Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wp2c8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-14T14:23:14.692Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A variationist analysis of first-person-singular subject expression in Louisiana French

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2022

Aarnes Gudmestad  and
Katie Carmichael
Aarnes Gudmestad*
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA
Katie Carmichael
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail:agudmest@vt.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this study, we investigate first-person-singular subject expression in Louisiana French. This variety is undergoing language death and features extreme variation, with twelve first-person-singular subject forms identified within our corpus. We demonstrate that variationist methods are robust for examining such variation in obsolescing languages, and we provide a model for undertaking such analyses. Examining different aspects of our data, we fit two mixed-effects models, one that analyzes the four most frequent phonological variants of the atonic pronoun je ‘I’ and the other that focuses on the tonic pronoun mon ‘me.’ Several linguistic and social factors predict the use of these subject forms, supporting the claim that variability in declining languages is systematic, just as variation in healthy languages is. We argue that variationist methodologies have contributions to make to research on obsolescing languages and that variationist examinations of endangered and minority languages can provide methodological and theoretical contributions to the study of language variation and change more broadly.

Keywords

Louisiana Frenchsubject expressionvariationlanguage deathvariationist sociolinguistics
Type
Research Article
Information
Language Variation and Change , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , March 2022 , pp. 53 - 77
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Austin, P. K., & Sallabank, J. (Eds.). (2011). The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bayley, R., Greer, K., & Holland, C. (2013). Lexical frequency and syntactic variation: A test of a linguistic hypothesis. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 19(2), 4.Google Scholar
Blainey, D. (2017). Sociolinguistic research with endangered varieties: The case of Louisiana French. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 62:576–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, R., & Flores-Ferrán, N. (2004). Perseveration of subject expression across regional dialects of Spanish. Spanish in Contex. 1:41–65.Google Scholar
Campbell, L., & Muntzel, M. C. (1989). The structural consequences of language death. In Dorian, N. C. (Ed.), Investigating obsolescence: Studies in language contraction and death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 181–96.Google Scholar
Carmichael, K. (2007). Gender differences in the substitution of /h/ for /ʒ/ in a formal register of an endangered dialect of Louisiana French. Southern Journal of Linguistics 31(2):1–27.Google Scholar
Carmichael, K. (2017). Stylistic variation and dialect contraction: The case of /ʒ/ and /h/ in Louisiana French. Fleur de Ling: Tulane University Working Papers, Sociolinguistics 3(1), 72–89.Google Scholar
Carmichael, K., & Gudmestad, A. (2019). Language death and subject expression: First-person-singular subjects in a declining dialect of Louisiana French. Journal of French Language Studies 29:67–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carvalho, A. M., Orozco, R., and Shin, N. (Eds.) (2015). Subject Pronoun Expression in Spanish: A Cross-Dialectal Perspective. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Cook, E-D. (1989). Is phonology going haywire in dying languages? Phonological variations in Chipewyan and Sarcee. Language in Society 18:235–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dajko, N. (2009). Ethnic and Geographic Variation in the French of the Lafourche Basin. Unpublished Tulane University dissertation.Google Scholar
Dajko, N. & Blainey, D.. (2016). Variation in Louisiana French: Prairie Cajuns and Bayou Cajuns. In Detey, S., Durand, J., Laks, B., & Lyche, C. (Eds.), Varieties of Spoken French. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 478–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorian, N. C. (1973). Grammatical Change in a Dying Dialect. Language 49(2):413–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorian, N. C. (1977). The problem of the semi-speaker in language death. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 12:23–32.Google Scholar
Dorian, N. C. (1978). The fate of morphological complexity in language death. Language 54:590–609.Google Scholar
Dorian, N. C. (Ed.). (1989) Investigating obsolescence: Studies in language contraction and death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dressler, W. (1972). On the phonology of language death. Chicago Linguistic Society Papers, 8, 448–57.Google Scholar
Dubois, S. (2001). Attrition linguistique ou convergence dialectale: JE, MOI/JE et MOI en français cadien. In Donabédian, A. (Ed.), Langues de diaspora, Langues en contact. No 18 of Faits de Langue: Revue de Linguistique. Paris: Ophrys. 149–65.Google Scholar
Dubois, S. & Horvath, B.. (2000). “When the Music Changes, You Change Too”: Gender and Language Change in Cajun English, Language Variation and Change 11:287–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubois, S. & Noetzel, S.. (2005). Intergenerational pattern of interference and internally-motivated changes in Cajun French. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 8(2):131–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erker, D., & Guy, G. R. (2012). The role of lexical frequency in syntactic variability: Variable subject personal pronoun expression in Spanish. Language 88:526–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geeslin, K.L., & Long, A.Y. (2014). Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition: Learning to use language in context. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Girard Lomheim, F. (2017). Le pronoun dans le français de Louisiane: Trois siècles de cheminement. Paris: L'Harmattan.Google Scholar
Gorman, K. & Johnson, D.E.. (2013). Quantitative Analysis. In Bayley, R., Cameron, R., & Lucas, C. (eds.), The Oxford handbook of sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 214–40.Google Scholar
Gudmestad, A., Edmonds, A., Donaldson, B., & Carmichael, K. (2018). On the role of the present indicative in variable future-time reference in Hexagonal French. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 63(1):42–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, K.D. & Anderson, G.. 2008. Tofa language change and terminal generation speakers. In Anderson, K.D., Rood, D.S., & Dwyer, A., Lessons from documented endangered languages [Typological Studies in Language 78]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 243–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, D.E. (2009). Getting off the GoldVarb Standard: Introducing Rbrul for Mixed-Effects Variable Rule Analysis. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(1):359–83.Google Scholar
Kasstan, J. R. (2019). Emergent sociolinguistic variation in severe language endangerment. Language in Society 48:1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, R. (1989). On the social meaning of linguistic variability in language death situations: Variation in Newfoundland French. In Dorian, N. C. (Ed.), Investigating obsolescence: Studies in language contraction and death. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 139–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. (1966). Hypercorrection by the Lower Middle Class as a Factor in Linguistic Change. In Bright, W. (Ed.), Sociolinguistics: Proceedings of the UCLA Sociolinguistics Conference. The Hague: Mouton. 84–113.Google Scholar
McNeish, D. (2017). Small sample methods for multilevel modeling: A colloquial elucidation of REML and the Kenward-Roger correction. Multivariate Behavioral Research 52(5):661–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nagy, N. (2015). A sociolinguistic view of null subjects and VOT in Toronto heritage languages. Lingua 164B:309–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagy, N. (2017). Documenting variation in (endangered) heritage languages: How and why? Language Documentation and Conservation 13:33–64.Google Scholar
Nagy, N., Iannozzi, M, & Heap, D. (2018). Faetar null subjects: A variationist study of a heritage language in contact. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 249:31–47.Google Scholar
Otheguy, R., & Zentella, A. C. (2012). Spanish in New York: Language contact, dialect leveling, and structural continuity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pabst, K., Konnelly, F., Wilson, F., Meslin, S., & Nagy, N. (2020). Variation in subject doubling in homeland and heritage Faetar. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, 42:1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palosaari, N. & Campbell, L.. (2011). Structural aspects of language endangerment. In Austin, P.K. and Sallabank, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 100–19.Google Scholar
Picone, M. D. (1997). Enclave dialect contraction: An external overview of Louisiana French. American Speech 72(2):117–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rottet, K. J. (1996). Language change and language death: Some changes in the pronominal system of declining Cajun French. Plurilinguismes 11:117–52.Google Scholar
Rottet, K. J. (2001). Language shift in the coastal marshes of Louisiana. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Rottet, K. J. (2005). Variation et étiolement en français cadien: Perspectives comparées. In Valdman, A., Auger, J., & Piston-Hatlen, D. (Eds.), Le Français en Amérique du Nord: État présent. Saint-Nicolas, Québec, Canada: Les Presses de l'Université Laval. 243–60.Google Scholar
Salmon, C. (2007). Français acadien, français cadien: variation stylistique et maintenance de formes phonétiques dans le parler de quatre générations de femmes cadiennes. Unpublished dissertation, Louisiana State University.Google Scholar
Schmidt, A. (1985). Young people's dyirbal: An example of language death from Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, B., Biber, D., Egbert, J., & Franco, K. (2016). Toward more accountability: Modeling ternary genitive variation in Late Modern English. Language Variation and Change. 1:1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, J. A. (2010). Variation in linguistic systems. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1974) [1953]. Languages in contact: Findings and problems. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Wolfram, W. (2004). Language death and dying. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P., & Schilling-Estes, N. (Eds.), The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 764–87.Google Scholar