[updated 2/24, 21:00]

A word on method

There is an ongoing debate, articulated first by Woolard & Schieffelin and reiterated more recently by Mary McGroarty in “Language and Ideologies” (Sociolinguistics and Language Education, 3-31), over appropriate sites for the study of language ideologies. Are the former best examined via real language use, or should studies of ideology and linguistic practices be kept separate? Or again: do we learn more about language ideologies via metalinguistic discourse about language, language on the topic of language, or are language ideologies essentially behavioral and pre-reflective, which is to say (with whatever paradox), essentially non-linguistic?

As regards this study in particular, both approaches to the examination of language ideologies (whether via actual use or metalinguistic discourse) are problematic. Because French is not used in normal conversation on the Monterey Peninsula, general attitudes toward the language cannot be elucidated from linguistic usage; nor can I expect a random selection of people from Monterey (and Salinas) to be able to expound critically on French as a language. What all participants in my survey can be counted on to share, however (and this is where those theorists who debate the question also align in opinion), is what McGroarty calls “the experience of and response to a particular social position” where “essential meanings about language” are “socially produced”: where, for example, someone’s predilection for French fashion might betray a significant (while likely implicit) assumption that the French language is valuable insofar as it is aesthetically-pleasing–as opposed to being practical, for example, or financially rewarding. Indeed we see this in the case of participant #4: a woman in her mid-forties, entirely enamored by French haute culture, who exclaims that French is “so beautiful!” and, in the same breath, is quick to assume that “monetary compensation” does not come from a college major in French studies (she compares a student majoring in French to one who wants to pursue the life of a traveling musician—“Finances will come… Do what your heart tells you to!”). While I do not want to argue that an affinity for French fashion and an appreciation of the musicality of the language necessarily equate to a dismissal of the French language as holding no real currency in society (no currency, that is, apart from its aesthetic value), I do want to highlight the meaningful confluence of social and linguistic elements in the formation of attitudes toward any particular language. For this reason I anchor my study in questions intended to examine particular “social positions” (do you prefer the film in French or Spanish? what is your reaction to the waiter who says, “Bon appétit”?), from which broader attitudes toward the French language may be inferred.

Some observations

In the course of the survey a core “constellation of ‘common sense’ beliefs” surrounding French indeed became clear. Participant 3 summarized this most succinctly in his response to question 1: “French is still a language of prestige, an ‘ooh là là’ language.” Such an explicit articulation of a core belief about French was a rare occurrence, however, during the interviews; more often the idea of French as somehow more sophisticated than other languages was articulated paradoxically, or in the negative. French is, for example, so classically elegant that it risks falling into the ridiculous (question 2, regarding reactions to a friend’s “Entrez!” greeting: “Pretentious ass” was one exemplary response, besides “Ooh! Can I get a cupcake too?”). Or consider question 5, regarding the discontinuation of French at Monterey High School: precisely because French exists on a somewhat “higher” register than other languages, it holds little currency in everyday life. It is so notable, one might say, that it risks slipping into oblivion.

Often recurring in the conversations was the juxtaposition of practicality (including such topics as school budget concerns, monetary worth, everyday language use) with more abstract concepts of beauty (“it’s a beautiful language, and I’d be interested in the fashion”), passions (in response to a child wanting to pursue French studies: “[My reaction would be] positive! I’m a firm believer in following passions, to not have regrets”), and interests (“interests are more important than what’s ‘practical'”). French was consistently aligned with the latter. More significant still, however, was the apparent naturalness of these statements, recalling Kroskrity’s description of language ideologies as “relatively unchallenged, highly naturalized” beliefs. That French is seen as impractical is one thing; that its impracticality is taken as a given is another.

Final reflection

The problem here, I would argue, is with the “given-ness” of this opinion. A dominant attitude toward French may be that it is “an ‘ooh-là-là’ language,” but this can have numerous and potentially contradictory articulations in practice. To say it otherwise: discontinuing French in public high school is by no means a “given” consequence of a certain widely-held belief about French. Consider, in this regard, the same man who would have called his friend a “pretentious ass” for saying “Entrez!”. “If it were a woman I was dating that’d be different,” he went on to qualify: “then it’d be inviting, attractive even.” While this is admittedly a very localized example of how a general attitude might have different (and here, very contradictory) articulations in practice, it does at least gesture toward explaining how difference might occur under even the fiercest of hegemonic ideologies.

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Poll locations: Monterey (Old Fisherman’s wharf, The Bear and Bull bar and grill), Salinas (old town, Steinbeck center, Lala’s bar & grill)  // Estimated Age Range of participants: 30 – 60 // Sex: 3M, 2F

1. You’re at a restaurant. Your server gives you your dinner and, while placing your food on the table, says “Bon appétit!” What is your immediate reaction (to the words, to the server who says them), if anything?

1. “Interesting. I’d squint my eyebrows a little but not think about it much.”
2. “It’d mean ‘Welcome!’ And ‘Enjoy.’ Honestly it doesn’t say French very much, it’s so common.” It doesn’t ‘say French’? You mean… sound foreign? “Yeah, like a foreign language. Everybody says it.”
3. “If he had an American accent? I’d think ‘Oh, that’s cute, the waiter’s trying to bring a touch of sophistication to the meal.’” Sophistication? “Because French is still a language of prestige, an ‘ooh là là’ language.”
4. “I’d smile and think it was pleasant—charming!”
5. “Ooh! Can I get a pink cupcake too?”

` 1b. You arrive at your good friend’s house. As he opens the door he says, “Entrez!” and gestures inside. Reaction?

1. “Nothing. Wouldn’t care for it. I was a missionary where they spoke Haitian Creole—it’s a lazy language. Nothing gets finished, everything just runs off… and then stops there. I don’t think much of French.”
2. “Pretentious ass. Would probably respond, ‘Moi?’ You mean, be mock-pretentious in turn? “Yeah. But then again, if it were a woman I was dating that’d be different—then it’d be inviting, attractive even.”
3. “Stupid. I’d assume it was a joke: my friend just being dumb.”
4. “Great! I’d love it! Let’s go to Paris!”
5. “Dude, what movies have you been watching??”

2. You have a hypothetical child. You’ve paid a lot of money for him or her to go to college. One summer break your kid comes home and tells you that he or she has decided to major in French literature, even though he or she had always been extremely gifted in computer science. Your immediate, gut reaction to this news would be:

1. “What’s this fascination with French?”
2. “Positive! I’m a firm believer in following passion, and to not have regrets. I value personal satisfaction and growth over monetary compensation.”
3. “I’d be mildly surprised. Since the child has an innate skill I’d expect him or her to go into that area. But college is about discovery, so I’d mostly be thrilled.”
4. “Being interested in something is the most important! Finances will come. I’d say ‘Hey, you know what, be a musician! Whatever—do what your heart tells you to!’”
5. “Kid’s been watching too much Pink Panther.”

3. Someone gives you tickets to the Osio Cinema to attend whatever show you’d like. Unfortunately (or not!), all that is playing are foreign films: one German, one French, and one in Spanish. Without knowing anything about the plots, would you have any preferences for one film over the others? Immediate aversions?

1. “Here’s the problem: who gives a sh!t? I could care less about any of that.”
2. “I’d go for the German film. French films are generally… like, ‘film noir’: something that takes a long time to develop, and requires a lot of attention. As for Spanish, I get enough of it already, living in Salinas. A German film just seems more stoic, more of a manly thing.”
3. “Spanish. The film could be from Central or South American: two regions I don’t know so well. Seeing that I’m already familiar with European traditions, I’d tend toward the Spanish.”
4. “Oh French, definitely! It’s a beautiful language, and I’d be really interested in the fashion. And that it might be filmed in Paris! German is too guttural-sounding… and Spanish is commonplace, I hear Spanish all the time.”
5. “German and French: naw. They’re the same. I’d probably pick the Spanish film because I already speak a little Spanish.”

4. I just heard French coming from a woman nearby us. When I tell you that a French woman just walked by, what is the first visual that comes to mind?

1. “Dark hair, pointed nose, moderate height, dark clothing (dark blue, you know). No lipstick. Fairly fair. Not albino, you know, but lighter than a Portuguese.” Than a Portuguese? “Yeah, I’m Portuguese—lighter than me. And no smile. Moderately attractive.”
2. “Well dressed. No smile—or at least, not for a while.” Not for a while? “Yeah, you know, until we start talking.”
3. “Brunette, bob cut, scarf, black clothes. Fair skin. Red lipstick. Eye makeup. Thin. No wedding ring—French people don’t get married.”
4. “She’d be so fashionable! I’d just try to look at what she’s wearing!”
5. “Tall, attractive, well-put together. And I’d be like, ‘Oh cool, here’s this French woman in such a quaint town as Monterey!’”

5. Here’s a real-to-life final question: Monterey High School may be discontinuing its French program. What is your immediate reaction to this, if anything?

1. [no comment]
2. “The budget. The money’s gotta come from somewhere—my fear would be that they’ll keep funding sports over French, because there’s more demand there.”
3. “What! Sad. That they’re still teaching language though, that’s good. It doesn’t necessarily have to be French. But I also have mixed feelings about it. They obviously think that discontinuing French in particular makes economic and political sense. But learning shouldn’t be informed by those imperatives. What the school board has in mind is maintaining American economic and political hegemony rather than a sincere interest in a rich cultural diversity and life.”
4. “I would care about this. I’d understand – because look who we are, which languages are important right now – but go back to that child who wants to major in French in college, follow his interests; interests are more important that what’s ‘practical’.”
5. “Why, is there a budget problem? Have to say, doesn’t seem that French is too conducive to the upcoming ways of the world—it’s more beneficial to learn Spanish these days. I mean, look at the cooks here, not one French guy is back there in the kitchen.” [laughs]