>>Could you tell me how ît would be possible to really protect french without being anti-english (even just a little bit) ?
>
>Very easy. Take the existing law(s) and rephrase to say that all labelling, signage, etc. must contain Canada's two official languages, french and english. I wouldn't consider this anti-english. There are already a lot of federal laws and regulations in place that state this. Take something as simple as a cereal box: Everything on it is in english and french.
>
>Like I stated before it is the people and not the government that can sustain a culture and language. An example of this is the Gaelic language which is very rare today. But there are still people out east and in Ireland that still speak it and continue teaching it to their children.


If you don't impose any size it also means that a business can put it as little as they want. In front of most stores we would see tiny (microscopic) messages in french and big messages in english.

What do you think it was like before those laws (to protect french).

The business face of montreal was only english. Not because people living in Montréal were english but because the businesses would'nt respect the citizens and impose their rules.

Don't think that because those laws were made that everyone is speaking or must speak french in Montréal.

I'm sorry Colin but I'm afraid that without laws Montréal would become an english city in no time.

And then the other cities in the province would alse become english because a majority of those cities do business with Montréal...

You could be tempted to reply to me and say 'So what ?' and to that I could tell you 'So what if french is the language of the province of Québec ?'

The solution to this problem is not as easy as it seems.