Wairead's Notes

Sunday, 6 December 2015

Pragmatics: Tu vs Vous

Historical use of 'tu' and 'vous':

The original T/V distinction was a reflection of power
When used non-reciprocally, the person with power used 'tu' and the person without it used 'vous'
Non reciprocal use
e.g. Older -> younger = tu
e.g. Younger -> older = vous
e.g. Noble -> Peasant = tu
e.g. Peasant -> Noble = vous
Reciprocal use was for equals in power
Noble classes used vous for each other
Common people used tu
The choice of pronoun can indicate solidarity, degrees of closeness and intimacy
These days a reciprocal relationship is reflected in reciprocal pronoun use
Powerful people with no shared common ground will use 'vous', but with common ground they will use 'tu'

Conflict in choice:

Sometimes there is a conflict between people's level of solidarity and the power dynamics of their relationship
e.g. in a parent/child relationship
this is a solidarity relationship but it is also power bound
in the past, they would have had a non reciprocal relationship
these days solidarity is more important than power displays
the more powerful individual decides on the use of tu or vous

Social factors:

Politically radical individuals are more likely to use the tu form
rural children are more likely to use a non reciprocal vous form with adults
Urban children are more likely to use a reciprocal tu form with adults
Gender - familiar male adults will use reciprocal vous with teenage girls, non reciprocal tu with younger girls and non reciprocal tu with boys of all ages

Discourse: Pragmalinguistics

Pragmalinguistics:

The link between form and function
form - the linguistic elements/structures used to complete a speech act
e.g. the imperative is used for command, a negated modal is used for requests

Sociopragmatics:

Mapping form and function of linguistic elements to the appropriate social context
e.g. donne moi vs donnez moi
the choice is based on the question of politeness, formality, prestige, age, situation and the number of people

Politeness Theory and Face:

'Face' is the positive social value a person effectively claims

i.e. how you present yourself and how you are perceived

Positive Face serves the purposes of:

Enhancement of positive self image
Preserving one's own face
Intimate behaviour - showing social closeness

Negative Face serves the purpose of:

Non imposition on the hearer
Preserves the hearer's face
Achieving distance, in order to demonstrate respect

Face Threatening Act:

An act which endangers either one's own image or somebody else's

e.g. requests - can be viewed as showing weakness, opening oneself up to rejection (Positive Face) or imposing on the hearer (negative Face)

French and English have similar language use for requests - designed to reduce the threat to face

the presumption of rejection so as not lose face in the event

FTAs are communicative acts that do not respect either the hearer's need for space (negative face) or the speaker's desire to uphold their own self image (Positive face) or both

Choices in FTA Performance:

Every time we are confronted with an FTA we face a choice whether or not to perform it

Discourse: Pragmatics

Pragmatics:

The analysis of the unsaid

Examining the deeper meaning of language

e.g. nous sommes Paris vs Je suis Charlie
The change in deitic reference (nous vs je) leads to an entirely different meaning
from the personal to the universal
Deitic references are often used in contrast with each other
The unsaid - the je/nous are excluding the tu/vous

What is the study of Pragmatics?

The study of the relationship between what is said and what is actually meant
It focuses on the functions of language
e.g. "you wouldn't pass the salt"
literal meaning - an accusation - in the past, I asked you to pass the salt and you refused
however because of our social experience, we know that what is actually meant is a request to pass the salt

Studies on Pragmatics:

Morris, 1938, coined the term pragmatics and defined it as the study of the relationship of signs to the user (speaker) and the interpreter (hearer)
Katz, 1977, described pragmatic phenomena as those in which knowledge of setting and context of an utterance plays a role in its understanding
Fesold, 1991, described pragmatics as the use of context to make inferences about meaning
Bach, 2004, defined it as the theory of language use

A Working Definition of Pragmatics:

A set of internalised rules which tell us how to use language in socio-culturally appropriate ways, taking into account the participants in a communicative interaction and the features of the context within which the interaction takes place.

Speech Act Theory:

Austin and Serl
Divides language into functions
e.g. requests, apologies, compliments, advice, complaints, suggestions, insults, etc
The study of utterances as functions
They created two categories of language

Performatives - whereby saying and doing are conflated to perform an action

e.g. "I now pronounce you man and wife"
the words make the action happen
when the act of speaking changes a situation or physical circumstance
Characterised by the first person pronoun and a valid speaker, hearer and context

Constatives - whereby the utterance can be said to be true
focused on truth values
e.g. "The cat is in the house"

Focus of Pragmatics:

What's done with language and how it's accomplished
The three major concerns of pragmatics
the difference between literal and intended meaning
directness vs indirectness
conventional vs non conventional

Literal vs Intended Meaning:

Locutionary Act - the actual utterance

the physical act of constructing utterance and meaning is determined by the rules of language

Illocutionary Act - the intended meaning

e.g. "It's really hot in here" could mean "Please open the window"

Perlocutionary Act - the effect of the locutionary act and the illocutionary act

e.g. Locution: "Vous ne pouvez pas m'aider."

the literal meaning is "You can't help me" as in "you don't have the ability or the possibility of helping me"

Illocution: a request for help
Perlocution: the person will help or refuse

Therefore it is the illocutionary act which is the key to the success or failure of an exchange

if the hearer understands the speaker's intention as voiced through the illocution, then it is a successful exchange
If the hearer's understanding differs from the speaker's intention then there is a mismatch between locution and illocution

Indirectness vs Directness:

With a Direct Act, there is no possibility of a mismatch
With an Indirect Act, the possibility of a mismatch exists

Conventionalised vs Non-Conventionalised:

Conventionalised - the normal, universal way of saying something

e.g. "Vous ne pouvez pas m'aider" is universally recognised as a request for help
no room for ambiguity

Non-conventionalised - a personal way of expressing something, which is not universally recognised as having that meaning

e.g. "T'as pas faim?" could mean "I am hungry and would like to eat."
personal - depends on context for understanding
the hearer will need to disambiguate the meaning

The interpretation of speech acts is highly subjective and depends a lot on context.

Discourse: Text Cohesion and Coherence

Devices of discourse:

Deixis - shows the way speakers and writers orientate themselves and others in discourse
through the use of deitic expressions
What:

Demonstratives - ce/cette, ces ... là, celui-là
Possessives - sa, son, ses etc

Who:

Verbs in 1st/2nd/3rd person
Pronouns - je, tu, il etc

When:

Time adverbs - maintenant, autrefois etc
Tense of verbs - j'ai donné, je donnerai, etc

Where:

Spatial adverbs - ice, là, là-bas

Deitic expressions are used to point out or indicate something to the speaker or listener

Coherence and Cohesion:

Coherence - in order to be considered discourse, a text must be coherent

i.e. it can't be a random sequence of sentences
it must tell its audience what is going on

Cohesion - how sentences are linked together

A text can be cohesive without being coherent
i.e. it can be linked together by a topic without having any logical structure

In order to create coherence, we used subordinating and coordinating clauses
Coordinating conjunctions - mais, et, ou, ou bien
Subordinating conjunctions - parce que, si, tandis que, dont, lequel, où, que, qui
Coordinating clauses can exist independently, are equally important as each other in a sentence
Subordinating clauses are dependent on the main clause to make sense and cannot exist independently

Cohesive Ties:

Hold discourse together
e.g. d'abord, ensuite, en plus, enfin, cependant, au contraire d'autre part
give the text a logical structure

Endophora:

An expression which is used to refer to something which has been or which will be said or written in a text
it can refer to something mentioned earlier or something that will mentioned later
e.g. demonstrative pronouns are often used to avoid noun repetition and ambiguity
Two types of endophora - anaphora and cataphora
Anaphora - use of pronoun or demonstrative to refer back to something previous mentioned
Cataphora - use of pronoun or demonstrative to refer forward in text to something which will be mentioned

Examples:

Je ne vous présente pas un programme, au sens habituel du mot. Je l'ai fait en 1981 alors que j'étais à la tête du Parti socialiste.

Analysis:

Deitic expressions in bold, anaphora underlined, cataphora overlined
je ne vous présente

je & vous = demonstratives, verb ending = time indication

je l'ai fait en 1981
je = demonstrative, fait, en 1981 = time indication, l' = anaphoric reference

Introduction to Discourse

Studying Discourse:

Discourse is any body of text, written or spoken, which is longer than a sentence
The study of discourse takes the organisation of texts as a whole into account

Taking a broader view of how the composite elements of language work together as a whole, successfully or not

The study of discourse focuses on language as a social, cultural context
Texts and discourse:

compositions of phonetics and phonology, morphology and syntax and lexicology
created by identifiable participants
bearing in mind sociocultural and historic constraints such as time/place/content

Speaking - Dell Hymes:

Hymes' model to assist the identification and labeling of components of linguistic interaction

S - setting (when and where is the interaction taking place)
P - participants (who's taking part? Speaker? Audience?)
E - end (what are the goals and outcomes of the interaction)
A - act sequence (what is the form and order of the message?)
K - key (what is the tone/manner/spirit of the interaction? Is it serious/humorous/etc?)
I - instrumentality (forms and styles of the interaction)
N - norms of interaction in a particular culture (social rules governing the interaction)
G - genre (what kind of speech act is it? A story? A lecture?)

A change in any one of these factors would mean a change in discourse
This was one of the first attempts made at socially situating language
Before this, people had always been more interested in discussing the structure of language as an abstract concept
However language can't survive if not socially situated

Co-operative Principles - Grice:

According to Grice, in order for discourse to be successful, the four maxims of the co-operative principle must be followed:

Quantity - say no more and no less than is necessary

Quality - be truthful

Don't say anything you know to be untrue or can't provide adequate evidence of

Relation - be relevant to what has been said before
Manner - be lucid

speak in a clear and orderly fashion to avoid ambiguity

These maxims are relevant to an idealised interaction
The correct use of the maxims is entirely context dependent

Saturday, 5 December 2015

Lexicology: Linguistic Prescriptivism

History:

Beginning in 15th century when Louis XII was advised by his counsellor Claude de Seyssel to attempt to unify the various different forms of 'patois'
so much linguistic disunity could have a potentially destabilising effect
Until 1490, there was no standard vernacular - the only standard was Latin
1539 - Ordonnance de Villers-Cotterêts - declared all laws should be in French from then on
post 1789 - French was established as the language as France and it was used for all dealings

Linguistic Centralisation:

France has 200+ language bodies
The problem with centralisation is that it involves people in one area trying to define French for everybody in a wider area
1958 - the Défense de la langue française was set up - indicative of French mentality that their language is under threat
1966 - Haute comité pour la défense et l'expansion de la langue française was set up

the committee has gone through multiple evolutions since then but still remains in some form

Future of the French Language:

Many language bodies continue to be set up and attempt to govern the language
e.g. Haute Conseil de la Francophonie, Organisation Internationale de la francophonie
Various terminology commissions exist
e.g. la commission générale de terminologie et de néologie - 1996
concerned with feminisation of professional titles etc
Several laws have been passed in an attempt to regulate the use of French
Loi Bas Lauriol - 1975

Made the use of French obligatory in all public bill posting and advertising, banned all use of foreign terms or expressions

Loi Toubon - 1994
mandating the use of the French language in official government publications, in all advertisements, in all workplaces, in commercial contracts, in some other commercial communication contexts, in all government-financed schools
these laws were made in effort to control the impact of English on the French language however they have not been particularly successful
some fines have been imposed, but the insistence on the complete use of French can be off putting for multi national companies looking to settle in France
e.g. of failure - English is still largely the language of the scientific world - it is the most commonly used language at scientific conferences and scientific seminars and the governing bodies have concluded that full implementation would not only be too difficult to regulate but also be too damaging for France's reputation in the scientific community

Lexicology: Slang and Youth Language

Language Change:

vocabulary is an area of language where change is especially rife
young people are usually the ones who change a language rather than the old

Concept of 'Argot':

Slang - a specific type of vocabulary used by a social or professional group to express an identity of some sort
Slang is a reflection of societal and conceptual developments
specialised vocabulary is not necessarily informal
Historical connotations - it originally referred to secret means of communicating in the criminal underworld
It is now a method of making those who can share in the communication feel included while excluding those who can't
creates a sense of identity for a specific group

Youth Language:

Young people play an important role in lexical change, often creating new words
This is a means of expressing identity/solidarity and excluding undesirables (often adults)
This also creates a sense of rebellion
Creativity is especially high in certain lexical domains - a reflection of the source of the creativity
e.g. source languages (often those spoken by immigrants) and social milieus (certain areas with a high concentration of youth/immigrants)
The rapid spread of words through modern media contributes to lexical change

Structural characteristics of youth language:

Foreign/Dialectical borrowing - youth language often uses elements from foreign languages and dialects of French
e.g. bagnole is from Northern French and la taule (prison) and le frangin (younger brother) are from Lyon
A lot of examples from foreign languages - truc (Spanish),schlof (drunk - German), toubib (doctor - Arabic), shooter, sniffer, dope (English)

Semantic Change:

Pre-existing words can assume informal, slang values
Certain lexical fields contribute slang more than others

e.g. animal vocabulary - les flics, les poulets, les perdreaux, les condors - words for police based on animal imagery
also shows speakers attitude towards police

Humour is often used in slang

e.g. 'écraser le champignon' (to drive fast, step on it)

Food imagery in slang

e.g. boîte à ragoût - jam packed, une viande froid (dead person)

Slang often offers a wide variety of choice for expressing one common concept

e.g. fauché, à sec, dans la panade etc = broke

Slang frequently makes use of pronouns which don't actually refer to anything

e.g. J'en ai marre, j'en ras-le-bol
this meaningless pronoun is referred to as a lexical chunk or lexicalised units
could refer to some older lost part of the phrase - e.g. "tu me casses les pieds" becomes "tu me les casses"

In slang, words sometime assume the opposite of their original meaning

e.g. "faire un malheur" can mean something is great

Word Formation:

Slang consists not just of different use of existing vocabulary but also the formation of new words

Often from a change of word category

e.g. Flingue (gun) derived from 'flinguer' (to shoot)
e.g. être classe, être galère - nouns used as adjectives

Inflectional Suffixes:

Certain suffixes are very productive in slang
e.g. aille, asse, ard
soiffard (heavy drinker), la flicaille (cops), vignasse (cheap wine)

Abbreviations:

Often involve breaking up the word in some way

e.g. shortening - ciné, apparte, métro

Or shortening and then adding another ending (iche, oche)

e.g. fastiche - easy (facile - fac + iche), cinoche - cinema

Repeating the first syllable is also a possibility
e.g. jojo = joli, mimi = mignon, dodo = dormier

Word Games:

New words are created by rearranging elements of old words

e.g. 'largonji' from 'jargon' - argon + j

lofoque - louf - fou

lerche - cher

Insertion of letters into the middle of words also occurs

e.g. gosse + av = gavosse

Verlan(isation) - word reversal, a kind of backwards slang

e.g. chicha = haschich, rebier = bière, féca = café
this rearrangement of letters and sounds is very Arabic in origin, which reflects the strong Arabic influence in contemporary French society

Short words are sometimes repeated

e.g. foufou = fou