all. If the 110mio is a reliable figure, it shouldn't be hard to find this figure elsewhere. But if it's only used by an organisation with as sole purpose promoting French, that uses vague phrasing (do they really mean native speakers? I find their switch from native to real speakers a bit ambiguous) and contradictory numbers as a source (see my example), is not the best way to go. I do not want an edit war, or cause any impressions of incivility, so I rely on you and other people's common sense to see that La Francophonie could be a problematic source. Can't we just keep La Francophonie out and search for reliable / independent sources that would support the higher claim? Would make everyone happy. Morgengave (talk) 19:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

It's reasonable to ignore them because they are tertiary sources - and some of them (especially Encarta) are clearly out of date. Encyclopediae don't generally cite other encyclopediae because all that results is an incestuous circle of citations with no verification. I'm not defending the numbers themselves - I'm saying that the sopurces being used to justify them are fine should not be superseded by lower-quality sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eldamorie (talk • contribs) 13:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Another consideration here is that the sources mentioned above, are all tertiary sources. Given the number of secondary sources available, it seems reasonable to ignore Encarta et al. in this case. eldamorie (talk) 17:37, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Those sources are all outdated. Just look at the Yahoo article, 55 million native speakers in France ? Seriously, that must have been like 20 years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.249.207.73 (talk) 02:00, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Let's make a sense check. Seeing the large number of immigrant and immigrant children in France, the number of 55mio native speakers in France does not seem outdated. Even La Francophonie says that only 82% of France has French as a mother tongue, which would - using the latest population estimate of almost 66mio French - be around 54mio speakers. Ethnologue's estimate of 2005 is 53.2mio. Morgengave (talk) 18:33, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Knowing that there is a sizable immigrant population in France, the 55 million figure seems quite correct. Also, the statements are substantiated by the Columbia University Press, which is why I used that source ahead of the other two (one of which was a dictionary). The 110 million source also seems accurate, and is also substantiated by an extremely reputable institute of higher education, Laval University in Canada. I see no reason to alter the population figures. The two sources also provide a balance that was missing before. BalticPat22Patrick (talk) 23:53, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I think this number is a little bit underestimated. In 2005, la Francophonie estimated that 99,8% of the population of metropolitan France could speak French, that is 60 578 600 people.

5 million people is not that important, but if the number of Francophones is outdated in all countries as it is in France, "110 million" may well be a slightly underestimated figure.

Here I found a study by the Scots college that estimates that there are 128 million native speakers of French.

Celyndel (talk) 10:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, now that I read the entire introduction, I can see that 'French is estimated as having between 70 and 110 million speakers'. Wow, 70 million, it is just ridiculous ! How can one count only 70 million native speakers of French as France's population is 65 million ? (let's assume that only 60 million people in France speak French as a native language, even if this figure is underestimated). If you add people from Quebec (about 6 million), Switzerland (1.5 million), and Belgium (4.4 million), you reach 72 million people. It's probably how they have calculated it. It's nice but ... you forget all the minorities elsewhere who speak French as their native language in all other countries : many people in Africa have French as their native language, (and many others have French as an additional language) but with the 70 million figure, you just forget them. That's stupid ! Does someone say that they are only 68 million (62 fot the UK and 6 for Ireland) native speakers of English, forgetting all the people who speak it as a native language in the former British colonies ?

How serious is a study that say that only in Europe and in Quebec French is talked as a first language ? Here I found another site that gives a number of 67 million : [10] According to it, only France and French polynesia have French as an official language ... I finally understand how only 70 million people could speak French as their mother tongue ...

I suggest to remove that senseless estimate, or I'm afraid we would have to change the number of native speaker of Spanish by the population of Spain alone (that is aroud 45 million people). Celyndel (talk) 19:00, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Celyndel, please do not remove well-sources numbers: the 70mio is at least supported by 4 reliable sources. (As you know, the 110mio includes real non-native speakers as well... but to avoid a ridiculous edit war, we are a bit more flexible for French than for other languages on this.) The EU report clearly puts it as the 4th language by number of native speakers in the EU. Morgengave (talk) 12:02, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Extract from the EU report: "In conclusion, German is the most widely spoken mother tongue in Europe (18%) followed by English and Italian with a 13% share. 12% of respondents indicate that they speak French as their mother tongue." Morgengave (talk) 12:15, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Morgengave. Could you please show me the links of the "4 reliable sources" that state that there is only 70 million native speakers of French in the world ? There is only one reference in the article that's backing this information, and I think no one can really consider "Yahoo" as a reliable source. I would also like to read the EU report, do you have the link ? Thanks.

Another thing, you erased what I wrote about the current situation of French today in the part "History": [11]; and that wasn't justified at all, so I'm going to add it again in the article page. Celyndel (talk) 22:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

No problem, Celyndel. You can find the four sources in this very talk page topic (see a bit above). The link to the EU report is in the article (the reference at the end of the phrase). Morgengave (talk) 17:16, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

The concept of "native speakers" is often problematic. If someone from an immigrant family in France attended school (which is of course taught in French) from age five onward, can we really say he (if he is an adult today) isn't a native speaker? Many such people ultimately come to lose their ability to communicate in their first language as time passes, as the majority language becomes their everyday tongue. As for people in Francophone Africa, their entire education is often in French. For some, French is the only language in which they are literate. If that is the case, is it truly a non-native language? Funnyhat (talk) 05:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Second or third place for number of students

The claim that Spanish is now second is reported in Spanish at the following link . http://www.20minutos.es/noticia/227910/0/espanol/estudia/extranjero/

Claimed by César Antonio Molina of the Instituto Cervantes. William Avery (talk) 16:50, 13 June 2011 (UTC).

French native speakers

According to the "Cahiers québécois de démographie" there are 551.864 millions of french active francophones in the world. In 2050 they'll be more than a billion speakers.

http://www.erudit.org/revue/cqd/2003/v32/n2/008997ar.html?vue=figtab&origine=integral&imID=im1&formatimg=imPlGr — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.85.43.207 (talk) 15:22, 18 July 2011 (UTC) Now, THAT'S interesting! Thanks for the info! --87.203.233.214 (talk) 16:05, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

And by 2100, everybody in the whole world will be speaking French and the French will start teaching French to Klingons and Romulans. Unoffensive text or character (talk) 07:38, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Please avoid sarcasm, it is not constructive. If you are willing to participate, put forward your arguments instead. Best regards. Mouloud47 (talk) 08:42, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

My apologies. Just couldn't resist. Unoffensive text or character (talk) 07:12, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

People with no resistance lack in arguments. :P I believe the "Cahiers quebecois" are a very credible source but "active speakers" doesn't mean "native" speakers. Of course french is a language in a high rate progression in Africa and in Europe. Have a glance at what wille happen in Africa in 2100 here --194.63.239.234 (talk) 11:26, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

I am just a bit tired of people digging up obscure sources that are supposed to show how many speakers their own precious language has or will have soon. In 2100, my arse. That's 89 (eighty nine) years away. Unoffensive text or character (talk) 15:03, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Unoffensive, though I would have phrased it a bit in a more polished way. Among some people, there seems to be an obsession about the number of French speakers, even future numbers. Just compare the focus on numbers of speakers in this article versus the English, Arab or Chinese ones. 3/5 of the lead of this article and 1/3 of the article itself is about the numbers and the geographic spread. This is absurd. Morgengave (talk) 16:35, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Anyone had a look at the content of the equivalent page, Langue française on French Wikipedia? There they accept the "Francophonie" figures without question. But to me, having worked in several Francophone African countries and travelled recently in South-east Asia, the "Francophonie" numbers are blatant propaganda. They actually claim that the number of people using French worldwide is increasing, whereas the number using English is falling!!! Looking at Africa, and taking RDCongo (the largest "francophone" country in Africa) as an example, very few nationals are native French speakers, almost all are fluent speakers of one or more of the main national languages (Kicongo, Lingala, Tshiluba and Kiswahili) but only the small minority who have received a secondary education can really communicate in French. Situation in the former French colonies is similar, except that French is taught in primary schools and small communities of native French speakers can be found in some capital cities. The French language has almost disappeared completely from the former French Indochina, despite the efforts of the French government to fund French-medium schools and language courses. Kahuzi (talk) 14:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Which Francophone African countries did you visit? Aaker (talk) 11:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Due to scolarisation children tend to adopt more and more the french language. Only older people talk dialects.

This is a total misunderstanding of the source. The source is talking about the total population of countries in the Francophonie, with different possible definitions of the "Francophonie". "Active" means "active within the structures of [the organization of] the Francophonie". Thus it includes many people who don't speak French, but who live in countries that are francophone in some way. The point is more about the potential for growth, as people in those countries become more educated and learn French, particularly in the "active" countries like, say, Senegal (and not Vietnam - I'm guessing). This cannot be used as a reference for the number of French-speakers, and it doesn't make any claims about that. 96.46.204.126 (talk) 07:28, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Words (ca vs. fr)

What is the point of providing a table explaining the different pronunciation between Canadian French and France French if the phonetic transcription suggests that there is barely a difference between both pronunciations? And why only those two? Why not Belgian French, Swiss French, and RDCongo French? If this table wants to show how the orthography matches with the pronunciation and its phonetic transcription, then only one French variety is sufficient. If this table wants to show the diversity in accents, then 1) more French varieties need to be represented and 2) the words chosen need to show the variety better: a simple "bonjour, comment ça va" barely varies in French varieties. 147.143.96.47 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:17, 9 December 2011 (UTC).

I have several complaints about the sample audio files. 1) The transcriptions are not always accurate. This goes as far as writing "Parlez-vous anglais?" when the speaker says "Est-ce que vous parlez l'anglais?", but there are other cases too. It seems the transcriptions are more of a preconceived idea of what will be said than actual transcriptions of the recordings. They also show some misconceptions about the differences between French and Canadian accents, sometimes reversing the differences actually heard, as in the case of on sounds. 2) The speakers in some of the Canadian recordings appear to be non-native speakers of French. This is certainly the case for "Bonne nuit", "Merci" and "Où sont les toilettes?", and probably for "Comment?" as well, though I'm not positive for that one. I have some suspicions about "Où?" and "Quoi?", but they're too short for me to be sure, as I'm not a native speaker myself. The rest seem to be without a foreign accent.96.46.204.126 (talk) 07:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

French is the 4th most spoken mother tongue in the EU

The EU report clearly says on page 7: "In conclusion, German is the most widely spoken mother tongue in Europe (18%) followed by English and Italian with a 13% share. 12% of respondents indicate that they speak French as their mother tongue." Morgengave (talk) 12:23, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

The French speaking United Kingdom

Within the article it says "French is spoken and understood by 23% of the UK population".

I've lived in the UK my whole life and i think the 23% figure is massively incorrect. It's definately lower than that. Are there any other more accurate reliable sources than the one given? It now makes me wonder about all the other language stats i've read on Wikipedia as well and how many of those are just as inaccurate. 09.55, 3 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.99.10.14 (talk) Slightly misleading - the source means to say that 23% of the UK population can at least have a conversation in French. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cymru123 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Confusing text under map

Currently reads, "Note that around 40% of Belgium's population are native French speakers,[20] totaling 88%[21] of the country's population."

(Scratches head) What does this mean? Ordinary Person (talk) 11:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Around 80% of the Dutch speakers in Belgium (around 60% of population) say they are also able to speak - to varying degrees - French. This gives us 40% native speakers + 48% non-native speakers (80%*60%) = 88% of the Belgium that says they can speak French. Morgengave (talk) 23:09, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Third or fourth most spoken in Europe and number of speakers

The user Morgengave, probably with the best intentions, argued that French is the fourth most spoken language in the EU and referred to a survey Eurobarometer. Unfortunately, that survey is not enough to make such a claim. What is showed that in the sample in the study, French was spoken by 1% less than English and Italian. While a sample of 25000 is rather good, it' still not a satisfactory source to claim that Italian and English are larger (or smaller) than French. Given how small the difference between all three are, and the risk for measurement errors, a survey of 0,0005% of the EU population resulting in a difference of 1% is simply not sufficient to categorically state the number of speakers of French, or Italian, or English. As for the number of native speakers, it's easier. Morgengave uses Ethnologue as a source, which is certainly not acceptable. Ethnologue, which is a Christian evangelical organization, is not made up of linguists, and their claims are often outlandish and in sharp contrast to the consensus among all linguists. What is more, their focus is on the third world (due to their missionary efforts) and much of the data they give for Europe is 30 years old. If no source can be found for a claim, Ethnologue is (perhaps) better than nothing, but whenever there is a conflict between Ethnologue and a proper linguistic source, there is never any reason to rely on Ethnologue. This argument has been played out time and time again on numerous Wikipedia-articles related to languages and linguistics, no need to repeat them in further detail here. 30 year old data from a missionary organization that often invent fictional language groups simply aren't reliable.Jeppiz (talk) 14:10, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Jeppiz, you probably act with the best intentions, but you are making a few mistakes. Eurobarometer is an official, neutral and credible source. If we use the Eurobarometer survey as a source, we surely cannot use it to support the claim of a "third place", because that would contradict the source. In fact, as long as other quality surveys are missing, the best practice is just to use this source for what is says, and leave language sensitivies out of the article.

Concerning the second topic: this parallels the discussion on the number of native speakers page. They switched from Etnologue to Nationalencyklopedin, with the latter source being deemed reliable for various reasons. It's fine for me to copy their approach. In general, I think it's a really good idea to apply a more rigid approach, but let's be consistent then and remove the 115mio figure as well, which comes from the francophonie website - that website is at least as unreliable as Etnologue - and most likely much more unreliable. Morgengave (talk) 15:19, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I agree that Eurobarometer is neutral and official, but that does not really change the matter of things. It build on a survey, and a rather small survey with around 1000 respondents per country if they used the same sample size in each country. To extrapolate from that survey, and the minimal difference it finds between English, Italian and French seems rather dubious, particularly when it contradicts common sense. France's population is around six millions larger than Italy's population and French is spoken by just over four millions in Belgium. So in the EU, the French-speaking regions have a population that is around ten millions larger than the Italian-speaking regions. Sure, not everybody in France has French as their first language, but the same goes for Italy. And there is an Italian diaspora in other EU-countries, but there's also a French diaspora. So where do these more than ten million Italian speakers come from that overturn the 10.5 million advantage in population that the French speaking areas have other the Italian speaking? It seems more plausible that Eurobarometer's results are due to the methodology they applied and their sample; I would not consider it as a reliable source. Not because it isn't neutral and official, but quite simply because there are question marks over its methodology.

And please note The Eurobarometer never claims that French is smaller than English and Italian. In the appendixes, they list how many of the respondents that speak different languages as their mother tongue. The person who inserted the claim about French being the fourth most spoken language in the EU (I don't know it it were you or somebody else) quite simply invented a claim that the source never makes. I'm sure it was well-intentioned and not intended to misrepresent the source; however, the source never claims that French is a smaller language than English or Italian. Jeppiz (talk) 16:05, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

First language in Africa ( Asia ) ?

French is an official language in a number of African countries, sometimes with a distinct local variant or dialect. I find it very strange that it is described as "second language" in the lead for all of Africa while in regions of the US where it is barely spoken anymore (and certainly not used in primary education, daily life, etc..) it is described as first language. And here's an image to illustrate the problem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:New-Map-Francophone_World.PNG
--Helixdq (talk) 06:41, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

This is because most African Francophones have learned French in school (after having learned another language at home) while for example the Cajun speakers have learned French from their parents, often before learning another language. However this doesn't mean that they are more proficient in the language or use it more. Aaker (talk) 18:44, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 26 October 2012

Reference No. 25 has just been added to the Wikipedia page to increase backlinks to a language school and should be deleted.

Superwelshman (talk) 06:17, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Done Spam or not, it doesn't support the text, so out it goes. À bientôt. Rivertorch (talk) 23:21, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 28 October 2012

Delete the sentence "French is spoken and understood by 23% of the UK population."

This ludicrous statistic has been in the article for far too long. As 178.99.10.14 notes above, the true figure is certainly much lower than that, for any reasonable interpretation of "spoken and understood". There is absolutely no way that 23% of the UK population can speak French with any degree of fluency. 23% probably know how to say "bonjour", and "deux bières s'il vous plaît", and a few more simple phrases.

86.160.221.121 (talk) 02:44, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Ludicrous or not (I found it surprising), the claim does have a reliable source. I have altered the wording to explicitly mention the source; this makes it strictly factual, whether it's accurate or not. Rivertorch (talk) 06:35, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. "Reliable" source or not, at some point common sense has to prevail. It is obvious that 23% of the UK population cannot "speak French" with anything resembling fluency. Any statistic that says they can is simply wrong. 86.160.221.121 (talk) 12:02, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I would guess that more than 50% of the UK population has, at some time, carried out a conversation in French, even if it was just a basic conversation as part of a qualification. I agree that less than 23% can speak French fluently. Rivertorch's modification warns the reader to take the figure with a pinch of salt, but, until we find alternative research, that's the best we can do. Languages of the United Kingdom clarifies the true situation. Should we link to that article? Dbfirs 17:16, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can see, far from "clarifying" anything, Languages of the United Kingdom just repeats the same bollocks that "23% of the UK population can speak/understand French" and "French is understood by 23% of the country's population". I wish I could find a solid source to totally refute this nonsense. [12] says "fewer than one in 10 British workers could speak a foreign language, even to a basic level". With the emphasis on "basic level", I can believe that. I would guess possibly a third or a half of those cases would be French. 86.181.171.155 (talk) 04:34, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, then, why don't you try to find the sources mentioned on the BBC website? Unoffensive text or character (talk) 11:26, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, I used to think the same about the British people until I visited the UK in company of some French people (who didn't know English). To my surprise there were lots of people who addressed or replied us in French. Of course we cannot use this anecdote as a source but I guess that the folks who claim that very few Britons speak French have never tried to speak French with them. Also the new Eurobarometer survey from 2012 [13] (see also: [14]) seems to be more carefully conducted and in this one 19% of Britons claim that they can have a conversation in French. However, most of them say that their knowledge is basic and only 11% of Britons claim they can understand broadcast news in French. Aaker (talk) 02:31, 1 November 2012 (UTC)