Harriet kindly put together this glossary of terms:







Diaphrasia = the study of the capacity of speakers to vary their manner of talking according to circumstances (situation, person(s) to whom they are talking, activity, etc.)
There are three circumstances in which ‘que’ is used.
The relative ‘que’
The general subordinating conjunction
Other circumstances
The relative ‘que’
In standard French one says
L’homme que j’ai vu
Because the verb takes a direct object – j’ai vu un homme
However, one says
L’homme dont je parle; or
L’homme de qui je parle; or
L’homme duquel je parle
Le garage dans lequel il est rentré
La reunion à laquelle j’ai assisté
Because the verb is indirectly transitive (it requires an object introduced by a preposition) or it takes a direct and an indirect object
An example of a verb requiring an object introduced by à is assister à
Some verbs are ditransitive (they take a direct object and an indirect object introduced by a preposition
L’homme à qui j’ai donné le livre ; or
L’homme auquel j’ai donné le livre
The non-standard usages in these circumstances are:
L’homme que je parle de lui; or
L’homme que j’en parle
Le garage qu’il est rentré dedans
La réunion que j’assiste à elle
La réunion que j’y assiste
L’homme que j’ai donné le livre à lui
L’homme que je lui ai donné le livre
This is known as the ‘décumul du rélatif’ or relieving of the relative pronoun of some of its functions.
French relative pronouns bear a heavy syntagmatic load, because they have to fulfil a number of functions
Introduce the subordinate clause
Replace a substantive already mentioned
Indicate the function of that substantive in the subordinate clause; i.e. is the subject or object of the verb; if the object is it the direct or indirect object, etc
Gadet suggests that in français populaire the relatives, such as the non-standard usages illustrated above, have a decumulative function.
‘que’ merely indicates the start of the relative clause. The task of replacing the preceding substantive is shifted to a pronoun.
The functional role of indicating syntagmatic relationships/parts of speech is shifted either to a pronoun (in the examples above ‘lui’ ‘en’ or ‘y’) or a proposition (in the examples above ‘à’ or ‘de’) or an adverb (in the examples above ‘dedans’)
Sometimes there is the use of hypercorrection or pleonasm
L’homme dont j’en parle
L’homme dont je parle de lui
Gadet also identifies the ‘defective’ relative – the use of ‘que’ on its own and distinguishes this from the relatives of français populaire
L’homme que je parle
While the relatives of français populaire are used by educated people (i.e. the use or non-use is diaphasic) defective relatives are only used by lower classes. (i.e. the use or non-use is diastratic)
The general subordinating conjunction
Standard French employs a range of subordinating conjunctions
Autant que, comme, puisque, sinon que, tandis que, bien que, après que, etc.
Non-standard usages reduce these to ‘que’
Je vais voir les enfants qu’ils font beaucoup de bruit = je vais voir les enfants parce qu’ils font beaucoup de bruit
Other circumstances
Gadet identifies other functions
‘Une incise d’énonciation’ – an interpolation
Quatre degrés à Lamorna le matin qu’il a dit le boucher
An ‘introducteur du prédicat’
Heureusement qu’il a réussi
‘Téléscopage’
T’as besoin de rien que je monte ? = est-ce que je te monte quelque chose ?
The development and future of the French language.
Francais familiar is very rich in synonyms for everyday situations and concepts.
As we move away from formal French, we find more ways of saying something.
Words can take a long time to form or happen overnight, and in just the same unpredictable way, they can go out of fashion.
Studies have shown that the number of words used is actually very small. It is only when wandering into abstract, specific or technical contexts that a wider range of vocabulary is required.
Language evolves and develops new words for one of two reason:
Technical innovation produces a new term
Expressive needs of language users in their daily conversations
Neologism = new word.
Neologisms that are technical are concerted, systematised and channelled, whereas fashionable expressions are born in a spontaneous, individualistic and disordered way and spread is governed by whims of fashion or needs of the moment.
New words are created in accordance with certain established principles:
Suffixation
Abbreviation
Repetition
Inversion
Anglicisms
Suffixation – inside this lies resuffixation where the standard word ending is replaced by a non standard word ending. E.g. Cinoche instead of cinema, instead of governement they would say governoche. There is also gratuitous suffixation which is the addition of an extra ending where none exists in standard. For example, instead of cher they say cherot and instead of chic they would say chicos.
Abbreviation – apocope is a common example of abbreviation – aka right hand syllabic deletion. In simplest of terms, for example, le professeur becomes le prof. Many forms end in a non-etymological fashion, so an o is added for ease of pronunciation, eg. Aperitif becomes aper which becomes apero. In English we can use o, but also ies, such as commies or lefties.
Repetition –
Syllabic – identical repetition of syllable, with euphemistic or hypocoristic function, such as calling someone coco for communiste, nunu for nudiste. It’s very childish, and by making the word sound funny you’re masking the nastier meaning.
Whole word repetition – repeating the word with intensive function, reinforcing its meaning. eg. Mignon-mignon. Etre boulot-boulot for hard working. Particularly with exclamations and oaths, such zut zut zut, merde merde, putain de putain (Quebec influence)
Non-identical – euphemistic or hypocoristic such as be-bete meaning silly-billy, or gueguerre for guerre. It has the same intentions as syllabic, but uses a different method.
Inversion -
Verlan – ’nuff said.
Largonji and loucherbem – displace the initial consonant of a standard word, substitute for an L and then add a suffix. Eg. Jargon → argonj → largonji. Boucher → loucherb → loucherbem. Sac → lacse. Damme → lammede. Deux → leude. Cher → lerche. Pisser → lissepem. Putain → lutainpem.
Derives from the butchers slang of La Villette. Largonji appears to be unproductive and limited to a small number of working class Parisians.
Anglicisms – le chewing-gum, le babysitter, le weekend.
Hybrids – part english, part french. Top-niveau, opera-rock, top modele, block systeme, credit revolving.
Pseudo-anglicisms –
created inside French, taking bits of English, mashing them together, and although the component parts are from English words they don’t really represent English. E.g. un crossman (cross country runner), une tenniswoman.
Discrepancies in French and English usage, such as a pullover → le pull.
Break with convention in that many Anglicisms take on different meanings in French. E.g. palace means 5 star hotel in French. Le building is a high rise block. Un jogging is a tracksuit.
You can then apply any of the other styles to Anglicisms eg abbreviation, verlan etc. E.g domb – useless, lousy = verlan (dombi < bidon) + apocope. Eg. Linguebur – office = resuffixation (burlingue < bureau) + verlan. E.g. blackos – black person = anglicism + gratuitous suffixation.
Society is made up of human groups which engage in interaction. The groups – a family, a faith, women, children, the working class – can be identified through their roles in social systems: the legal, educational, religious, political, economic; while their interaction is revealed through such social processes as the differentiation of functions, the socialisation of children, or the dialectic of the power struggle. Social groups can interact in a number of ways: through political activity, economic domination, and through the exchange of symbols/language. There are three types of linguistic and attitudinal interaction:
Based on a stratified (structural, functional) approach, allows correlation of linguistic and social variables: cooperation.
Based on Marxist approaches, leads to analyses of conflictual power relationships as mediated through language.
Interactional, based on the informal relationships contracted by the individual. May lead to the analysis of an individual’s linguistic repertoire and its relationship to his social network.
Most sociolinguistic research in France is based on the conflictual approach, while most American work is derived from the cooperative approach.
Research among school children produced the following results.
In reply to the question, ‘If a new pupil arrives at your school, do you automatically tutoyer him?’ 80.55% of the sample said they would do so straightaway.
The next question was, ‘What is your reaction if the new arrival uses vouvoiement? Do you
(a) think that it’s a bit unfriendly – 23.25%
(b) think that it’s up to him – 23.25%
(c) ask him why – 20.93%
(d) find it funny – 11.63%
(e) think that it’s quite normal – 9.30%
(f) have any other reaction 2.33% would ostracise him; 9.33% would invite him to tutoyer
On balance, the majority of opinions either expressly or implicitly disapprove.
The functions of language
Language can also vary according to
|
Differences between the written and spoken languages |
|
|
Written |
Spoken |
|
Prepared |
Spontaneous |
|
Revised, corrected |
Corrections effected by repetition |
|
Continuous text |
Hesitations |
|
Co-ordinated |
Fragmented – ‘um’ & ‘er’ to fill in while thoughts collected |
|
Punctuation assists comprehension |
Use of parataxe – the use of short, simple sentences without linking conjunctions |
|
Adverbs & adjectives are used to describe the speaker/writer |
Use of prosody (intonation, accentuation, rhythm) to indicate expression |
|
Long, complex sentences |
Short, simple sentences |
|
More redundancies |
Non-linguistic context has linguistic consequences – deixis (point of reference) |
|
More precision |
|
|
Spelling – fewer ambiguities |
Homophones – more ambiguities |
|
Language is clearly marked for gender & number |
Marking for gender & number is less apparent |
Language marking: Compare
Leur chien aboie / leurs chiens aboient : leur ami ouvre la porte/leur amie ouvre la porte
[lœr ʃjɛ̃ abwɑ] [lœr ʃjɛ̃ abwɑ] [lœr ami uvR la pɔrt] [lœr ami uvr la pɔrt]
|
Written |
Spoken |
|
Je chante |
[ʒə ʃɑ̃t] |
|
Tu chantes |
[tu ʃɑ̃t] |
|
Il chante |
[il ʃɑ̃t] |
|
Nous chantons |
[nu ʃɑ̃tɔ̃] |
|
Vous chantez |
[vu ʃɑ̃te] |
|
Ils chantent |
[il ʃɑ̃t] |
|
6 different endings |
3 different endings |
In the spoken language markers are suppressed.
+ + + +
[lœr livr zetɛ uvɛrt]
– + – –
Brief history
Intonation
In some cases intonation alone distinguishes the syntactic or semantic components of the phrase. Compare:-
|
|
On le |
remontait, |
il |
redescendait… |
(enumeration) |
|
|
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On le |
remontait, |
il |
redescendait. |
(subordination) |
|
|
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
|
In the absence of any other indices, only intonation allows the interlocutor to understand the logical sequence of the speaker’s ideas.
|
Les cours que |
je suis |
(l’économie et |
l’histoire |
sont mes |
préférés |
|
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
Il est |
à moi, |
ce |
livre |
|
|
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
|
Il |
vient |
ce |
café? |
|
|
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
Accentuation
A group of words ending in an accentuated syllable and preceded by one or more unstressed syllable, which forms a unity of sense.