Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T18:15:54.676Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

‘Moving’ through the past: Thirty years of avoir été in Ontario French

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 December 2014

OLIVIA N. SAMMONS*
Affiliation:
University of Alberta – Linguistics Edmonton, AlbertaCanada
TERRY NADASDI
Affiliation:
University of Alberta – Linguistics Edmonton, AlbertaCanada
RAYMOND MOUGEON
Affiliation:
York University, Glendon College – French Studies Toronto, OntarioCanada
*
Olivia N. Sammons Department of Linguistics 4-32 Assiniboia Hall, University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta, Canada e-mail: sammons@ualberta.ca

Abstract

This article examines a case of real-time language change in the spoken French of adolescents residing in four localities in Ontario, Canada. The focus of the study is the alternation between verb forms meaning ‘went/have gone’ over a three-decade timespan (1978–2005), and involves three main variants: avoir été, être allé and avoir allé. This study investigates the influence of both social and linguistic factors on variant choice, showing evidence for both devernacularization and regularization as a result of social change.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alexandre, N. (2004). Variation in the spoken French of Franco-Ontarians: Preposition de followed by the deictic pro-forms ça and la, aller in compound past tenses and prepositions à, au and en preceding geographical place names, MA thesis, York University.Google Scholar
Beniak, E. and Mougeon, R. (1989). Recherches sociolinguistiques sur la variabilité en français-ontarien. In: Mougeon, R. and Beniak, E. (eds), Le français canadien parlé hors Québec : un aperçu sociolinguistique. Quebec City: Les Presses de l’Université Laval, pp. 69104.Google Scholar
Blishen, B., Carroll, W. and Moore, C. (1987). The 1981 socioeconomic index for occupations in Canada. The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 24.4: 464488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canale, M., Mougeon, R. and Bélanger, M. (1977). Analogical leveling of the auxiliary ÊTRE in Ontarian French. Contemporary Studies in Romance Linguistics. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Canale, M., Mougeon, R. and Beniak, E. (1978). Acquisition of some grammatical elements in English and French by monolingual and bilingual Canadian students. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 34.3: 505524.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. (1950). Regards sur la langue française. Paris: Sedes.Google Scholar
Dupré, P. (1972). Encyclopédie du bon français dans l’usage contemporain. Paris: Éditions de Trévise.Google Scholar
Gal, S. (1984). Phonological style in bilingualism: The interaction of structure and use. In: Schiffrin, D. (ed.), Meaning, form, and use in context: Linguistic applications. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, pp. 290302.Google Scholar
Frei, H. (1971). La grammaire des fautes. Geneva: Slatkine Reprints. (Originally published 1929 by Paris-Genève).Google Scholar
Grevisse, M. and Goose, A. (1988). Le bon usage de la grammaire française. Paris: Duculot.Google Scholar
Knaus, V. and Nadasdi, T. (2001). Être ou ne pas être in immersion French. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 58.2: 287306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mougeon, R. (2005). Rôle des facteurs linguistiques et extra-linguistiques dans la dévernacularisation du parler des adolescents dans les communautés francophones minoritaires du Canada. In: Le Français en Amérique du Nord: Etat présent. Saint-Nicolas: Les Presses de l’Université Laval, pp. 261285.Google Scholar
Mougeon, R. and Beniak, É. (1978). Corpus of Ontario French.Google Scholar
Mougeon, R. and Beniak, É. (1991). Linguistic consequences of language contact and restriction: The case of French in Ontario, Canada. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mougeon, R. and Beniak, É. (1995). Le non-accord en nombre entre sujet et verbe en français ontarien: un cas de simplification? Présence Francophone, 46: 5365.Google Scholar
Mougeon, R., Nadasdi, T. and Rehner, K. (2005). Corpus of Ontario French.Google Scholar
Mougeon, R., Nadasdi, T. and Rehner, K. (2009a). Évolution de l’alternance je vas/je vais/je m’en vas/je m’en vais/m’as dans le parler d’adolescents franco-ontariens. In: Baronian, L. and Martineau, F. (eds), Le français d’un continent à l’autre: Mélanges offerts à Yves Charles Morin. Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval, pp. 327374.Google Scholar
Mougeon, R., Nadasdi, T. and Rehner, K. (2009b). Évolution de l’usage des conjonctions et locutions de conséquence par les adolescents franco-ontariens de Hawkesbury et de Pembroke (1978–2005). In: Martineau, F., Mougeon, R., Nadasdi, T. and Tremblay, M., (eds.), Les français d’ici: études linguistiques et sociolinguistiques sur la variation du français au Québec et en Ontario. Toronto: Éditions du GREF, pp. 145184.Google Scholar
Mougeon, R., Rehner, K. and Alexandre, N. (2006). Le français parlé en situation minoritaire: choix de langues, identité linguistique et variation linguistique parmi les élèves des écoles de langue française dans cinq communautés franco-ontariennes. Final report prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
Nadasdi, T. (2000). Variation grammaticale et langue minoritaire: Le cas des pronoms clitiques en français ontarien. Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
Nadasdi, T. (2005). Le français en Ontario. In: Le Français en Amérique du Nord: Etat présent. Saint-Nicolas: Les Presses de l’Université Laval, pp. 99115.Google Scholar
Russo, M. and Roberts, J. (1999). Linguistic change in endangered dialects: The case of alternation between avoir and être in Vermont French. Language Variation and Change, 11: 6785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, G. (2006) Age: Apparent time and real time. Elsevier Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Second Edition, 2006. Article Number: LALI: 01479.Google Scholar
Sankoff, G. and Thibault, P. (1980). The alternation between the auxiliaries avoir and être in Montréal French. In: Sankoff, G. (ed.), The Social Life of Language. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, D. and Thibault, P. (1981). Weak complementarity: Tense and aspect in Montreal French. In: Johns, B.B. and Strong, D.R. (eds.), Syntactic Change (Natural Language Studies 25). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, pp. 205216.Google Scholar
Williams, Glyn. 1987. Bilingualism, class dialect and social reproduction, International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 66: 8598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar