From what I heard from my Grandad in 16th HLI, most of what you did was within the unit. The only people having much interaction with those beyond were either runners or some officers often above company or battalion/regimental level who had to coordinate. The coordination wasn't generally as low level as some I've heard told to me by friends in the military in the last 30 years - that can be a lot closer coordination. So language issues could exist, but that was dealt with at higher echlons. Attacks were done by schedules and you hoped the other units didn't fark that up....

As an example of modern day french-english issues:

PPCLI (princess patricia's Canadian Light Infantry, aka "the kilted ladies") had a battlegroup in Afghanistan that was headed to end of roto and were packing up to go home when the Royal Vingt-Deuxieme Regiment arrived (the Vandoos). The PPCLI guys tried to brief them up on all the ambush issues, local terrain, local actors, etc. but the Vandoos needed no help from no Anglos and so.... they went out and promptly ran into stuff they could have avoided or recognized sooner if they'd accepted the wisdom of the guys who just spent 12-18 months there....

... so this kind of stuff is still going on.

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 8:57 PM Phil Pugliese - philpugliese at yahoo.com (via tml list) <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:

Thanks for the info,

I believe that, in the end, no matter how snooty Parisians or any other Frenchmen would get, french-canadians would still be a great resource to the British stationed in France during WWI.

Also, consider that, way back then, a very significant # of french army conscripts spoke languedoc(sp?) as their native language.
And, according to a book I read some time ago. About 10% of conscripts from that time period spoke a language native to them that was mutually unintelligible to french.

If that could be worked around then just about anything could be, IMO.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wednesday, July 22, 2020, 07:30:10 AM MST, Hubert Figuiere <xxxxxx@figuiere.net> wrote:

On 2020-07-21 6:17 a.m., xxxxxx@gmail.com wrote:
> In theory....
> They both speak French like Aussies and Scots speak English.
> The claim here is continental french has mutated and Quebec french stayed
> closer to 1700s french.
> Je ne sais pas rien!

That claim is false. It is just they evolved differently, because it's a
living language. With different accents, different lexicons.

A person from Quebec will have less trouble understanding a French
person, than the otherway, because they are more exposed to "European
French" than French people are exposed to Quebecois French.[1][4]

This applies to other languages too:

Ask an American whether they drive a lowry or a saloon, and if they have
spare trousers in their boot in case they spill something.
Also here in Canada we find that colour is mispelled by our neighbours
but we'd need to wrap our head around the question above as well.[2]

Funnily in Traveller everyone seems to speak the same Galanglic. Unless
there is the hand-waived universal translator.

Hub

[1] English is my second language. Born and raised in France, living in
Canada for quite a while.

[2] as an oversimplication, Canadian English is the Queen's English
spelling and the American lexicon.[3]

[3] This is really oversimplifying. It is not that dry cut.

[4] French is also spoken on Ontario (Franco-Ontarians) and in the
maritimes (Acadians, New Brunswick) with their own take.

-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://archives.simplelists.com

-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=RDHE7iRpfwqlHvVvWBIhpJZsbTiD5NnL