Introduction

The difference between spoken and written French of past ages is the most difficult parameter of variation to investigate, not least since there are no direct sources of speech available to us. Even if we look at direct discourse in written texts, which may be assumed to approximate to spoken language, we do not have straightforward access to speech. A major consideration here will therefore be to examine the extent to which it is possible to find reflections of spoken French in textual and other sources, and to evaluate their reliability.

In this chapter and the following one we will also be constantly forced to consider to what degree it is possible to separate differences of medium (spoken versus written French) from other types of variation, and in particular from differences of register. As we have already noted (section 1.3.2), all too often a simple equation is made between spoken and informal usages on the one hand, and written and formal usages on the other. In some cases ‘spoken French’ is even equated with ‘faulty French’ and a narrow range of features is discussed such as negation, the ‘incorrect’ choice of auxiliary, or the extension of the use of que (Blanche-Benveniste 1995: 26). Bayley's (1980) study of pulpit oratory and Zoberman's (1998) account of ‘ceremonial’ language, such as set-piece speeches, are just two indications of the range of spoken usages in the seventeenth century.