From: Rick McCallister
Message: 58753
Date: 2008-05-21
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallisterAs a significant part of Canada, Quebec was able to
> <gabaroo6958@...>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> >
> > . . .
> > > Unfortunately, that ideology might be what
> upholds
> > > the group of the
> > > proponent in question, and giving up the belief
> will
> > > make it crash.
> > > Look what happened in the socialist block after
> they
> > > gave up the
> > > doctrine. It's all more complicated than you
> would
> > > like to believe.
> > > Linguistics is a dangerous thing. Most East
> European
> > > nations owe their
> > > existence to it.
> > > Torsten
> >
> >
> > Look at how Third World dictatorship create
> enemies
> > through linguistic differences and thereby prop up
> > their regimes. On the other hand, Latin America is
> a
> > failure because linguistics was not strong enough
> to
> > hold it together. Geography defeated it. North
> America
> > was defeated by ideology: Tories vs. Yankees. If
> > linguistics had triumphed, the US would include
> Canada
> > and Quebec would probably be another Louisiana.
> Yet
> > the historical moment seemed to dictate whether or
> not
> > linguistics, geography or ideology would prevail.
>
>
> Again, I'm not sure what you and Torsten mean by
> "linguistics" in
> these statements. In regard to Latin America and
> North America, I
> think you're referring to shared language, language
> identity as
> opposed to political identity. But I don't see why
> Quebec should
> become another Louisiana just because it would be
> surrounded by U.S.
> English speakers rather than Canadian English
> speakers ("if
> linguistics had triumphed"). Or maybe I'm being too
> critical.
>
> Andrew