No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
On contracted forms in Canadian French
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 February 2009
Extract
Speculation concerning the future direction of linguistic evolution, despite its obvious pitfalls, has a long tradition, not to mention attraction, in linguistics. In the French domain, one need only think of Pulgram (1967) or of various works by Ashby concerning « Future French » (1974, 1977), both of whom reflect on ideas present in French scholarship dating from the early decades of this century (e.g. Meillet, 1921, 1936; Vendryes, 1923). Recent work in typology, showing apparently orderly progression from one language state to another, has buttressed speculative efforts, as have many of the results of sociolinguistics, where clear trends in age or social profiles often allow one to infer directionality and even end result on the basis of ongoing change.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Journal of the International Phonetic Association 1985
References
Ashby, W. (1974). Il parle or Iparl? Prefixed Inflection in French. Semaaia, 1, 83–93.Google Scholar
Ashby, W. (1980). Prefixed conjugation in Parisian French. In Italic and Romance. Linguistic Studies in Honor of Ernst Pulgram. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 195–207.Google Scholar
Ashby, W. (1984). The elision of /l/ in French clitic pronouns and articles. Unpublished manuscript, UC Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
Bougaieff, A. and Cardinal, P. (1980). La chute du /l/ dans le français populaire du Québec. La Linguistique, 16, 91–102.Google Scholar
Meillet, A. (1921). Linguistique historique et linguistique générale, I. Paris: Champion.Google Scholar
Meillet, A. (1936). Linguistique historique et linguistique générale, II. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Moravscik, E. (1978). Agreement. In Greenberg, J. et al. (eds.), Universals of Human Language, 4. Syntax. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Morin, Y.-C. (1979). La morphophonologie des pronoms clitiques en français populaire. Cahiers de linguistique, 9, 1–36.Google Scholar
Poplack, S. (1983). The care and handling of a megacorpus: The Ottawa-Hull French project. To appear in Fasold, R. and Shiffrin, D. (eds.), Proceedings of NWAVE XI. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Poplack, S. and Walker, D. (1984). Going through (1) in Canadian French. Unpublished manuscript, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
Pulgram, E. (1967). Trends and predictions. In To Honour Roman Jakobson. The Hague: Mouton, 1634–49.Google Scholar
Pupier, P. and Légaré, L. (1973). L'effacement du /l/ dans les articles définis et les clitiques en français de Montréal. Glossa, 7, 63–80.Google Scholar
Sankoff, G. and Cedergren, H. (1972). Some results of a sociolinguistic study of Montreal French. In Darnell, R. (ed.), Linguistic Diversity in Canadian Society. Edmonton: Linguistic Research Inc., 61–87.Google Scholar
Santerre, L., Noiseux, D. and Ostiguy, L. (1977). La chute du /l/ dans les articles et les pronoms clitiques en français québécois. The Fourth LACUS Forum, 1977, 530–8.Google Scholar
Tranel, B. (1981). Concreteness in Generative Phonology. The Evidence from French. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Vendryes, J. (1923). Le langage. Introduction linguistique à l'histoire. Paris: Albin Michel.Google Scholar