Le dictionnaire maître de langue: lexicographie et didactique éd. par Michaela Heinz

look at a snapshot in time and gauge language change by differences between younger and older speakers, or by comparing corpora gathered over the years, Blondeau’s study makes use of three corpora that consist of the same people recorded at intervals of roughly a dozen years. She can therefore follow how individual speakers change (or do not change) their use of the variable in question. Her data comes from the Sankoff-Cedergren (1971) corpus, the Montreal (1984) corpus, and the Montreal (1995) corpus, all of which consist of interviews with the same people. In addition, the Montreal (1995) speakers also recorded themselves going about their daily lives, which attenuates the “observer’s paradox” and allows the researcher to see language use in a natural setting, rather than in the semi-formal interview. The data from only thirty speakers from the first two corpora and twelve from the last were analyzed, all of which give rich data despite the relatively small numbers and allow Blondeau to examine the linguistic, sociolinguistic, and stylistic factors that influence the use of the simple and compound variants. She comes to the following conclusions: the autre has become grammaticalized and serves no discursive function, such as emphasis; use of vous and vous-autres is stable, clearly marking singular and plural reference; the simple variant is more prestigious than the compound one and is therefore found more frequently in the speech of women, speakers of a higher socioeconomic level, and in more formal speech; use of the simple variant has increased over the years. The organization of the book reflects its origins as Blondeau’s doctoral dissertation , though it has been considerably expanded. This is not a negative comment , quite the contrary. There is a nice logic to how the chapters flow, and each of the first four chapters could easily stand alone for use in a linguistics or advanced grammar course. The writing is clear, avoiding excessive technical terminology , and is therefore more accessible to non-specialists in linguistics. There is also a wealth of examples selected from the corpora. The statistical data is generally clearly presented in tables and graphs. However, Tableau II (52) and Tableau V (91) have so many empty cells that it is not clear if it is a printer error or if another kind of organizational structure might have been better. Finally, in her discussion of previous studies on clitics, Blondeau uses Kayne’s (1977) classic work as representing the generativist tradition, although the theory has evolved considerably since then. This is a minor criticism, however, in what is otherwise a fine addition to the body of work in French sociolinguistics. Arizona State University Helene Ossipov HEINZ, MICHAELA, éd. Le dictionnaire maître de langue: lexicographie et didactique. Berlin: Frank & Timme, 2009. ISBN 978-3-86596-200-3. Pp. 326. 68 a. The Journées allemandes des dictionnaires, held every two years in Klingenberg, Germany since 2004, has become one of the most significant events dedicated to French lexicography. Heinz, the conference organizer, has been efficient in assembling an edited volume following each of these events. The volume reviewed here comes out of the 2006 conference, organized around the theme “le dictionnaire maître de langue,” focusing on what are commonly called dictionnaires d’apprentissage. The introduction provides a context for most of the papers, celebrating the lexicographic career of Josette Rey-Debove (1929–2005), well known for her lead role in many Robert dictionaries. Heinz laments in the introduction 232 FRENCH REVIEW 86.1 that the 2006 conference was not dedicated to Rey-Debove, since the theme of the learner’s dictionary is a relevant topic to celebrate her work. Six of the fourteen contributions deal with dictionaries of which Rey-Debove was one of the principal editors. The term dictionnaire d’apprentissage is often taken more broadly than the English terms “pedagogical dictionary” or “learner’s dictionary,” which typically designate monolingual works intended for adolescent or adult learners of English as a second language (ESL). The French term includes monolingual dictionaries of français langue étrangère (FLE) but can also encompass dictionaries for L1 French schoolchildren, or even bilingual dictionaries. The ambiguity of the French term is evident...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.