Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45
I could easily point out that my definition sticks to official languages therefore works perfectly and coherently. No need for a different color speck where Richmond BC is with "彩色铅笔" rather than "coloured pencils". There's one and only one way to say it in an official language in BC that will get you understood. Same thing in the territories - wherever you are in them, there's only one official language in which you can say "coloured pencils" in and generally be understood. So all those areas should be treated as unambiguously unilingual by that map, logically.
|
The languages I listed are actually "official languages" alongside English and French in some parts of the country, and pre-date both English and French, not to mention Chinese in Canada
. And in some parts, i.e. the sparsely populated northern regions I mentioned, where it is mostly remote reserve type settlements, those languages would be the ones you'd be more likely to hear over French or English. Take Nord-du-Québec as an example (which is over half the area of Quebec, though has less than 50k people)... Native languages outnumber either French or English as the mother tongues. That alone should black out a large portion of Quebec in either English or French comparisons. The same goes for Northern Saskatchewan, Manitoba, NWT, and Nunavut, especially outside urban centres like Yellowknife.
I really don't understand why it's such a big deal to recognize that native languages do actually have a lot of prominence in some areas of the country, both constitutionally and in usage... In the same way that some Francophones have taken some level of offence to the uniform "Canada" comparison, could Aboriginals not feel the same against both English AND French?