Community Morphology
Page 9 of 36
Networks and Common Interests
In addition to the villages, neighbourhoods, towns or regions with which OLMCs identify, there are communities whose primary link is a shared interest in their language. For these communities of interest, the territorial footprint is less important than the network of interactions into which the individuals and the groups breathe life around the focus of their common interest in the minority language. The Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism stated that a common language is the expression of a community of interest within a collectivity (Canada, Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, 1967: xi). This community of interest is related to what has in Canada been described in recent years as social cohesion: "[...] the ongoing process of developing a community of shared values, shared challenges and equal opportunity [...], based on a sense of trust, hope and reciprocity [...]" (Canadian Council on Social Development, 2000: 3).
The need for a territorial basis for the development of a feeling of belonging to a community has thus been called into question in recent decades. A study of the various forms of linkage among the elements of Francophone communities in Canada showed that the "French-Canadian fabric" is based, beyond blood relationships, on migratory exchanges and tourist visits, the flow of information, cultural exchanges and economic partnerships, a sharing of scientific and educational resources and a web of associations (Guindon and Poulin, 1996). Subsequently, research by geographer André Langlois explored new forms of structuring of social ties based on the existence of interactive networks. He sought to identify opportunities for community development.
"[...] in a discontinuous ethno-cultural space, albeit one in which the elements are strongly interlinked [...] Thus, the future of Francophone communities can no longer be viewed solely in terms of the traditional territorial base, but also, and increasingly, as a function of the vitality of urban Francophone minorities" (Langlois, 2000: 212).
The interest that binds these communities together may be collective or sectoral in nature. There are many cases of communities that can be recognized in relation with their collective identities: for example, Quebec's English-language community, the Acadian community in Atlantic Canada or the Franco-Manitoban community and, in its entirety, the French-Canadian community. Furthermore, the fact of sharing the French language in Canada or the English language in Quebec prompts, for example, members of professions to join together into networks to exchange their experiences and to advocate their specific interests. The same can be said of associations and networks of stakeholders in such sectors as arts and culture, education, women, ethno-cultural groups, immigration, young people, justice, health, etc.
Communities of interest are sometimes derived from legal categories. Thus one speaks of eligible Anglophone or Francophone parents (rights holders) as if they were a community under section 23 of the Charter (Martel, 2001; Jedwab, 2002b; Landry, 2003, 2004). Rights holders from mixed marriages are regarded as a potential source to increase the number of students enrolled in minority community schools. However, their integration represents a substantial challenge (Landry, 2003). This problem exists both for English-language schools in Montréal and other cities in Quebec, and for Francophone minorities in urban communities across Canada, although it does not manifest itself in the same way (Jedwab, 2002b).
The subfields of linguistics also contribute their share of categories. Sociolinguists distinguish between speakers who know their mother tongue, those who actually speak it, and those who identify with it. Demolinguists for their part distinguish between mother-tongue speakers (language learned and still understood), language most often spoken at home and other languages spoken at home, language used at work, English or French as the first official language spoken, knowledge of languages other than English or French, etc. While these are not communities in the sociological sense, the fact remains that these populations are being studied as community-related realities that can be measured from the standpoint of vitality.
Statistics Canada does not define Anglophones or Francophones in a minority situation. According to Marmen (2004), "Each user, agency or department establishes its own definition of minority Francophones or Anglophones." The concept of the first official language spoken is nonetheless increasingly common, as Marmen and Corbeil (2004: 139-140) explain:
"[...] The changes in the composition of the Canadian population will likely bring about a redefinition or an extension of the concept of Francophone population or community, inasmuch as French is used daily, in a dominant or extensive way, by a significant number of persons whose mother tongue is neither English nor French. In this regard, the concept of first official language spoken is, despite its limits, definitely a starting point."
There is continuing interest in the definition of what constitutes an official language minority population. Thus, Rodrigue Landry (2005b) recently proposed a new statistical definition of the Francophone minority to a group of senior government officials:
"A definition that would optimize the number of Francophones would include the following people: (a) all those who have French as first language learned and still understood (whether or not other languages are also declared by the person in question); and (b) all those for whom French is not the mother tongue but for whom the first official language spoken is French or French and English."
This solution attempts to get beyond certain existing problems by combining the variables of mother tongue and first official language spoken to arrive at their potential strength and maximum number.
