Swedish

[foca]

Why should they have this resentment at first place? What will they lose other than the satisfaction of being a very powerful minority if their language is not forced on the rest of the population? Nobody is stopping them from learning and speaking their own language.

You are talking as if there is a danger of a civil war in case mandatory Swedish is changed with a freedom of choice about languages. As said time and again it's not year 1700 anymore. Sooner or later it has to happen so better sooner than later.

Why should they have resentment.. It is easy - they struggled for this status quo , they have reached a compromise , and now there's an attempt to go back on the arrangement .the mind of a person works in a simple way : So first goes mandatory swedish in schools, then goes public services in swedish, then swedish as the second state language ...after that Ålands might go to....civil war or not , Swedish speakers will feel cheated. Civil wars happen in present day Europe , it is enough to look at former yougoslavia and Ukraine (there the language is one of the main topics of propaganda and political manipulation ). People are the same now as they were in the 18th century...

The whole democracy thing costs untold millions , and is of no interest for many if not most . Why does it exist?

The answer is within your statement that there can be many but they are no where near a majority. But for Swedish it's very clear majority whcih wants to remove it from schools as a mandatory subject.

So the when or if clear majority will be unsupportive of democracy you will let it go? In many countries which have banned death sentence clear majority is for it, should it be reintroduced ? I can tell you that clear majority in many countries (most probably in Finland too) is for abolishing of taxation...one can continue the list

[foca]

As long as Swedish is one of the national languages, and services are being provided in Swedish, I really don't see what they really lose out other than not being able to force their language on other people. And, removal of compulsory Swedish does not mean banning it from being taught at schools that it should cause a 'deep resentment' in them. People who wanna reap the benefits of the Swedish language will learn it at their will, with taxpayers money.

And, I definitely think there's already a split in the society regarding compulsory Swedish, now only growing louder.

As long as .... See my statement above about resentment ....

[foca]

It will lead to split in the society and deep resentment of the swedish speaking minority.

I believe the majority of Swedish speakers will feel no such thing, but regarding the fraction that will feel so, I'd welcome it. Just as much as I'd welcome the frustration of school yard bully being frustrated. If they are so open in their contempt of the Finnish speaking majority, that they can feel happy only when they force their language down by other people's throats, not because the people who had "pakkoruotsi" would be of use in offering public services to Swedish speakers (the SFP/RKP itself does not believe that), but just for the pure pleasure of mobbing, then let them be unhappy.

In your terms Swedish speaking people are also "bullied" by obligatory finnish which is being forced down their throats by the majority ... (See above about the mojority wishes ....)

[Rip]

In your terms Swedish speaking people are also "bullied" by obligatory finnish which is being forced down their throats by the majority ... (See above about the mojority wishes ....)

I already stated once in this thread that I can live with Swedish speaking population having Finnish classes on voluntary basis.

they have reached a compromise

What did "they" compromise in 1970's when the Swedish became compulsory to all in schools? By your "logic" of slippery slope argument one could never change anything in politics, because eventually it would all lead to civil war and genocide.

[007]

As long as Swedish is one of the national languages, and services are being provided in Swedish, I really don't see what they really lose out other than not being able to force their language on other people. And, removal of compulsory Swedish does not mean banning it from being taught at schools that it should cause a 'deep resentment' in them. People who wanna reap the benefits of the Swedish language will learn it at their will, with taxpayers money.

And, I definitely think there's already a split in the society regarding compulsory Swedish, now only growing louder.

As long as .... See my statement above about resentment ....

Why should they have resentment.. It is easy - they struggled for this status quo , they have reached a compromise , and now there's an attempt to go back on the arrangement . the mind of a person works in a simple way : So first goes mandatory swedish in schools, then goes public services in swedish, then swedish as the second state language ...after that Ålands might go to....civil war or not , Swedish speakers will feel cheated. Civil wars happen in present day Europe , it is enough to look at former yougoslavia and Ukraine (there the language is one of the main topics of propaganda and political manipulation ). People are the same now as they were in the 18th century...

and that slippery slope of yours all hinges on the arrangement that forces minority language on above 90% of population. No wonder there's a vocal resentment towards such arrangement which has been growing by the day, as I understand.

As for status quo, today's parliament voting result has stirred it a bit. Changes in compulsory Swedish in parts of Finland are now only a matter of time.

My personal view is that let people (parents and/or students) choose either Finnish or Swedish as their compulsory language studies at schools, while making both (Finnish, Swedish) languages available for optional studies, along with other few major languages of the world.

-x-

The legislature did however approve a motion allowing more flexibility in language teaching in Eastern Finland – where schools have long argued that Russian would be more useful to learn than the minority Swedish language. That motion was narrowly approved by a vote of 93 to 89. Unusually, it was filed jointly by the prime minister’s National Coalition Party in partnership with the main opposition Centre Party.

http://yle.fi/uutiset/swedish_remains_o ... ls/7850431

[foca]

What did "they" compromise in 1970's when the Swedish became compulsory to all in schools? By your "logic" of slippery slope argument one could never change anything in politics, because eventually it would all lead to civil war and genocide.

The compromise is bigger than decision in 1970 on compulsory swedish in school. The whole idea of 2 languages is a compromise that consists of many bits and points... I did not say genocide anywhere , if I am not mistaken. In this particular case it might lead to cessation of Ålands , war or not is anothwr issue....

[foca]

and that slippery slope of yours all hinges on the arrangement that forces minority language on above 90% of population. No wonder there's a vocal resentment towards such arrangement which has been growing by the day, as I understand.

Many things are forced on majority in many countries - gay marriages (I am personally rather indifferent to the idea, but in many countries it is unacceptable for majority for confessional reasons) , excessive taxation , membership in military and political organizations etc.... all done for the greater good (however it is understood)....
The price what is paid weighted against the results is negligible - after all they make our childer learn a living language which is used in the country, not the theory of Marxism -Leninism...

[007]

and that slippery slope of yours all hinges on the arrangement that forces minority language on above 90% of population. No wonder there's a vocal resentment towards such arrangement which has been growing by the day, as I understand.

Many things are forced on majority in many countries - gay marriages (I am personally rather indifferent to the idea, but in many countries it is unacceptable for majority for confessional reasons) , excessive taxation , membership in military and political organizations etc.... all done for the greater good (however it is understood)....
The price what is paid weighted against the results is negligible - after all they make our childer learn a living language which is used in the country, not the theory of Marxism -Leninism...

Where are you going with that argument? In many countries, minority language has not been forced on majority like in Finland.

used by 5,50% on over 90%. Enough said.

[007]

by the way, you didn't remark on status quo of compulsory Swedish being stirred today by parliament. Will that lead to resentment in Fenno-Swedes which in turn invites a a civil war?

[foca]

Where are you going with that argument? In many countries, minority language has not been forced on majority like in Finland.

used by 5,50% on over 90%. Enough said.

I am going where I have been going from the start - for the sake of stability and mutual respect in the society a child could spend 300 hours over a period of 4 years and learn something 5,5 , 20 or 35 ...... It is not the percentage that counts,it is the idea of mutual respect towards the person who lives nearby - after all there were many more Russians in the empire and when they tried to force a majorty language on Finns they disliked it a lot (even though that parallel is wrong on many levels). Another thing is - is it ok to force a majority language on swedish speaking people (even though this parallel is also wrong on so many levels)?.

[007]

Where are you going with that argument? In many countries, minority language has not been forced on majority like in Finland.

used by 5,50% on over 90%. Enough said.

I am going where I have been going from the start - for the sake of stability and mutual respect in the society a child could spend 300 hours over a period of 4 years and learn something 5,5 , 20 or 35 ......

Swedish language has been enshrined in the constitution as one of the national languages of Finland and also public services are being provided in Swedish language. In my book, this should already be enough for stability for a functioning democratic society.

It is not the percentage that counts,it is the idea of mutual respect towards the person who lives nearby - after all there were many more Russians in the empire and when they tried to force a majorty language on Finns they disliked it a lot (even though that parallel is wrong on many levels).

Again, respect is earned. No wonder they didn't like Russian language forced on them or Swedish.

Another thing is - is it ok to force a majority language on swedish speaking people (even though this parallel is also wrong on so many levels)?.

My view on this is as I stated in my previous post:

My personal view is that let people (parents and/or students) choose either Finnish or Swedish as their compulsory language studies at schools, while making both (Finnish, Swedish) languages available for optional studies, along with other few major languages of the world.

[Jukka Aho]

Another thing is - is it ok to force a majority language on swedish speaking people (even though this parallel is also wrong on so many levels)?.

My view on this is as I stated in my previous post:

My personal view is that let people (parents and/or students) choose either Finnish or Swedish as their compulsory language studies at schools, while making both (Finnish, Swedish) languages available for optional studies, along with other few major languages of the world.

As it stands, there are basically five categories of language classes traditionally taught to the natives in Finnish schools:

1. Your mother tongue as stated in your personal record in the national Population Information System — either Finnish or Swedish. Compulsory. Studies begin as a first-grader.
2. Language trail “A”. Compulsory, classes usually begin in the 3rd grade. Nearly always English, but I guess there are some culturally affiliated schools where it might be something else, such as German or French. The student cannot generally choose the language, except by enrolling to a school which does not follow the general curricula.
3. Language trail “B”. Compulsory, classes usually begin in the 7th grade. Nearly always “the other domestic language” (that is, Swedish for the Finnish-speakers or Finnish for the Swedish-speakers). The student cannot generally choose the language.
4. Language trail “C”. Optional, not compulsory. Often German or French, sometimes maybe Russian. If taken, classes usually begin in the 8th grade.
5. Language trail “D”. Optional, not compulsory. Often German or French, sometimes maybe Russian. If taken, classes usually begin in the gymnasium (lukio).

The letter codes A, B, C, and D are more or less directly related to the expected length of studies for that language. Mother tongue does not have a letter code; it is a given that you’re going to study that language throughout your school years anyway.

I’m not sure how this works for those whose mother tongue happens to be something else than Finnish or Swedish, and yet they need Finnish or Swedish studies along with that. I guess there are special arrangements for such situations where the “A” and “B” languages can be chosen more freely.