Yes. The article is merely saying that one of the major municipalities of the Capital Region — which once could have been assumed to support a stable, “natural”, historical presence of bilingual Swedish speakers — now finds itself in a situation where the number of Russian and Estonian speakers have surpassed the number of Swedish speakers. This is primarily due to immigration, but it is a development which would have appeared quite improbable (and maybe even startling), say, 25 years ago.Noral wrote:The article that Jukka Aho just linked to is about changes in population demographics, as far as I can tell, not about Swedish speakers giving up their language.
the place of Swedish in Finland.
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
Last edited by Jukka Aho on Mon Feb 03, 2014 1:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.
znark
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
Without excusing this person's behavior, I think this kind of scenario is not unrelated to the continued insistence (by the Finnish state) on elevating Swedish to a special status above other minority languages, at the cost of Finnish speakers' time and resources.Cory wrote:I have to chime in here after a funny situation at the gym this morning. I was up early so was at the gym about 07:30. Someone had left the radio on YLE Puhe so I asked the one woman in there if she'd mind if I switched it, in Finnish. The only station that had decent music was the Swedish music station. Went back to spinning and when the announcer came on, in Swedish, she was quite annoyed that I chose a Swedish station over a Finnish one. WTF! Listened to her ignorant 1 minute rant about how I should listen to Finnish and not Swedish, blah, blah, blah. She could hear from my accent that I was obviously not Finnish. About 5 mins after she changed the station to NJR, so left. Ignorant cow!!
I think (though I could be mistaken) that if this factor were removed, the kind of incident you experienced would become less and less frequent.
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
1.keep Swedish until i wing the citizen test.
2.Its better to never be a 1 language country.
2.Its better to never be a 1 language country.
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
NJR is rather good for working or working out though.Cory wrote: changed the station to NJR, so left. Ignorant cow!!
I like swedish speaking Finns, they have this intrepid feature.
intrepid
ɪnˈtrɛpɪd/
adjective
1.
fearless; adventurous (often used for rhetorical or humorous effect).
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
3. Finnish is crapenmegawording.
4.Swedish translates perfectly on every translator
5.I guarantee if Finland did not have the easy translated FIN to SWEDE that is already developed, it would not be the country you live in now, end of story.
4.Swedish translates perfectly on every translator
5.I guarantee if Finland did not have the easy translated FIN to SWEDE that is already developed, it would not be the country you live in now, end of story.
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
I was referring to so called Swedish language strife which continued well into late 1920 ( there is a lot of information on that , just use any search engine). besides, Sweden put a lot of pressure on Finland ( including involvement of the league of nation, before and during Åland conflict). There were many "regional" languages in Europe that have died out ( Prussian, Frisian , Sorb , Ruthenian etc.). There is a regional language in Finland -Sami , which is facing the same problem. of course Sami and Swedish are incomparable , but if the official backing ( including the mandatory teaching at school ) is cancelled , Swedish will slowly disappear from the public life, thus changing the face of the Finland forever... Look at Ireland as an example -in essence people speak the language of the nation which colonized it. English repressed the use of the native Gaelic the great famine decimated the population and emigration to America finished the story, and no effort will ever restore even pre 1850 situation there.Noral wrote:I'm not sure what fight you're referring to, but why did the survival of Swedish in 20th-century Finland depend on it having the status of national language (as opposed to a regional/minority language) in Finland?foca wrote:if it was not the fight that the Sweden put up after 1917, they would most probably be speaking finnish now...
what I said has nothing to do with Jukka Aho message really.....and it seems quite self evident that if the official bilingualism is cancelled that the balance will change - and there will be less Swedish in the society.Noral wrote:Again, with all due respect, I'm waiting for any evidence that this is the case. (The article that Jukka Aho just linked to is about changes in population demographics, as far as I can tell, not about Swedish speakers giving up their language.)foca wrote: Finland has quite a unique situation at the moment which will cone out of balance if Finnish majority will stop actively supporting Swedish.
I sarcastically referred to the earlier message by Onko about "masterace" . if you took pains to read my messages you would understand that I do know that there are swedish speaking people in Finland (one glance through the window at my neighbors confirms that). And what Onko really argued about is quite hard to understand, perhaps I should apply google translator to his statement to get it into Swedish and then into English... By the way , what if " the extent that they want" extends to Swedish being an official language of the country? or what would you say if the "extent" extends to Swedish being the only language of the country, since you so lavishly allow Swedish speaking minority to want whatever they want?Noral wrote:Swedish speakers in Finland haven't been vanquished. Their language is still spoken by 5% of the population who are free to keep their native language alive to the extent that they want to, and I don't see where Onko argued anything different.foca wrote: Everyone sees what he/ she wants to see, obviously . But since the master race has been vanquished why should its language survive?
Last edited by foca on Sun Feb 02, 2014 8:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
What do you want from me?????
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
cors187 wrote:1.keep Swedish until i wing the citizen test.
2.Its better to never be a 1 language country.
that's a good practical approach. the test is easy, by the way....
What do you want from me?????
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
Sorb, Frisian and Ruthenian haven't died out. Also, once again, none of the languages you mention has (or had)foca wrote:I was referring to so called Swedish language strife which continued well into late 1920 ( there is a lot of information on that , just use any search engine). besides, Sweden put a lot of pressure on Finland ( including involvement of the league of nation, before and during Åland conflict). There were many "regional" languages in Europe that have died out ( Prussian, Frisian , Sorb , Ruthenian etc.).
- a well-developed presence in all media (television, radio and print)
- the support of a 9-million-resident country in which it is the majority language, directly bordering on the country where it is a minority language
What do you mean by incomparable? Note that Sami lacks the two advantages I listed above (among others).There is a regional language in Finland -Sami , which is facing the same problem. of course Sami and Swedish are incomparable ,
It probably will diminish to some degree (which is not the same as disappearing), but I don't understand the importance that you and others are attaching to this.but if the official backing ( including the mandatory teaching at school ) is cancelled , Swedish will slowly disappear from the public life, thus changing the face of the Finland forever...
(By the way, decreeing that Swedish is no longer a national language on par with Finnish is not the same as removing all official backing.)
You're comparing the changing of Swedish to an official minority language (on par with Sami) to a famine that killed nearly a million people? I'm sorry, but that's absurd.Look at Ireland as an example -in essence people speak the language of the nation which colonized it. English repressed the use of the native Gaelic the great famine decimated the population and emigration to America finished the story, and no effort will ever restore even pre 1850 situation there.
I don't think Onko's post was nearly as cryptic as you're making it out to be.Noral wrote:I sarcastically referred to the earlier message by Onko about "masterace" . if you took pains to read my messages you would understand that I do know that there are swedish speaking people in Finland (one glance through the window at my neighbors confirms that). And what Onko really argued about is quite hard to understand, perhaps I should apply google translator to his statement to get it into Swedish and then into English...
"To the extent that they want to" doesn't include a group of politically influential Swedish speakers forcing the majority population to give Swedish special status above other minority languages.By the way , what if " the extent that they want" extends to Swedish being an official language of the country? or what would you say if the "extent" extends to Swedish being the only language of the country, since you so lavishly allow Swedish speaking minority to want whatever they want?
When I wrote that Swedish-speakers are free to keep their language alive, I was emphasizing the responsibility of Swedish-speakers (as opposed to the non-Swedish speakers that live around them) in maintaining their own language.
Last edited by Noral on Mon Feb 03, 2014 12:53 am, edited 8 times in total.
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
Explain, please? German is also known for having long words; what makes Finnish so different in that respect?cors187 wrote:3. Finnish is crapenmegawording.
I might be misunderstanding, but are you saying that the ability of non-Finnish-speakers to understand Finnish is somehow dependent (to this day) on Finnish being translated to Swedish first?5.I guarantee if Finland did not have the easy translated FIN to SWEDE that is already developed, it would not be the country you live in now, end of story.
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
Sorb and Frisian have died out for all practical purposes, few hundred active users do not not change anything. Ruthenian , being a dialect of Ukrainian, spoken in an area which was directly bordered by Ukrainian speaking people was suppressed and to a great extent forcefully exchanged for polish for political reasons. thus close proximity of language host country does not always help if politics gets involved.Noral wrote:
Sorb, Frisian and Ruthenian haven't died out. Also, once again, none of the languages you mention has (or had)
- a well-developed presence in all media (television, radio and print)
- the support of a 9-million-resident country in which it is the majority language, directly bordering on the country where it is a minority language
I meant exactly what you said when I stated that the situation with Sami is incompatible - Sami is a bit to late to be saved unfortunately, even with the official backing..Noral wrote:
What do you mean by incomparable? Note that Sami lacks the two advantages I listed above (among others).
it is the degree that matters.......Noral wrote:
It probably will diminish to some degree (which is not the same as disappearing), but I don't understand the importance that you and others are attaching to this.
Absurd is when one takes a quote out of context. what I meant when I wrote about Ireland is that a language situation in a country may be changed quite drastically by political measures (acoompanied by other factors) nor more no less. I never , as anyone can see for themselves , compared changing of the official status of Swedish in Finland to a famine...Noral wrote:You're comparing the changing of Swedish to an official minority language (on par with Sami) to a famine that killed nearly a million people? I'm sorry, but that's absurd.foca wrote: Look at Ireland as an example -in essence people speak the language of the nation which colonized it. English repressed the use of the native Gaelic the great famine decimated the population and emigration to America finished the story, and no effort will ever restore even pre 1850 situation there.
and I do...Noral wrote:
I don't think Onko's post was nearly as cryptic as you're making it out to be.
"Also list where swedish is better than finnish, remember that we demolished hegemony of swedish hundred years ago, there was and is protests against finnish education because masterrace. I mean in cases of intellectual and cultural texts. How many relevant to anything texts are only in swedish and if there are then why?" - written by Onko, not me .....
perhaps next time when you write about "them" who have the right to want anything to any extent you should specify it like that: those Swedish speaking Finns who do not involve themselves in political, public , business or society life, and especially not those who live on Ålands....Noral wrote:
"To the extent that they want to" doesn't include a group of politically influential Swedish speakers forcing the majority population to give Swedish special status above other minority languages.
What do you want from me?????
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
I think both are still in the thousands.foca wrote:Sorb and Frisian have died out for all practical purposes, few hundred active users do not not change anything.
The Ukraine wasn't politically independent until recent decades; Sweden has been independent for 500 years, and has been politically stable for quite some time now.Ruthenian , being a dialect of Ukrainian, spoken in an area which was directly bordered by Ukrainian speaking people was suppressed and to a great extent forcefully exchanged for polish for political reasons. thus close proximity of language host country does not always help if politics gets involved.
So, what do you consider an unacceptable degree of diminishing for Swedish in Finland, and why?it is the degree that matters.......
I'm sorry for misinterpreting you, but if the famine was a decisive factor in the disappearance of Irish from Ireland (as you seemed to say in your post), then I don't see how any analogy can be drawn between the situation of Irish after the famine, and the (hypothetical) situation of Swedish in Finland after its legal status has been made equal to that of Sami.foca wrote:Absurd is when one takes a quote out of context. what I meant when I wrote about Ireland is that a language situation in a country may be changed quite drastically by political measures (acoompanied by other factors) nor more no less. I never , as anyone can see for themselves , compared changing of the official status of Swedish in Finland to a famine...
Onko is asking what important texts are available only in Swedish, and not any other languages. In the message he's responding to, AldenG wrote that Finns who didn't learn Swedish would not have access to what he called "pan-Nordic culture", and therefore Onko is questioning why Swedish is a necessary conduit for this culture (especially given the fact that English already serves as a lingua franca between the Nordic countries).Foca wrote:and I do...Noral wrote:
I don't think Onko's post was nearly as cryptic as you're making it out to be.
"Also list where swedish is better than finnish, remember that we demolished hegemony of swedish hundred years ago, there was and is protests against finnish education because masterrace. I mean in cases of intellectual and cultural texts. How many relevant to anything texts are only in swedish and if there are then why?" - written by Onko, not me .....
But that's not what I meant. Swedish speakers have every right to use Swedish when they conduct business, politics etc. with other Swedish speakers (including native speakers of Finnish or other languages who have chosen to learn Swedish), regardless of whether Swedish is given special status above other minority languages in Finland or not.perhaps next time when you write about "them" who have the right to want anything to any extent you should specify it like that: those Swedish speaking Finns who do not involve themselves in political, public , business or society life, and especially not those who live on Ålands....
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
mostly on paper ..... I have a couple " Frisian" people that I know, they speak a dozen words of Frisian and mostly those that equal German or Dutch ....Noral wrote:I think both are still in the thousands.foca wrote:Sorb and Frisian have died out for all practical purposes, few hundred active users do not not change anything.
Political independence has no or little influence on this question really.... Ukrainian dialects were still well preserved within the empire. Ruthenian was suppressed only due to political power play within multinational Habsburg empire. and many swedes would be really surprised that you count their independent history only from after Wasa coup. during times of Kalmar union most of them still though of themselves being quite independent , and some , especially those in Skåne , were really hard to identify themselvs at being swedish.Noral wrote:The Ukraine wasn't politically independent until recent decades; Sweden has been independent for 500 years, and has been politically stable for quite some time now.foca wrote: Ruthenian , being a dialect of Ukrainian, spoken in an area which was directly bordered by Ukrainian speaking people was suppressed and to a great extent forcefully exchanged for polish for political reasons. thus close proximity of language host country does not always help if politics gets involved.
none. I am quite satisfied with the present status, and think no change is required.Foca wrote:So, what do you consider an unacceptable degree of diminishing for Swedish in Finland, and why?..Noral wrote:
it is the degree that matters.......
Still trying to find a hidden message? It is not there. I can explain it to you one more time: the analogy is not between famine and "and the (hypothetical) situation of Swedish in Finland after its legal status has been made equal to that of Sami". the analogy is about linguistic majority (Ireland having a status if modern day Scotland in the 19 th century UK, thus Gaelic being a minority language) pushing out the minority language out of the picture. the Great Famine and emigration ( often sponsored) just sealed the deal.Foca wrote:I'm sorry for misinterpreting you, but if the famine was a decisive factor in the disappearance of Irish from Ireland (as you seemed to say in your post), then I don't see how any analogy can be drawn between the situation of Irish after the famine, and the (hypothetical) situation of Swedish in Finland after its legal status has been made equal to that of Sami..Noral wrote:
Absurd is when one takes a quote out of context. what I meant when I wrote about Ireland is that a language situation in a country may be changed quite drastically by political measures (acoompanied by other factors) nor more no less. I never , as anyone can see for themselves , compared changing of the official status of Swedish in Finland to a famine...
he is also referring to that "we demolished hegemony of swedish hundred years ago, there was and is protests against finnish education because masterrace. " which is wrong on so many levels....Noral wrote:
Onko is asking what important texts are available only in Swedish, and not any other languages. In the message he's responding to, AldenG wrote that Finns who didn't learn Swedish would not have access to what he called "pan-Nordic culture", and therefore Onko is questioning why Swedish is a necessary conduit for this culture (especially given the fact that English already serves as a lingua franca between the Nordic countries)..
Foca wrote:But that's not what I meant. Swedish speakers have every right to use Swedish when they conduct business, politics etc. with other Swedish speakers (including native speakers of Finnish or other languages who have chosen to learn Swedish), regardless of whether Swedish is given special status above other minority languages in Finland or not.Noral wrote:
perhaps next time when you write about "them" who have the right to want anything to any extent you should specify it like that: those Swedish speaking Finns who do not involve themselves in political, public , business or society life, and especially not those who live on Ålands....
here we come to the core of the problem. I hope that you will allow those politically crafty and manipulative Swedish speaking Finns to exercises all their might to demand that the Swedish has exactly the same way as it is and is elevated above other minority languages?
What do you want from me?????
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
1. I said that the political independence (and close proximity to Finland) of Sweden was a factor in keeping the Swedish spoken in Finland alive, a factor that most minority languages don't have in their favorfoca wrote:Political independence has no or little influence on this question really.... Ukrainian dialects were still well preserved within the empire. Ruthenian was suppressed only due to political power play within multinational Habsburg empire.
2. You (as far as I can tell) attempted to put forward the case of Ruthenian and the Ukraine as a counter example to this pattern
3. I responded by saying that the Ukraine wasn't an independent country during most of the time period that Ruthenian was suppressed, and therefore this doesn't qualify as a counter example
I agree that political independence isn't a necessary factor in keeping minority languages alive, but I disagree that it's never an important factor.
And I'll reiterate that removing the unique status of Swedish among Finland's minority languages is very, very far from the kind of suppression that minority languages experienced in the 19th century or premodern times.
I didn't imply that Sweden was never independent before that time. As far as I know, the early 1500s were the last time that the independence of Sweden from neighboring kingdoms was seriously disputed.and many swedes would be really surprised that you count their independent history only from after Wasa coup. during times of Kalmar union most of them still though of themselves being quite independent ,
OK. It seemed as though you were presenting the Potato Famine as a necessary step in the decline of Irish in Ireland (which agrees with what I've heard from certain Irish speakers in the past), but if I understand you correctly now, you think that the famine was a minor-to-insignificant factor in this decline, and that the suppression of Irish by the British state was the only genuinely significant factor?Foca wrote: Still trying to find a hidden message? It is not there. I can explain it to you one more time: the analogy is not between famine and "and the (hypothetical) situation of Swedish in Finland after its legal status has been made equal to that of Sami". the analogy is about linguistic majority (Ireland having a status if modern day Scotland in the 19 th century UK, thus Gaelic being a minority language) pushing out the minority language out of the picture. the Great Famine and emigration ( often sponsored) just sealed the deal.
(If that's what you're saying, the analogy still doesn't work: to name just two differences, 19th-century Britain isn't 21st-century Finland, and Irish had no "Sweden" to draw support from, as the Swedish spoken in Finland does today.)
Such as?Noral wrote: he is also referring to that "we demolished hegemony of swedish hundred years ago, there was and is protests against finnish education because masterrace. " which is wrong on so many levels....
If a group of Swedish speakers in Finland supports this cause, it's perfectly legal (in present-day Finland) for them to advocate for it, but if the Finnish state responds to their advocacy by taking what most Finnish citizens want into consideration, I don't expect this advocacy to succeed.Foca wrote:here we come to the core of the problem. I hope that you will allow those politically crafty and manipulative Swedish speaking Finns to exercises all their might to demand that the Swedish has exactly the same way as it is and is elevated above other minority languages?
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
National affiliation works on many different levels . Ruthenians did not want to be Hungarians or Germans , they wanted to be " Russians" (yes , most often Russians not Ukrainians). Political relation of Ukraine to the outside world including Russia or the Russian position on the question of Rusins in the Hubsburg empire played almost absolutely no role in survival or disappearance of Ruthenian ( especially if you take into consideration that literary Ukrainian is really a 19th century invention) .In case of the Ruthenian and Ukrainian languages in the Habsburg empire the polish question played a much bigger role than the situation in Ukraine ( however you may define that territory/nation). thus , at least in Ruthenian case, it does prove the point that the state representing a certain language majority if it wants can effectively suppress the language as part of national identity. however hard Russia ( or an independent Ukraine, it it existed then) would have tried to save Ruthenian (and they did try) they could only succeed by war ..Noral wrote:
1. I said that the political independence (and close proximity to Finland) of Sweden was a factor in keeping the Swedish spoken in Finland alive, a factor that most minority languages don't have in their favor
2. You (as far as I can tell) attempted to put forward the case of Ruthenian and the Ukraine as a counter example to this pattern
3. I responded by saying that the Ukraine wasn't an independent country during most of the time period that Ruthenian was suppressed, and therefore this doesn't qualify as a counter example
I agree that political independence isn't a necessary factor in keeping minority languages alive, but I disagree that it's never an important factor.
Pardon my French , but "a necessary step in decline of Irish"? none of the steps in decline of Irish were necessary . as I stated earlier there were three factors that made the Gaelic disappear in Ireland:Noral wrote:
OK. It seemed as though you were presenting the Potato Famine as a necessary step in the decline of Irish in Ireland (which agrees with what I've heard from certain Irish speakers in the past), but if I understand you correctly now, you think that the famine was a minor-to-insignificant factor in this decline, and that the suppression of Irish by the British state was the only genuinely significant factor?
(If that's what you're saying, the analogy still doesn't work: to name just two differences, 19th-century Britain isn't 21st-century Finland, and Irish had no "Sweden" to draw support from, as the Swedish spoken in Finland does today.)
1. the British state and British landlords , who controlled education and state governance (obviously done in English). British (and Scottish Protestant ) settlers only made it worse.
2. the potato Famine which affected mostly poor Gaelic speaking population.
3. immigration to the US , that to a great extent was brought about by the famine.
and no , you did not understand it correctly , I do not think that famine was a minor factor in decline of Gaelic in Ireland. I never said it. there still a lot of controversy as for the reasons for disappearance of Gaelic in Ireland . one can argue in favor of any of those factors or against them but still there they are. Irrespective of all other factors the position of the British state effectively deterred Gaelic speaking Catholics from taking part in political and social life and neither the famine nor the emigration alone would make those who left in Ireland speak another tongue . but without the famine and the emigration the British might have not been able to finalize the "resolution" of the Gaelic problem.
Of course parallels are always questionable, but human society develops in accordance with certain laws ( even if we do not know all of them, or tend to misunderstand those that we may know). if you want an example from 21 century buy yourself a ticket and go to Tallinn. there is a Russian language minority there that draws support from the neighboring Russia ( so there is internet, radio, TV - all in Russian ). but sometimes I am just ready to weep when I read documents written by younger Russian people in Estonia- this a direct result of nationalistic position of the Estonian government. same thing happens in Latvia. and yes it happens in 21 century and in the united Europe that supports diversity.
to start with - when did that happen that Finnish demolished Swedish hegemony?Noral wrote:Such as?Foca wrote: he is also referring to that "we demolished hegemony of swedish hundred years ago, there was and is protests against finnish education because masterrace. " which is wrong on so many levels....
it has so far and I hope that they will keep on succeeding. as I pointed out earlier , Finland has managed to create a unique system relating to the language minority. it is balanced and it works for both sides. it allows swedes to keep a separate but specifically Finnish identity ( most of them dig for the Finnish hokey team when Sweden plays Finland). they consider themselves local people , there is a very specific feeling among them to the Finnish state, especially since the times when they fought together for the country.Noral wrote:
If a group of Swedish speakers in Finland supports this cause, it's perfectly legal (in present-day Finland) for them to advocate for it, but if the Finnish state responds to their advocacy by taking what most Finnish citizens want into consideration, I don't expect this advocacy to succeed.
What do you want from me?????
Re: the place of Swedish in Finland.
(duplicate message)
Last edited by Noral on Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:02 am, edited 1 time in total.