Opinion: AI will expose the limits of Quebec’s language restrictions

For more than half a century, Quebec’s language policy has rested on a legitimate concern: protecting French on a continent dominated by English. That concern is not about to go away.

However, AI translation will increasingly force Quebec governments to distinguish between two different objectives that are too often presented as though they were the same: The first aims to preserve the public and institutional face of French. The second is to modify how individuals actually communicate, obtain information and navigate their daily lives.

Language legislation can continue to accomplish the first objective. It can determine the language in which governments publish information, businesses display signs, employers communicate with workers, and institutions provide services. These requirements affirm the primacy and visibility of French.

AI does not undercut these goals. What it does, however, is weaken the assumption that controlling the language of publication also controls the language in which information is received, understood and used.

A French-only government website, form, sign, notice or workplace document may preserve the official French face of Quebec. But a citizen, worker, immigrant or visitor can increasingly translate it instantly with a browser, phone camera or AI assistant. The state still controls the language in which the information appears. It has far less control over the language in which individuals read it.

That distinction is critical because Quebec politicians often present restrictions on English as more than symbolic affirmations of French. They insist that such measures will modify behaviour, increase the use of French and reduce reliance on English.

AI makes those claims more difficult to uphold.

People have always used dictionaries, professional translators and bilingual friends to understand material written in another language. But AI transforms what was once occasional, costly or cumbersome into something immediate, automatic and nearly invisible. Translation is no longer a separate activity. It is becoming a built-in layer between the institution providing the information and the person receiving it.

There is also an important irony. Quebec appears increasingly prepared to accept AI as a means of converting English-language material into French, provided the resulting French is accurate and meets the required standard. That use of technology can help businesses comply with their obligations and make more English-language content available to francophone consumers.

But Quebec must also confront the inverse. The same technology that translates English content into French allows users to convert officially French-only websites, forms and documents into English — or virtually any other language — in seconds. Quebec may welcome one direction of translation while being uncomfortable with the political implications of the other, but the technology itself does not recognize that distinction.

Quebec language laws can require an organization to produce a proper French version of its materials. It can establish standards for the quality of French and impose consequences when those standards are not met. But it cannot realistically regulate the private translation functions embedded in a user’s browser, social-media platform or mobile device.

This is the rapidly growing limitation facing Quebec language policy.

A rule may continue to shape institutional conduct while having less influence over individual linguistic choices and ensuing behaviour. French-only web content can satisfy the letter of the law and maintain the French face of government. Yet if users can instantly convert that content into English or another language, the measure does not necessarily encourage them to learn French or engage more deeply with it.

The difference is between visibility and use.

French may remain highly visible in the public sphere while technology makes it easier for individuals to function through another language. The result is not necessarily the erosion of French, but a widening gap between the official linguistic environment and people’s personal experience of it.

That gap is politically potent. Quebec governments repeatedly reinforce language restrictions while assuring voters that they are strengthening French and limiting the influence of English. As technology makes many restrictions easier to circumvent, politicians will face growing pressure to explain whether a measure is intended to protect the symbolic and institutional position of French or to produce a measurable change in language outcomes.

The first goal remains achievable. The second will become increasingly more difficult. Quebec can still require its institutions to operate and communicate in French. But it cannot control the language in which people choose to read or understand that information.

AI will not remove French from Quebec’s public face. It will, however, make it harder for governments to claim that French-only rules necessarily lead people to use more French.

Future Quebec governments will therefore face a choice. They can continue to present restrictions on English as proof that they are strengthening French, even as AI makes those restrictions easier to get around. Or they can acknowledge that the language landscape is changing and find more practical ways to promote French.

Jack Jedwab is president and CEO of the Association for Canadian Studies.