MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7074612965

Sociolinguistic variation in contemporary French

2009· article· en· W7074612965 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Analysis with R
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariation (astronomy)Theme (computing)Section (typography)ConsonantSound changeProsodyFocus (optics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This volume, co-edited with France’s foremost sociolinguist, Françoise Gadet (Université de l’Ouest de Paris/Nanterre), and with Nigel Armstrong from the University of Leeds, breaks new ground by bringing together researchers from different traditions working in different linguistic domains. In introductions to the three main sections, the co-editors of the volume contribute overviews of their respective areas of expertise, namely phonological variation and leveling in hexagonal French and elsewhere, syntactic and stylistic variation and lexical variation and semantic change. These set the scene for the more focused studies presented in the individual chapters. A unifying theme of the volume is the role of external sociolinguistic factors in both variation and change. 
\n
\nFrom a diatopic perspective, varieties of French in France, Belgium, Switzerland, Africa and Canada are considered, mainly with respect to phonological variation (Section I) but also with respect to syntactic and lexical features (Knutsen in Section II on French in the Ivory Coast; Dostie in Section III on Canadian French). The intersection between social factors and phonological change is explored in Armstrong and Boughton’s chapter on dialect leveling in hexagonal French. Hambye’s paper on word final consonant devoicing in Belgium is original in highlighting diastratic as well as regional factors, while variation with age is the focus of both Violin-Wigent’s and Pustka’s papers on the phonological features of Southern France. Miller’s study of style-shifting in Swiss French is unique in the volume in focusing on prosody and finally, a contrast between English and French is drawn in Pooley’s review of the impact of an influx of immigrants on local varieties. Many of these studies paint a similar overall picture: that European French is undergoing standardization or is tending towards a supra-local norm, a norm which is not necessarily that of classical standard French but has currency over the region as a whole and is not restricted to one locality. 
\n
\nSociostylistic and syntactic features are the focus of a number of the papers in Section II. Bilger and Tyne’s study of syntax across speech styles in UK anglophone learners focuses on the use of parce que while Rossi-Gensane compares the use of non-standard non-finite forms in the spoken language, in newspapers and in novels. Knutsen examines relative clauses in the French spoken in the Ivory Coast, while Buson traces the perceptions of pre-teenagers with respect to stylistic variation and relates these to social class. 
\n
\nFinally, in Section III, we look at the impact of social and stylistic factors in lexical variation and semantic change. Dostie looks at diatopic variation, suggesting that the degree of pragmaticalization of discourse markers in Quebec French may vary from one region to another. Beeching, on the other hand, examines the extent to which sociosituational variation has contributed to the rise in distributional frequency and pragmaticalization of discourse-marking bon in modern hexagonal French. The social and economic factors behind the shift in meaning of fortuné from ‘luck’ to ‘wealth’, along with the resistance to change evident in metalinguistic works across the centuries, form the subject of Courbon’s highly detailed study of this lexical item which concludes the volume.
\n
\nWritten entirely in English, the volume allows scholars of sociolinguistic variation access to work which might otherwise appear only in French and was reviewed as “ a most valuable mise au point on the variability of contemporary French, synthesising French and Anglo-American methods and perceptions in a highly creative way” (Anthony Lodge, St. Andrews University) and “An interesting and diverse collection of articles. This will offset the commonly heard claim that no one does quantitative sociolinguistics in France”. (Naomi Nagy, University of Toronto).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Analysis with RFrench-language works237,207