Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Wiley-Blackwell Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info


New from Oxford University Press!

ad

Language Planning as a Sociolinguistic Experiment

By: Ernst Jahr

Provides richly detailed insight into the uniqueness of the Norwegian language development. Marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of the Norwegian nation following centuries of Danish rule


New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

Acquiring Phonology: A Cross-Generational Case-Study

By Neil Smith

The study also highlights the constructs of current linguistic theory, arguing for distinctive features and the notion 'onset' and against some of the claims of Optimality Theory and Usage-based accounts.


New from Brill!

ad

Language Production and Interpretation: Linguistics meets Cognition

By Henk Zeevat

The importance of Henk Zeevat's new monograph cannot be overstated. [...] I recommend it to anyone who combines interests in language, logic, and computation [...]. David Beaver, University of Texas at Austin


Academic Paper


Title: 'Le débat sur la diglossie en France: aspects scientifiques et politiques'
Author: BenjaminMassot
Institution: 'Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München'
Author: PaulRowlett
Email: click here to access email
Homepage: 'http://www.languages.salford.ac.uk/staff/rowlett.php'
Institution: 'University of Salford'
Linguistic Field: 'Sociolinguistics'
Subject Language: 'French'
Abstract: This article outlines the diglossic approach to intra-speaker grammatical variation (Ferguson 1959), wherein speaker-hearers acquire two grammars which are socio-stylistically distinct – one H(igh), the other L(ow) – but linguistically related (to the extent that users regard them as the same language), and then engage one or other of them (but do not mix them) in their active productions. It then sets out how a case could be made for such a model to capture variation in contemporary France, in place of the variationist model which envisages a single, flexible grammar, e.g., the bipolarity, strength and non-random nature of the sociolinguistic H–L distinction, the differing pattern of acquisition of H and L forms, the tendency for L forms to encroach on H terrain (rather than vice versa), and the internal coherence of each of the H and L varieties. Finally, the article sketches the politico-moral dimension to the debate, extending beyond scientific objectivity, and relating to the treatment of non-standard linguistic behaviour in context of the socio-cultural status of the standard.

CUP at LINGUIST

This article appears in Journal of French Language Studies Vol. 23, Issue 1, which you can read on Cambridge's site or on LINGUIST .



Back
Add a new paper
Return to Academic Papers main page
Return to Directory of Linguists main page