Technological advances in recent decades have reinforced the presence of the keyboard, both in the office and at home. We communicate our ideas and thoughts through writing. The mastery of a language cannot be accomplished without the use of a medium. Without support, information is doomed to remain compartmentalised.
During the 1980s, the democratization of microcomputing made it possible to gradually remove the barriers that arose for the use of typewritten French. Until the end of the 1970s, the use of “mechanical” typewriters and teleprinters, conforming to the American ASCII standard, allowed a limited use of special characters and accents. The traditional French-Canadian keyboard reflects these limitations, relying on the increased use of dead letters, in addition to the characters that must be entered later.
The intensive use of these characters does not allow smooth writing. In addition, the absence of the “Oe” ligature prevents writing in neat language. The use of automatic correction makes it possible to overcome the defects of non-standardized keyboards. Its use is nevertheless a crutch that does not replace manual input.
A new French-Canadian keyboard was standardized in 1988. This first preliminary standard made it possible to limit the use of dead letters, by adding the most used accented letters in French (À, É, È, Ç, Ù ). A revision of this standard was adopted by a Canadian committee mandated in 1992. This revision largely reproduces the previous standard, while integrating more characters for the writing of European languages.
From the 2000s, in order to offer computer products at low prices, some manufacturers began to sell entry-level computers equipped with a “hybrid” 48-key (ISO) alphanumeric keyboard, printing the characters of the traditional American and French-Canadian keyboard in an overlaid manner. This practice was taken up by other manufacturers and gradually extended to mid-range models.
This seems to be a problem. By not adopting the CSA standard keyboard, which is installed by default on Windows in Canada under the name of Standard Multilingual Canadian, French speakers have to deal with a configuration that is in direct competition with the standardized model and which does not necessarily reflect the preferences users.
In the early 1990s, French speakers in Quebec and the rest of Canada were polled on their preference between the “French-Canadian” keyboard and the CSA keyboard. Among respondents, 71% said they were more comfortable with the CSA model. How is it then that this standard is practically impossible to find on the PC market? Apple currently seems to be the only major manufacturer to offer the default CSA keyboard for French speakers, in its minimal version (ligature and group 2 characters are not visible on the keys). When you are an individual, it is practically impossible to obtain a standardized keyboard. The minimum standard of the CSA keyboard remains insufficient for calls for tenders in the Quebec public service.
If small countries like Norway and Denmark manage to get sufficient supplies of their computer equipment, why not tighten our criteria? Manufacturers could be more compelled to offer a CSA keyboard on their shelf models, complying with ISO standards on the layout of keys, characters and pictograms and including the use of special characters required in calls for tenders. Manufacturers would be discouraged from producing poor quality “hybrid” keyboards to save money. The Office québécois de la langue française could keep a list of providers that individuals could refer to, as was the practice in the past.
The Government of Quebec could start by requiring the use of this standardized keyboard in the health network. It continues to stock up with the old French-Canadian model. When you want to defend a language, you can’t be satisfied with a passive attitude, sometimes you have to raise your voice, demand a little more respect and, when individuals are unable to make these companies listen to reason, the legislator must take over.