HOW TEACHING
FOREIGN STUDENTS CAN LEAD TO QUESTIONING ONE'S CULTURAL IDENTITY
When I was requested to participate in the
conference celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Language Department at
Makerere University (on August 22nd, 2014), a lot of memories came to my mind, as I spent there 8 academic years in the 1980s, teaching French as a
foreign language to students, quite often beginners. I remembered a problem I
met regularly, and which puzzled me quite often.
Why is this word masculine or feminine?
When you teach French to total beginners,
you bring in a basic vocabulary, and you ask your students to learn :
le bureau, la table, le stylo, la salle, le livre, la porte, la chaise
And always, unless they dared not, the students,
feeling confused, would ask: WHY ?? why LE
here, and LA there??
Then, in a very masterly tone, you tell
them that we use LE when nouns are
masculine, and LA when nouns are
feminine. But it does not solve the problem at all. Because immediately comes
again the question WHY?? What is masculine about STYLO? the phallic shape? but what
about LIVRE? what is feminine about TABLE? the long legs? but what about
PORTE?
At first I would attempt explanations which
do not work, skirt the problem, show authority: it is like that, learn it, full
stop.
But still it makes you think, ask yourself questions
you never considered before. Because for a native speaker it is so obvious. A
book is masculine, a chair is feminine. You are taught that from P1, or even
before at home. When a toddler, uttering your first words, you were corrected :
No, say “une table”, not “un table”, And you did.
But for foreign students, it could be a discouraging
mystery. They want to understand, they have an idea about masculine and
feminine in life, they try to make the connection, and feel frustrated. I know
– and I was confirmed when talking to several of you – that this issue makes
many students hate learning French, and often drop it. So, what is to be done?
The gender of nouns in the French language
Let’s go back to some basics of French.
In French, there are 2 genders, called “Masculine” and “Feminine”. We don’t have NEUTER.
In France, one has to choose one’s side: no middle way.
The gender of the noun is very important,
because it affects determiners (articles, demonstrative, possessives, etc.),
pronouns, adjectives (which agree with the noun, unlike in English), the verb
sometimes when used with an auxiliary.
Le stylo est vert.
Il est posé sur la table.
La règle est verte. Elle est posée sur la table.
“Masculine” and “Feminine” refer (at least
metaphorically) to a reality in nature: the sexual differentiation among
individuals of a same species. But what about nouns referring to realities with
no gender connotation – no sexual differentiation? Are there any rules,is there
any way to understand or explain the distribution into genders?
Let’s consider some examples.
Names of animals
Sometimes, the noun changes for male and
female. It applies to a few familiar animals: pets and farm animals, game.
Obviously, this differentiation goes back far into the past, to the Middle
Ages, and refers to the daily life of the time.
Un chien, une chienne – un chat, une chatte –
Un taureau ou un bœuf, une vache – un cheval
,une jument,
une poule-un coq, un lapin, une lapine
Un cerf, une biche -- un sanglier, une laie -- un loup, une
louve – un lion, une lionne
But for all other species, more than 98%,
there is only one word, either masculine or feminine – randomly -, and you have
to add “male” or “femelle” to stress the difference:
un pigeon, une souris, une girafe, un aigle, un hippopotame, une antilope
LE perroquet, le marabout LA cigogne, la pintade
LE pigeon, le paon LA colombe, la grue couronnée
LE capitaine, le tilapia LA carpe, la morue
LE ver de terre, le batracien LA limace, la grenouille
LE scorpion, le hanneton LA fourmi, la cigale,
Names of countries :
Even countries are either Masculine or
Feminine.
LE
Canada LA France LE Kenya LA Tanzanie
LE Maroc LA Tunisie LE Pakistan LA Birmanie
LE Honduras LA Guyane LE Soudan LA Guinée
But the same country can be both:
LE Royaume Uni LA
Grande Bretagne
Apparently, there is a differentiation.
When the name of the country (in French) ends with –e, the country is feminine,
if not, it is masculine (with the exception at least of Mexico - LE
Mexique – don’t ask me why).
But is Uganda more masculine than France ?
A few interesting or funny cases:
The same
reality can have 2 names nouns of a different gender
Just to mention 2 cases of such homonymy..
There are so many others:
Un cartable, une serviette – un tube, une durite
In
the military field:
Nouns, as expected, are masculine:
Un capitaine, un sergent, un officier, un soldat, un artilleur, un sapeur,
But you also find
une sentinelle (sentry), une estafette (courier), une ordonnance (orderly, batman)
Why ? Though not heroic, those positions
have never been a gay preserve.
Sexual organs
We have so many names for them in French.
But interestingly enough, the nouns for the male organ are either masculine or
feminine
Un v…, une b…, un b…, la v…, le z…, la p…, etc.
And the same applies to the female organ :
Un v…, une c…, une m…, la p…, le c…, le m…, la p…, etc.
Decency forbids me to be more explicit, but
you have them in mind, and many more.
In conclusion
There is nothing like any explanation to be
given, nothing like a guide line to help the learner.
Nouns in French are “masculine” or
“feminine” just at random, irrationally- May be the blame can be put on the ancient
Latin speakers, from whom we inherited. But they had a neuter, which, unlike in
English or German, we abandoned and distributed the neuter nouns into our two
Masculine and Feminine categories in an incomprehensible way.
The reality of the language
Classes of nouns
In a dramatic Cartesian move, let us
abandon our beliefs, criticize them, and look at the language itself, without
any prejudice or the traditional categories.
In French, there are 2 classes of nouns .The only characteristic which actually differentiates
them is that each class uses a different set of words, or paradigm (determiners
-articles, interrogative, possessives, etc.-, pronouns -personal, possessive,
etc.-) they go or agree with.
One class will use le, un, mon, ce, il, celui-ci, or agree
as beau, vert, écrit, etc.
One class will use la, une, ma, cette,elle, celle-ci, or
agree as belle, verte, écrite, etc.
The other way round, a noun belongs to this
or that class according to whether it fits with le, un, mon, etc. paradigm,
or la, une, ma, etc. paradigm.
I use here the term of class of noun which is the one used for describing Bantu languages,
where there are usually more than 2. In Kiswahili for instance, you can find
the m-/wa- class (mtu, watu – mzee,
wazee), the ki-/vi class
(kitabu/vitabu), the ji-/ma- class
(jicho/macho), and several other classes,where each commands agreements:
Mzee wangu mzuri Wazee
wangu wazuri (my elder(s)
is/are fine)
Kitabu changu kizuri Vitabu
vyangu vizuri (my book(s) is/are
nice)
Jicho langu zuri Macho
yangu mazuri (my eye(s) is/are
good)
In spite of the fact that we have a prefix
in Kiswahili and a detached determiner in French, the systems are quite
similar. Thus, the category of class of
nouns to describe the French language too looks relevant.
In French, it will also imply the agreement
of the adjectives or verbal participles
Which nouns belong to which class?
Now, if the go back to consider the question, is it 100% randomly? Not really.
It happens
that most nouns with a male gender connotation belong to one class (aka “masculine”),
together with so many more nouns without any gender connotation at all. And most
nouns with a female gender connotation belong to the other class.(aka “feminine”).
It applies in about 99% of cases, but not always, as we mentioned earlier.
In both classes of nouns, those with gender
connotation are a small minority. Yet, the whole class of nouns is usually, traditionally
named, in French grammars, after that small part of it.
In fact, it is a kind of metonymy which is
not acknowledged. Taken for granted. Ideological, in fact.
Naming the classes of nouns
Talking in terms of classes of nouns, as
described above, should imply to abandon the use of the words “masculine” and
“feminine”, as confusing and irrelevant to describe the reality they refer to. What to replace them by?
Let us discard A and B, or 1 and 2, etc. as
they imply a hierarchy, an order, a superiority of one over the other.
In a previous note of blog (see “Et ta soeure ? – Elle bat le beur.” - )
I proposed to name one class of noun # (hash) and the other class of nouns * (star).
Why ? (1) Those signs, though not in the
alphabet, are now found in each and every handset keyboard. (2) There is no
hierarchy between them. (3) As in French we say UN dièse (#) et UNE
étoile (*), each can easily symbolize the class it belongs to.
Anyway, this is just a proposal, with a
pinch of salt. But talking of classes of nouns (and NO LONGER about “masculine”
and “feminine”) could make things easier when teaching foreigners. Especially
when it corresponds to a reality they are used to in their own vernacular languages.
They will not get confused if you refer them to what they know. They will not
ask any longer the “WHY?” question: you have to know which class a noun belongs
to. Period.
But in France, proposing to drop Masculine
and Feminine from Grammar cannot even be suggested. I don’t know who would dare
utter such a change, as this idea is a mere abomination.
Why such a resistance ?
For centuries these categories (Masculine/Feminine)
have been and are still imposed on French speakers. We drink them from the
mother’s breast.
They are self imposed. A form of
alienation, as we are not conscious of it. We take it as a matter of fact. A
kind of accepted servitude, as La Boetie would say..
That nouns are either masculine or feminine
is as obvious as the sun is bright and the night is dark. At school, we learn
that rule : “le masculin l’emporte sur le
feminin” – the masculine prevails over the feminine … And indeed, in
French, you have :
Paul est
beau. Jeanne est belle.
Jeanne, Sophie, Marie, Dorothée, Agnès, … (+ 50 girls), sont belles.
Jeanne, Sophie, Paul,
Marie, Dorothée, Agnès… (+ 50
girls), sont beaux..
However numerous the feminine nouns may be,
the agreement will be masculine if there is but one noun of this case in the
list. That is what the language says about the reality of life.
Those categories (M/F) imply – and spread –
certain ideas about gender differences, and their respective roles – not so
much in the language as in the society. Saying # prevails over * is
meaningless. But the“masculine prevails over
the feminine” tells a lot.
Language is not in a vacuum, it is the
language of a society.
It is informed by the values and uses of
that society. Social, ideological, religious values. It embodies the “UNCONSCIOUS”
of the society. As a native speaker, one thinks through the values one is
unconsciously imposed upon by the language.
A language is a “vision of the world”. Then,
what one sees around comes as self evident, when the truth is that one sees the
world through the particular lenses of one’s own language (or languages).
As the French philosopher
Louis Althusser puts it : “Ce que je pense n’est que l’effet de ce que j’impense.”
(what I think is…)
Thus teaching a language is also teaching
those values enshrined in the language itself.
Teaching a language to native speakers is a
way of socializing them into the society, by transmitting those values. It is
part of community or citizen building.
Teaching a foreign language is a way to
help the learner to discover a different world, or a world seen from a
different perspective. To discover some values which are not his – and that he
is invited to share, or at least feel, be sensitive to, if he wants to be
fluent.
(All
those statements after all are commonplaces).
The point I wanted to make here is that grammar,
too, participates in transmitting values.
Anyone would think that grammar is just
ideologically neutral, but this is not true, as the topic we explored today
demonstrates.
Grammar is not a scientific discourse about
a language. It does not objectively describe an object called a language, as an
entomologist would describe an insect.
Grammar enunciates a way the language
should be looked at – not necessarily as it is. It is ideological. It is an
interpretation of the language. It is the way a society looks at its own
language, as it expresses its explicit or implicit values. Grammar is a mirror
displaying not the image of a language, but the image that a society has of
itself. A kind of selfie.
Then, teaching grammar contributes to
strengthening this image, to transmitting values and representations. It is
meant for the native speakers, for the strengthening of the social cohesion and
transmission. In a kind of inner bondage.
But
also teaching a foreign language can give the opportunity to break the illusion,
to have a distanciated view. The teacher of a foreign language is not locked in
the ideological circle. He can have a look at the language from the outside. He
does not have to adhere to the image the native speakers have of the language
he teaches. I would even say: he must not.
Freud showed that an outsider is necessary
to allow one to dilute one’s fantasies and cope positively with the reality.
This is the meaning of psychoanalysis. The same idea can be applied to the
teacher of a foreign language. If he has a critical eye, if he remains an
outsider, looking from the outside, he will be in a position to point to the
discrepancies between a language and the idea the native speakers have of their
own language. And then help the latter out of some illusions.
You teach a foreign language. The language
does not belong to you. You have to teach it as it is. As the speakers speak
it. But when teaching your students, you don’’t have to adopt submissively the
image the native speakers have of their own language. It may be deceitful.
Allow yourself to have original approaches. Dare. Use unhesitatingly the similarities with the languages your
students speak, if it helps them, as I said earlier. Be critical with the
grammar and methods coming from the native speakers, they are meant for their
own use.
Gender and societal changes
Life is change and movement. Societies
change a lot, more and more and especially these days, in so many areas. Among
other major changes in the last 50 years, in France and in the Western world at
large : the gender equality issue.
The language is conservative, it changes
more slowly than societies. But yet, it is affected. How does the French
language adjust to the progress of gender equality?
The
changes in French
As any other language, French changes,
according to what the native speakers do with it. Some new words appear, some
are no longer used. All sorts of influences play their part.
There are also the prescribers, those with
some authority to propose changes.
Stephane Mallarmé assigned this task to the
poets : “Donner un sens plus pur aux mots
de la tribu” (give a clearer meaning to the tribe’s words). Additionally,
France is may be the only country in the world where the language is political
and ruled by the law. The National Assembly debates on language issues.
So, how are the societal evolutions (gender
equality) being translated into the language, and grammar ? Let’s take an
example.
The names
of jobs and positions
Women have had gradually access to many –
most - jobs which had always been men’s monopolies or preserves. Most of them
have “masculine names”, without any feminine equivalent, which is very much
resented by women in these positions.
Un ingénieur, un professeur, un soudeur, un charpentier, un bijoutier,
un pasteur,
un maçon, un auteur, un écrivain
Yet there are many cases, in French, when
names of jobs have a feminine equivalent :
Un infirmier Une
infirmière Un danseur Une danseuse
Un instituteur Une institutrice Un marchand Une marchande
Un postier Une postière Un paysan Une paysanne
Une sage-femme
(midwife) does not have a masculine form.
But in many cases, the corresponding
feminine form does not refer to a woman in charge but to « the wife
of » :
Le boulanger la boulangère Le
général la générale
L’ambassadeur l’ambassadrice Le maire la mairesse (horrible)
Some have got a very different meaning,
always derogatory:
Un entraîneur une
entraîneuse Un professionnel une professionnelle
Un rapporteur une
rapporteuse Un maître une maîtresse
There have been attempts : Madame le Maire, Madame le Ministre – with
the use of feminine agreements.
But that was not enough for some feminist
activists.
A
grammatical nonsense : adding a final -e
We are taught in Primary school that you
turn an adjective into feminine by adding a final –e. This is a big
simplification, as the reality is much more complex. But it produces a fantasy somewhere
at the back of the minds: final –e = feminine..
Thus a trend (somehow officialized) to add
a final –e to nouns of jobs or positions when one refers to a woman :
une écrivaine, une auteure, une procureure
(mind that you find it only with
prestigious jobs : une fraiseure, une facteure, une soudeure are nowhere to be read)
As a consequence, many writers and
journalists use these forms, to sound women lib friendly, or gender correct.
Personally it hurts my ears and my feeling
of the language. As a false note in a sweet and familiar music. The addition of
this final –e is pure fetishism.
It is nothing but a myth. And a nonsense,
considering the history and uses governing the life of the language Final –e is
very common with masculine nouns, while many feminine nouns do not have a final
–e. The rules to turn adjectives and nouns into feminine are much more complex
than a simple addition of –e (-eur / -euse, -teur / -trice, etc.).
instituteur institutrice
directeur directrice
coiffeur coiffeuse
chanteur chanteuse
romancier romancière poète poétesse
In fact, un prieur / une
prieure is
the only existing case in French of a final –eur becoming –eure when the
position is occupied by a woman. Not very modern or exciting.
All that reveals some unconscious ideas in
the society. The final –e becomes an emblem, a mark of identity. A kind of flag
telling that this position has been conquered. It is.ostentatious. Grammar is
also a ground where fantasies can grow and flourish.
I believe this is short - sighted and does
not help much the fight for gender
equality, or rather against gender inequality. Another evolution is much more
interesting.
Using
epicene nouns
Some nouns and names are both masculine and
feminine – or the masculine noun and the feminine noun are exactly similar : un enfant, une enfant whether boy or
girl. Some first or Christian names are used for both boys and girls : Claude,
Dominique, Camille.
It has a name in grammar: “Epicene nouns” ,
which an English dictionary defines as: “denoting
a noun that may refer to a male or a female, such as teacher as opposed to
businessman or shepherd”.
It gets more and more frequently used : la ministre, la deputé.
The noun, originally masculine, is treated
as feminine (using the determiners, agreements, etc. proper to feminine nouns)
when it refers to a woman. We can
have then :
Ce grand écrivain est un excellent romancier.
Cette grande écrivain est une excellente romancière.
It breaks a very strong rule : it
introduces an agreement according to the meaning, to the referent, and no
longer according to the grammar or the signifier.
So, how about considering all nouns as
epicene, and use them as masculine or feminine according to the person they
refer to ? It would go a much longer way into abolishing gender inequality than
the cosmetic –e.
By the way, the
personal pronouns of 1st and 2nd person (je, tu
and also nous, vous) are epicene. They are either masculine or
feminine according to who speaks or is spoken to. So, nihil novi sub sole, it is not something that extraordinary.
Conclusion
The debate is still raging on. We shall keep you informed of the next
developments
