This will in all likelihood get nuked, but I just can't help myself.

Cyt's w/u on the nature of the french language in Quebec is not only offensive and smacks of elitism, but is also wrong. Yes, the french spoken in Quebec is reminiscent of that spoken in France in the 17th century, but that most definitely is not the case for the written french. I defy any French citizen to read a Quebec newspaper (preferably La Presse rather than one of the tabloids) and identify significant departures from the language as it is used in France.

When the French complain about the status of the language in Quebec, they are complaining about the accent and the use of colloquial terms. The grammar is the same. The words are the same (more or less). The ebb and flow of communication is the same. They complain because they find it difficult to follow the Quebecois when they speak amongst themselves. This is akin (one might be so bold as to say identical) to the English complaining about the accents of the Irish and Scottish, New Yorkers complaining about the accents of Floridians, Spaniards complaining about the accents of Mexicans etc. The essential problem with the attitude that there is something wrong/broken with the spoken language of an ethnic/regional/cultural group is that it discounts the flavour and depth such groups add to the language. I believe that in the absence of regional character, language dies for it cannot evolve.

In summary, I would like to say in my heaviest Quebecois accent: "Toiye, mon tabarnac, viens-toiye icit pour que je puisse te creuver la yeule!"

Personal background: I am a recent adoptee to the Quebecois family, having moved here from Ontario. I spoke french with a Parisian accent and style prior to moving here, but have adopted the Quebecois style of communication. My co-workers (all francophones) are or multiple nationalities, and my impressions concerning the French are based on my discussions (at length) with the two French students in our lab. So, this is not entirely without foundation...