«Every language evolves»: yes, but so what?

French isn't just any language. And a language isn't just any old thing. And yet, if the linguists themselves are to be believed, it is. I've just come from an academic conference entitled «Les Rectifications orthographiques du français». Before we can talk about rectifications, shouldn't the reforms in question at least be right, and therefore justified?

And therein lies the problem: the new spelling initiated by a few individuals in the 1990s and recognized in 2016 by the French Ministry of Education is presented to us as a normal and useful evolution. Abandoning structures deemed «archaic» and simplifying «etymological» rules would be part of the idea that «every language evolves».

Of course it's normal and good for every language to evolve, but not every evolution of language is normal and good. In every field, every change needs to be weighed up, thought through and, above all, motivated. If every change is good as long as it transgresses the past, then fine, in that case let's write anything. Let's do away with the good old letter «b», for example.

At the end of the conference, I asked a sympathetic question: how do you justify dropping circumflex accents? The room cried wolf, people cackled. I was now enveloped in reactionary odors; Finkielkrauttian glasses were drawn on my face, which had dared to open a dialogue. Despairing of the dogmatism of a self-styled «open» camp, I nevertheless remain hopeful: the people, whom these pseudo-elites believe they are defending but who, on the contrary, find their reforms foolish, will continue to love and write our beautiful language as it should be.

Write to the author: jonas.follonier@leregardlibre.com