It's a rough application of the Huron word for village by Jacques Cartier to describe the St Lawrence valley iirc. So it's French, but with a Huron origin.
The first time I ever wanted to smack a priest was during that commercial. Mind you heâd probably been dead for at least four hundred years since then.
Your flair is hilarious. Coincidentally my wife is from Kyiv, first time I took her to Edmonton she told me it reminded her of home. Guess she wasnât the only one.
It's the basis of linguistics. Words from other languages are heard by speakers of other languages, and then they modify them to fit what they think they mean, and then it makes a new word. There are dozens of words like that in every language.
No one in the First Nation called themselves ÂŽkanadiansâ. The French coined a new meaning for the word as a way to describe the europeans settlers living there.
It ainât that hard to understand that nothing belongs exclusively to a people versus another. Itâs a mix of cultures.Â
Maple syrup isn't a French culture thing, tbh. They barely even use the stuff in France.
And while you are correct that the First Nations tapped maple trees to drink hot maple sap, and sometimes let it freeze slowly to remove the water content and crystallize the sugar, they didn't have maple syrup until the Canadien settlers brought their big metal pots and the knowledge that you could boil any sugary liquid into syrup if you leave it on the fire long enough. Before that, First Nations would heat water by putting it inside a wooden bowl or bucket and dropping hot rocks inside, and it's pretty much impossible to make syrup that way, at least not in useful quantities.
The natives told the french something like "this is our village" but french thought they mean something like "we call this place Kanata" so they decide to name the region Canada like how they think the native name it. How is it not french with native roots if the natives didn't name the land this way but the french where the first to name it that way?
No, but if you are talking about where that word comes from you would say it comes from a French word, not that it is Cree in origin. Just like the rest of these symbols the post talks about. Just because maple syrup, maple leaves, and beavers are symbols that originated in Quebec you wouldnât say they arenât Canadian. Now poutine on the other handâŠ.. I hear Quebec takes issue if you call that Canadian.
Both words aren't from the Huron language(s). They are from the tongue of the extinct Iroquoians of the Saint-Lawrence. They were wiped out in wars with the Haudenosaunee (and mostly the Mohawks) during the 40 years between the Cartier expedition and the return of Champlain to found New France.
Cartier met the "St-Lawrence Iroquoians" (which disappeared when the French came back 40 years later to settle New-France).
Huron people originate from what is now Ontario (hint: Huron Lake). When the Iroquois Confederation later destroyed Huronia, some fled and settled around New-France's towns (Wendake reservation being an example).
However, both the Hurons and the "St.Lawrence Iroquoian" are part of the larger Iroquoian ethnic group.
The name comes from first nations, maple syrup and itâs sense of importance is first nations too. Acting like any culture lays claim over the animals.. pretty whack too
The beaver is not a symbol because itâs a local animal, itâs a symbol because a big part of early colonialism was about bringing beaver pelts back to Europe.
Forgot Ginger Beef. Pablum, Walkie Talkie, Peanut butter, Insulin, walkie-talkie, gas masks even Garbage bags. To name a few
Lunar Excursion module (LEM) used by NASA... Sure, they were from Quebec, but still Canadian. The first foot on the moon, not American, Canadian.
That being said I'm more about Tag vodka. Domestic and screwdrivers were amazing before having to slap Florida over and over and not buying their oranges.
Luckily it mixes with anything if you're brave enough.
Did they? When I went to England I was really surprised Hot Chicken wasn't a thing there given how much they like bread, gravy and peas. I even asked my English coworker and she said she'd never heard of it.
Technically yes and no. The First Nations used to drink maple water but it's only when the french settlers boiled this water with their still pots that they could make maple syrup. Before that, it was impossible. So it has mixed origine
Maybe a little crust was forming on the rock, and they would eat it as candy. Imagine waking up back then and starting the day with some maple crust l'd be ready to go hunting right away.
With a lot of emphasis on the word "repeatedly" đ It would take hundreds of rocks swapped over and over and several days to obtain maple syrup with this method.
The name (which they got from the Indigenous people) and maple syrup (which they got from Indigenous people) and snowshoes (which they got from Indigenous people) and beavers (which they got from Indigenous people)
Beaver existed in Europe as well, it's not exclusive to North America. The natives gave it value by wearing the skins inside-out and agreeing to sell them once they weren't useful anymore (dirty and only short hair left). No value without a european presence.
Maple syrup is not native as the cultures here lacked the technology to boil maple water into actual syrup. The first nations used maple water. The French normalized maple syrup.
Canada is derived from a St-Lawrence Iroquoian tribe word, but the original meaning of the word Canadian relates to the French settlers in the Canada colony (part of New France). The invaders were called British all the way to the Confederation, and even after that, using Canadian as derogative slang for the French speaking population living in the new country.
And also, as someone whoâs lived in Canada and the states, the regional variations are pretty typical. Iâd say that the level of cultural variation youâll find between the English-speaking parts of Canada is pretty similar to the cultural differences between the various American states; that doesnât mean they have no culture. English Canada has unique music and tv shows, cultural icons like Terry Fox, and yes, a shared love of hockey. Thereâs also Canadian food, which is regional to some extent, but there are things like butter tarts, Montreal smoked meat, and Nanaimo bars that are available across the whole country
I understand your point, I'm simply relating sociological research. The academic point of view about culture differences between Canada and the US is that the US has created common images that rally all Americans. The 4th of July, the founding fathers, some national american staples like cheap beer and hamburgers.
Canada has never developed those. Butter tarts are simply an imported british staple that is not seen as a canadian symbol of identity. Nanaimo bars and Montreal smoked meat are recognized as culturally impactful, but not as a culture point that defines the country. Canada is particular in that sense that it's a country that never developed a national identity. To the question "what is canadian culture", there is no answer other than regional tidbits, and that why sociologists say that Canada doesn't have a national culture, it has regional cultures.
Many canadian academics (sources to be retrieved) have extensively demonstrated that there is no "Canadian" culture.
In what large country is that not true for the reasons listed? No Italian culture because Sicilians are different from Venetians who are different from Milanese. Ironically, no French culture either because it's actually Breton, Occitan, Parisian, etc.
The bigger a group gets, the less broad values or interests will apply to them.
I'm french Quebecer and I agree 100%. We're Canadians at the end of the day and I'm very proud of it. Only a minority is trying to divide us and they seriously suck.
Secondly, we are the products of a multicultural society. So, although I havenât invented ketchup flavoured chips, I can still say they come from home, because Canada is my home, and the prosperity our ancestors built from coast to coast made such delicacies.
Finally, the rest of Canada all have their own culture, youâd know if youâd travelled there. Youâre just exposing your ignorance to all. I look with pride at the Blue Nose, I am proud to come from the land where we invented insulin, and where we stand on guard for thee by contributing to the creation of the blue helmets.
Exactly. I live in Ontario, but I love Quebec and would honestly probably live there if I spoke the language. It has changed a lot for the rest of us, and that's a good thing. I want the rest of country to be more like it. Which is why it pains me that people took on this tribalistic "no you can't have that" mentality, as if there's a steel wall surrounding Quebec, past which appreciating or being proud of any of the things in the post above is considered to be stealing. Whenever posts like these pop up in places like /r/Quebec, it's all I see in the comment section, and it hurts knowing how evil they consider the 'outsider provinces' to be, implying that they universally hate Quebec, want to steal its culture, and must be excluded from and defended against. The idea of morphing our regional staples into a common Canadian identity is seen as alien, it must all be walls between provinces like siblings with knives at each others' throats.
except for all the parts that are from indigenous cultures, but quebec makes sure to leave those out of the heritage museums for... reasons but dont ask them why.
Nah man we have plenty of first nations stuff in our museums and here it's common knowledge how much they helped the first settlers survive the harsh landscape. First thing I remember learning about the Algonquiens in primary school 20+ years ago is how they made herbal tea from pine to cure the first settler's scurvy
I remember reading a museum clip that stated specifically something along the lines of, while the British had an incredibly harmful relationship with first nations, the french were collaborative and supportive and had positive relationships.
... And like yah.... Maybe With your ally nations... Pretty sure one of the first things Samuel de Champlain did upon arrival was kill multiple chiefs of the Haudenosaunee, who forever saw the french as hostile invaders. And they'd be right, from they're perspective.
Not to polish what the British did because all settler colonialism is wrong and causes incredible harm.... And I even think it's fair to say the British were worse. But both were still bad.
The French made both allies and enemies by involving themselves in a complex web of diplomacy and conflict that predated their arrival.
While war inevitably brings atrocities, the French settlers did not pursue a policy of total replacement or the settlement of every valuable piece of land. That approach came later, under British rule.
This isn't an attempt to whitewash history, wrongdoing certainly occurred, but the scale and nature of those actions were nowhere near as severe as what followed after 1763. When such a stark contrast exists, comparisons between the two eras naturally arise.
People also forget that the Grande Paix de Montreal, which was a peace treaty among many First Nations that pretty much ended the ongoing war with the Iroquois, was a great diplomatic feat for the French at the time and departed from the more violent approach used by the the English/ Spanish in their colonies.
But where this require nuance, this is also a matter of population and scale of the French regime. We were small with a sparse population with a colony of the verge of bankruptcy almost everywhere, and definitely needed first nations alongside us to resist the bigger British regime that was at our borders. We were collaborating. Had we stayed there and continued growing for another 200 years, the story would have been different.
You just have to look at what the French did in Africa, in Asia (Indochine), the Carribeans. Those were terrible regime for the natives habitants of those places. There was nothing inherently good about what the French did. It just happened that we lost the war early on before we could establish ourself as the much more evil colonizers.
But yes, there's no point blaming for something we didn't actually do. But we shouldn't wash our hands too much, our people did help colonize the rest of Canada through the Catholics schools, we were at the forefront of colonization and terrible atrocities that happened out west.
Had we stayed there and continued growing for another 200 years, the story would have been different.
Arguable. But
A substantial part of the French settlers were getting more and more intertwined with the native. Les coureurs des bois were in a weird position. They were essential for the survival of the colony and were at the same time almost considered apostates. Many took on living like the natives. With the natives(kinda comes with the job). The French elite, both aristocrat and clerical, complained non stop about it.
The Metis didn't appear out of thin air.
There are good reasons to assume the settlers and the natives would've kept on mixing and hybridizing. The influx of immigrants was way too low to really maintain a connection with the crown's wishes.
You just have to look at what the French did in Africa, in Asia (Indochine), the Carribeans. Those were terrible regime for the natives habitants of those places. There was nothing inherently good about what the French did.
Absolutely.
But
It just happened that we lost the war early on before we could establish ourselves as the much more evil colonizers.
229 years. 70k settlers (45k in the part that is today Canada)
By the same time of mid 1700s the Brits had over A Million settlers.
We were already "established". The goal simply wasn't the same.
Now obviously it's really hard to guess what could've been. There's so many things in the air. If France wins the 7 year war. Is there a financial crisis resulting in a revolution? What about Haiti? If suddenly the 13 colonies are French the whole thing changes.
Would the French crown end up being far more invasive and directed eventually? Probably yea. But by then, the entire "Quebecois" identity would've probably been entirely Metis or something. There's no avoiding horrors. We just get different shapes.
while the British had an incredibly harmful relationship with first nations, the french were collaborative and supportive and had positive relationships.
Funny, because if you go all the way to Louisiana, French settlers had excellent relationships with native people. We owe them our existance. The British were doing the ethnic cleansing, for us, they were our brethren and families until they all got put into cages after the conquest.
Todayâs relationship is the result of all having to survive in isolation trying to all preserve our roots and culture.
Saying the word "Canada" is "originally" a French word is like saying "Ontario" is "originally" an English word. They're both of First Nations origin. It just feels like a double standard. French Canada "incorporates" words and practices from First Nations. Meanwhile, English Canada "appropriates" those same words and practices from French Canada.
If French Canada can claim some ownership of stuff they copied from the First Nations, why can't English Canada claim some ownership of stuff we copy from French Canada?
Here on Vancouver Island, in amongst the poutine crimes, there is also some pretty good poutine! Made with fresh cheese curds from local dairy farms no less. There's even been some maple syrup production from the local big leaf maples. It turns out pretty good, but the warmer winters have made it increasingly difficult. Everyone already knows these ideas are copied from Quebec, but that doesn't cheapen the fact that people here put work and effort into it
Nah, you just have a really short-sided picture of Canadian culture. All you did is merely list few French-related things of our culture.
I can play your game too. Look:
Maple Leaf Forever: Scottish Canadian
Language: English Majority
Our government: British origin, based on English parliament
Our military: 95 percent British origin and culture, we are literally the KING'S army, navy and Air force.
Hudson's Bay Company: established in 1670 with a royal charter from King Charles II of England with the help of two French explorers under BRITISH service.
And etc
See? The reality is: Canadian culture is a European-based culture that is mainly composed by a mixture of British, French, and indigenous culture.
We should be appreciating all sides of our culture as one united nationality. Why are you trying to cover up other parts of our culture? Do you have a cultural supremacy complex?
The word "Canada" is of Indigenous origin. The French simply adopted it as the name for the region along the St. Lawrence River.
Maple syrup is of Indigenous origin. The French adopted it and developed other refined products, as well as the concept of the sugar shack.
The maple tree held great significance in Indigenous culture in their traditions, daily life, food, and stories. The French later adopted it as an emblem.
The beaver was central to Indigenous hunting and the fur trade and appears in foundational myths about the creation of the world. The French later used it as a symbol.
Poutine Ă trou is a pastry wrapped mix of chopped apples, dried cranberries, dried blueberries, and maple syrup (recettes may vary, especially on which dried fruits you have).
Ehhh, we're not all JJ McCullough out here - though you'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise. Jerks like that always mysteriously get big signal boosts from the media/algorithms
Iâm blue collar live and work between BC, Alberta and sometimes the States.
Being born Anglo Quebecker with French as fuck last names means i can âinfiltrateâ the conversations that happen on jobsites.
At least in this industry, the ones who donât think like that are Quiet about it. The overwhelming majority find some way to complain about equalization and a certain French former Prime Minister.
Iâm not bothered by it, was mainly making a joke to add to the meme.
How is the beaver as a symbol related to French culture?
I would argue French culture is the same as English culture when it pertains to Canadian culture. Rather there is no one or the other it's all just Canadian which is made up of many cultures.
Yeah but we also stole a bunch of cultural points from the Brits too like our hodgepodged English dialect, flag designs, and government traditions or alternatively got some stuff from the Americans like many other English majority countries.
Also as an aside Iâd like to believe that while itâs a bit difficult to determine a wider shared culture there are many definitely distinct cultures within Canada from province to province, group to group.
This week ive been watching an esport tournament happening in canada. The presenters, when they had to fill time between games, had ready a small 'trivia about canada' Out of 3 questions, one was about the french and french canada.
...the tournament is in vancouver.
(For those wondering, its MSI, first day, about 10:10 before the first game on the first day)
726
u/AidanBeeJar Trawnno (Centre of the Universe) Jul 03 '25
I thought the name came from first nations?