Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T04:46:15.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Schwa and the loi de position in Southern French

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2013

JULIEN EYCHENNE
JULIEN EYCHENNE*
Affiliation:
Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Republic of Korea
*
Address for correspondence: Julien Eychenne, Dept. of Linguistics and Cognitive Science, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Mohyeon, Yongin, Gyeonggi 449–791, Republic of Korea e-mail: jeychenne@hufs.ac.kr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper investigates the alternation of mid-open and mid-close vowels in southern French, a pattern known as the loi de position, and its relation to schwa. I offer a critical survey of the main analyses that have been put forward in the literature, showing how different conceptions of schwa influence the interpretation of the loi de position. I demonstrate that even in varieties where the pattern is considered fully productive, there are a number of exceptional cases that lend themselves to a usage-based approach. I develop an analysis of the phenomenon in the framework of Cognitive Grammar: the loi de position is formalized as the result of the interplay between substantive and symbolic constructions which emerge through usage.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of French Language Studies , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , July 2014 , pp. 223 - 253
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. and Ewen, C. (1987). Principles of Dependency Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barlow, M. and Kemmer, S. (eds.)(2000). Usage Based Models of Language. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Basbøll, H. (1978). Schwa, jonctures et syllabification dans les représentations phonologiques du français. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 16.2: 147–82.Google Scholar
Browman, C. and Goldstein, L. (1992). ‘Targetless’ schwa: an articulatory analysis. In: Papers in Laboratory Phonology II: Gesture, Segment, Prosody. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 26–67.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2001). Phonology and Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clements, N. (1993). Un modèle hiérarchique de l'aperture vocalique: le cas du bantou. In: Laks, B. and Plénat, M. (eds), De natura sonorum. Essais de phonologie. Saint-Denis: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes, pp. 23–64.Google Scholar
Côté, M.-H. (2000). Consonant cluster phonotactics: A perception-based approach. MIT Linguistics Dissertations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
Côté, M.-H. and Morrison, G. S. (2007). The nature of the schwa-zero alternation in French clitics: experimental and non-experimental evidence. Journal of French Language Studies, 17.2: 159–186.Google Scholar
Croft, W. and Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crosswhite, K. (2001). Vowel Reduction in Optimality Theory. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dell, F. (1985). Les règles et les sons. Introduction à la phonologie generative. Paris: Hermann. Second edition.Google Scholar
Dik, S. (1997). The Theory of Functional Grammar. Part I: The Structure of the Clause. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Second edition.Google Scholar
Durand, J. (1976). Generative phonology, dependency phonology and southern French. Lingua e Stile, 11.1: 3–23.Google Scholar
Durand, J. (1986a). French liaison, floating segments and other matters in a dependency framework. In: J. Durand (1986b), pp. 161–201.Google Scholar
Durand, J. (ed.) (1986b). Dependency and Non-Linear Phonology. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Durand, J. (1988). Les phénomènes de nasalité en français du Midi: phonologie de dépendance et sous-spécification. Recherches Linguistiques, 17: 29–54.Google Scholar
Durand, J. (1990). Generative and Non-Linear Phonology. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Durand, J. (1995). Alternances vocaliques en français du Midi et phonologie du gouvernement. Lingua, 95: 27–50.Google Scholar
Durand, J., Laks, B. and Lyche, C. (2002). La phonologie du français contemporain: usages, variétés et structure. In: Pusch, C. and Raible, W. (eds.), Romanistische Korpuslinguistik- Korpora und gesprochene Sprache/Romance Corpus Linguistics ‒ Corpora and Spoken Language. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, pp. 93–106.Google Scholar
Durand, J., Laks, B. and Lyche, C. (2005). Un corpus numérisé pour la phonologie du français. In: Williams, G. (ed.), La linguistique de corpus. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes, pp. 205–217.Google Scholar
Durand, J., Slater, C. and Wise, H. (1987). Observations on schwa in Southern French. Linguistics, 25.2: 983–1004.Google Scholar
Encrevé, P. (1988). La liaison avec et sans enchaînement. Phonologie tridimensionnelle et usages du français. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Eychenne, J. (2006). Aspects de la phonologie du schwa dans le français contemporain. Optimalité, visibilité prosodique, gradience. PhD thesis, Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail.Google Scholar
Flemming, E. (2010). The phonetics of schwa vowels. In: Minova, D. (ed.), Phonological Weakness in English. From Old to Present-day English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. (1993a). Harmonic Phonology. In: J. Goldsmith (ed.), pp. 21–60.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. (ed.) (1993b). The Last Phonological Rule. Chicago and London: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Hannahs, S. (1995). Prosodic Structure and French Morphophonology. Niemeyer: Tübingen.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1993). Cognitive Phonology. In: J. Goldsmith (ed.), pp. 117–146.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987a). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume 1: Theoretical Prerequisites, Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987b). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume 2: Descriptive Application, Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar. A Basic Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, G., Moulin, B., Bréchet, P. and Baquié, J-P. (1998). Grammaire provençale et cartes linguistiques. Aix-en-Provence: EDISUD.Google Scholar
Martinet, A. (1969). Le français sans fard. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. (2007). Hidden Generalizations. Phonological Opacity in Optimality Theory. London and Oakville: Equinox.Google Scholar
Mielke, J. (2008). The Emergence of Distinctive Features. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Moreux, B. (1985a). La ‘loi de position’ en francais du Midi. 1. Synchronie (Béarn). Cahiers de grammaire, 9: 45–138.Google Scholar
Moreux, B. (1985b). La ‘loi de position’ en francais du Midi. 1. Diachronie. Cahiers de grammaire, 10: 95–174.Google Scholar
Nespor, M. and Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
van Oostendorp, M. (2000). Phonological Projection: A Theory of Feature Content and Prosodic Structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Prince, A. and Smolensky, P. (1993). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Technical report Ru-CCS-TR2, Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science, New Brunswick.Google Scholar
Rizzolo, O. (2002). Du leurre phonétique des voyelles moyennes en francais et du divorce entre licenciement et licenciement pour gouverner. PhD thesis, Université de Nice-Sophia Antipolis.Google Scholar
Rochet, B. (1980). The mid-vowels in Bordeaux French. Orbis, 29: 76–104.Google Scholar
Selkirk, E. (1978). The French foot: on the status of ‘mute e’. Studies in French Linguistics, 1.2: 141–150.Google Scholar
Séguy, P. (1951). Le francais parlé à Toulouse. Paris: Privat.Google Scholar
Spencer, A. (1988). Bracketing paradoxes and the English lexicon. Language, 64.4: 663–682.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R. (2002). Cognitive Grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tranel, B. (1976). A note on final consonant deletion in modern French. Lingua, 39: 53–68.Google Scholar
Tranel, B. (1987). The Sounds of French. An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Turcsan, G. (2005). Le mot phonologique en français du Midi. Domaines, contraintes, opacité. Unpublished PhD thesis, Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail.Google Scholar
Walker, D. C. (2001). French Sound Structure. Calgary: University of Calgary Press.Google Scholar
Watbled, J-P. (1995). Segmental and suprasegmental structure in southern French. In: Smith, J. C. and Maiden, M. (eds.), Linguistic Theory and the Romance Languages. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 181–200.Google Scholar
Wheeler, D.W. and Touretzky, D. (1993). A connectionist implementation of Cognitive Phonology. In: J. Goldsmith (ed.), pp. 146–172.Google Scholar
Wolf, M. and McCarthy, J. (2009). Less than zero: Correspondence and the null output. In: Blaho, S. and Rice, C. (eds.), Modeling Ungrammaticality in Optimality Theory. London: Equinox, pp. 17–66.Google Scholar