A Corpus Analysis of Intra- and Extralinguistic Factors triggering<i>ne</i>-Deletion in Phonic French

Meisner, Charlotte

doi:10.1051/cmlf/2010091

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fonseca-Greber's (2007) data, phonic everyday conversations). In addition, for the first time, C. Meisner (2010) shows systematically that stylistic-pragmatic factors are relevant for ne drop. C. Meisner (2010) cornpares two subcorpora taken from the phonic reference corpus for Romance languages, C-ORAL-ROM (cf E. Cresti and M. Moneglia 2005).…”

Section: State Of the Art And Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…(16) Subject type and ne realization in C. Meisner (2010Meisner ( :1949 By far, the most frequent subject exponent isje^^^, followed by tu^^ç. and ce, ça/ cela^ 5Q ('this').…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ashby (1976Ashby ( ,1981 suggests that there is a significant difference between nonfinite verb forms and imperatives on the one hand and verb forms with an obligatory subject on the other, especially indicative verb forms. This hypothesis was tested by C. Meisner (2010) and is also the inspiration ofour most recent empirical investigation ofthe French text messages in the Swiss corpus. We separated nonfinite verb forms (infinitive, gerunds, participles -42 altogether) from imperatives, and compared these two groups with verb forms which must have an exphcit subject constituent.…”

Section: Form and Frequency Ofthe Postverbal Negative Elementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Negation marking in French text messages

Stark¹

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the drop of the first clitic element, ne, of French sentential negation. It is based on 4,628 French text messages taken from the newly established corpus sms4science.ch. It shows that regional or stylistic factors do not play a major role in triggering ne deletion or ne retention, and that the only relevant language-internal factor is subject type, more precisely clitic subjects (also in subject doubling structures) and subject drop, which seem to favour or even trigger categorically ne deletion. Our findings are in keeping with those by R. van Compernolle (2008) on European French in online chats, and thereby indicate partially specific regularities in French computer-mediated communication (CMC). The findings question traditional assumptions on ne drop as a variety marker in French, irrespective of the phonic or graphic nature of the data (cf. P. Koch and W. Oesterreicher 2011). In fact, even in graphically deviant data, ne drop seems to follow the observed robust language-internal regularities. Some data seem to indicate that the graphic nature of SMSes plays a role also in ne-drop (cf. similar conclusions by R. van Compernolle 2008 for chats); this has to be checked by examining a larger number of French text messages.

show abstract

Section: State Of the Art And Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…(16) Subject type and ne realization in C. Meisner (2010Meisner ( :1949 By far, the most frequent subject exponent isje^^^, followed by tu^^ç. and ce, ça/ cela^ 5Q ('this').…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Form and Frequency Ofthe Postverbal Negative Elementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Negation marking in French text messages

Stark¹

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…e.g. Ashby, 1976Ashby, , 1981Ashby, , 2001Armstrong & Smith, 2002;Coveney, 2002;Culbertson, 2010;Hansen & Malderez, 2004;Meisner, 2010). However, with respect to ne-omission there is no clear-cut distinction between full DPs and clitic pronouns, as we show.…”

Section: Figure 1 Lexical Subjects Nous and Vous (Results Of Severamentioning

confidence: 53%

Synchronic variation in the expression of French negation: A Distributed Morphology approach

Meisner

Pomino

2013

French Language Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses ne-variation in French sentential negation based on the phonologically transcribed corpus T-zéro (cf. Meisner, in preparation) which allows a new interpretation of the facts. In the last decades, sociolinguistic and stylistic approaches to linguistic variation in French (cf. Armstrong, 2001) have shown that extra-linguistic factors, such as the speaker's age, sex, social background or geographic origin as well as the communication situation may have considerable influence on variable ne-omission. However, in contrast to most sociolinguistic studies dedicated to this phenomenon (cf. Ashby, 1976Ashby, , 1981Ashby, , 2001Armstrong and Smith, 2002;Coveney, 2002) we will focus on the linguistic factors influencing ne-variation, since their importance is empirically evident but not yet fully exploited on a theoretical level. One leading assumption with respect to ne-variation in literature is that the particle ne is most frequently retained in combination with a proper name or a full DP and is commonly omitted when combined with clitic subjects. However, there are many exceptions to this rule which, as we argue, can be better explained by considering the phonological form of the involved subject. Nerealisation is treated here as an inner-grammatical phenomenon that is triggered by context sensitivity with regard to the element to its left, i.e. usually the grammatical subject, and not as a consequence of 'code-switching' between two grammars nor as a sociolinguistic variable characterising certain groups of speakers in the Labovian sense (cf. Labov, 1972), since we seek to describe general variational tendencies, present in nearly all speakers of contemporary European French. Our analysis, which is implemented in a Distributed Morphology framework (Halle Marantz, 1994), is compatible, however, with stylistic approaches to ne-variation, such as audience design (cf.

show abstract

“…However, the precise nature of this interaction, which has been observed for quite some time (see e.g. Dufter & Stark, 2007;Meisner, 2010), has not yet been fully understood, neither for French, nor for other Romance varieties (cf. e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to the special issue: ‘Negation and Clitics in French: Interaction and Variation’

Stark

Meisner

Völker

2013

French Language Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This introduction presents very briefly some of the main issues currently discussed around negation particles and clitics in contemporary French and taken up by the six contributions it assembles, namely language change (grammaticalisation of clitics into agreement markers, completion of the Jespersen Cycle) vs. stable variation, and external (sociolinguistic) or internal (phonotactic, prosodic, or syntactic) factors triggering variation in both cases; the hypothesis of a potential diglossia in French opposing two grammars with considerable syntactic differences. Five out of six contributions focus on modern standard and non-standard varieties of French, with a formal theoretical background, while one shows a more philological-descriptive approach and is dedicated to Old French manuscripts.

show abstract

A Corpus Analysis of Intra- and Extralinguistic Factors triggeringne-Deletion in Phonic French

Cited by 9 publications

References 29 publications

Negation marking in French text messages

Negation marking in French text messages

Synchronic variation in the expression of French negation: A Distributed Morphology approach

Introduction to the special issue: ‘Negation and Clitics in French: Interaction and Variation’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About