Norsk Meiteunion - 1 Story
1) Sportsfiske, regler og fiskeforvaltning i Australia og Canada. Har vi noe å lære i Norge? (Ole-Håkon Heier) 2000
http://www.meite.org/article.php?articleid=34
This story has many mistakes in reference to Canada and Canadian provinces. Here are a few examples: "De fransktalende statene ligger i øst og de engelsktalende i vest." Canada is a country with two official languages. Canada is both a French speaking and English speaking country, and has been for over 400 years. In the eastern Canadian province of Quebec, French is the official language spoken by the majority of Canadians. In east coast province of New Brunswick, French is the official language as well as English, and in the province of Ontario French is also spoken by over 500,000 French-Canadians. And in Manitoba, in western Canada, there is the largest population of French-Canadians in the West. There are French speaking Canadians in western Canada, even though English is the dominant language. There are no "states" in Canada as this Norwegian writes. Canada does not have states, this is a mistake. To be correct it should read "De fransktalende provinsene ligger..." He also writes: "...vestligste statene British Columbia og Alberta." This is a mistake the Canadian provinces of British Columbia and Alberta are provinces, not "states". Also, "Den vestligste staten, British Columbia (BC), er først og fremst preget av høye fjell og skogsområder". British Columbia (B.C.) is a province in Canada, not a state. " I nord grenser staten mot Yukon " Again this should read "grenser provinsen mot Yukon" "Amerikanere kaller imidlertid alle fisker av familien Cyprinidae (karpefisk!) for minnows. De utviser like stor variasjon som i Europa (og andre steder i verden), men kun et fåtall er målet for noe større sportsfiske." The people that inhabit Canada are called Canadians, they are not Americans as he has written. This is a mistake as well, and it should state: "Kanadianere kaller imidlertid..." Amazing to spend five weeks in Canada, and to use American references for Canada, and not know Canada is divided into provinces. As well he writes: "flere av statene i Canada og Australia på størrelse" This is wrong. It should read: "flere av provinsene i Canada og statene i Australia..." Canada is divided into provinces, Australia in divided into states. In North America, Mexico and USA are the only two countries with states, Canada has been using the French system of provinces for 345 years, since 1663, when Canada was made a Royal Province of France. He also states: "Alle større sjøer og vassdrag sto listet opp alfabetisk i brosjyren, sortert under definerte regioner i delstaten." This is wrong, it should read: "regioner i provinsen." How is it that a Norwegian can spend five weeks in Canada, and come home to Norway to write that Canada has states, refer to Canadian provinces as states, and make reference to what the Americans call certain species of fish etc.?? This would be like a Canadian coming to Norway and writing a story about fishing in Norway and stating: "This is what the Swedes call this type of fish..." or "Sweden calls this type of fish....". This writer was in Canada spending time in Canada speaking with Canadians, learning about fishing in Canada, learning Canadian terminology, so what do the Americans have to do with this Canadian story? This story is another example of how many Norwegians often pay little attention to giving Canada and Canadians the proper credit in the way Canadians and Canadian are reported on in the Norwegian press. It seems from a Canadian perspective that many Norwegians seem to think everything on this side of the Atlantic Ocean is American. Mexico and Canada are in North America, and we are not Americans. This is also an excellent example of how many in the Norwegian press think Norwegian readers will have a difficult time to understand Canadian terms, or Canadian references, thus they substitute "Canadian" for "American" thinking their readers will relate better to the story. Is that fair to Canada and Canadians? Should a Canadian journalist write about Norway and Norwegians and substitute Sweden or Swedish because the Canadian journalist fears Canadians will not understand the Norwegian terminology? Here are some great examples seen over the years in the Norwegian press of this habit:
Canadian term - Prime Minister (reported as President in the Norwegian press)Canadian term - province (reported as "state" in the Norwegian press)Canadian term - Canadian (reported as American in the Norwegian press)Canadian term - Canadian football (reported as "American football" in the Norwegian press, despite the fact it's a different game)Canadian term - Premier (reported as "state governor" in the Norwegian press Canadian term - Canadian dollar (reported as American dollar in the Norwegian press, and so often converted with the wrong exchange rate instead of the correct CAD-NOK rate)Canadian term - Canadian hockey (reported as American hockey in the Norwegian press)Why do so many Norwegian journalists see Canada, Canadians, and Canadian culture so non-existent that they don't see it as worthy to report it as Canadian? Why do they need to change Canadian details to American? Are they so worried about the inability of the Norwegian reader to not understand Canadiana they feel compelled to report Canadian culture, language, names, etc. as American? When in fact they are not American? Again this is like a Canadian journalist worried that Canadian readers will not understand Norwegian terms and culture that they feel compelled to report it as Swedish or German. Why would a Canadian journalist do this? It simply does not make sense and it is evident to see that the reporting practice of many in the Norwegian press in regards to Canada is poor at best, and needs to change. Why do Norwegians seem to think the Americans have a dominance on the English language in North America? Canadians speak Canadian-English and Canadian-French, dialects unique to Canada, so why do so many in the Norwegian press constantly refer to Canada's English as being American?
This story has many mistakes in reference to Canada and Canadian provinces. Here are a few examples: "De fransktalende statene ligger i øst og de engelsktalende i vest." Canada is a country with two official languages. Canada is both a French speaking and English speaking country, and has been for over 400 years. In the eastern Canadian province of Quebec, French is the official language spoken by the majority of Canadians. In east coast province of New Brunswick, French is the official language as well as English, and in the province of Ontario French is also spoken by over 500,000 French-Canadians. And in Manitoba, in western Canada, there is the largest population of French-Canadians in the West. There are French speaking Canadians in western Canada, even though English is the dominant language. There are no "states" in Canada as this Norwegian writes. Canada does not have states, this is a mistake. To be correct it should read "De fransktalende provinsene ligger..." He also writes: "...vestligste statene British Columbia og Alberta." This is a mistake the Canadian provinces of British Columbia and Alberta are provinces, not "states". Also, "Den vestligste staten, British Columbia (BC), er først og fremst preget av høye fjell og skogsområder". British Columbia (B.C.) is a province in Canada, not a state. " I nord grenser staten mot Yukon " Again this should read "grenser provinsen mot Yukon" "Amerikanere kaller imidlertid alle fisker av familien Cyprinidae (karpefisk!) for minnows. De utviser like stor variasjon som i Europa (og andre steder i verden), men kun et fåtall er målet for noe større sportsfiske." The people that inhabit Canada are called Canadians, they are not Americans as he has written. This is a mistake as well, and it should state: "Kanadianere kaller imidlertid..." Amazing to spend five weeks in Canada, and to use American references for Canada, and not know Canada is divided into provinces. As well he writes: "flere av statene i Canada og Australia på størrelse" This is wrong. It should read: "flere av provinsene i Canada og statene i Australia..." Canada is divided into provinces, Australia in divided into states. In North America, Mexico and USA are the only two countries with states, Canada has been using the French system of provinces for 345 years, since 1663, when Canada was made a Royal Province of France. He also states: "Alle større sjøer og vassdrag sto listet opp alfabetisk i brosjyren, sortert under definerte regioner i delstaten." This is wrong, it should read: "regioner i provinsen." How is it that a Norwegian can spend five weeks in Canada, and come home to Norway to write that Canada has states, refer to Canadian provinces as states, and make reference to what the Americans call certain species of fish etc.?? This would be like a Canadian coming to Norway and writing a story about fishing in Norway and stating: "This is what the Swedes call this type of fish..." or "Sweden calls this type of fish....". This writer was in Canada spending time in Canada speaking with Canadians, learning about fishing in Canada, learning Canadian terminology, so what do the Americans have to do with this Canadian story? This story is another example of how many Norwegians often pay little attention to giving Canada and Canadians the proper credit in the way Canadians and Canadian are reported on in the Norwegian press. It seems from a Canadian perspective that many Norwegians seem to think everything on this side of the Atlantic Ocean is American. Mexico and Canada are in North America, and we are not Americans. This is also an excellent example of how many in the Norwegian press think Norwegian readers will have a difficult time to understand Canadian terms, or Canadian references, thus they substitute "Canadian" for "American" thinking their readers will relate better to the story. Is that fair to Canada and Canadians? Should a Canadian journalist write about Norway and Norwegians and substitute Sweden or Swedish because the Canadian journalist fears Canadians will not understand the Norwegian terminology? Here are some great examples seen over the years in the Norwegian press of this habit:
Canadian term - Prime Minister (reported as President in the Norwegian press)Canadian term - province (reported as "state" in the Norwegian press)Canadian term - Canadian (reported as American in the Norwegian press)Canadian term - Canadian football (reported as "American football" in the Norwegian press, despite the fact it's a different game)Canadian term - Premier (reported as "state governor" in the Norwegian press Canadian term - Canadian dollar (reported as American dollar in the Norwegian press, and so often converted with the wrong exchange rate instead of the correct CAD-NOK rate)Canadian term - Canadian hockey (reported as American hockey in the Norwegian press)Why do so many Norwegian journalists see Canada, Canadians, and Canadian culture so non-existent that they don't see it as worthy to report it as Canadian? Why do they need to change Canadian details to American? Are they so worried about the inability of the Norwegian reader to not understand Canadiana they feel compelled to report Canadian culture, language, names, etc. as American? When in fact they are not American? Again this is like a Canadian journalist worried that Canadian readers will not understand Norwegian terms and culture that they feel compelled to report it as Swedish or German. Why would a Canadian journalist do this? It simply does not make sense and it is evident to see that the reporting practice of many in the Norwegian press in regards to Canada is poor at best, and needs to change. Why do Norwegians seem to think the Americans have a dominance on the English language in North America? Canadians speak Canadian-English and Canadian-French, dialects unique to Canada, so why do so many in the Norwegian press constantly refer to Canada's English as being American?
Comments