La co-variation des marqueurs discursifs bon, c'est-à-dire, enfin, hein, quand même, quoi et si vous voulez : une question d'identité ?

Beeching, Kate

doi:10.3917/lf.154.0078

Cited by 27 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies generally address DP through semantic and pragmatic descriptions, from synchronic or diachronic points of view (see [30,24,6,13,22,5]). Syntactic analysis is less frequent (see [10,29,17]), while prosodic considerations remain peripheral or too general (see [31,11,1]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourse Particles in French: Prosodic Parameters Extraction and Analysis

Dargnat

Bartkova

Jouvet

2015

Statistical Language and Speech Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Detecting the correct syntactic function of a word is of great importance for language and speech processing. The semantic load of a word is different whether its function is a discourse particle or a preposition. Words having the function of a discourse particle (DP) are very frequent in spontaneous speech and their discursive function is often expressed only by prosodic means. Our study analyses some prosodic correlates of two French words (quoi, voilà), used as discourse particles or pronoun (quoi) or preposition (voilà). Our goal is to determine to what extent intrinsic and contextual prosodic properties characterize DP and non-DP functions. Prosodic parameters are analyzed with respect to the DP or non-DP function for these words extracted from large speech corpora. A preliminary test concerning the automatic detection of the word function is also carried out using prosodic parameters only, leading to an encouraging result of 70% correct identification.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourse Particles in French: Prosodic Parameters Extraction and Analysis

Dargnat

Bartkova

Jouvet

2015

Statistical Language and Speech Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…My argument in this paper is that the hedging use of bon has become far less marginal in recent years and that the manner in which such a usage develops from a propositional through a textual to an intersubjective one reflects a particular type of regular semantic change, induced by considerations of politeness and face, which is universal. Bon has become a great deal more frequent overall (see Beeching, 2007c) and this in itself is an indication of semantic change (semantic bleaching/ pragmatic enrichment). Brémond (2004) examines conversational exchanges in three different speech situations: televised debates, a cookery programme and ordinary everyday conversation.…”

Section: Textual and Expressive Functions Of Bonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following Brown and Levinson (1987), positive politeness is considered here to be the behavior adopted by speakers who wish to flatter their interlocutor's face by, amongst other things, giving compliments and treating them as a friend, whilst negative politeness does so by showing deference and respect for the views of others, by hedging claims or rejoinders, for example. Beeching (2007b and2007c) provides substantiation, for French, for the runaway positive feedback loop with respect to positive politeness and casual speech described by Wheeler (1994): rates of stigmatized post-posed quoi rose dramatically between 1968 and 2002 and working class and middle class rates converged during this period, suggesting a relative democratization of French society -at least symbolically. One of the aims of the current study is to test the hypothesis that a politeness-induced non-prestige usage of bon follows a similar pattern.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Sociolinguistic factors  and the pragmaticalization ofbonin contemporary spoken French

Beeching¹

2009

Sociolinguistic Variation in Contemporary French

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Its adverbial and interjective uses can, according to Hansen (1998a), be related to its canonical adjectival use (as in 'C"est bon' 'It's good'), its discourse-marking and hedging uses being more peripheral extensions of this. Beeching (2007c) charts the remarkable increase in rates of bon usage in both real and apparent time from 1968-2002. The present paper establishes the extent to which bon is pragmaticalizing by investigating its sociosituational variation and distributional frequency in the Corpus de Référence du Français Parlé. The rise in frequency of the compound expressions mais bon and parce que bon suggests a shift towards increased intersubjectivity 1. This chapter explores the relationship between synchronic and diachronic variation drawing, by way of illustration, on an analysis of the relative distributional frequencies of the senses or functions of the pragmatic particle bon in contemporary spoken French, either as an end-marker or as a hesitation marker. In addition to describing the senses of bon and its sociosituational variation, the chapter hopes to contribute to the literature on historical semantic change and the relative impact of cognitive factors, considerations to do with politeness and the pragmatic factors alluded to in Traugott and Dasher"s (2002) Invited Inferencing Theory of Semantic Change. The chapter is structured in the following way: after outlining the main theoretical strands, an overview is given of existing literature on the meanings and functions of bon and compounds of bon and how these may best be accounted for, integrating new corpus data within this account. The results of a qualitative and quantitative analysis of bon and compounds of bon in balanced extracts from the Étude Sociolinguistique d'Orléans (ESLO) (1968) Corpus, the Beeching (1988) Corpus and the Corpus de Référence du Français Parlé (2002) are then reported, followed by some tentative conclusions. Theories of Semantic Change Sweetser (1990), along with a number of other cognitive linguists (see Panther and Thornburg, 2003), argues that universal cognitive principles such as metaphor and metonymy can account for regularities in three important linguistic domains: polysemous relationships, lexical semantic change and pragmatic ambiguity. A number of fundamental relations of a

show abstract

“…L'objectif de cet article est de voir dans un premier temps si les locuteurs non-natifs du français utilisent aussi quoi comme marqueur discursif dans leur production orale. Cet usage comme marqueur discursif est assez récent chez les locuteurs natifs du français et représente, selon Beeching (2007), un parler des jeunes locuteurs masculins. Cet emploi a souvent une connotation péjorative, considéré comme mal parler.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…Selon cette analyse, le marqueur discursif quoi est « une particule de connivence ». (Beeching, 2007) Beeching (2002) a remarqué que dans son corpus, « la majorité des occurrences marque une hésitation par rapport au caractère adéquat de l'expression (80%) ». Le quoi « sépare le dire et le dit, indiquant une gêne par rapport au caractère adéquat de l'expression ».…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

« Comme c’est un peu langage des jeunes quoi » : analyse du marqueur discursif quoi dans le discours des Chinois résidant en France

Deng

2018

SHS Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Il est documenté que dans les décennies récentes quoi commence à être utilisé comme marqueur discursif dans le discours des locuteurs natifs du français. Cependant, cet usage n'est mentionné ni dans le dictionnaire ni dans les méthodes de grammaire. Malgré des travaux fructueux à la fois qualitatifs et quantitatifs sur sa fonction syntactique et discursive dans le discours des locuteurs natifs du français, sa présence dans le discours des locuteurs non-natifs n'attirent pas encore beaucoup d'attention. Cet article a donc pour objectif de comparer l'usage du marqueur discursif quoi dans le discours des locuteurs non-natifs avec celui dans le discours des locuteurs natifs. Nous nous concentrons sur les divers contextes sous lesquels il apparaît ainsi que comment des facteurs sociaux influencent son emploi. En conclusion, on constate que les locuteurs non-natifs utilisent quoi beaucoup moins fréquemment que les locuteurs natifs. Cependant, ils l'emploient sous des contextes différents tout en tenant compte que les contextes sont plus complexes et variés chez les locuteurs natifs. En ce qui concerne les facteurs extralinguistiques, les hommes utilisent beaucoup plus de quoi que les femmes. La durée de séjour et le statut professionnel semblent aussi significatifs pour son emploi dans notre étude. Abstract. Analysis of discourse markers quoi in the speech of French L2 speakers: the case of the Chinese living in Paris.It is observed that quoi has started to be used as discourse marker in French native speakers' speech in the recent decades. However, this usage is not mentioned neither in the dictionary nor in the grammar books. Despite of some fruitful studies in this usage in French native speakers' speech, its appearance in non-native speakers' speech, to our knowledge, has not yet drawn enough attention. Therefore, this article aims to compare the use of the discursive marker quoi in the speech of nonnative speakers of French with that in the speech of native speakers of French, in particular the various contexts under which this discursive marker appears and how social factors influence its usage. In conclusion, we find that these speakers not only learnt to use quoi as a discursive marker but also in different contexts. However, the contexts are more complex and varied in the speech of the native speakers. As to the extralinguistic factors, male speakers use much more quoi than female speakers. Length of stay and employment status also seemed to be significant for its usage in our study.

show abstract

La co-variation des marqueurs discursifs bon, c'est-à-dire, enfin, hein, quand même, quoi et si vous voulez : une question d'identité ?

Cited by 27 publications

References 12 publications

Discourse Particles in French: Prosodic Parameters Extraction and Analysis

Discourse Particles in French: Prosodic Parameters Extraction and Analysis

Sociolinguistic factors  and the pragmaticalization ofbonin contemporary spoken French

« Comme c’est un peu langage des jeunes quoi » : analyse du marqueur discursif quoi dans le discours des Chinois résidant en France

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

La co-variation des marqueurs discursifs bon, c'est-à-dire, enfin, hein, quand même, quoi et si vous voulez : une question d'identité ?

Cited by 27 publications

References 12 publications

Discourse Particles in French: Prosodic Parameters Extraction and Analysis

Discourse Particles in French: Prosodic Parameters Extraction and Analysis

Sociolinguistic factors and the pragmaticalization ofbonin contemporary spoken French

« Comme c’est un peu langage des jeunes quoi » : analyse du marqueur discursif quoi dans le discours des Chinois résidant en France

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Sociolinguistic factors  and the pragmaticalization ofbonin contemporary spoken French