This paper examines variation in Louisiana French nasalized vowels across two time periods: 1977 and 2010–2011. Non-contrastive nasal vowels are typical of English, while contrastive nasal vowels are typical of French. Louisiana French is an endangered language variety. Instead of simplifying to a single type of vowel nasality, as might be expected in a situation of heavy language contact and language shift, Louisiana French maintains a system of phonetic and phonemic nasal vowels. Digitized interviews with 32 native speakers from lower Lafourche Parish provide 2801 data points for analysis. In contrast with previous assertions in the literature, quantitative analyses reveal that contextual nasalization operates almost exclusively within the domain of the word, not the syllable.

This article outlines the differences in goals, methods and results that variationist researchers may encounter when exploring and/or documenting a threatened language variety, and underscores special considerations and aspects of the research program that linguists must work to control for when working with endangered varieties of Western languages. In particular, it examines questions and strategies for dealing with sparse data for longitudinal studies; fewer speakers for stratified samples; the inverse relation between linguistic fluency and age; social network constraints in small speech communities; literacy-centric exercises in oral language communities; and larger project protocols designed for stable linguistic communities. Throughout the paper, the collection and analysis of Louisiana French liaison data from 1939, 1977, and 2010 provide an application of the proposed methods.

This paper examines /ɛ/ lowering before /r/ in Louisiana Regional French (e.g., père, /pɛr/ → [pær], [pɛr] ‘father’) between 1977 and 2011 in a small geographic region. The analysis of 436 tokens from 32 speakers shows that /ɛ/ lowering has changed through time from a generational to a geographical boundary marker. This explains differing /ɛ/ lowering rates reported in the literature (Guilbeau, 1950; Dubois, 2005; Salmon, 2009). Results confirm that sociolinguistic factors play an active role in Louisiana Regional French, despite its endangered status (Dajko, 2009; Dubois, 2005), underscoring the need to better control for diatopic factors in future research.

Louisiana French displays a good deal of regional variation. This chapter compares the speech of a Ville Platte (Evangeline Parish) native with that of a Golden Meadow (Lafourche Parish) native. The analysis highlights important differences between the two regions, as well as nonstandard features common to both areas. While both parishes attest such features as pronunciation of /h/, alternation of /s/ and /ʃ/, and an extension of liaison to contexts not found in Metropolitan French, our speakers diverge in their use of such items as third-person plural subject pronouns (ils vs eusse), and affrication of /t/ and /d/ (found only in Ville Platte). In many cases, features are variable, and our speakers differ only in the rate at which they use a trait.

No abstract