
Mandatory Swedish is a compulsorary school subject in Finland, wherein the Swedish language is taught. The official term is ''toinen kotimainen kieli'' in Finnish language, or ''det andra inhemska språket'' in Swedish language, which would translate to "second domestic language". Among Finns the derogatory term ''pakkoruotsi'', literally "compulsory Swedish", or even "forced Swedish", is often used in reference to this imposed tuition, revealing the loaded bitterness in what is perceived as a Swedish yoke. == Overview == In Mainland Finland both official language, Finnish and Swedish, are mandatory subjects for pupils in primary education and secondary education schools – and exams. The autonomous Åland Islands (pop. 26.000) have only one domestic language, Swedish, and its inhabitants are not forced to learn Finnish. For the 92% majority in Finland who speak Finnish, this means they have to learn the language of their Finland-Swedish fellow countrymen. This of course also means that the Swedish-speaking minority is obliged to study the Finnish language to the same extent. The reasons given for this arrangement are that both languages are official languages of Finland and part of the Finnish culture. The compulsory Swedish is also justified by that Finland will be closer to the Nordic Union by mastering Swedish, since Swedish is quite similar to both Danish and Norwegian. Critics of the system claim that most people don't have, or in any case have a limited natural contact with Swedish-speaking people. Supporters claim that mandatory Swedish improves relations to the Nordic countries and supports an improved learning of other Germanic languages, such as English and German. Supporters also maintain that mandatory Swedish is necessary to ensure that all citizens can interact with governmental institutions in their own language and thus not create language-barriers between the two languages, while opponents claim that this can be ensured by other means. It is the view of some opponents that this could actually be achieved better if those who do learn Swedish did so of their own free will. The status of Swedish as an official language in Finland is protected by Finland's Constitution and to some degree supported by international treaties according to which Åland is to remain exclusively Swedophone. The political party representing the Swedish speakers, the Swedish People's Party (Finland), has successfully been a minor partner in most Cabinets since Finland's independence. == History == Swedish teaching for all pupils in primary education was introduced in the 1970s, until then it had only been required in secondary education and tertiary education. Governmental service is, since the end of the 19th century, offered in both domestic languages; therefore employees must be proficient in both Finnish and Swedish. The reform was based on a political ambition to strengthen the ties with Western countries through Scandinavia, and to show that Finland was still a part of the Nordic countries, and not an Eastern Bloc country. It also sought to improve social mobility by ensuring that a bad decision on language in the early school years should not become an obstacle for applicants to the civil services. In Secondary education all the students learn at least two foreign languages, one of which is the other domestic language (Swedish or Finnish). The Finnish speakers take Swedish, and vice versa. Practically all the students took English (language), either as a compulsory or an optional language; 44 per cent took German (language) and 21 per cent French (language). [http://www.stat.fi/tk/he/edufinland/teksti2_5.html] Some who oppose mandatory Swedish claim that it has also influenced to the fact that Finns know foreign languages somewhat less than Swedes, Norwegians and Danes. Supporters maintain that such a claim is an oxymoron and that Scandinavians find it easier to learn eg. German and English, because they belong to the same group of Germanic languages. Finnish, a Finno-Ugric_language, is very different from most languages spoken in Europe. This, the supporters claim, is also why the Swedish-speaking Finns are better at mostly German and English, although they spend significantly more time learning Finnish (from 3rd grade) than the Finnish-speaking spend learning Swedish (from 7th grade) and, consequently, less time learning foreign languages. == Students' opinions == In many cases, pupils have negative expectations towards learning Swedish, which tends to reflect back in the social interaction between pupils and teachers, which creates a negative learning environment, which in turn further contributes to negative attitudes towards the Swedish language, the Swedish speaking minority in general, and Sweden as a country. Some argue that such negative attitudes founded in the formative school years might contribute to negative attitudes in the adult population. The attitudes of pupils and adults alike are partly expressed by prejudices which perceive the Swedish-speaking minority as wealthy snobs, which is a historical recollection of the times when the educated and landed class in Finland was Swedish-speaking, neglecting the history of the Swedish-speaking peasantry. There has also been a lot of critisism of the methodology used to teach Swedish and the lack of competence among many of the teachers. Sentiments toward mandatory Swedish vary. Many prominent politicians (both Finnish- and Swedish-speaking) whole-heartedly support mandatory Swedish in schools, while others oppose it. There have been numerous petitions and other similar campaigns arranged by some dedicated grassroot organizations to pressure the lawmakers, but to date, they have had no significant impact on the established policy and have not attained a great deal of momentum. Thus, while the ongoing national debate is often heated and passionate, the backing of the compulsory Swedish in schools still remains strong enough for the government not to consider a change of policy. It is noteworthy that mandatory Swedish is supported by the main political parties in Finland, the Kokoomus, the Centre Party of Finland, the Social Democratic Party of Finland and the Left Alliance (Finland). However, the requirement to take Swedish (or Finnish for the Swedish-speaking) as part of the high school final exams was recently abolished as part of a larger educational reform by the centrist government, which maintains its view to preserve mandatory Swedish. Opposition to mandatory Swedish can, however, bear a stigma of bigotry, although most people recognise that sentiments against the mandatory subject of Swedish do not necessarily indicate any sentiments against the Swedish-speaking population. == Future == There are those who believe that the new anti-racism directive [http://europa.eu.int/infonet/library/m/200043ce/en.htm EC (2000/43)] may put an end to the practice to force Finns to possess attributes of an ethnic group. "In very limited circumstances, a difference of treatment may be justified where a characteristic related to racial or ethnic origin constitutes a genuine and determining occupational requirement, when the objective is legitimate and the requirement is proportionate. Such circumstances should be included in the information provided by the Member States to the Commission." Thus the present Finnish way to demand minimal skills in Swedish from all educated people and public servants is against the directive, they maintain. ==See also== * Finland's language strife * [http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/alkup/2002/20021174 Government regulation on classification of municipalities according to language] Finnish history
Moved from article:'' As members of the minority naturally will be more skilled in the majority language, than the majority population will be in the minority language, the pakkoruotsi reform can also be seen as an effective means against Finland-Swedish dominance in governmental offices and organisations.'' -- Firstly, I don´t see why there should be any danger of the minority language dominating governmental offices and organisations, secondly, I don´t understand how this sentence might help in understanding the implications of compulsory Swedish language tuition in Finnish schools. If somebody could clarify and NPOV this, please put it back into the article.
:My attempt was to "balance" the section regarding reasons behind the policy. While I certainly agree to the wording being unsufficiently cautious, as it was written rather much in haste, it does most certainly surprice me that the ''logic'' doesn't shine through. ;-/ It's not the ''minority language'' which is at danger of dominating government, but the minority itself. As far as I understand, there is an overrepresentation of the minority in the ranks and staffs of the governmental authorities, which would have been worse without the pakkoruotsi unless the minority language requirement were laxed. -- User:Ruhrjung 17:41 23 May 2003 (UTC) ditto: ''arguing that the Swedish speakers of Åland and Finland maybe better should emigrate to Sweden if they aren't able to conduct their business in Finnish''. -- This looks like disguised polemics against the minority, and is not helpful either.
:You are certainly right, it too was an attempt at balancing the following: -- User:Ruhrjung 17:41 23 May 2003 (UTC) and more:''Some pupils feel they suffer from learning the minority language during two years or more. Also the mandatory course and exam in tertiary education is questioned by them who hold mandatory Swedish for the most disliked subject in school, arguing their skill in the disliked language doesn't correspond with all the years spent studying it.'' -- The facts in this sentence may be true, but should be expressed in a more neutral way before going into an encyclopedia article.
Cheers, User:Kosebamse 13:10 23 May 2003 (UTC) :I tried to turn the rant into a less biased version, but you still found it insufficiently NPOV. Obviously, I didn't try hard enough. ;-) -- User:Ruhrjung 17:41 23 May 2003 (UTC) I had made a revision some days ago, which I thought I had been fairly successful with, in NPOV-regards. I was then this morning pretty baffled to see ''"my splendid neutral text"'' ;->> hadn't been accepted but preambled by a rather biased rant, which I subsequently tried to edit to get it 1/ more neutral, and where that's not possible, 2/ more balanced, in a way which hopefully would be acceptable for both side of the feud. It would be stupid of me to try to hide the element of injured pride in my less skillful editing today, but I hope something good is coming out of it in the end. ;-)
-- User:Ruhrjung 17:41 23 May 2003 (UTC) :I believe that the article is evolving quite nicely and your contributions did help a lot (thanks!). However, when debates are getting 1) ridiculous and 2) nationalistic, I believe it might sometimes be best to take out the controversies entirely instead of starting out on a way that leads to detailing every possible implication of every possible interpretation of every statement. That´s why I excised these portions, and I do believe that the trimmed-down article is now more readable and less biased than it was a while ago. but please feel free to add any comment on controversy that you feel is necessary to complete the picture. And it might still be a good idea to have some others review it (I´ve asked Jniemenmaa to have a look). User:Kosebamse 22:32 23 May 2003 (UTC) ::Probably you are right. In this case I felt it might be perceived as the introduction to an edit-war, of which I have no interest (see the German language version which I decided to ignore;-), why I didn't simply revert to the previous version. More generally, it can't be neglected that the Pakkoruotsi issue is a part of the long domestic "debate" regarding Finland's positioning between the nearest powers Russia, Germany and Sweden. Although the arguments are crude and anything but NPOV, they are not representing any fringe minority, or (only) immature school children.
::-- User:Ruhrjung 23:24 23 May 2003 (UTC) :::Please don´t get me wrong, I didn´t refer to your work when using the words "ridiculous and nationalistic". The matter, however, does seem to have its ridiculous and nationalistic aspects and IMO it might help to keep these out if possible as they might be seen as bait for trolls of all sorts . Thanks for your work, User:Kosebamse 23:34 23 May 2003 (UTC) ---- Thanks for the invitation to both Kosebamse and Ruhrjung. I do not know if I can add anything essential to this article, but I tried looking at it with "fresh eyes". You two seem to have managed to make it quite understandable for someone without any knowledge of Finnish language education. But there are still some things that I do not like in the article: ''5.1% of the population in Mainland-Finland in addition to the autonomous Åland islands'' -- This is just bending the truth with statistics. Why make a distinction with "Mainland-Finland". Lets just say 5.6% of the population of Finland. :I've no problems to buy the rest, although I wonder if your proposed revisions really would be accepted as NPOV by those disliking the mandatory education in Swedish. But on this very point, I think it would be wise to keep the 5.1%-figure. Otherwise the ~5%-figure will return sooner or later. The 5%-figure can be argued to be correct, but only if Åland is counted separately. And Åland can be argued to be irrelevant here, as Åland doesn't have two official languages, and hence no Pakkoruotsi.
:-- User:Ruhrjung 00:58 26 May 2003 (UTC) In the first paragraph: '' to refer to Finland-Swedish studied in the schools of Finland.'' -- I know that Ruhrjung is not going to like this... but I do not think it is Finland-Swedish that is taught to the Finnish speaking pupils. Maybe we can change that toFinland-Swedish? :)
:Certainly. (i.e.: no, you are wrong! I wouldn't dislike it.) In this context I thought it was more NPOV to literally write "Finland-Swedish" inasmuch as one of the arguments I've heard a few times is the scorn over not even learning the ''real'' standardized Swedish but a small dialect (although standardized - similarly to Meankieli). The argument is not worth much in my ears, but I thought it would make at least some Pakkoruotsi-disliker happy. ;-)
:-- User:Ruhrjung 00:58 26 May 2003 (UTC) ''In governmental terminology "the other domestic language" is the term used for Pakkoruotsi, like Finnish is the other domestic language for pupils with Swedish mother tongue.'' -- I don't understand this sentance at all. Doesn't "the other domestic language" refer to (Finland-)Swedish? :This is how it's been explained for me (and what's supported by the .stat.fi-site): :In the peruskoulu you study first your mother tongue for some years, then English, and finally also "the other domestic language". :The Fennophones study Finnish, English, Swedish :The Swedophones study Swedish, English, Finnish :(in some cases a second non-domestic language as French or German is studied in the peruskoulu too). :Hence Finnish is "the other domestic language" for the Swedophone, :and Swedish is "the other domestic language" for the Fennophone. :I guess the words in Finnish and Swedish are ''"toinen"'' and ''"andra"'' which at least in the case of Swedish can mean both "second" and "other".
:-- User:Ruhrjung 00:58 26 May 2003 (UTC) Is the link to "Pois pakkoruotsi" necessary? It could only be interestint to people who can read Finnish (and they should read the Finnish wikipedia article instead). -- User:Jniemenmaa 18:28 25 May 2003 (UTC) ---- I moved the following paragraphs here:
(maybe they could be re-worded?) :''In later times the protected status of the language has become a valued bludgeon to hammer the Swedish government. Since Sweden has been slow to implement even those minority rights for Finnish-Swedes that its own international obligations warrant, this matter is always brought to the forefront when the two countries meet. The perceived hypocrisy of Swedish indignation at for example Estonian tardiness at granting full rights to ethnic Russians, has given some further force to this argument.'' :''== External links: =='' :''* [http://www.poispakkoruotsi.com/ Pois pakkoruotsi petition] (in Finnish) for abolishing compulsory Swedish.'' -- User:Ruhrjung 16:44 28 May 2003 (UTC) Uhm. What exactly bothers you about the above paragraph? (The links aren't my responsibility) -- User:Cimon avaro 17:25 28 May 2003 (UTC) The language. The connection to Finnland and Finnish politics is also somewhat fussy, but primarily the language. You don't say so in English, unless you are something like a fringe politician (Glistrup-or-worse rather than Kjaersgaard). I know this is hard for many Finns (and Israelis) to assess, as the level of the style used by Finns ...well, let's just say that "something" often makes Finns appear more aggressive than would be good for you, if you get my drift?
-- User:Ruhrjung 17:38 28 May 2003 (UTC) ---- Should the entry retain its present name? An explanatory title like "Swedish education in Finland" ought to be more appropriate. The present terminology might be colloquial i Finnish, but it does hardly have the same use in English. Another aspect is that it can be interpreted as a POV or defamatory statement. -- User:Mic 16:50 28 May 2003 (UTC) :My opinion (if it is worth anything) is that the topic is of fringe interest except for the few fennophiles (like myself) and for Swedes in Sweden. And for us (the fennophiles and the Sweden-Swedes) ''Pakkoruotsi'' is the relevant term. There exists a legitime debate in Finland on these issues (although the main interest is held by mathematically geared pupils, that kind which have problems with any language), and ''Pakkoruotsi'' is the term most often heard, also in unsober English.
:-- User:Ruhrjung 17:02 28 May 2003 (UTC) Nobody asked for my opinion, but I tend toward the view that maybe this article need not be here, although it doesn't bother me much, and as long as it's here, I will concentrate on trying to make it as NPOV as possible. On the other hand, it has already, for the better or worse already been translated to several other language wikipedias, so...
User:Cimon avaro 17:25 28 May 2003 (UTC) ::I'm not sure that any one can or should tell what is needed or not on Wikipedia. I am however concerned over the habitually reoccurring NPOV issues which seem to plague the entry. The style of propagation to other language Wikipedias is also starting to look more like advocacy than serious encyclopedia contributions. It seems kind of ridiculous to have an extensive, and rather badly written (machine translated?), article on pakkoruotsi on the French Wikipedia when there barely is an article on the Swedish language as such. I think that there is need for a frank article regarding the position of the Swedish language in Finland, which covers the several different sides of the issue which reflects that there is a real and certainly valid debate on these issues in Finland. But, Wikipedia is not the place to be making advocacy for one position or the other, and I'm questioning whether the name of this article is appropriate. The term may be simple and even witty, but I doubt that an article named "Coerced tutoring in Swedish", or a similar synonym in English, would pass any NPOV standard. -- User:Mic 19:26 28 May 2003 (UTC) ::: Thank you for putting into words my feelings for which I lacked the eloquence. The whole polemic of the article seemed to insinuate an ethnic tension in Finland which simply does not exist. Maybe my own contributions didn't help (it's easy to overcompensate on a see-saw], but I think the whole concept is in some sense flawed. It definitely could (at the minimum) benefit from some oversight from someone who knows nothing of the ''history'' that is in play. User:Cimon avaro 20:32 28 May 2003 (UTC) The article looks plain silly, and nothing else. From the start with the title to the end with the rant. Someone must have been severly intoxicated to come up with such an idea. Domestic issues of Finland don't need to be covered in articles of their own. The reader don't get any favorable impression of neither the anti-Pakkoruotsi activists, nor of Finland. User:193.14.212.59 ---- I don't understand at all why you would complain about this article not being NPOV... I mean, in its current form, it simply just blatantly advocates the Fenno-Swedish position and doesn't even mention once that people disagree with the official status quo. In effect, it is completely biased and doesn't even make a fair attempt at recognizing the other side of the discussion... I do realize that in Finnish domestic politics ever even slightly questioning the wisdom of the position of Swedish in Finland gives you the automatic label of nazi, but I would have hoped that Wikipedia would have had the guts to recognize that not everyone think it's total bliss... User:HuckFinn I think there hasn't been much of complains lately. The User:193.14.212.59 comment above was made May 28th. The article has improved since then.
--User:Ruhrjung 06:40, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC) :Somehow, in the series of edits, the English translation of the expression ''pakkoruotsi'' seems to have been lost. If it is to be retained, it should be explained. -- User:Ihcoyc 02:04, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC) == A title reflecting this article's limited scope? == Should we maybe move this article to a page titled something like: * Mandatory Swedish tuition in Finnish schools * Tuition in Finland's two domestic languages or? /User:Tuomas 10:43, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC) Under any circumstances, the neutrality of this article must be considered as disputed. This should be properly indicated, as is done in the article about, say, Yasser Arafat. The function of the whole article seems to be taking what is essentially a minor internal dispute on an international arena in an improper way. The question of "pakkoruotsi", which is in itself a polemical word coined by an organisation aimed against the minority, should rather be handled as an annex to the situation of the Swedish minority in Finland. (A passer-by, 12 November 2004) == the map == isn't a little strange to put a map in an encylopedia article, along with a whole paragraph explaining why the map is incorrect/biased, followed by a link to an apparently less biased map (which seems to be on the author's personal homepage... wouldn't there be a more official source for it??). if the linked map is indeed less biased, let's just but that on the page instead and get rid of the biased one. User:84.248.81.201 20:32, 19 Apr 2005 :Wikipedia's copyright policies is one hinderness. But, in fact, although I think none of the alternative maps are to prefer, also the current map is somewhat questionable in the context of Wikipedia:Image use policy. Feel free to improve the article, for instance by a map made by yourself! : :-) :/User:Tuomas 13:30, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Mandatory_Swedish:
Mandatory_Swedish
Mandatory_Swedish
Mandatory Swedish
Mandatory Swedish is a compulsorary school subject in Finland, wherein the Swedish language is taught. The official term is ''toinen kotimainen kieli'' in Finnish language, or ''det andra inhemska språket'' in Swedish language, which would translate to "second domestic language". Among Finns the derogatory term ''pakkoruotsi'', literally "compulsory Swedish", or even "forced Swedish", is often used in reference to this imposed tuition, revealing the loaded bitterness in what is perceived as a Swedish yoke. == Overview == In Mainland Finland both official language, Finnish and Swedish, are mandatory subjects for pupils in primary education and secondary education schools – and exams. The autonomous Åland Islands (pop. 26.000) have only one domestic language, Swedish, and its inhabitants are not forced to learn Finnish. For the 92% majority in Finland who speak Finnish, this means they have to learn the language of their Finland-Swedish fellow countrymen. This of course also means that the Swedish-speaking minority is obliged to study the Finnish language to the same extent. The reasons given for this arrangement are that both languages are official languages of Finland and part of the Finnish culture. The compulsory Swedish is also justified by that Finland will be closer to the Nordic Union by mastering Swedish, since Swedish is quite similar to both Danish and Norwegian. Critics of the system claim that most people don't have, or in any case have a limited natural contact with Swedish-speaking people. Supporters claim that mandatory Swedish improves relations to the Nordic countries and supports an improved learning of other Germanic languages, such as English and German. Supporters also maintain that mandatory Swedish is necessary to ensure that all citizens can interact with governmental institutions in their own language and thus not create language-barriers between the two languages, while opponents claim that this can be ensured by other means. It is the view of some opponents that this could actually be achieved better if those who do learn Swedish did so of their own free will. The status of Swedish as an official language in Finland is protected by Finland's Constitution and to some degree supported by international treaties according to which Åland is to remain exclusively Swedophone. The political party representing the Swedish speakers, the Swedish People's Party (Finland), has successfully been a minor partner in most Cabinets since Finland's independence. == History == Swedish teaching for all pupils in primary education was introduced in the 1970s, until then it had only been required in secondary education and tertiary education. Governmental service is, since the end of the 19th century, offered in both domestic languages; therefore employees must be proficient in both Finnish and Swedish. The reform was based on a political ambition to strengthen the ties with Western countries through Scandinavia, and to show that Finland was still a part of the Nordic countries, and not an Eastern Bloc country. It also sought to improve social mobility by ensuring that a bad decision on language in the early school years should not become an obstacle for applicants to the civil services. In Secondary education all the students learn at least two foreign languages, one of which is the other domestic language (Swedish or Finnish). The Finnish speakers take Swedish, and vice versa. Practically all the students took English (language), either as a compulsory or an optional language; 44 per cent took German (language) and 21 per cent French (language). [http://www.stat.fi/tk/he/edufinland/teksti2_5.html] Some who oppose mandatory Swedish claim that it has also influenced to the fact that Finns know foreign languages somewhat less than Swedes, Norwegians and Danes. Supporters maintain that such a claim is an oxymoron and that Scandinavians find it easier to learn eg. German and English, because they belong to the same group of Germanic languages. Finnish, a Finno-Ugric_language, is very different from most languages spoken in Europe. This, the supporters claim, is also why the Swedish-speaking Finns are better at mostly German and English, although they spend significantly more time learning Finnish (from 3rd grade) than the Finnish-speaking spend learning Swedish (from 7th grade) and, consequently, less time learning foreign languages. == Students' opinions == In many cases, pupils have negative expectations towards learning Swedish, which tends to reflect back in the social interaction between pupils and teachers, which creates a negative learning environment, which in turn further contributes to negative attitudes towards the Swedish language, the Swedish speaking minority in general, and Sweden as a country. Some argue that such negative attitudes founded in the formative school years might contribute to negative attitudes in the adult population. The attitudes of pupils and adults alike are partly expressed by prejudices which perceive the Swedish-speaking minority as wealthy snobs, which is a historical recollection of the times when the educated and landed class in Finland was Swedish-speaking, neglecting the history of the Swedish-speaking peasantry. There has also been a lot of critisism of the methodology used to teach Swedish and the lack of competence among many of the teachers. Sentiments toward mandatory Swedish vary. Many prominent politicians (both Finnish- and Swedish-speaking) whole-heartedly support mandatory Swedish in schools, while others oppose it. There have been numerous petitions and other similar campaigns arranged by some dedicated grassroot organizations to pressure the lawmakers, but to date, they have had no significant impact on the established policy and have not attained a great deal of momentum. Thus, while the ongoing national debate is often heated and passionate, the backing of the compulsory Swedish in schools still remains strong enough for the government not to consider a change of policy. It is noteworthy that mandatory Swedish is supported by the main political parties in Finland, the Kokoomus, the Centre Party of Finland, the Social Democratic Party of Finland and the Left Alliance (Finland). However, the requirement to take Swedish (or Finnish for the Swedish-speaking) as part of the high school final exams was recently abolished as part of a larger educational reform by the centrist government, which maintains its view to preserve mandatory Swedish. Opposition to mandatory Swedish can, however, bear a stigma of bigotry, although most people recognise that sentiments against the mandatory subject of Swedish do not necessarily indicate any sentiments against the Swedish-speaking population. == Future == There are those who believe that the new anti-racism directive [http://europa.eu.int/infonet/library/m/200043ce/en.htm EC (2000/43)] may put an end to the practice to force Finns to possess attributes of an ethnic group. "In very limited circumstances, a difference of treatment may be justified where a characteristic related to racial or ethnic origin constitutes a genuine and determining occupational requirement, when the objective is legitimate and the requirement is proportionate. Such circumstances should be included in the information provided by the Member States to the Commission." Thus the present Finnish way to demand minimal skills in Swedish from all educated people and public servants is against the directive, they maintain. ==See also== * Finland's language strife * [http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/alkup/2002/20021174 Government regulation on classification of municipalities according to language] Finnish history
Mandatory Swedish
Moved from article:'' As members of the minority naturally will be more skilled in the majority language, than the majority population will be in the minority language, the pakkoruotsi reform can also be seen as an effective means against Finland-Swedish dominance in governmental offices and organisations.'' -- Firstly, I don´t see why there should be any danger of the minority language dominating governmental offices and organisations, secondly, I don´t understand how this sentence might help in understanding the implications of compulsory Swedish language tuition in Finnish schools. If somebody could clarify and NPOV this, please put it back into the article.
:My attempt was to "balance" the section regarding reasons behind the policy. While I certainly agree to the wording being unsufficiently cautious, as it was written rather much in haste, it does most certainly surprice me that the ''logic'' doesn't shine through. ;-/ It's not the ''minority language'' which is at danger of dominating government, but the minority itself. As far as I understand, there is an overrepresentation of the minority in the ranks and staffs of the governmental authorities, which would have been worse without the pakkoruotsi unless the minority language requirement were laxed. -- User:Ruhrjung 17:41 23 May 2003 (UTC) ditto: ''arguing that the Swedish speakers of Åland and Finland maybe better should emigrate to Sweden if they aren't able to conduct their business in Finnish''. -- This looks like disguised polemics against the minority, and is not helpful either.
:You are certainly right, it too was an attempt at balancing the following: -- User:Ruhrjung 17:41 23 May 2003 (UTC) and more:''Some pupils feel they suffer from learning the minority language during two years or more. Also the mandatory course and exam in tertiary education is questioned by them who hold mandatory Swedish for the most disliked subject in school, arguing their skill in the disliked language doesn't correspond with all the years spent studying it.'' -- The facts in this sentence may be true, but should be expressed in a more neutral way before going into an encyclopedia article.
Cheers, User:Kosebamse 13:10 23 May 2003 (UTC) :I tried to turn the rant into a less biased version, but you still found it insufficiently NPOV. Obviously, I didn't try hard enough. ;-) -- User:Ruhrjung 17:41 23 May 2003 (UTC) I had made a revision some days ago, which I thought I had been fairly successful with, in NPOV-regards. I was then this morning pretty baffled to see ''"my splendid neutral text"'' ;->> hadn't been accepted but preambled by a rather biased rant, which I subsequently tried to edit to get it 1/ more neutral, and where that's not possible, 2/ more balanced, in a way which hopefully would be acceptable for both side of the feud. It would be stupid of me to try to hide the element of injured pride in my less skillful editing today, but I hope something good is coming out of it in the end. ;-)
-- User:Ruhrjung 17:41 23 May 2003 (UTC) :I believe that the article is evolving quite nicely and your contributions did help a lot (thanks!). However, when debates are getting 1) ridiculous and 2) nationalistic, I believe it might sometimes be best to take out the controversies entirely instead of starting out on a way that leads to detailing every possible implication of every possible interpretation of every statement. That´s why I excised these portions, and I do believe that the trimmed-down article is now more readable and less biased than it was a while ago. but please feel free to add any comment on controversy that you feel is necessary to complete the picture. And it might still be a good idea to have some others review it (I´ve asked Jniemenmaa to have a look). User:Kosebamse 22:32 23 May 2003 (UTC) ::Probably you are right. In this case I felt it might be perceived as the introduction to an edit-war, of which I have no interest (see the German language version which I decided to ignore;-), why I didn't simply revert to the previous version. More generally, it can't be neglected that the Pakkoruotsi issue is a part of the long domestic "debate" regarding Finland's positioning between the nearest powers Russia, Germany and Sweden. Although the arguments are crude and anything but NPOV, they are not representing any fringe minority, or (only) immature school children.
::-- User:Ruhrjung 23:24 23 May 2003 (UTC) :::Please don´t get me wrong, I didn´t refer to your work when using the words "ridiculous and nationalistic". The matter, however, does seem to have its ridiculous and nationalistic aspects and IMO it might help to keep these out if possible as they might be seen as bait for trolls of all sorts . Thanks for your work, User:Kosebamse 23:34 23 May 2003 (UTC) ---- Thanks for the invitation to both Kosebamse and Ruhrjung. I do not know if I can add anything essential to this article, but I tried looking at it with "fresh eyes". You two seem to have managed to make it quite understandable for someone without any knowledge of Finnish language education. But there are still some things that I do not like in the article: ''5.1% of the population in Mainland-Finland in addition to the autonomous Åland islands'' -- This is just bending the truth with statistics. Why make a distinction with "Mainland-Finland". Lets just say 5.6% of the population of Finland. :I've no problems to buy the rest, although I wonder if your proposed revisions really would be accepted as NPOV by those disliking the mandatory education in Swedish. But on this very point, I think it would be wise to keep the 5.1%-figure. Otherwise the ~5%-figure will return sooner or later. The 5%-figure can be argued to be correct, but only if Åland is counted separately. And Åland can be argued to be irrelevant here, as Åland doesn't have two official languages, and hence no Pakkoruotsi.
:-- User:Ruhrjung 00:58 26 May 2003 (UTC) In the first paragraph: '' to refer to Finland-Swedish studied in the schools of Finland.'' -- I know that Ruhrjung is not going to like this... but I do not think it is Finland-Swedish that is taught to the Finnish speaking pupils. Maybe we can change that to
:-- User:Ruhrjung 00:58 26 May 2003 (UTC) ''In governmental terminology "the other domestic language" is the term used for Pakkoruotsi, like Finnish is the other domestic language for pupils with Swedish mother tongue.'' -- I don't understand this sentance at all. Doesn't "the other domestic language" refer to (Finland-)Swedish? :This is how it's been explained for me (and what's supported by the .stat.fi-site): :In the peruskoulu you study first your mother tongue for some years, then English, and finally also "the other domestic language". :The Fennophones study Finnish, English, Swedish :The Swedophones study Swedish, English, Finnish :(in some cases a second non-domestic language as French or German is studied in the peruskoulu too). :Hence Finnish is "the other domestic language" for the Swedophone, :and Swedish is "the other domestic language" for the Fennophone. :I guess the words in Finnish and Swedish are ''"toinen"'' and ''"andra"'' which at least in the case of Swedish can mean both "second" and "other".
:-- User:Ruhrjung 00:58 26 May 2003 (UTC) Is the link to "Pois pakkoruotsi" necessary? It could only be interestint to people who can read Finnish (and they should read the Finnish wikipedia article instead). -- User:Jniemenmaa 18:28 25 May 2003 (UTC) ---- I moved the following paragraphs here:
(maybe they could be re-worded?) :''In later times the protected status of the language has become a valued bludgeon to hammer the Swedish government. Since Sweden has been slow to implement even those minority rights for Finnish-Swedes that its own international obligations warrant, this matter is always brought to the forefront when the two countries meet. The perceived hypocrisy of Swedish indignation at for example Estonian tardiness at granting full rights to ethnic Russians, has given some further force to this argument.'' :''== External links: =='' :''* [http://www.poispakkoruotsi.com/ Pois pakkoruotsi petition] (in Finnish) for abolishing compulsory Swedish.'' -- User:Ruhrjung 16:44 28 May 2003 (UTC) Uhm. What exactly bothers you about the above paragraph? (The links aren't my responsibility) -- User:Cimon avaro 17:25 28 May 2003 (UTC) The language. The connection to Finnland and Finnish politics is also somewhat fussy, but primarily the language. You don't say so in English, unless you are something like a fringe politician (Glistrup-or-worse rather than Kjaersgaard). I know this is hard for many Finns (and Israelis) to assess, as the level of the style used by Finns ...well, let's just say that "something" often makes Finns appear more aggressive than would be good for you, if you get my drift?
-- User:Ruhrjung 17:38 28 May 2003 (UTC) ---- Should the entry retain its present name? An explanatory title like "Swedish education in Finland" ought to be more appropriate. The present terminology might be colloquial i Finnish, but it does hardly have the same use in English. Another aspect is that it can be interpreted as a POV or defamatory statement. -- User:Mic 16:50 28 May 2003 (UTC) :My opinion (if it is worth anything) is that the topic is of fringe interest except for the few fennophiles (like myself) and for Swedes in Sweden. And for us (the fennophiles and the Sweden-Swedes) ''Pakkoruotsi'' is the relevant term. There exists a legitime debate in Finland on these issues (although the main interest is held by mathematically geared pupils, that kind which have problems with any language), and ''Pakkoruotsi'' is the term most often heard, also in unsober English.
:-- User:Ruhrjung 17:02 28 May 2003 (UTC) Nobody asked for my opinion, but I tend toward the view that maybe this article need not be here, although it doesn't bother me much, and as long as it's here, I will concentrate on trying to make it as NPOV as possible. On the other hand, it has already, for the better or worse already been translated to several other language wikipedias, so...
User:Cimon avaro 17:25 28 May 2003 (UTC) ::I'm not sure that any one can or should tell what is needed or not on Wikipedia. I am however concerned over the habitually reoccurring NPOV issues which seem to plague the entry. The style of propagation to other language Wikipedias is also starting to look more like advocacy than serious encyclopedia contributions. It seems kind of ridiculous to have an extensive, and rather badly written (machine translated?), article on pakkoruotsi on the French Wikipedia when there barely is an article on the Swedish language as such. I think that there is need for a frank article regarding the position of the Swedish language in Finland, which covers the several different sides of the issue which reflects that there is a real and certainly valid debate on these issues in Finland. But, Wikipedia is not the place to be making advocacy for one position or the other, and I'm questioning whether the name of this article is appropriate. The term may be simple and even witty, but I doubt that an article named "Coerced tutoring in Swedish", or a similar synonym in English, would pass any NPOV standard. -- User:Mic 19:26 28 May 2003 (UTC) ::: Thank you for putting into words my feelings for which I lacked the eloquence. The whole polemic of the article seemed to insinuate an ethnic tension in Finland which simply does not exist. Maybe my own contributions didn't help (it's easy to overcompensate on a see-saw], but I think the whole concept is in some sense flawed. It definitely could (at the minimum) benefit from some oversight from someone who knows nothing of the ''history'' that is in play. User:Cimon avaro 20:32 28 May 2003 (UTC) The article looks plain silly, and nothing else. From the start with the title to the end with the rant. Someone must have been severly intoxicated to come up with such an idea. Domestic issues of Finland don't need to be covered in articles of their own. The reader don't get any favorable impression of neither the anti-Pakkoruotsi activists, nor of Finland. User:193.14.212.59 ---- I don't understand at all why you would complain about this article not being NPOV... I mean, in its current form, it simply just blatantly advocates the Fenno-Swedish position and doesn't even mention once that people disagree with the official status quo. In effect, it is completely biased and doesn't even make a fair attempt at recognizing the other side of the discussion... I do realize that in Finnish domestic politics ever even slightly questioning the wisdom of the position of Swedish in Finland gives you the automatic label of nazi, but I would have hoped that Wikipedia would have had the guts to recognize that not everyone think it's total bliss... User:HuckFinn I think there hasn't been much of complains lately. The User:193.14.212.59 comment above was made May 28th. The article has improved since then.
--User:Ruhrjung 06:40, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC) :Somehow, in the series of edits, the English translation of the expression ''pakkoruotsi'' seems to have been lost. If it is to be retained, it should be explained. -- User:Ihcoyc 02:04, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC) == A title reflecting this article's limited scope? == Should we maybe move this article to a page titled something like: * Mandatory Swedish tuition in Finnish schools * Tuition in Finland's two domestic languages or? /User:Tuomas 10:43, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC) Under any circumstances, the neutrality of this article must be considered as disputed. This should be properly indicated, as is done in the article about, say, Yasser Arafat. The function of the whole article seems to be taking what is essentially a minor internal dispute on an international arena in an improper way. The question of "pakkoruotsi", which is in itself a polemical word coined by an organisation aimed against the minority, should rather be handled as an annex to the situation of the Swedish minority in Finland. (A passer-by, 12 November 2004) == the map == isn't a little strange to put a map in an encylopedia article, along with a whole paragraph explaining why the map is incorrect/biased, followed by a link to an apparently less biased map (which seems to be on the author's personal homepage... wouldn't there be a more official source for it??). if the linked map is indeed less biased, let's just but that on the page instead and get rid of the biased one. User:84.248.81.201 20:32, 19 Apr 2005 :Wikipedia's copyright policies is one hinderness. But, in fact, although I think none of the alternative maps are to prefer, also the current map is somewhat questionable in the context of Wikipedia:Image use policy. Feel free to improve the article, for instance by a map made by yourself! : :-) :/User:Tuomas 13:30, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
M
MA | MB | MC | MD | ME | MF | MG | MH | MI | MJ | MK | ML | MN | MO | MP | MR | MS | MT | MU | MW | MX | MY | MZ |Words begining with Mandatory_Swedish:
Mandatory_Swedish
Mandatory_Swedish
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
