A WINDOW ON THE PAST,
A MOVE TOWARD THE FUTURE:
SOCIOLINGUISTIC AND FORMAL PERSPECTIVES
ON VARIATION IN ACADIAN FRENCH
PHILIP DENIS COMEAU
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
GRADUATE PROGRAM IN LINGUISTICS AND APPLIED LINGUISTICS
YORK UNIVERSITY,
TORONTO, ONTARIO
DECEMBER 2011
© PHILIP DENIS COMEAU, 2011 Library and Archives Bibliotheque et Canada Archives Canada
Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition
395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-88668-7
Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-88668-7
NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distrbute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.
The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission.
In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these.
While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. Canada . Abstract
This dissertation examines variation in mood choice and in the expression of future temporal reference in a conservative variety of Acadian French. The data come from two sociolinguistic corpora representative of the variety spoken in the Baie Sainte-Marie area of southwest Nova Scotia. Since varieties of Acadian French preserve features lost in most other contemporary varieties, they offer a unique opportunity to study linguistic systems closely related to earlier stages of the language.
The methodological and theoretical approaches involve both variationist sociolinguistics and generative theories of grammar, thus combining two areas of research not usually brought together. The study focuses on two linguistic variables:
1) use of the subjunctive vs. other moods (indicative and conditional), and 2) expression of future temporal reference (inflected future vs. periphrastic future). The analysis of the subjunctive shows that there is actually little variation and the subjunctive mood is well preserved. The variation which is observed can be accounted for by assuming that mood choice turns on the presence or absence of a semantic feature, assertion. The results for the future temporal reference variable show, contrary to what has been found for
Laurentian varieties, that the inflected future remains in robust use, with the strongest predictor of variant choice being temporal reference, with proximate actions favouring the periphrastic future. The future results are in line with both prior studies of Acadian
French and with grammarians' characterization of the latter variant as le futur proche.
The results also differ from those of studies of Laurentian varieties in that sentential
iv polarity plays no role in conditioning variant choice. The formal analysis accounts for variation by positing two loci of variation (one pre-syntax and one post-syntax) which accurately predicts the observed frequencies of the variants.
Overall, this dissertation shows that while there may be variable usage there is no evidence of change in the linguistic system for these two variables, thus supporting the characterization of this variety of Acadian French as conservative. The formal analyses contribute to an emerging line of research, sometimes referred to as sociosyntax, which aims at accounting for variation within the grammar.
v A ma famille.
vi Acknowledgements
First and foremost, this work would not have been possible without the generous time and commitment of the residents of Baie Sainte-Marie, Nova Scotia who participated in the two corpora analyzed in this study (the Butler Grosses Coques Sociolinguistic Corpus and the Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse). The consultants graciously welcomed me into their homes whenever we needed additional information.
This dissertation would never have seen the light of day without the guidance, encouragement, and generosity of Ruth King. She has provided constant support, even in ways I may not have realized at the time, which occasionally included orders to take a day off. Ruth has been a true mentor in every sense of the word. I am honoured and privileged to have had the opportunity to learn from such a dedicated scholar.
The other members of my supervisory committee also greatly contributed to this dissertation project. Thanks to Raymond Mougeon, who shared his expertise and native- speaker intuitions of French and also for his insight into the sociolinguistic analyses. Thanks also to Gabriela Alboiu, who provided important feedback on the formal analyses. Her contribution to this and other research projects is greatly appreciated.
Thanks also to the examination committee, chaired by Raymond, and composed of David Heap, Ruth, James Walker, and Linda Steinman. Their insightful feedback regarding particular analyses and other aspects of the work helped strengthen the clarity of this research.
Thanks to Gary Butler for granting me access to the Grosses Coques corpus for this study and for other research projects.
Thanks also to Michelle Daveluy (and to Karin Flikeid) for collaborating with me on the preservation of the Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse.
Other professors and staff in the Linguistics and Applied Linguistics program helped create a fruitful learning environment and I am grateful for the many classroom discussions and friendly chats. In particular, I'd like to thank Rose Frezza-Edgecombe, for her support within the program, and James Walker, who provided valuable feedback and constant support of graduate students in the infancy of our PhD program.
Without a doubt, the journey of a PhD student is enriched by peers. While Tanya, Jeff, and I found the department quieter in the early years, we were soon joined by an energetic group of students working on a range of interesting and diverse projects. It's great to have gone through this program with them. Tanya and Jeff provided a great start to a program and the arrival of Laura, Sibley, Rick, Jacqueline, Jessica Spieker, Jessica
Vll King, John, Sean, etc. enriched our program further. Their intellectual and social interactions made graduate school enjoyable. Thanks especially to Rick for the endless discussions of French and its myriad varieties and complexities. He is a great collaborator and friend.
I appreciated the opportunity to leave a humid Toronto summer when invited by Gerard Van Herk to work at his sociolinguistics lab at Memorial University as a visiting student scholar. The people at the MUSL lab (Jenn, Suzanne, Matt, Lindsay, and others) provided a new and fun environment to do sociolinguistic research. Their generosity and hospitality is much appreciated.
I am also thankful to have had the chance to work on the CIEL-F project with the welcoming people at Universite de Moncton (Annette Boudreau, Laurence Arrighi, Karine Gauvin, Matthieu LeBlanc) and Fransoise Gadet of Universite Paris Ouest Nanterre La Defense. The interesting discussions about the creation of corpora justified the sometimes confusing teleconference calls.
For technical aspects of this dissertation, I thank Walter Giesbrecht at York University for assistance with accessing older census data. I also thank Carolyn King of York University for drawing such great maps.
My interest in language was nurtured by various teachers I've had throughout the years, but, bar none, Jeannette Ireland of Saint Mary's University instigated my early decision to study linguistics. She has provided constant encouragement to pursue research on Acadian French and her teachings instilled a passion in me for syntax and for linguistics, in general.
Thanks also to Ingrid Neumann-Holzschuh and Julia Hennemann who generously provided information they had gathered on a wide range of varieties of Acadian French.
I am grateful for financial support from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada in the form of a Joseph-Armand Bombardier Canada Graduate Scholarship (767-2008-2215).
Beyond the academic support I have received, I would like to thank my family for their love and encouragement. They remain the biggest supporters of all my endeavours. Mercil Je vous aime a pu finir! In addition, they provided me with numerous grammaticality judgments when my mind was too intertwined with the linguistic side of things. Thanks also to my friends, who listened to me complain about the trials of graduate school (Marie-Claire, Melodie, Erin, Danette, Catherine). Aside from lending an ear, they often provided me with much-needed reprieve from work. Algonquin Park yurts, scenic Newfoundland fjords, and Gaspe moose encounters made for nice changes of scenery!
viii Most certainly, my greatest debt of gratitude is to my partner and best friend (and more recently husband), Dennis Newhook, who helped me maintain balance throughout this experience. He has provided unending encouragement while enduring hours of me talking about what must have been the most boring and technical facts of linguistics. He provided a critical eye and ear for countless practice talks, Power Point slides, and edits. He truly knows more about linguistics than any layperson should. E'je t'aime.
ix TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract iv Dedication vi Acknowledgements vii Table of Contents x List of Tables xiv List of Figures xvi List of Maps xvii Abbreviations xviii
Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1. Introduction 1 2.1 The subjunctive mood 1 2.2 Future temporal reference 4 3. Research questions 7 4. Outline of the dissertation 12
Chapter 2: Acadian French 14 1. Introduction 14 2.1 The founding of Acadie 15 2.2 Grand Derangment (The Great Upheaval) 15 2.3 The return of Acadians from exile 17 3.1 Phonetic and phonological studies of Acadian French 19 3.2 Morphological and syntactic studies 21 3.3 Lexical studies 24 3.4 Language contact phenomena 25 4. Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French 27 5. Conclusion 37
Chapter 3: Theory and methodology 38 1. Introduction 38 2. The formal approach: Minimalism and distributed morphology 38 3.1 The variationist approach: Variation theory 48 3.2 The variationist approach: Variation methodology 54 4. The integrated approach: The minimalist program and variationist sociolinguistics58
x 5. The speech community: The Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian region of Nova Scotia 63 5.1 Sociohistorical profile of the Baie Sainte-Marie region 63 5.3 The history of education in Baie Sainte-Marie.... 67 5.4 Language use in Baie Sainte-Marie 71 5.5 Grosses Coques 72 5.6 Meteghan 74 6.1 The Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French corpora 74 6.2 The Butler Grosses Coques Sociolinguistic Corpus 75 6.3 Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse 78 7. Conclusion 80
Chapter 4: The subjunctive mood in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French 81 1. Introduction 81 2. The French subjunctive mood 82 2.1 The history of the French subjunctive mood 82 2.2 The imperfect subjunctive 84 2.3 The subjunctive mood in Modern French 91 2.4 Conclusion 97 3.1 Quantitative analysis 97 3.2 The variable context 98 3.3 Excluded tokens 103 3.4 Overall results for the subjunctive mood in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French ..109 3.5 Mood variability with verbal matrices 114 3.5.1 Aimer 115 3.5.2 Avoir peur 117 3.5.3 Esperer 118 3.5.4 Falloir 119 3.5.5 Guetter 124 3.5.6 Point croire 125 3.5.7 Valoir la peine 128 3.5.8 Vouloir 129 3.6 Mood variability with nonverbal matrices 130 3.6.1 Apres que 130 3.6.2 Avant que 133 3.6.3 Jusqu 'a tant que 134 3.6.4 Mais que 137 3.6.5 Pour que 138 3.6.6 Infrequent nonverbal matrices 140 3.7 Forms of the subjunctive 142 3.8 Concluding remarks on the variationist analysis 145 4.1 The formal account of mood variation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French 147 4.2 Previous accounts of the French subjunctive mood 147
xi 4.3 Previous accounts of mood variation in French 150 4.4.1 Mood variation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French 154 4.4.2 Mood variation following verbal selectors in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French 154 4.4.3.1 Constraint on the sequence of tenses 166 4.4.3.2 Alternation with the indicative 167 4.4.3.3 Locality of triggering 168 4.4.3.4 Obviation effects 170 4.4.4 Concluding remarks on intensional subjunctive and polarity subjunctives....171 4.4.5 Mood variation following non-verbal selectors 173 4.5 Comparison across varieties of Acadian French 177 4.6 Conclusion 182
Chapter 5: The expression of future temporal reference in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French 185 1. Introduction 185 2.1 The history of the variants 186 2.2 Contemporary studies of the future temporal reference variable 189 2.3 Quantitative studies 194 3.1 Future temporal reference in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French 211 3.2 The variable context 212 3.3 Excluded tokens 213 3.4 Social constraints 216 3.5 Linguistic constraints 217 3.5.1 Temporal reference 217 3.5.2 Adverbial specification 219 3.5.3 Certainty (Imminence) 221 3.5.4 Sentential polarity 222 3.5.5 Other factors 223 3.6 Quantitative results for the future temporal reference variable 225 3.7 Results for linguistic factors 226 3.8 Results for social factors 230 3.9 Conclusion 231 4.1 Introduction to the formal account of the future temporal reference variable 232 4.2 Previous accounts of time and tense 233 4.3 Combinatorial variability 235 4.4 Accounting for future temporal reference variation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French 238 4.5 Concluding remarks on the formal analysis 246 5. Conclusion 247
xii Chapter 6: Conclusion 248 1. Overview 248 2. Research Questions 253 3. Limitations of the present study and suggestions for future research 256 4. Concluding remarks 256
References 258
xiii List of Tables
TABLE 2.1. VERBAL TENSE PARADIGMS FOR -ER VERBS IN BAIE SAINTE- MARIE ACADIAN FRENCH 29 TABLE 2.2. VERBAL TENSE PARADIGMS FOR -OIR VERBS IN BAIE SAINTE- MARIE ACADIAN FRENCH 32 TABLE 3.1. THE GROSSES COQUES CONSULTANTS 77 TABLE 3.2. THE METEGHAN CONSULTANTS 79 TABLE 4.1. PLURAL CONJUGATIONS OF THE SIMPLE PAST IN MARAIS- VENDEE (SVENSON 1959) 90 TABLE 4.2. SUBJUNCTIVE SELECTORS IN THE BAIE SAINTE-MARIE CORPORA 102 TABLE 4.3. RATE OF SUBJUNCTIVE PER MATRIX VERB FOR GROSSES COQUES 110 TABLE 4.4. RATE OF SUBJUNCTIVE PER MATRIX VERB FOR METEGHAN. .110 TABLE 4.5. RATE OF SUBJUNCTIVE PER MATRIX VERB FOR THE BAIE SAINTE-MARIE DATA (BOTH GROSSES COQUES AND METEGHAN). ...111 TABLE 4.6. RATE OF SUBJUNCTIVE PER NONVERBAL MATRIX VERB FOR GROSSES COQUES 113 TABLE 4.7. RATE OF SUBJUNCTIVE PER NONVERBAL MATRIX VERB FOR METEGHAN 113 TABLE 4.8. RATE OF SUBJUNCTIVE PER NONVERBAL MATRIX VERB FOR BAIE SAINTE-MARIE (BOTH GROSSES COQUES AND METEGHAN) 114 TABLE 4.9. TENSE FOR AIMER AND EMBEDDED VERBS 116 TABLE 4.10. TENSE FOR FALLOIR AND EMBEDDED VERBS 123 TABLE 4.11. TENSE FOR POINT CROIRE TOKENS IN THE BAIE SAINTE-MARIE DATA (BOTH GROSSES COQUES AND METEGHAN) 128 TABLE 4.12. TENSES FOR VOULOIR AND EMBEDDED VERBS 130 TABLE 4.13. TENSES FOR TOKENS FOLLOWING APRES QUE 132 TABLE 4.14. TENSES FOR TOKENS FOLLOWING A VANT QUE 134 TABLE 4;15. TENSE FOR TOKENS FOLLOWING JUSQU'A TANT QUE 136 TABLE 4.16. TENSE FOR TOKENS FOLLOWING MAIS QUE 138 TABLE 4.17. TENSE FOR TOKENS FOLLOWING POUR QUE 140 TABLE 4.18. INFREQUENT SUBJUNCTIVE-SELECTING NONVERBAL MATRICES 141 TABLE 4.19. MATRIX TENSE OF VERBAL MATRICES WHICH OCCURS WITH THE IMPERFECT SUBJUNCTIVE IN THE BAIE SAINTE-MARIE DATA (BOTH GROSSES COQUES AND METEGHAN) 144 TABLE 4.20. RATE OF SUBJUNCTIVE PER MATRIX VERB FOR THE BAIE SAINTE-MARIE DATA (BOTH GROSSES COQUES AND METEGHAN) 155
xiv TABLE 4.21. USE OF THE SUBJUNCTIVE PER TENSE FOR POINT CROIRE IN THE BAIE SAINTE-MARIE DATA (BOTH GROSSES COQUES AND METEGHAN) 157 TABLE 4.22. USE OF THE SUBJUNCTIVE FOR PRESENT TENSE POINT CROIRE IN THE BAIE SAINTE-MARIE DATA (BOTH GROSSES COQUES AND METEGHAN) 160 TABLE 4.23. TENSE CONCORDANCE FOR INTENSIONAL SUBJUNCTIVES. ..167 TABLE 4.24. RATE OF SUBJUNCTIVE PER MATRIX VERB FOR THE BAIE SAINTE-MARIE DATA (BOTH GROSSES COQUES AND METEGHAN) 168 TABLE 4.25. RATE OF SUBJUNCTIVE PER NONVERBAL MATRIX FOR BAIE SAINTE-MARIE (BOTH GROSSES COQUES AND METEGHAN) 173 TABLE 4.26. RATES OF MOOD PER TENSE FOR NONVERBAL MATRIX FOR BAIE SAINTE-MARIE (BOTH GROSSES COQUES AND METEGHAN) 174 TABLE 5.1. OVERALL DISTRIBUTION OF VARIANTS PER VILLAGE 225 TABLE 5.2. OVERALL DISTRIBUTION OF VARIANTS PER VILLAGE 226 TABLE 5.3. ANALYSIS OF LINGUISTIC FACTORS WHICH CONDITION THE PERIPHRASTIC FUTURE 227 TABLE 5.4. RATE OF EACH VARIANT PER TYPE OF ADVERBIAL SPECIFICATION 229 TABLE 5.5. ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL FACTORS WHICH CONDITION THE PERIPHRASTIC FUTURE 230
xv List of Figures
FIGURE 5.1. RATES OF THE PERIPHRASTIC FUTURE (PF) PER TIME PERIOD FOLLOWING UTTERANCE TIME (UT) 243
xvi List of Maps
MAP 2.1. ACADIAN REGIONS IN NOVA SCOTIA 18 MAP 3.1. ACADIAN REGIONS IN NOVA SCOTIA 64 MAP 3.2. THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARE 65
xvii Abbreviations
1 first person 2 second person 3 third person COND present conditional F feminine FUT future IMP imperfect IND indicative INF infinitive INT interrogative particle M masculine NEG negative marker PART particle PL plural PRES present tense PST past REFL reflexive SBJV subjunctive SG singular SP simple past [•••] pause
xviii Chapter 1: Introduction
1. Introduction
Acadian French is a dialect of French, spoken mainly in Atlantic Canada, which is
distinct from other varieties of French in a number of ways. Varieties of Acadian French
are often described as linguistically conservative in comparison with most other varieties
of French and at the same time as being innovative, both due to relatively low normative
pressure and levels of contact with supralocal varieties of French. This dissertation
presents the results of a study of two grammatical phenomena, variation in mood choice
and expression of future temporal reference, in one particular variety of Acadian French,
that spoken in the Baie Sainte-Marie region of southwest Nova Scotia. The analysis
involves the integration of two theoretical frameworks, the generative approach
embodied in the minimalist program and variationist (Labovian) sociolinguistics. As
such, the dissertation contributes to research in both subfields and also adds to our
knowledge of panlectal variation in French. This introductory chapter will provide a brief
overview of the variables under study and will also present the major research questions
this study seeks to address. These research questions are then formulated into testable
hypotheses, replies to which will be given in the concluding chapter. The last section of
this chapter will provide a chapter-by-chapter outline of the dissertation.
2.1 The subjunctive mood
The exact functions of the French subjunctive mood have been heavily debated by early grammarians (de Condillac 1798, de Vaugelas 1996 [1647]), contemporary syntacticians
1 (Barbaud 1991, Farkas 1982, Rowlett 2007), and sociolinguists (Auger 1990; Laurier
1989; Poplack 1992, 1997, 2001) alike. For some (Lachet 2010, Rowlett 2007), the subjunctive clearly expresses, or rather continues to express, semantic functions while for
others (Poplack 1992), the subjunctive is actually devoid of semantic meaning and simply functions as a marker of subordination in contemporary French.
In addition, researchers disagree as to whether the subjunctive mood is in decline
in contemporary varieties of French. For instance, Laurier (1989) provides a variationist analysis of subjunctive usage in Ontario French and asks whether the subjunctive may be
in decline due to contact with English, a language with a more limited subjunctive mood system. In contrast, Poplack's (1992) study of the subjunctive in the French of the
Ottawa-Hull region argues that the subjunctive is not actually in decline. She concludes that while there is variability in mood choice, this is not indicative of change in the system. Thus, there is disagreement in the literature with regards to the status of the subjunctive in present-day varieties of French.
This dissertation analyzes variation between use of the subjunctive, as shown in 1, and other moods, such as the indicative, as shown in 2, and the conditional, as shown in
3, in the variety of Acadian French spoken in the Baie Sainte-Marie region of Nova
Scotia.
2 (1) Jecrois point qu' il ait plus que son grade s-, 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG.M have.PRES.SBJV.SG more than his grade s-
[...] huh six ou sept.1 huh six or seven i don't think he has more than his grade s-, [...] huh. Six or seven.' (Carole, M-298)2
(2) But jecrois point que c' est passe encore, but 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG be.PRES.LND.SG passed yet 'But 1 don't think it's passed yet.' (Carole, GC-6)
(3) J'aurais point cru qu' elle aurait pu le 1 have.CoND.SG NEG thought that 3.SG.F have.COND.SG could him
stander, ielle asteure non plus. stand.lNF her now no more 'I wouldn't have thought that she could stand him now, her either.' (Zabeth, GC-12)
The quantitative and formal analyses provided in the present work will determine whether or not the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French is stable or in decline and whether it (still) expresses semantic functions.
In addition to the present subjunctive, Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French preserves the imperfect subjunctive, widely regarded to have been lost from (spoken)
French, as shown in 4.3
1 Je in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French can be used for both first person singular as well as first person plural subjects and so will be glossed as 1 with no number marking. I assume that je is underspecifed for number. For data from other varieties, use of nous is glossed as 1 .PL and je as 1 .SG. 2 The code in parentheses gives the consultant pseudonym, corpus (GC: Grosses Coques; M: Meteghan), and interview number. 3 Note that in this variety of French, as in many colloquial varieties, gender is not distinguished with a third person plural pronominal subject (i.e. ils is used for both masculine and feminine subjects and elles is not attested). 3 (4) lis avont calle pour bailler cinquante piastres a Pierre pour 3.PL have.PL called in.order.to give.LNF fifty dollars to Pierre in.order.to
qu' il fit une smile.4 that 3.SG.M make.lMP.SBJV.SG a smile 'They had called to give fifty dollars so that Pierre would smile.' (Evelyn, GC-27)
Therefore, Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French provides us with a unique opportunity to study the imperfect subjunctive, a feature widely regarded to have been lost in the
language, in naturalistic spoken language data. The quantitative analysis is followed by a formal account of the variability. We will see here that particular functions are indeed
operative in the variety under study. In the final part of my analysis of mood choice, I show how variation between subjunctive and indicative morphology in subjunctive- selecting contexts may be captured within the grammar.
2.2 Future temporal reference
The second variable to be examined in this dissertation is the expression of future
temporal reference, which involves a number different ways of expressing the future, in
Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. The inflected future, as shown in 5, varies with the periphrastic future, as shown in 6, and the futurate present, as shown in 7.
(5) Je reviendrai demain.5 1 come.again.FuT. 1 .SG tomorrow 'I'll come back tomorrow.' (Patrick, GC-18)
4 For the endings je ... -ons and ils ... -ont, I do not indicate number in the gloss since the endings are homophonous (i.e. avont in this example). Thus 1 assume the suffix to be underspecified for person. With the second person plural agreement marker -ez, 1 assume that this is specified for the second person and is glossed as such (i.e. 2.PL). Clearly, the inflected future is in the indicative mood. However, 1 omit mood information from the gloss where it is not relevant (i.e. it is only included in the glosses for examples of mood variation). 4 (6) Et la apres je vas rouvrir ma own petite besogne dans Meteghan.6 and then after 1 go.PRES.SG open.lNF my own little business in Meteghan 'And then I'm going to open my own little business in Meteghan.' (Veronique, M-296)
(7) Jebraquons back dans le mois de [...] mai.7 1 start.PRES.PL back in the month of May 'We start again in the month of [...] May.' (Sam, GC-36)
The future tense system has been studied in a wide range of varieties of French. Once
again, there is debate as to whether the different forms express different meanings or
fulfill different functions. For instance, grammarians typically characterize the
periphrastic future as le future proche 'the near future' since it is associated with events
or states which are anticipated to occur shortly after the utterance time. The inflected future is associated with events or states further removed from the utterance time.
However, recent studies of varieties of Canadian French (Deshaies & Laforge 1981,
Emirkanian & Sankoff 1985, Grimm & Nadasdi 2011, Poplack & Turpin 1999) suggest
that the effect of temporal reference does not really account for differences in usage,
certainly not in comparison with another constraint, that of sentential polarity. While
commentary on sentential polarity is rare in the works of early grammarians and commentators, studies of present-day Laurentian varieties of French (i.e. varieties of
French spoken in the province of Quebec as well as varieties which are derived from it,
Vas [va] is a vernacular pronunciation of standard first person singular vais [ve]. While vas is also widespread in other varieties, the default variant in Laurentian varieties is m 'as (Mougeon & Beniak 1991), which does not occur in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. Phonologically, the singular forms for present tense alter {je vas, tu vas, il/elle/ga va) are identical [va]. The absence of the in je vas is an orthographic form intended to represent homophony with tu vas. Since these are phonologically identical, 1 assume that they are unmarked for person. 7 The Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian verb braquer 'to start' has a different meaning than in standard French where it is synonymous with tourner, fixer 'to turn, aim', as defined in Le Grand Robert de la ktngue franqaise (Rey 2011). 5 such as varieties of Ontario French) report that the inflected future is almost entirely
limited to negative contexts. In addition to the debate surrounding constraints on usage,
there is also debate as to whether the inflected future is in decline (i.e. it is being supplanted by unmarked use of the periphrastic future). However, a study (King &
Nadasdi 2003) of varieties of Acadian French spoken in Newfoundland and Prince
Edward Island report that the strongest predictor of variant choice in these varieties is still
temporal reference, as suggested by grammarians, and that the inflected future is still used at high rates.
Since Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French is a conservative variety, one which preserves a fairly rich inflectional morphology (see Chapter 2 for discussion) which
includes more tense and agreement contrasts than in other varieties, we might expect this variety to have higher rates of the inflected future than is the case in Laurentian and
European varieties.8 Studies sometimes point to the shift from synthetic to analytic as a possible explanation. However, in the case of Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French, which retains more synthetic forms, we might anticipate that the inflected is used to a greater degree than in other varieties. In addition, if the polarity constraint is a fairly recent innovation, we would expect to find it to have no effect on variant choice in Baie Sainte-
Marie Acadian French (indeed, King & Nadasdi 2003 reports it to have no effect on variant choice in the Acadian varieties included in this study). We do, of course, find variation in the expression of future temporal reference and the present work will present a variationist as well as a formal analysis of this variation. Following the quantitative
s For European French, see Blanche-Benveniste 1990, Jeanjean 1988, and Roberts 2010. 6 analyses of the expression of future temporal reference, I present a formal analysis which
accounts for variation in the grammar.
3. Research questions
In order to clearly identify the major areas addressed in this dissertation, a number of
research questions are presented below. These questions are formulated as testable
hypotheses.
1) Are the linguistic systems for the two grammatical variables under
investigation (mood choice and future expression) similar or different from
other varieties of French?
As Section 2.1 and 2.2 have outlined, there is considerable debate with regards to the role
of both the subjunctive and the future temporal reference in French. Some researchers
have argued that the subjunctive does not have a semantic function but rather serves to
mark subordination while others claim that it does indeed express a semantic function.
Some studies of the future variable report that sentential polarity is the strongest predictor
of variant choice and that temporal reference exerts a minor role. An investigation of
these variables will inform us as to how they pattern in a conservative variety of French.
In addition, the conservative nature of this variety provides us with a glimpse as to how
they may have patterned in earlier stages of the language.
2) Are the grammatical variables under investigation undergoing a change in
this variety?
The literature on the two grammatical variables involve a debate surrounding their current status in Canadian French and in French more generally. The quantitative analysis
7 will allow us to determine whether there is a change in progress or stable variation in
Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
3) What linguistic factors condition variability of these two variables in this
variety?
The quantitative analyses will determine which of the potential linguistic factors condition usage for each variable. An analysis of such conditioning in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian will contribute to our understanding of the possible ways in which these variables operate in French.
4) What social factors condition variability of these two variables in this
variety?
The quantitative analyses will determine which social factors condition the variation. The social factor age will help us answer the question of change versus stable variation.
Speaker sex will also be considered since sex-linked difference is often a diagnostic of the early stages of change in the system, at least in western societies (Labov 2001).
5) What is the role of language contact on variant choice?
While Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French is arguably a highly conservative variety in terms of preservation of linguistic features lost or moribund in most other varieties, it has also been in contact with English for a considerable portion of its history, which has had repercussions for the variety, typically in the form of codeswitching and lexical borrowing. While certain studies have argued that (intense) contact with English leads to the decline of the subjunctive, an investigation of this variable in a contact variety such as
8 Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French allows us to investigate the potential effects of
language contact on mood choice and the expression of future temporal reference.9
6) How might we account for linguistic variation in a formal framework?
While there has been much recent work which attempts to reconcile variationist sociolinguistics and generative theories of syntax (e.g. Adger & Smith 2005,2010; King
2005), there is still debate as to the precise formal mechanisms which can account for variability. The formal analyses put forward in this dissertation propose mechanisms to account for two cases of grammatical variation.
These research questions have been formulated as testable hypotheses.
Hypothesis 1: If the linguistic system which underlies use of the two grammatical variables in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French is similar to that of other varieties of
French reported in the literature, then the results will be in line with those of prior analyses. For instance, if the subjunctive varies with the indicative with no semantic effects, this would suggest that the subjunctive does not really have a semantic function or that the grammars of Acadian and Laurentian varieties diverge on this dimension. With regards to the future temporal reference variable, quantitative analyses may reveal that sentential polarity plays no role in influencing variant choice, which would suggest that the polarity constraint may have been a innovation in other varieties which did not take place in Acadian French.10
9 As we shall see, restriction in use of the inflected future appears most advanced in situations of intense language contact (Grimm & Nadasdi 2011) although the authors do not argue that this factor actually motivates the change. 10 Clearly, another possibility is that Acadian French lost the polarity constraint. However, lack of mention of such a constraint in grammatical commentary suggests otherwise. 9 Hypothesis 2: If the quantitative analyses provide synchronic evidence of change with regards to the grammatical variables, then this will provide further evidence for claims that the subjunctive and the inflected future are in decline. Evidence from studies of the variables in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French would thus provide additional support in terms of either loss or maintenance. However, as this variety is conservative in many respects, we might expect the scales to be tipped in favour of maintenance, showing divergence between Laurentian and Acadian varieties.
Hypothesis 3: If the same linguistic factors are found to condition variation as in other studies of French, then this will suggest that the maintenance rich verbal morphology has no relevant effect on the linguistic system for these grammatical variables. On the other hand, as Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French retains tense/aspect/mood combinations as well as agreement marking lost in most other varieties of French, we might expect that the linguistic factors which condition variation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French to be different from those found in varieties.
Hypothesis 4: If age and sex are found to condition variation as in other studies of
French, then this may be indicative of change.
Hypothesis 5: If contact with English plays a role in terms of loss of the subjunctive, then we would expect to find evidence of decline of the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French. As mentioned in Section 2.1, contact with English, a language which has largely lost its subjunctive mood, has been argued to result in the loss of the subjunctive mood in French. Since Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French has a history of contact with English, it provides an opportunity to test the potential effects of contact.
10 Hypothesis 6: If formal accounts of the linguistic variation are readily available within current syntactic theory, then this is evidence that they are compatible with the attested variation facts. While early generative theories largely excluded the possibility of internal variability, current attempts to account for linguistic variation have proposed a number of mechanisms by which variation might be encoded in the grammar. The formal analyses presented here will suggest ways in which the variation found in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French may be accounted for within current minimalist frameworks, such as distributed morphology.
The study of grammatical variation presented here will inform us as to how these variables operate in a non-standard variety of French. Since there are differences across varieties of French (or any language, for that fact), reliance on data from a few well- known varieties leads us with a limited understanding of both variation and change in the language as a whole. A defining feature of Acadian French is its linguistic conservatism.
Therefore, by studying varieties of Acadian French, we gain an opportunity to study mechanisms which may have been lost from other varieties of French. This gives us a
'window' on earlier stages of the language, through access to the linguistic systems of conservative features via the speech of living, breathing French speakers. Clearly, there is the possibility that these linguistic systems have changed over time. However, by careful comparison with other sources (studies of other varieties, grammarians' commentaries, etc.), we are able to determine whether aspects of the linguistic system may in fact be preservations of earlier stages in the language.
11 Beyond the linguistic goals of the present study, there is an obvious benefit to the study of minority varieties in that the act of studying such varieties can offer valorization of the variety as objects worthy of academic research. While speakers of minority varieties often experience linguistic insecurity and stigmatization (from within and external to the community), the study of these varieties communicates a value to its speakers. As such, the study of Acadian French provides in and of itself considerable benefits. Further, the data used for the present research provides important documentation of a particular variety since it constitutes both a linguistic record and social portrait of a people.
4. Outline of the dissertation
The dissertation is organized as follows. This chapter has presented an introduction to the study. Chapter 2 provides a review of the literature on Acadian French in general and on the local variety in particular, Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. Chapter 3 provides the theoretical framework for the study, both generative and variationist, as well as the relevant methodologies. Descriptions of the community under investigation and the corpora are also provided here. Chapter 4 presents the analysis of the subjunctive mood in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. The first part of the chapter provides a historical overview of the forms of the subjunctive and is followed by a review of the relevant literature on the variable. The variationist analysis is then presented, followed by the formal analysis. Chapter 5 presents the results for the expression of future temporal reference in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. The first part of the chapter presents a historical overview of the variants followed by a review of the literature on the expression of future temporal reference in French. As in Chapter 4, the variationist analysis precedes the formal analysis. The final chapter, Chapter 6, concludes the present study and provides a summary of the dissertation. The results are contextualized within the broader linguistic context. Some limitations of the present study are also provided.
Finally, possible directions for future research are suggested.
13 Chapter 2: Acadian French .
1. Introduction
This chapter presents a review of the relevant literature on Acadian French in general followed by an outline of research which focuses specifically on the variety examined in this study, that spoken in Baie Sainte-Marie, Nova Scotia. Acadian French refers to varieties spoken by descendents of 17th century settlers from France who settled in present-day Nova Scotia in the area originally named Acadie. These varieties differ from most other varieties of French, such as Laurentian French and European French, in a number of respects. Historically, Acadian settlers came predominantly from the centre- ouest region of France (including Poitou-Charentes, Saintonge, etc.) whereas Quebec settlers largely originated from north of the Loire Valley (Charbonneau & Guillemette
1994, Massignon 1962). Due to these different points of origin, the varieties spoken by the settlers of New France (latterly the province of Quebec) and those of Acadie were likely different to some degree from the beginning of settlement (see Flikeid 1994 for discussion). Contemporary studies of Acadian French are generally characterized as being both linguistically conservative and linguistically innovative (King 2000). As we shall see, the existing literature on varieties of Acadian French typically focuses on one or both of these tendencies. I first contextualize the discussion with a brief overview of the literature on Acadian history followed by a review of studies of Acadian French. The final part of the chapter provides a description of the variety under study, that spoken in the Baie Sainte-Marie region.
14 2.1 The founding of Acadie
The first permanent French settlers arrived in the New World in 1604. They came from
various regions of France, but most notably from the centre-ouest region. The
establishment of the fortress of Port Royal (in present-day Annapolis Valley, Nova
Scotia) shortly thereafter would become an important Acadian stronghold for over a century. The establishment of Port Royal took place three years prior to Samuel de
Champlain's founding of New France (present-day Quebec). However, the French were not the only European settlers to arrive in the New World; there would soon be a population of British settlers as well. Tensions between England and France and their new world settlements would impact strongly on these early settlers.
The early Acadians did have good relations with the local natives, the Mi'kmaq, who had long been established in the region. Since most early Acadian settlers were men, these good relations with the Mi'kmaq resulted in a number of marriages between the early Acadian settlers and native women. In fact, there is evidence that Acadians at Port
Royal regularly received the local Mi'kmaq men and their families as guests (Ross &
Deveau 1992).
2.2 Grand Derangment (The Great Upheaval)
While the Acadian settlers established a viable population in Acadie, tensions between
France and England persisted into the 18th century." While Acadie gradually expanded into a French settlement which spanned from the present-day state of Maine to the
Canadian Maritime provinces (New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia),
11 This section draws on Ross & Deveau 1992. 15 the Treaty of Utrecht of 1713 ceded the French settlement to England. However, Prince
Edward Island and Cape Breton Island (the latter is currently part of Nova Scotia) remained under French rule. Subsequently, work began on the fortress of Louisbourg on
Cape Breton Island, which would soon become a busy Atlantic port. As threat of war was a reality to the English and Acadian settlers, the English authority feared that in such an event Acadians would side with France or with the Mi'kmaq. Although the territory was under British rule, the Acadians were permitted to remain on their lands provided they swore an oath of allegiance to the British monarchy. Clearly, swearing an oath to
France's enemy was problematic for the Acadian settlers as they did not want to bear arms against France or against the Mi'kmaq, should tensions escalate into full-scale conflict (Ross & Deveau 1992). Some scholars describe the nature of the political position(s) of Acadians along a continuum from adamantly neutral to vehemently opposed to the British. However, by the first half of the 18th century, the British were able to convince many Acadians to sign or pledge the oath under the condition that they would not have to bear arms in the event of war. However, this declared neutrality would not satisfy the British governors of the time and orders were made to physically remove the
Acadians from the British territory in 1755, marking the beginning of the Grand
Derangement.
The Grand Derangement (or Great Upheaval) is the single most important historical event in Acadian history. Suspicious of the Acadians' neutrality, British
Lieutenant-Governor Charles Lawrence escalated tensions between the British and the
French to a point that forced Acadians to abandon their neutrality in defence of the
16 French forts. In 1755, the Acadians at Fort Beausejour were the first to be removed from their lands, marking the beginning of a large-scale removal of Acadians from Acadie.
Shortly thereafter, the residents of Grand-Pre were also removed from their lands. Ross and Deveau (1992) estimate that approximately 6,000 Acadians were deported in 1755, involving the loss of farms, lands, possessions, and, in certain cases, the separation of families. Many Acadians were removed to the eastern coast of the United States while others were sent to France. Still others were sent to Britain as prisoners. While some
Acadians did manage to evade the British by hiding in the woods or by migrating to present-day northern New Brunswick, successive waves of expulsion occurred over several years following 1755. The Acadians' lands were largely repopulated by New
England Loyalists and British settlers.
2.3 The return of Acadians from exile
The return of Acadians is a significant turning point in Acadian history. Eventually, even
French-governed Cape Breton Island and Prince Edward Island had been handed over to the British. Since many Acadians had struggled in English-speaking colonies, particularly since most of them were likely unilingual francophones, some chose to return to Acadie.
Some expelled Acadians eventually made their way to Louisiana, then a French territory, where they settled and became known as Cajuns (the name itself is derived from
Acadian). For the most part, those Acadians who made their way back to Nova Scotia found that their lands had been granted to New England colonists. With the exception of the Argyle and lie Madame regions, the original lands of the Acadians were no longer available to the returning Acadians. However, Acadians were permitted to resettle in
17 particular regions across present-day Nova Scotia (Ross & Deveau 1992). Map 2.1 shows
the current distribution of Acadian regions in grey, a pattern which reflects how
communities were settled following the Grand Derangement.
PRINCE EDWARD w ISLAND NEW BRUNSWICK
He MADAME
CoquM O ATLANTIC OCEAN
ARQYLE 40 SO 120
MAP 2.1. Acadian regions in Nova Scotia.
Some newly-settled regions such as Chezzetcook in Halifax County were unsuccessful in
maintaining the French language, likely due to intense contact with a large nearby
English-speaking population (Ross & Deveau 1992). The regions in grey, however, were able to preserve their language and culture up to the present day.
Following the return from exile, Acadians were forced to settle in isolated areas.
It turns out, though, that this restriction created fairly isolated concentrations of Acadians
18 wherein the French language and culture could be preserved. There was intercommunity variation in that some communities were in greater contact with English-speaking communities (e.g. Acadian villages in the Argyle region) while others were more isolated
(e.g. Cheticamp). In addition, isolation from normative French (there were few opportunities for French education) ensured that the varieties preserved a large number of traditional vernacular features. On the other hand, as Section 3.4 shows, contact with
English had linguistic consequences in some regions more than others. In short, the particular sociohistorical context of each community resulted in regional linguistic differences.
3.1 Phonetic and phonological studies of Acadian French
There have been numerous studies of phonetic features and phonological processes for varieties of Acadian French. In fact, differences in the sound system are frequently cited as distinguishing Acadian French from other varieties of French, in particular, from
Laurentian French. For instance, phonetic studies of varieties of Acadian French have focused on realization of nasal vowels in open syllables, such as the pronunciation of h/ as either [or)] or [arj] in Petit-de-Grat (lie Madame) or as [iw] in Meteghan (Baie Sainte-
Marie) (Flikeid & Richard 1993). Landry (1.985), Massignon (1949), and Ryan (1982a) have also analyzed Acadian nasal vowel systems. Another phonetic feature which has received considerable attention is [j] saintongeais, so-called since it occurs in the
Saintonge region of the centre-ouest of France, a point of origin of Acadian settlers
(Lucci 1973, Massignon 1962). [J] saintongeais involves the use of velar variants ([x] and
[y]) and glottal variants ([h] and [fi]) for the phonemes /J7 and /$/. The retention of
19 conservative phonetic features, such as [|] saintongeais, results from relative isolation from external varieties of French as well as the point of origin of Acadian settlers, which was different from Laurentian settlers.12
There have also been a number of general studies of the phonological system for varieties of Acadian French. One of the first comprehensive studies of the phonological system of a variety of Acadian French is Garner's (1952) doctoral dissertation which provides a study of five Acadian communities (Havre-aux-Maisons in the Magdalen
Islands, Moncton and Caraquet in New Brunswick, and Pointe-du-Sault and Cheticamp in Nova Scotia). Lucci's (1973) analysis of the phonological system of the variety of
Acadian French spoken in Moncton, New Brunswick is a landmark study in the Acadian
French literature. Lucci's analysis, based on Martinet's (1956) functionalist model, describes a number of phonological processes, such as the palatalization of /k/ and /g/ when preceding non-high front vowels, as in quai 'wharf [tfe] or aiguille 'needle'
[ed3yj], the retention of /h/, as in haul 'tall' [ho], preservation of apical /r/, etc. Ryan
(1981) provides a description of the phonological system of the variety spoken in
Meteghan, in the Baie Sainte-Marie region. His study, like that of Lucci (1973), is embedded in Martinet's functionalist approach. Ryan compares his findings with Lucci's for the Acadian French of the Moncton area. In a smaller study, Wrenn (1981) examines allophonic variation of Izl in the variety spoken in Pubnico-Ouest.
12 While these features are sometimes noted as typically Acadian by speakers themselves, there is evidence that some were present (and in some cases may still be present) in varieties of Laurentian varieties of French. For example, see Charbonneau 1957 for an analysis of [/] saintongeais in a variety spoken on the outskirts of Montreal. Thus [fl saintongeais probably originally had a wider distribution in France.
20 Other studies of phonological variation include Karin Flikeid's doctoral
dissertation, published in book form as Flikeid 1984, in which she provides a
sociolinguistic analysis of a number of phonological features of the Acadian French
variety spoken in northeastern New Brunswick. Flikeid's 1988 study provides an
overview of the phonology of Nova Scotia varieties. Another major contribution to the
literature is the Atlas linguistique du vocabulaire maritime acadien (Peronnet et al. 1998)
which contains lexical and phonetic information for 18 communities in New Brunswick,
Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia. Cichocki's (2006, 2008) studies are based on this
atlas data. Finally, King and Ryan (1989) describe the phonological system of varieties of
Acadian spoken in Prince Edward Island while King (1989) presents a description of
phonological features in Newfoundland Acadian French.
3.2 Morphological and syntactic studies
Varieties of Acadian French differ in a number of ways with many other varieties of
French in terms of their morphology and syntax. Some features are found across varieties of Acadian French while others are limited to particular varieties. In comparison with
many other varieties of French, varieties of Acadian French are generally considered to have retained a richer system of verbal morphology, particularly in terms of verbal tenses and subject-verb agreement. For example, the use of the subject pronoun je with the -ons suffix on the verb to mark first person plural, attested as early as the 14th century, but lost
See Gesner's 1986 annotated bibliography for information on works on Acadian French published and unpublished available at that point. 21 by the turn of the 19th century in most urban varieties (King et al. 2011), has been widely
attested across varieties of Acadian French.14 This usage is illustrated in 1.
(1) Euh, [...] j' allons dire « Bangor ». uh 1 go.PRES.PL say.LNF Bangor 'Uh, [...] we're going to say "Bangor".' (Benoit, M-340)
Contemporary French varieties typically have first person plural definite on while
standard nous is at best marginal (Coveney 2000, King et al. 2011). Flikeid and Peronnet
(1989) report relative proportions of use ofje ... -ons in varieties of Acadian French
while King, Nadasdi, and Butler (2004) analyze variable use of this feature in Prince
Edward Island Acadian French. King and Butler (2005) report that it remains near
categorical in Newfoundland Acadian French. However, in the varieties of Acadian
spoken in northeastern New Brunswick,ye ... -ons has arguably been lost (Beaulieu &
Cichocki 2008).
Another traditional feature is the use of -ont to mark third person plural
agreement, as in 2.
(2) Oh? lis vendont leur 1' autre, je crois. oh 3.PL sell.PRES.PL their the other 1 think.PRES.SG 'Oh? They're selling their other one, 1 think.' (Elze, GC-18)
The -ont ending is attested from as early as Old French and as late as the 16th century in
literary sources, but from the Classical French period (17th century) it has been proscribed and marginalized (see King et al. 2011). Beaulieu and Cichocki (2008) conducted a
14 There are attestations of je ... -ons morphology throughout France in the Alias linguistique de la France (Gillieron & Edmont 1969 [1902-1910]). 1 thank David Heap for pointing this out. 22 sociolinguistic analysis of this feature for data from northeastern New Brunswick, specifically the FANENB (Fran^ais acadien du nord-est du Nouveau-Brunswick) corpus.
While the -ont feature is still in use, it is a minority variant. Beaulieu and Cichocki argue that it functions as a marker of solidarity by speakers with more closed social networks
(i.e. with greater ties in the local community). In other communities, there is less variability with regards to the Us ... -ont variant. For instance, King (1994) reports that in
Newfoundland Acadian French Us ... -ont is nearly categorical.15 Thus robust use of je
..-ons and ils ... -ont are found only in the most conservative Acadian varieties.
Studies of Acadian French have also focused on tense/aspect/mood variation. For instance, some varieties of Acadian French preserve the simple past and imperfect subjunctive. Flikeid and Peronnet (1989) note that both are retained in Nova Scotia varieties, but only the imperfect subjunctive is still attested in southeast New Brunswick.
Gesner (1979,1982) also attests use of the simple past and the imperfect subjunctive in
Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. In a variationist study of the simple past in Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French, Comeau, King, and Butler (2013) show that not only is the simple past in robust use in Baie Sainte-Marie, but it also observes the same constraints attested in prior centuries by grammarians. It is found mainly in narration and it is used to report events at some remove from the moment of speech.
15 King (1994, 1995) does show, however, that subject relative clauses display default singular agreement, a tendency also found in spoken European varieties (Bauche 1928, Frei 1993 [1929]). 23 3.3 Lexical studies
Some of the earliest linguistic research on varieties of Acadian French were dialectology
studies which tended to focus on the lexicon. Poirier's (1993) the Le glossaire acadien is
a dictionary of traditional Acadian vocabulary which was assembled from short articles
which first appeared in the New Brunswick newspapers, Le moniteur acadien and
L 'Evangeline in the 1920s. Poirier provides etymologies of words which are typically
considered Acadian, as the dictionary entries shown in 3 and 4.
(3) Hucher. Crier, appeler. 'To yell. To cry, call out.' (Poirier 1993:256, my translation)
(4) Par6. Se dit aussi pour pret 'Ready. Also used for ready.' (Poirier 1993:339, my translation)
Another study which focuses on Acadian vocabulary is the first major dialectological study of Acadian French, Massignon's (1962) Les parlers frangais d'Acadie : enquete linguistique, a study based on data for Acadian communities from all three Maritime
provinces and in Acadian pockets of Quebec. Although it is largely lexical in nature, this study provides a wealth of additional information, particularly in the form of phonetic transcriptions. Thus, while these first works were focused on the lexicon, they also captured differences at other levels of the grammar (phonetic differences,
morphosyntactic differences, etc.). A more recent dictionary of Acadian vocabulary is
Cormier's (1999) Dictionnaire du frangais acadien.
24 3.4 Language contact phenomena
Varieties of Acadian French provide important data for the study of language contact
phenomena. In fact, it is often the case that outsiders and Acadian speakers themselves
will refer to their variety as 'half-French, half-English'. Despite such characterizations,
studies show that this is not the case. Flikeid (1989) examines language contact
phenomena in five Nova Scotia Acadian communities and reports that words of English
origin are well below the 50% level in her corpora; in fact, the actual rates are close to
10% even in the most extreme cases of language contact. That said, the borrowing of
words from English is not surprising given longstanding contact with English-speaking
communities in most Acadian areas.16 In the same article, Flikeid analyzes codeswitching
between Acadian French and English and she compares her findings with those of
Poplack (1987) for the French spoken in the Ottawa-Hull region. In analyzing patterns of
codeswitching in Pubnico, Flikeid finds that the results differ somewhat from those found
in Ottawa-Hull. For instance, Ottawa-Hull consultants typically overtly signal the fact
that they are codeswitching more than do the Pubnico consultants.
The first sociolinguistic study of lexical borrowings in a variety of Acadian
French is Roy's (1979) study of English but and so in the variety spoken in Moncton,
New Brunswick where she finds that the English variants are in frequent use. Beyond the overall frequency of the variants, Roy provides proportions of the variants in relation to social characteristics of the speakers, which suggests that use of the English variants is
16 This is not the case in northeastern New Brunswick, however, where the population is overwhelmingly francophone. socially constrained. Peronnet (1989) also studies borrowings in varieties spoken in southeastern New Brunswick. Her study analyzes the types of borrowings by lexical categories (i.e. nouns, verbs, etc.) as well as the degree of integration of tokens into
Acadian French. Comeau (2007a) analyzes the semantic and syntactic reanalysis of two borrowings, bout and tight, in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
King (2000) provides a large-scale analysis of borrowings from English in varieties of Acadian French spoken in two communities in Prince Edward Island. Her study argues that what may appear to be syntactic borrowing (i.e. the borrowing of particular syntactic structures) are, in fact, the result of the borrowing of lexical items.
Her analysis of a number of lexical borrowings from English reveals that they may be subject to semantic and syntactic reanalysis. For instance, the English preposition back has been reanalyzed as a French adverb, as shown in 5, and has also been reanalyzed semantically to have a non-English meaning, as shown in 6.
(5) a. II faut back venir. 3 be.necessary.PRES back come.lNF *'It is necessary back to come.'
b. II faut venir back. 3 be.necessary.PRES come.lNF back 'It is necessary to come back.' (King 2000:132)
(6) Elle va le refaire back. 3.SG.F go.PRES.SG it re.do.LNF again 'She is going to do it again.' (King 2000:129)
As 5a-b show, the preposition back has been reanalyzed as a French adverb and it can occur in the same positions where other French adverbs can occur in Acadian varieties.
26 As the English translation in 5a shows, the English preposition back cannot occur in this position. 6 shows that back has undergone semantic reanalysis to have the meaning of
'again' or 'repeat an action or process', which does not occur in English. As King shows, the borrowing of lexical items has repercussions in terms of how these borrowings are used in the target language. In another chapter of that work, she analyzes the emergence of preposition stranding in varieties spoken in intense contact with English. In an analysis further developed in King 2005a (see also Roberge & Rosen 1999), she argues that the borrowing of English prepositions triggers reanalysis of individual French prepositions and ultimately of the entire preposition system.
4. Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French
This section presents a brief overview of the literature on the variety of Acadian French spoken in the Baie Sainte-Marie region in southwest Nova Scotia, the object of the present inquiry. Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French is generally considered as one of the most conservative varieties of Acadian French as it preserves features which are in decline or which have been lost in other varieties of Acadian French. By studying Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French, we have access to a highly conservative system. Various studies have examined aspects of the variety spoken in Baie Sainte-Marie, ranging from the phonological system to the morphology and syntax.
Gesner's (1979, 1982) studies of Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French are mainly based on eight interviews recorded in 1975 and 1976. Gesner (1979) provides a description of the use of various tense/aspect/mood combinations in this variety, such as the present perfect, the simple past, the conditional, etc. He also discusses the auxiliary selection and aspects of the preposition system. Ryan (1981, 1982a, 1982b) also
conducted a series of studies of this variety of Acadian French. His analyses, based on the
functionalist framework of Andre Martinet (1956), provides detailed descriptions of the
morphological system of the variety.
The first large-scale sociolinguistic corpus for Baie Sainte-Marie was constructed
in the early 1980s under the direction of Karin Flikeid as part of her larger Nova Scotia
Acadian French project. Two sets of interviews were conducted, one by community
residents and one by an interviewer external to the community, in order to compare
casual and formal speech styles. These data have formed the basis of Flikeid's (1989,
1994) studies of a variety of features, including use of point as a negator, ye ... -ons use,
and an array of language contact phenomena. It should be noted, though, that Flikeid's
analyses of grammatical variables do not involve study of constraints on variation, an
important focus of the present work.
Another large corpus for the Baie Sainte-Marie variety is the Butler Grosses
Coques Sociolinguistic Corpus, constructed under the direction of Gary R. Butler. A
number of recent studies have been based on data from this corpus. Comeau (2007a)
analyzes the integration of English borrowings and use of point along with pas as
negative markers (Comeau 2007b). A recent study by Comeau, King, and Butler (2013)
investigates use of the simple past tense. These studies have shown that the Baie Sainte-
Marie variety is highly conservative, providing a sort of window on the history of
Acadian French and, in the case of the past temporal reference study, of French more generally. The present study is based on data from the Butler Grosses Coques
28 Sociolinguistic Corpus and a later sampling of the Baie Sainte-Marie region by Karin
Flikeid (Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse), described in greater detail in Chapter 3.
The preservation of traditional features lost in most spoken varieties of French is a major characteristic of Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French, as noted by many linguists
(Comeau 2007b; Comeau et al. 2013; Gesner 1979, 1982; Ryan 1982b) and community residents alike. For instance, Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French preserves a richer verbal morphology than found in most other varieties of contemporary French. Table 2.1 shows the verbal paradigms for -er verbs, which shows that the local variety preserves more contrasts than in most other varieties of French.
Pres. Simple Imp. Pres. Imp. Past Cond. Future Ind. Past Ind. Subj. Subj. Subj. je je je je parle je parlis je parle je parlis j 'aie parle parlerais parlais parlerai tu tu tu tu tu aies tu paries tu parlis tu parlis parlerais parlais parleras paries parle il/elle/ il/elle/qa il/elle/qa il/elle/qa il/elle/qa il/elle/qa il/elle/qa il/elle/ qa parle parlit parlerait parlait parlera parle parlit q 'ait parle je je je je je je je j 'ayons parlons parlirent parlerions parlions parlerons parlions parlirent parle vous vous vous vous vous vous vous vous ayez parlez parlirent parleriez parliez parlerez parliez parlirent parle ils ils ils ils ils ils ils ils ayont parlont parlirent parleriont parliont parleront parliont parlirent parle * * "17 TABLE 2.1. Verbal tense paradigms for -er verbs in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
While the singular forms for each tense shown here are nearly all homophonous (note that I adopt standard orthography), the plural forms preserve distinctions lost in other
17 Note that not all distinctions are represented here since the only compound provided is the past subjunctive. 29 varieties of French.18 For instance, Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French preserves use of
the je pronoun with the plural agreement marker -ons as discussed above (Flikeid 1994).
Standard French has nous with the -ons ending and vernacular usage elsewhere has on
with third person singular verb ending. As noted above,ye is an older first person plural
variant in the history of French which was present in the speech of the lower classes in
the 17th century, but had largely disappeared by the 19th century (see King et al. 2011 for an analysis of first person plural forms in the history of French). Definite first person
plural on with singular agreement is also used, albeit much less frequently than the je ...
-ons variant (Flikeid 1994). Also noted above, Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French preserves the traditional -ont ending for third person plural verbs (e.g. ils mangeont 'they eat') unlike other varieties which have a phonetically null marker, orthographically represented as -ent (e.g. ils mangent 'they eat'). The retention of these two plural endings allows the preservation of a number of contrasts not maintained in other varieties. For instance, in varieties where je ... -ons and ils ... -ont are not found, the subjunctive forms for first person plural, as shown in 7, and for third person plural, as shown in 8, are ambiguous between the indicative or subjunctive moods (recall that the
-ent is null).
(7) II faut qu' on mange. 3 be.necessary.PRES that we eat.PRES.lND?/PRES.SBJV?.SG19 'It's necessary that we eat.'
18 The exception to this pattern of homophony is with the singular future forms (i.e. first singular [-e] and second and third person singular [-a]). 19 The question mark '?' in the gloss indicates that the actual form (indicative or subjunctive) cannot be determined. 30 (8) II faut qu' ils mangent. 3 be.necessary.PRES that 3.PL eat.PRES.LND?/PRES.SBJV?.PL 'It's necessary that they eat'.
In contrast with 7, in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French the first person plural forms do
preserve a contrast between moods (indicative: .. .que je mangeons [m§3EW] vs. subjunctive: .. .que je mangions [majje*]). Likewise, the forms for third person plural, as
in 8, preserve a distinction in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French (indicative: .. .qu 'ils mangeont vs. subjunctive: ... qu 'ils mangiont).20 Thus, the retention of rich verbal
morphology allows for certain contrasts to be preserved whereas in other varieties of
French these distinctions have been lost.
Another conservative feature of Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French is the
preservation of tenses which have been lost in most other varieties, such as the simple past and the imperfect subjunctive, as shown in Table 2.1 (Comeau et al. 2013, Gesner
1979). These two tenses are, in fact, homophonous in this variety. Both -er and -ir verbs are conjugated with the [i] suffix and the plural with the [ir] suffix, as shown in 9-10.
(9) Je lui parlis un elan, la. 1 him speak.SP.IND.SG a while there 'I spoke to him for awhile, there.' (Hector, GC-25)
(10) Jedis «Euh j'aimerais qu'elle sortit, 1 say.Sp.lND.SG uh 1 like.COND.SG that 3.SG.F come.out.lMP.SBJV.SG
qu' elle vient icitte me, me parler. » that 3.SG.F come.PRES.SG here me me speak.lNF 'I said "Uh, I would like for her to come out, that she come here to speak to, to me.'" (Eric, GC-23)
20 The first and third person plural endings are, of course, homophonous. 31 In 9, the -er verb parler has the [i] simple past conjugation, while in written standard
French one finds parlai. In 10, the -ir verb sortir has the [i] conjugation with the
imperfect subjunctive. As shown in Table 2.1, these two tenses are homophonous in this
variety. The standard French simple past equivalent of parler would be parlai, but the
standard French imperfective subjunctive conjugation would be parlasse. Note that the
collapse of the [a] and [i] conjugations occurred in France prior to Acadian settlement: it
is already the subject of commentary by 16th century grammarians (such as Meigret 1980
[1550] and Estienne 1980 [1578], as cited by Lodge 2004:134).
The verbal paradigm for -oir verbs is similar, as shown in Table 2.2.
Pres. Simple Imp. Pres. Imp. Past Cond. Future Ind. Past Ind. Subj. Subj. Subj. je je bois je bus je boivais je boirai je boive je bus j 'aie bu boirais tu tu aies tu bois tu bus tu boivais tu boiras tu boives tu bus boirais bu il/elle/ il/elle/ il/elle/ga il/elle/ga il/elle/ga il/elle/ga il/elle/ il/elle/ ga boit Qa but boirait boivait boira boive ga but g 'ait bu je je je je je je je j 'ayons boivons burent boirions boivions boirons boivions burent bu vous vous vous vous vous vous vous vous boivez burent boiriez boiviez boirez boiviez burent ayez bu ils ils ils ils ils ils ils ils ayont boivont burent boiriont boiviont boiront boiviont burent bu TABLE 2.2. Verbal tense paradigms for -oir verbs in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
As the conjugations in Table 2.2 show, the pattern is identical with the simple past and the imperfect subjunctive (i.e. they are homophonous) although the conjugations are with the [y] and [yr] forms.
32 As shown in Tables 2.1 and 2.2, the plural forms for both the simple past and the
imperfect subjunctive involve the addition of an [r] to either the [i], as shown in 11, or to
the [y], as shown in 12.
(11) Bien moi si faudrait je marchirent 9a asteure well me if be.necessary.COND 1 walk.lMP.SBJV.PL that now
je mourerions. 1 die.COND.PL 'Well me, if we had to walk that now, we would die.' (Rose, M-294)
(12) C' est -ti lui qu' etait au restaurant la 1' autrefois 3.SG be.PRES.SG INT him that be.LMP.SG at.the restaurant there the other time
la je le vurent la? there 1 him see.Sp.Ind.PL there 'Was it he who was at the restaurant there the other time there we saw him there.' (Richard, GC-29)
With both the imperfect subjunctive in 11 and the simple past in 12, the suffix [r] allows for a distinction based on number. The [r] plural marker is attested in the Atlas linguistique de la France (Gillieron & Edmont 1969 [1902-1910]) for the simple past,
which suggests that it is a conservative feature rather than an innovation.
Other conservative features found in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French include use of point as the general marker of negation with more limited use of pas. Historically,
point was the negative marker in partitive contexts while pas was the general marker of negation (see Martineau 2005 for a diachronic analysis of variation between pas and point in varieties of Canadian French). Flikeid (1994) reports that point is used at a rate of 72% in her Baie Sainte-Marie data while Comeau (2007b) reports a slightly higher rate of 83% for Grosses Coques. Flikeid's cross-variety comparison shows that point is also in
33 use in Pubnico, but it is not found in the three other Nova Scotia Acadian communities she investigates: Cheticamp, lie Madame, and Pomquet. In addition, Comeau (2007b)
reports that the variation between point and pas in the Baie Sainte-Marie variety is not
limited to partitive contexts. Point and pas typically occur without preverbal negative
marker ne, as one might expect given its loss in varieties of European and Laurentian
French (Martineau & Mougeon 2003).
Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French is also characterized by the presence of
language contact phenomena resulting from contact with English. For instance, Flikeid
(1989) provides an analysis of borrowing and codeswitching in varieties of Acadian
French spoken in Nova Scotia. While the title of her article deliberately invokes the
misnomer of Acadian French as a half-French, half-English variety ("Moitie anglais,
moitie fran?ais"? : emprunts et altemance de langues dans les communautes acadiennes
de la Nouvelle-Ecosse), Flikeid reports that words of English origin are used overall at a
rate well below 10% in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpus (7.5% in the speech of consultants
younger than 34 years old and 3.5% in the speech of consultants over 55 years of age).
Borrowings are typically morphologically integrated, as shown in 13 with the verb caller
which takes the infinitive suffix -er.
(13) Puis faudrait jemarchis back a la camp and be.necessary.COND 1 walk.LMP.SBJV.SG back to the camp
pour caller nos peres. in.order.to call.lNF our fathers 'And we had to walk back to the camp so that we could call our fathers.' (Francis, M-341)
34 Verbs of English origin always occur with relevant French verbal morphology (as in other Acadian varieties, see King 2000). Members of both the remaining lexical categories and functional categories can be borrowed as well. In addition, a borrowed word does not necessarily retain its category in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. For instance, the English preposition about has undergone reanalysis to become an epistemic adverb which denotes probability in this variety, as shown in 14a (Comeau 2007a).
(14) a. Tu en voudrais bout un autre? 2.SG some want.COND.SG probably one other 'You'll probably want another?' (Carole, GC-21) b. *You'll bout want another.
As 14 shows, bout (derived from about with the initial vowel dropped) is no longer a preposition (it is an adverb) and its meaning has changed in that it expresses epistemic modality. 14b shows that it cannot be used with this innovative meaning in English.
Another case of a borrowing which has undergone reanalysis is the case of the
English preposition back, discussed above with reference to King's (2000) research.21
While back can be used in English with a locative meaning, as in 15, in some varieties of
French, including in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French (Comeau 2007a), it may also have an iterative meaning, as in 16.
(15) J'aimerais backd'aller. 1 like.COND.SG back to go.lNF 'I would like to go back.' (Trina, M-295)
21 See as well King's 2011 cross-varietal North American French study of back integration. 35 (16) a. Je suis sure que tu ris back. 1 be.PRES. 1 .SG sure that 2.SG laugh.PRES.SG again 'I'm sure you're laughing again.' (Joanne, GC-10)
b. *I'm sure you're laughing back.
While locative back in 15 is acceptable in English, iterative usage, as shown in 16
(translated as 'again'), is not.
Another linguistic repercussion of contact with English is the use of codeswitching between French and English. As discussed above, Flikeid (1989) provides a close analysis of the different types of codeswitches for Nova Scotia Acadian French.
Based on Poplack's (1987) classification scheme, Flikeid identifies a number of functions associated with codeswitching, such as providing parenthetical information, translation, metalinguistic commentary, etc. She compares her results with those of Poplack (1987) for Ottawa-Hull. Many examples of codeswitching between English and French are found in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, as shown in 17, taken from the Grosses Coques corpus.
(17) I'm telling you que cte gars-la avait pati, I'm telling you that this guy there have.lMP.SG suffered
me comprends -tu? me understand.PRES.SG 2.SG 'I'm telling you that this guy, here, had suffered, do you understand me?' (Louise, GC-27)
The main clause in 17 is in English while the embedded clause is in French. As argued by
Poplack (1987), the ability to codeswitch (smoothly) according to community norms
36 reflects one's proficiency in a particular variety, rather than diminished ability in that
language, as is sometimes argued.
5. Conclusion
Varieties of Acadian French are distinct from other varieties of French in that they often preserve linguistic features lost in other varieties of French. In addition, they exhibit innovative use, often the result of contact with English. The particular historical context for Acadians has created a situation which minimized contact with other varieties of
French in some communities (physical isolation as well as a history of low levels of education, except for the recent past, to be discussed in Chapter 3) and contact with
English (e.g. contact with adjacent predominantly English communities, such as
Weymouth in the Baie Sainte-Marie case). These conditions allowed conservative features to be maintained in the Baie Sainte-Marie variety, as outlined above. The rich verbal morphology still found in this variety involves a greater number of contrasts in terms of number marking as well as the preservation of tense/aspect/mood combinations lost in other varieties of spoken French. The sociolinguistic context within which Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French speakers find themselves has resulted in one of the most conservative varieties of Acadian French.
37 Chapter 3: Theory and methodology
1. Introduction
This chapter presents a description of the frameworks adopted in this dissertation, both formal theory and sociolinguistic, along with a description of variationist methodology. I
then provide a description of the speech community under investigation, the Baie Sainte-
Marie region in southwest Nova Scotia, including a sociohistorical outline of the community and a description of the sociolinguistic corpora on which the present study is based.
2. The formal approach: Minimalism and distributed morphology
The minimalist program, as set forth by Chomsky (1995, 2000a, 2001), is a research program which seeks to understand the fundamental mechanisms of the language faculty.
In and of itself, minimalism is not a theory, but rather a research program which offers particular tools with which to evaluate particular theories of grammar. It is rooted in earlier generative theories, such as the principles and parameters framework and the government and binding theory. At the heart of the minimalist program is the goal to reduce the computational system, or the syntax, to its bare minimum. Therefore, there is a reduction in the amount of structure and levels of representation to the absolute necessary components to create an efficient and economical syntax.
One example of the reduction of unnecessary levels of representation is the removal of the split between the D(eep)-structure and the S(urface)-structure. In earlier models (e.g. government and binding), the syntactic component was split into two
38 separate components, D-structure and the S-structure, as shown in 1 (BoSkovic & Lasnik
2007).
(1) D(eep)-structure
S(urface)-structure
PF LF (Phonetic form) (Logical form)
At D-structure words are inserted in positions prior to any syntactic operations while at S- structure elements occur in their post-operation positions. For instance, the raising of wh- words to the complementizer phrase domain would involve their being inserted in their original position at the D-structure and then moved in the CP position at the S-structure in cases of w/z-movement. However, the minimalist program reduces these two levels of representation into one syntactic component. Along with the reduction of levels of representation, recent work in the minimalist framework has focused on phenomena which interact between the syntax and the two interfaces, PF and LF.
Rather than having a set of various operations which occur between the D- structure and the S-structure, operations in minimalism are reduced to a select few, namely merge, agree, and move. Merge involves selecting particular syntactic objects and merging them into a single syntactic unit, as shown in 2.
(2) [X] ... [Y]
Merge applies
[XY]
39 The process of merge shown in 2 creates larger constituents from smaller units selected from the numeration, that is, the collection of lexical items. Thus, merge accounts for the building of larger constituents from smaller units.
One of the components of the minimalist program relevant for the analysis presented in this study is the role that features play in terms of building syntactic structure. Within minimalism, there are two types of features, interpretable, which can affect semantic interpretation, and uninterpretable. Within the syntactic-computational system, the uninterpretable features must be checked against interpretable features and can then be deleted. If any uninterpretable features remain unchecked following the syntactic component, the derivation crashes since uninterpretable features cannot remain unchecked. Following the checking of uninterpretable features, the structure can then proceed to the semantic interface component where LF operations occur. The process whereby uninterpretable features are checked is referred to as feature checking or agreement. This involves the probe, the uninterpretable feature, seeking out a goal, the interpretable feature. A simple illustration taken from Adger (2003:91) shows the process of feature checking. In 3, the head kiss has an uninterpretable noun feature (represented as [«N]) while the noun pigs has the interpretable noun feature [N]. Both kiss and pigs are in a sisterhood relation and so the operation agree checks the uninterpretable feature [N] on the head kiss which renders the structure grammatical.
(3) Jtissjy^..]
kiss [V, «N, ...] pigs [N, ...]
40 Notationally, once the uninterpretable feature is checked, it is represented with a
strikethrough. Once all uninterpretable features are checked (and deleted), the well-
formed structure then proceeds to spell-out, where the structure proceeds to the PF level
as well as the LF level.
Another operation along with merge and agree is that of move-a, which involves
moving an element already present in the structure (represented as a) to a higher position.
This has been argued to account for the raising of the subject from the verbal domain to
the inflectional domain, as shown in 4.22
(4) TP
DP T'
D N T VP The cat
V DP sees D N the mouse
Move
As shown in 4, the raising of the determiner phrase (DP) subject the cat from the specifier of the verb phrase to the specifier of the tense phrase occurs due to the operation move-a. The mechanisms which trigger move-a (or internal merge as it is construed in more recent research) have largely been based on the role of features: an analysis is
22 Angled brackets (< >) represent the original position of moved objects. 41 proposed below whereby the need to check uninterpretable features triggers the operation
move.
Beyond feature checking, Chomsky (2001) proposes that the agreement operation
can also involve the valuing of a feature. According to Chomsky, unchecked
uninterpretable features do not yet have a value. Once the uninterpretable feature is
checked against an interpretable feature, the uninterpretable feature is checked and it
receives a value from the interpretable feature. The addition of values for the features
expands the system beyond privative features to a secondary set of features (e.g. specific
values for the feature tense, such as past, nonpast, etc.). While feature checking deletes
the uninterpretable feature, the value of a deleted feature survives beyond spell-out. The
following is an illustration of how this occurs. A tense head (T) is selected from the
numeration with an uninterpretable set of phi (
Once the T head is inserted into the structure, it has a set of uninterpretable ^-features
(wNum:, wPerson:, etc.) and it must enter into a checking relationship with a head which
has interpretable ^-features. The DP subject enters into a sisterhood relationship by
moving to the specifier position of the T head. The example in 5 shows the structure
before feature checking and feature valuing.
(5) TP
DP T'
D N T VP The cat [T, [D, Num: SG, «Num: , Person: 3,...] wPerson:,...]
42 Once the uninterpretable features check, they will likewise receive a value from the
interpretable feature on the determiner head. For instance, the uninterpretable number feature on the T head is checked and receives a value of singular from the interpretable
[Num] feature on the D head. 6 shows the structure once the uninterpretable features have
been checked and once they have received a value.
(6) TP
DP T'
D N T VP The cat [T, [D, Num: SG, »Num: SG, Person: 3,...] »Person: 3,...]
The valuing of the features is represented by a matching value (between the uninterpretable and interpretable features) inserted after a colon. Once all uninterpretable features have been checked and received a value, the structure can proceed to spell-out and to the two interfaces levels, as shown in 7.
(7) Numeration (Lexicon)
Syntax (merge, move, agree)
Spell-Out
PF LF (Phonetic Form) (Logical Form)
43 Thus, this model of grammar involves fewer levels of representation as well as a restricted set of syntactic operations.
Another aspect of features is that they have been argued to vary in terms of their strength in that some features may be strong while others may be weak. For instance, the raising of the DP subject to the TP domain has been analyzed to result from a strong uninterpretable feature on the tense head [wD]. If the [«D] feature is weak, as in English, then it does not trigger the operation move. In contrast, a strong feature requires that the uninterpretable and interpretable features are in a sisterhood relation for feature checking to occur. Thus, subject raising occurs to satisfy the strong [wD] feature on the T head.
Another example involves the raising of w/z-words to the CP domain. As discussed above, previous generative theories proposed that wh-words occur in their lower position at the D-structure followed by operations which result in their CP position the S-structure level. Chomsky (2000a) proposes a minimalist account whereby a head in the complementizer phrase domain has an uninterpretable wh-feature [Q] which must be satisfied by an interpretable [Q] feature. Since the uninterpretable feature is strong, the w/z-phrase moves to the CP domain to satisfy the uninterpretable [Q] feature. Thus features play a role in the operation move-a as well as agree.
The second theoretical approach adopted in this dissertation is distributed morphology. It was developed by Halle and Marantz (1993) and built on in later studies, such as Embick and Noyer 2007.23 Distributed morphology (hereafter DM) differs from lexicalist theories of morphology in that within DM, there is no separate lexicon wherein
23 See Siddiqi 2010 for a useful summary. 44 morphological operations occur. Instead, morphological operations can occur at various parts of the model (hence the name, distributed) following the syntactic component. In
DM, bundles of morphosyntactic features are subject to syntactic operations rather than fully-inflected lexical items, as was the case in Chomsky (1995). Following spell-out, a number of morphological operations can occur before the derivation reaches PF.
However, these morphological operations are syntactic in nature. A revised model is presented in 8.
(8) Numeration (Bundles of morphosyntactic features)
Syntax Spell-Out Morphological Structure
PF LF (Phonetic Form) (Logical Form)
As the revised model in 8 shows, there is an area between spell-out and PF where morphological operations can occur (e.g. operations such as fusion, fission, etc) called
Morphological Structure. Since the syntax deals with bundles of features, these features are given phonological information at PF during a process called vocabulary insertion and so late insertion is an important component of DM.
The process of vocabulary insertion relies on underspecification, a crucial aspect of the system which reduces unnecessary featural specification. Underspecification
45 entails that vocabulary items need not be fully specified for a particular feature bundle for insertion, but it must have some features which match features present on the bundle.
However, if vocabulary items have features which are not present in the feature bundle, they are not inserted. While some vocabulary items may be specified for certain features, there can also be an elsewhere (i.e. default) vocabulary item, which inserts in the contexts where no other vocabulary items can be inserted. In order to illustrate this, 9 shows how vocabulary insertion proceeds for the various present tense conjugations of the Acadian
French verb manger 'to eat'. As Acadian French preserves rich verbal morphology, the analysis must capture subject agreement between the grammatical subject and the verb.
(9) a. Acadian French manger Feature bundles je mange [Pers: 1, Num: SG] tu manges [Pers: 2, Num: SG] il/elle/9a mange [Pers: 3, Num: SG] je mangeons [Pers: 1, Num: PL] vous mangez [Pers: 2, Num: PL] ils mangeont [Pers: 3, Num: PL]
b. Feature24 Vocabulary Item [Num: Sg] «-» -e/-es/-e [0]25 [Num: Pl] *» -ons/-ont [iw] [Pers: 2, Num: Pl] ** -ez [e]
In 9a, the feature bundles shown are based on two features, person and number. Various combinations of the different feature values reflect differences among the grammatical subjects. As 9b shows, there are only three distinct vocabulary items for subject-verb agreement which are inserted based on the feature bundle. For the plural forms, there are
24 Clearly, tense must be included in all of these bundles or we might get past forms such as mangions 'eat.IMP.PL', but the focus here is on the subject agreement features. 251 show the phonetic realization of the forms for each vocabulary item which attach to the stem as differences in the orthographic system (i.e. -es vs. -e) are not necessarily representative of actual differences in the spoken language. 46 two possible vocabulary items which can be inserted, one specified for second person and plural and another which has no person specification. In the case where the feature bundle has a value of 2 for the person feature, the more specified vocabulary item [e] will be inserted as it better matches the feature bundle. In the case of first and third person plural, the [e] vocabulary item is overspecified in that the value for person does not match the feature bundles for either first or third plural subjects. The [ew] vocabulary item is underspecified in that it has no person feature although it does have a plural value for the number feature. In this case, the underspecified vocabulary item is inserted despite the fact that it lacks a number feature. For singular, the null vocabulary item [0] is inserted despite the fact that the vocabulary item is not specified for the person feature. Again, we see that an underspecified feature is inserted.
While late insertion of vocabulary items and underspecification are important components of the theory, DM also allows for morphological operations to account for certain morphological phenomena. As stated above, the mechanisms which drive morphology are syntactic in nature. However, following spell-out, these operations can apply and have effects on the morphology. Along with vocabulary insertion, DM operations such as fusion, fission, and readjustment rules have been proposed. As one example of a morphological operation, fusion takes features on separate heads and fuses them into one so that one vocabulary item will match those features, instead of postulating two vocabulary items. Halle and Marantz (1993:116) present fusion as a process which 'takes two terminal nodes that are sisters under a single category node and fuses them into a single terminal node. Only one Vocabulary item may now be inserted'. Siddiqi (2010:533) provides an example of fusion with the Spanish determiner del, which
involves both the preposition de 'of and the determiner el 'the'. He argues that the
preposition head (with the feature [P]) has fused with the determiner head (with the features [D], [masc], and [def]) to form a single syntactic node which involves all three features: [P], [D], [masc], and [def]. As such, del is inserted at the vocabulary insertion stage since it matches the featural specification of this fused head. Thus, operations such as fusion have effects on which phonological pieces will be inserted at the vocabulary
insertion stage.
Distributed morphology, then, is a minimalist theory of morphology which proposes late insertion of vocabulary items and morphological operations which apply following spell-out. Another important aspect of this theory is the role of underspecification of features involved at the vocabulary insertion stage. While DM involves the morphology component, it is integrated within the minimalist program. It is argued that the processes which apply in the syntactic component are similar to those of the morphological component.
3.1 The variationist approach: Variation theory
The field of variationist sociolinguistics originated in the foundational work of William
Labov beginning in the 1960s. His early work showed both how language change can be studied synchronically and how linguistic variation is subject to influence by factors external to the linguistic system (i.e. social factors like age, sex, ethnicity, social class, etc.). His early studies developed methodologies for conducting both survey research and micro-analyses of language variation and change (Labov 2006 [1966], 1969, 1972).
48 Variation theory proposes that components of language are subject to variation and that
this variation can be studied systematically to uncover the patterns of constraints which condition it. Labov's introduction of the notion of the linguistic variable parted company with other linguistic approaches, as non-allophonic or non-allomorphic variation had previously been considered random or free (see Chambers 1995 for a discussion of this issue).
Weinreich, Labov, and Herzog (1968) put forward a theory of language change within which linguistic variation is a crucial component. From the outset, the authors
(1968:101) argue that 'nativelike command of heterogeneous structures is not a matter of multidialectalism or "mere" performance, but is part of unilingual linguistic competence'.
Therefore, although previous accounts of variability were typically dismissed by the generative theories of the time, Weinreich and his colleagues argue that 'orderly heterogeneity' is an important aspect of language and of language change as well. With regards to variation, they argue that 'it is absence of structured heterogeneity that would be dysfunctional' (1968:101, italics in original). Thus, by arguing that variability is an integral part of language (even for unilingual individuals), they are claiming that language has inherent variability. As a corollary of this claim, differences in forms do not necessarily correspond to differences in meaning. Labov (1969) develops the notion of a variable rule, a rule which applies variably and which is constrained probabilistically by linguistic and social factors, in addition to the categorical rules which were already part of theories of generative grammar. Variants of a linguistic variable have the same
49 grammatical function.26 Despite limited acceptance of Labovian variable rules by
researchers working within generative frameworks, the concepts of orderly heterogeneity
and of inherent variability are central to a line of research devoted to understanding
language variation and change.
Orderly heterogeneity entails that there are constraints in place which govern
variability, central to Weinreich and his colleagues' (1968) proposal for an empirically-
based theory of language variation and change. In order to understand the mechanisms of
variability, they argue, it is important to accurately describe the variability. Labov's
(1972:72) principle of accountability captures this point as it requires that as analysts we
'report values for every case where the variable element occurs in the relevant environments as we have defined them'. Once every occurrence of the variable has been
determined, the analyst can then determine which factors influence variant choice.
Broadly speaking, there are two types of factors which have been argued to condition
variant use: linguistic factors (the linguistic context) and social factors (factors external to
the linguistic system, such as speaker age and sex). The statistical tools made available by variationist theory (outlined in Section 3.2) allow the analyst to determine the magnitude of effect for particular factors on a linguistic variable. Thus variability is no longer random or free, but variation may be analyzed in terms of the effects of linguistic and social factors.
26 The definition of the linguistic variable has changed over time, as is reflected in early exchanges between Lavandera (1978) and Labov (1978). See Walker 2010 and King in press for discussion. 50 The fundamental object of study in variationist analyses is the speech community,
which Labov defines not as 'a group of speakers who all use the same forms; it is best
defined as a group who share the same norms in regard to language' (Labov 1972:158). If
a speech community shares the same norms with regard to language use, it is the
linguistic system of the community as a whole which must be studied, as language use does not exist in isolation from a social context. Labov argues that language is 'exterior
to the individual. In fact, it can be argued that the individual does not exist as a linguistic identity' (Labov 2006 [1966]:5). However, he does not mean to imply that there is no
value in studying individuals as numerous studies of individual linguistic behaviour have shown interesting results, including his own (e.g. Labov 1963). His point here is that individuals should not be studied without first gaining an understanding of the system of the community.
If the speech community is the object of study, the data sample should reflect the behaviour of its members. Variationist studies usually make use of spoken language corpora in order to study language use at the level of the speech community. While there are different methodologies involved in collecting data for sociolinguistic corpora, the goal should be to obtain a sample which reflects the relevant social factors of the speech community under investigation (Sankoff 1988). In some studies, a random sample is obtained while still paying attention to relevant social characteristics of the community members (e.g. age, social class, sex, etc.). Many corpora have been collected using this methodology for cities such as New York City (Labov 2006 [1966]), Ottawa-Hull
(Poplack 1989), and Montreal (Sankoff et al. 1976, Thibault & Vincent 1990, Vincent et al. 1995). Other corpora have focused on different methods for collecting data, such as
gathering data representative of particular social networks within the community
(Beaulieu 1995, Milroy 1987).
The apparent-time construct (Labov 1972) is also central to variationist
sociolinguistics. While longitudinal studies may pose a number of practical problems, the
apparent-time construct allows for an interpretation of (potential) linguistic change from
data collected at a single point in time (i.e. a synchronic study). This assumption relies on
the critical period hypothesis (Lenneberg 1967), which assumes that the speech of adults
is relatively stable following the period of first language acquisition.27 Assuming that
adults' linguistic systems remain stable throughout their lives, sociolinguists compare the speech of younger speakers with that of older speakers. No differences across age groups suggest a stable linguistic system for the community. However, differences between age
groups can be indicative of two things: 1) a change in progress or 2) age-grading. Age-
grading, in contrast with true change, involves a pattern which repeats itself with each successive generation. Thus speakers change their linguistic behaviour at particular points in their lives, but this pattern is continuously repeated and the community system does not undergo a change. With synchronic data, it is difficult to determine whether the differences are due to age-grading or whether it is an actual change in progress since we do not always have the full spectrum of speakers in terms of age. However, Labov
(1994:97) argues that this opposition may be misguided, suggesting instead that it 'is
27 For arguments against a narrow interpretation of this position and a description of linguistic change across the lifespan see Sankoff and Blondeau (2007). 52 possible that age-grading is involved in the mechanism of real-time change for certain
types of linguistic change' and so it may be incorrect to assume age-grading is totally
unrelated to change. In analyzing actual patterns of age-grading, he observes a steady
increase of particular forms with each subsequent generation. This leads him to suggest
that the two patterns are perhaps not unrelated and not mutually exclusive.
Labov's observations on the age-grading versus change in apparent time
dichotomy have led Sankoff and Blondeau (2007) to bring into question the notion that
adults' linguistic systems are totally stable. In a series of studies of the longitudinal (or
real-time) Montreal French corpora, Gillian Sankoff and her colleagues tested whether
individuals changed their linguistic behaviour during their lifetimes. In a paper
investigating the change in Montreal French from apical [r] to uvular [R], Sankoff and
Blondeau (2007) show that some speakers did change their behaviour throughout their
adult lives, but these were only the speakers who were already variable in the earliest data
(the 1971 corpus). In all cases, consultants who changed their behaviour always moved in
the same direction of the change in the later corpora (1984 and 1995). Therefore, Sankoff and Blondeau argue that the apparent-time construct correctly predicts the direction of the change, but it may underestimate the rate of change as the apparent-time interpretation does not take into account lifespan change. The present study makes use of two corpora collected at approximately the same time and both are synchronic. Therefore, the present analysis makes use of the apparent-time construct to determine whether there is a change in progress for the variables in question. I will, however, compare with other studies of
Acadian French in support of my analyses. Variation theory, then, relies on a number of constructs, such as inherent variability, the speech community as the object of study, and the study of change in apparent time. The theory put forward in variationist research is that variability is an important component of a language and that such variability can be analyzed and understood. The following section will outline the methodologies used in variationist research to achieve those ends.
3.2 The variationist approach: Variation methodology
Along with variation theory, Labov pioneered new methods of studying linguistic variation. The fundamental unit in variationist research is the linguistic variable. As defined by Wolfram (1993:195, emphasis in original), it is 'an abstraction: it is made up of a class of variants ~ varying items that exist in a structurally-defined set of some type'. Therefore, the variable is some linguistic feature (phonetic, phonological, morphological, syntactic, lexical, etc.) composed of variants which vary with one another and which are constrained by linguistic and/or social factors, as shown in 10.
(10) Linguistic Variable
Variant 1 Variant 2 Variant 3...
Many variable phenomena (involving phonology, morphology, and syntax) have been have been studied for a wide array of languages. For instance, studies of phonological variables range from final -t/d deletion in English (Guy 1991) to reduction and deletion of final Is/ in Spanish (Hoffman 2004). Studies of morphological variables include variable present tense generalized verbal -5 in Vernacular Newfoundland English (Clarke 1997) and subject-verb agreement in Acadian French (King 2005b). Examples of studies of 54 syntactic variables include subject-verb order in Arabic (Owens et al. 2009) and variable
placement of object clitics in Cypriot Greek (Pappas 2008 cited by Walker 2010). There
are also studies of lexical variation in Faetar (Nagy 2011) and in American Sign
Language (Lucas et al. 2001). The wealth of variationist studies over the years has shown
that variation exists at all levels of the grammar.
In order to accurately assess the influence of factors conditioning variant choice,
it is important to define the variable context with precision. This is a necessary first step
in variationist analysis, which involves determining the possible contexts where the
variable can occur and ruling out contexts which are in fact invariable (Labov's principle
of accountability). This is an important stage as informed choices must be made
regarding which contexts to include (where there is variability) and which contexts to exclude (where there is no variability between or among variants). Once the variable
context has been defined, the next step involves extracting all occurrences (or tokens) of
the variable from the sociolinguistic corpus in order to have a complete and accurate data set to be analyzed.
Following the defining of the variable context and the extraction of relevant data from the corpus, the next step involves determining which potential linguistic and social factors may influence variant choice. The factors are based on hypotheses derived from
the relevant literature and from a preliminary study of the corpus, which are then operationalized as testable factor groups. Potential linguistic factors for a variable at any level of the grammar may include the phonetic environment, phonological contrasts, morphosyntactic distinctions, lexical effects, etc. Along with linguistic factors, a number
55 of social factors have been shown to influence linguistic variation. Some social factors may apply across speech communities (e.g. age or sex), but others are more specific to a particular community. For instance, Meyerhoff and Walker (2007) suggest that linguistic
patterns found in a corpus of English spoken on Bequia are different based on the extent
to which speakers have had contact with other varieties of English (the urban sojourners) or not (the stay-at-home consultants). While the overall rates of the variants differ, the
linguistic constraints were the same for both groups. Thus, a range of social factors may be considered as potential conditioning factors for variant choice. However, it is up to the analyst to determine which social factors are potentially relevant for the particular community under investigation.
Once the set of linguistic and social factors is established, they must be operationalized as testable factor groups. For instance, to test the influence of age on variant choice, sociolinguists often categorize age, a continuous variable, as a categorical variable by aggregating consultants' ages into groups (e.g. younger, middle-aged, older).
Other factors are already categorical and can easily be represented as factor groups such as speaker and linguistic factors such as person and number of the grammatical subject.
Once each token has been assigned a particular code for each linguistic and social factor,
the data are then submitted to statistical analyses in order to determine the effects of these factors on the variable. The results of the statistical analyses can shed light on which hypotheses best account for variability.
The use of statistical testing has become a standard practice in variationist research. The Varbrul family of software allows sociolinguists to conduct multiple regression analysis of the data to determine which factors (linguistic and/or social) play a
role in influencing variant choice. The current version of this software, Goldvarb
(Sankoff et al. 2005), allows sociolinguists to submit their data to multiple regression
analysis.28 It is important to keep in mind that while raw percentages reveal important
facts about the distribution of particular variants in relation to potential conditioning factors, these do not measure whether or not differences in frequency are statistically significant. However, multiple regression software like Goldvarb provide a measure of
the statistical significance of the factors as well as other information pertaining to the
variable grammar, such as which factors favour presence of a variant while others disfavour its presence.
Goldvarb provides a number of results which are useful in creating a model of a
variety's variable grammar. The software conducts multiple regression analysis and
provides a measure of the effects of particular factors on variant choice in factor weights,
measured on a scale from 0 to 1.0. The closer a factor weight approaches 1.0, the more it favours the variant while a factor weight which approaches 0 disfavours the variant.
Factor weights near the .5 level neither favour nor disfavour. In general, there are three types of results provided by Goldvarb: 1) the significance of a particular factor group on variant choice (either a factor group is selected as statistically significant or it is not), 2) the direction of particular factors on a variant (provided in factor weights as discussed above), and 3) the strength of a particular factor group in relation to the other factor
28 For a discussion of how to conduct multiple regression analysis using Goldvarb, see Bayley 2002, Guy 1988, Tagliamonte 2006, and Walker 2010. Note that other multiple regression programs have gained some currency in variationist sociolinguistics, such as R (Baayen 2008) and Rbrul (Johnson 2009). 57 groups (measured by comparing the range of factor weights within a factor group or order
of selection). With regards to statistical significance, while variants may occur at
different frequencies in relation to certain factor groups, these may not be statistically
significant. If a factor group is statistically significant in conditioning variant choice, the
factor weights for individual factors reveal which factors favour or disfavour the variant
in question. Finally, comparing the range of factor weights across factor groups reveals
the relative strength of a factor group on variant choice. A factor group with a greater
range is a stronger predictor of variant choice than a factor group with a smaller range.
A potential complicating issue in conducting analyses with Goldvarb is that the
software assumes the independence of factor groups. Therefore, sociolinguists must
ensure that there are no interactions among factors groups (i.e. they must not be testing
the same thing, but in different ways). As we shall see in Sections 6.2 and 6.3, there is a
strong correlation between level of education and age of the consultants in the Baie
Sainte-Marie corpora. Therefore, both of these variables cannot be included in a single
Goldvarb analysis. After testing various combinations of factor groups, the best model of variation is determined, which shows which factor groups are statistically significant in influencing variant choice along with the strength of each factor group on the variable.
4. The integrated approach: The minimalist program and variationist sociolinguistics
While minimalist theories of grammar, such as DM, and variation theory are typically regarded as quite different in orientation, recently researchers (e.g. Cornips & Corrigan
2005) have attempted to combine aspects of these two theories. In generative theories of grammar, variation which cannot be explained in terms of allophony or allomorphy has
often been characterized as free variation, as noted above. The characterization of
variation as free suggests that the variants are subject to random fluctuations or to
language-external factors, the latter of which is arguably not the domain of formal
linguistic theory. In contrast, variation theory argues that variation is a crucial aspect of
language and that variation can and should be analyzed and understood. While there
appears to be a gulf between the two subfields, it might be noted that Labov's (1969)
foundational work on English copula variation sought to account for variation within a
formal theoretical perspective. This work was met with little interest on the part of
generative linguists, nor was the approach adopted by many sociolinguists of the period.
Interestingly, Chomsky's earlier government and binding theory (Chomsky 1981a) would
eventually come to focus on differences in parameter settings (Chomsky 1981b) in a way
incompatible with Labov's early work. More recently, work within sociolinguistics has
attempted to reconcile the social with the biological (Cornips & Corrigan 2005), as we
shall see below.
One major difference between variationist research and generative theories still
involves the object of study. Within formal theory, Chomsky (2000b:27) argues that the
object of study is not language in use or in context, but rather I-language, the generative
component in individuals which creates grammatical structures. This view entails that
generative analyses tend to rely heavily on grammaticality judgments and native-speaker
intuition in understanding the possible grammar of a language. Conversely, variationist research focuses on language in use, or E-language, as the object of study. For Labov (2006 [1966]:86), the vernacular, the central object of study, is 'the language first
acquired by the language learner, controlled perfectly, and used primarily among intimate
friends and family members'.
While variationist research in the past forty years has largely developed
independently of generative research, there have been some attempts to couch variationist
research within a formal perspective (e.g. Auger 1990, Labov 1969, etc.) along with a
number of explicit attempts to reconcile the two (cf. Cornips & Corrigan 2005). A
number of researchers (e.g. Adger & Smith 2005, King 2005) have sought to account for
variation within generative theories, some of whom adopt the theory of distributed
morphology either overtly or propose similar mechanisms. This recent line of research
has proposed a number of mechanisms which might allow for variation to occur, as well
as provide a theoretical account for actual observed frequencies of variants (Adger 2006).
In a foundational article, Adger and Smith (2005) argue that variation between was/were
in Buckie (Scottish) English is due to variable insertion of functional heads prior to syntax (in their analysis, the relevant functional head is a T(ense) head). The variation is accounted for by the selection of one of two variants of a functional head, resulting in the
two possible realizations: was or were.
In another study from the same time period, King (2005b) makes use of both the minimalist program and distributed morphology to account for variable number agreement in Acadian French, as shown in 11-12, taken from King (2005b).
(11) Hyena dix-huit qu' a ete tue. there are eighteen who has.SG been killed 'There were eighteen of them that were killed.' (AC-2)
60 (12) Des fois il y en a qui s' assisont sur les jambes... some times there are some who REFL sit.PL on the legs 'Sometimes there are some who sit on their legs...' (ACM)
As examples 11-12 show, there is variable agreement in terms of number marking with a
third person plural subject. However, King observes that plural agreement only occurs at
a rate of 12% in subject relative clauses, with the great majority of tokens displaying singular agreement (which she interprets as the default agreement marker). A close look
reveals that the data which make up this 12% plural agreement consistently have an overt
head, such as dix-huit 'eighteen' shown in 11. As a result, King proposes that when there
is an overt antecedent as well as a predication relationship, then there is default singular marking. However, with bare il yen a constructions as in 12, some speakers tend to favour plural marking while others prefer the default singular marking. In order to account for plural marking, King suggests that these speakers spell out the number of the subject on the verb in the absence of an overt head which bears this feature. Thus, we see a mechanism to allow for the information to surface via the agreement morpheme in some speakers, while in others it is not recoverable and an agreement marker is not inserted. Thus, King uses distributed morphology along with a variationist analysis to account for variable agreement in third person plural contexts in Acadian French.
In a later paper, Adger (2006) proposes an algorithm to account for the was/were variable which predicts the actual frequencies of the variants rather than simply accounting for variable insertion. Different surface forms (was or were) are inserted based on the featural specification of the morpheme. The pattern observed in Buckie English, spoken in Buckie, Scotland, with respect to was/were variation is that there is
only variability with a second person subject (both singular and plural) and with a first
person plural subject. Otherwise, the pattern is categorical (i.e. first and third person
singular always occur with was while third person plural always occurs with were).
While a discussion of the precise mechanisms of Adger's analysis is presented in Chapter
5, the importance of the contribution that should be noted here is that the model he
proposes predicts the observed frequencies of the actual rates of occurrence for the
variants. This model was also adopted in Adger and Smith 2010 to provide a variationist
and formal account of was/were as well as verbal -s in Buckie English.
In a different vein, Nevins and Parrott (2010) reintroduce the notion of variable
rules by proposing that the variable application of a DM impoverishment rule (i.e. which deletes a feature post-syntactically) accounts for variation for three variables in different
varieties of English: belam variation in the variety spoken in Monmouthshire, Wales,
was/were in the variety spoken in Buckie, Scotland, and weren 't/ain 7 in the variety spoken in Smith Island, North Carolina. They argue that the variable application of the rule is driven by markedness-principles of the relevant features. This analysis departs in certain respects with other recent accounts in that Nevins and Parrott reintroduce (a contemporary version of) the variable rule, comparable to Labov's (1969) earlier work.
While variationist sociolinguistics and formal generative theory have largely developed independently of one another, recent attempts (e.g. Adger & Smith 2010,
Nevins & Parrott 2010) to bridge the two sub-disciplines have resulted in a range of novel ways in which variationist phenomena can be incorporated in generative theories of grammar. While a range of mechanisms have been proposed by proponents of this
integrated approach, it remains to be seen which analyses ultimately make the best
predictions with regards to variable linguistic phenomena. This emerging body of
research suggests that a theory of language must include mechanisms to account for
variable as well as invariant linguistic phenomena. Thus, the approach taken in this study
makes use of both variationist and formal frameworks. The following section presents the community under investigation, Baie Sainte-Marie, Nova Scotia.
5. The speech community: The Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian region of Nova Scotia
The data for this study were collected in the municipality of Clare (also referred to as the
Baie Sainte-Marie region) located in southwest Nova Scotia.29 This section presents a sociohistorical overview of the region, including relevant information on the history of education and relevant census information for the villages under investigation.
5.1 Sociohistorical profile of the Baie Sainte-Marie region
Baie Sainte-Marie is one of the five main Acadian regions in the province of Nova Scotia shown in grey in Map 3.1,30
29 While the region is officially called Clare by local and provincial governments and by local residents alike, 1 will refer to the region by its colloquial name, Baie Sainte-Marie. 30 Acadians also make up a small portion of the population in the capital city, Halifax, as well as in other regions (e.g. Sydney, Annapolis Valley, etc.), but these regions are predominantly English-speaking. 63 OuKotSL
PRINCE EDWARD ^ ISLAND NEW BRUNSWICK VS/7]I CAPE BRETON
LEUAOAME
CoquM O ATLANTIC OCEAN
•0 1*0
MAP 3.1. Acadian regions in Nova Scotia.
Baie Sainte-Marie was unsettled prior to the Grand Derangement, unlike other
Acadian regions, such as Argyle and lie Madame. Baie Sainte-Marie was first settled by
Acadians in 1755 and 1756 when Pierre Belliveau led a small group of refugees to a
small island off the coast of present-day Anse-des-Belliveau (Ross & Deveau 1992).
However, this group of refugees found the winters harsh and the colony did not survive.
The first permanent settlers arrived in 1768 when concessions of land from Anse-des-
Belliveau to Petit-Ruisseau were granted to transient Acadians (Ross & Deveau 1992).
Map 3.2 shows the area in more detail.
64 • Saint-Bernard Anse-des-Befltveau
Grosses Coques
Pofrite-de-TEgtee m
Comeauville
Corfoerrie • La Butte
Meteghan
• Maxwellton
Cap Sainte-Marie
6 Km RMere-aux-Saumons1 * 4 mi.
MAP 3.2. The municipality of Clare.
After 1785, descendents of these original settlers were given land further south in
present-day Saulnierville, Comeauville, and Meteghan. The southernmost villages of Cap
Sainte-Marie, Mavillette, and Riviere-aux-Saumons were populated by descendents of
the pioneer families by 1804 (Ross & Deveau 1992). Thus, the present-day municipality of Clare was gradually settled and attained its current general distribution by the early 65 19th century. Historically, the three main industries of the region were shipping, lumber,
and, more recently, the fisheries. Ross and Deveau (1992) note that while the lumber
industry had been one of the important early industries of the region, fishing became a
lucrative industry by the turn of the 20th century, thus superseding lumbering. Thus, much
of the 20th century saw the gradual closing of the many sawmills across the region and
the expansion of the fishing and shipbuilding industries.
Along with traditional industries, Baie Sainte-Marie has historically maintained a
diversified economy, with a variety of businesses and services which serve the local
community and which also operate predominantly in French. These include restaurants,
grocery stores, Nova Scotia's only French-language university, Universite Sainte-Anne,
established in 1890, social clubs, credit unions, clothing stores, and other businesses. The
diversity of institutions and businesses which operate predominantly in French creates a social context whereby Baie Sainte-Marie residents typically have not had to leave the community for goods or services.
The two main Acadian regions in the southwest part of the province (the municipalities of Clare and Argyle, shown in Map 3.1) are also colloquially known as
Par-en-haut 'up' (Clare) and Par-en-bas 'down' (Argyle). While there are similarities between the varieties spoken in each region, there are differences which are salient to speakers from the two regions as well.31 The geographically separate Acadian areas in
Map 3.1 resulted from conditions of resettlement following Acadians' return from exile.
31 As a native-speaker of French from Baie Sainte-Marie, 1 can attest that there are particular features (phonetic, phonological, lexical, etc.) of each variety which are salient to speakers from the two regions. Likewise, Flikeid (1989, 1994) show that there are differences in terms of both use of conservative features and of language contact phenomena. 66 The isolation of French communities across the province resulted in varieties which
developed largely independently of one another. Each particular region's history affected
the variety in that some communities were settled by different groups while others
remained relatively homogenous. This has had linguistic consequences in that some
communities, such as Cheticamp, underwent greater levels of dialect mixing than others,
such as Baie Sainte-Marie, which was and remained much more homogeneous. While
prior studies have compared proportions of use of certain linguistic features across
varieties (Flikeid 1989, 1994), the present study focuses specifically on the variety
spoken in the Baie Sainte-Marie region, Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
5.3 The history of education in Baie Sainte-Marie
The history of education in Baie Sainte-Marie is, as in many other minority communities,
a complex issue.32 Ross (2001) provides an in-depth overview of the history of education
in Acadian regions of Nova Scotia following the Grand Derangement up to the present
day. While the history of each region differs in some respects, the outline below focuses
mainly on the Baie Sainte-Marie region as this is the community investigated in this study.
Shortly after the start of their return from exile, a 1766 law prevented Roman
Catholics from opening and establishing schools, which greatly impacted Acadians' ability to establish schools in French as they were predominantly Roman Catholic (Ross
2001). However, by 1786 Acadians were granted the right to open schools, although their role in governance was limited. The first public schools were established in the Baie
12 The information presented in this section is largely drawn from Ross 2001. 67 Sainte-Marie region in 1832. One of the first teachers was Pere Jean-Mande Sigogne, a
European French priest who lobbied for French education in both Clare and Argyle.
Despite these early efforts, however, there was widespread illiteracy as these first schools were not entirely accessible since the majority of students' families had to pay fees.
Attendance was likewise not compulsory. In 1861, a Nova Scotia census reports that only
36% of children aged between five and fifteen years old attended school. Despite these initial obstacles, Acadians gradually became involved in the sociopolitical sphere and in the education system as well.
In 1864, the Nova Scotia Free School Act resulted in the construction of a number of rural schools across the province and most public schools were made free for students.
This granted Baie Sainte-Marie children, who previously could not afford to attend school, greater access to the educational system. Nearly three decades later, in 1890,
College Sainte-Anne was founded in Pointe-de-l'Eglise as a private institution run by
European French Eudists priests. The college was shortly thereafter granted the status of a university, although the official name did not change to Universite Sainte-Anne until nearly a century later, in 1977. A few years after its creation, College Sainte-Anne received grants to create L'Academie de Clare, a boys-only high school. Girls who sought a high school education were sent to take classes at a convent in Meteghan run by sisters of the Sisters of Charity order, which operated predominantly in English. It was only in 1932 that the convent school offered a grade twelve level of education (Ross
2001).
68 The 20th century saw a number of changes in the education system in Baie Sainte-
Marie and elsewhere in the province. In the early part of the century, the province officially recognized the presence of French language schools in Acadian regions, although it was assumed that these schools were bilingual and that they were to foster a transition from French to English. In 1902, the province struck a committee to study schools in Acadian regions and to establish the best methods of transitioning to English.
Despite the assumption that schools were transitioning from French to English, a survey of schools in 1910 by Louis A. d'Entremont, a newly-appointed school inspector, reported that most Acadian children arrived at school with no knowledge of English
(Ross 2001).
Along with the difficulties in establishing a French-medium education, schools in
Acadian regions suffered from low attendance. It was often the case that children abandoned school as young as fourteen years of age to work. This was sometimes a necessity, as older children were required to work in order to help support the family or families could not afford to pay for schoolbooks and materials. However, since 1946, attending school became mandatory until a child reached 16 years of age (Ross 2001).
The 20th century also saw the consolidation of most of the rural schools which were created following the 1864 Nova Scotia Free School Act. Thus, most small schools which had been constructed in the latter part of the 19th century were closed and children attended larger schools with students from many neighbouring villages. This consolidation most definitely had an impact on increasing contact between anglophone and francophone children. The mixture of anglophones and francophones in the same classroom would have increased Acadians' proficiency in English, although French
continued to be the medium of instruction.
While the consolidated classrooms involved both English and French as mediums
of instruction, by the 1970s a number of efforts were made to focus on French language
education. The establishment of the Centre provincial de ressources pedagogiques at
Universite Sainte-Anne in 1970 sought to provide resources for French language teachers
across the province. In 1981, a law on education (Act 65) brought about a program of
reform to make all elementary schools in Acadian regions to be French language only.
Ross (2001) emphasizes that with regards to this development, many Acadian parents
were at best apathetic, having themselves grown up in a mixed-language education
system. However, high schools still used both French and English as mediums of
instruction in Acadian regions until the late 1990s, at which time the French-only school
board, the Conseil scolaire acadien provincial, was established. As with earlier French-
positive reforms, many Acadian parents across the province resisted and protested the
establishment of a French-medium school board. Despite this resistance, the Conseil
scolaire acadien provincial continues in the 21st century to operate French-only schools at
the elementary and high school levels in Acadian regions.
Baie Sainte-Marie benefited from early lobbying by the Eudist priests for French-
medium education. The establishment of Universite Sainte-Anne also provided a locus for French language education, unlike the situation which obtained in other Acadian regions in Nova Scotia. The events which shaped the educational landscape likewise had an impact on the local variety. While generations prior to the 20th century were largely monolingual francophones, the consolidation of schools increased contact between
Acadians and anglophones, thus heightening fears of assimilation, which had been an
actual goal of the English governing authority since the 18th century. However, 20th
century institutional change ultimately ensured Acadian children could receive an
education provided entirely in French following decades of mixed-language education. In
the chapters that follow, we will see to what degree exposure to French education has
affected vernacular usage.
5.4 Language use in Baie Sainte-Marie
While the Baie Sainte-Marie region is known as a predominantly Acadian region, there are obviously native speakers of other languages, most notably native English speakers.
However, since its beginnings, Baie Sainte-Marie has always been a French-majority community within an English-majority province. Census data from the 1991 Census
(Statistics Canada 1991a) show that while the municipality of Clare had a population of
9,655, 70% of respondents indicated French only as their mother tongue (6,365 out of
9,125 who provided a single response).33 A further 525 indicated both French and
English as their mother tongue, some of whom may be individuals who speak English as a mother tongue. Since these 525 individuals claim both French and English as a mother tongue, they can be added to either the single French mother tongue population or the single English mother tongue population. Therefore, we can add half of these respondents
(N=262) to the amount of speakers who reported only French as a mother tongue. Thus,
33 Since the data for this study were collected in the early 1990s, information from the 1991 Canada Census most accurately reflects the linguistic profile of the community at the time of data collection. With reference to the census data, 1 use the official name of Clare (vs. Baie Sainte-Marie) as that is the name used by Statistics Canada. 71 by combining the single responses (one language as a mother tongue) with the multiple
responses (two languages as a mother tongue), Baie Sainte-Marie residents who speak
French as a mother tongue make up 67% of the population. There are also non-Acadian
native French speakers in Baie Sainte-Marie as there are a number of residents who have
immigrated from Quebec as well as countries like France. While the census data do not distinguish between Acadians and non-Acadians, we may assume that a small part of
these results involve a proportion of residents who are francophone, but not Acadian. By comparison, the 1991 Census data for the entire province of Nova Scotia reveals that
those whose mother tongue is either only French, half of those who reported both French and English or French and another language make up only approximately 4% (39,230) out of the total population of 899,950 (Statistics Canada 1991b). Thus, French speakers are the majority (67%) within the Baie Sainte-Marie region, but at the provincial level they are clearly a small minority (4%).
5.5 Grosses Coques
The village of Grosses Coques is located at the northern end of the Baie Sainte-Marie region, couched between the villages of Pointe-de-l'Eglise and Anse-des-Belliveau, as shown on Map 3.2. As the name of the village suggests, Grosses Coques 'big clams' refers to the large clams which can be collected during low tides. At their maximum, when they are referred to as les grandes marees 'spring tides', the tides are quite large
72 and can reach nearly 9m in height, which presents the perfect conditions for
clamdigging.34
A concession of land granted to the early Acadian settlers in this region included portions of land in present-day Grosses Coques. One of the first settlers, Charles
Thibodeau, occupied a lot of land in this village in 1775 (Deveau 1968). Today, residents have to leave the village to conduct some of their day-to-day activities (e.g. employment, shopping, etc.),0 although there is a small corner store and a social club, along with a few small businesses. While there used to be an elementary school in Grosses Coques, children currently attend the nearest elementary school in the neighbouring village of
Pointe-de-l'Eglise. The only high school in Baie Sainte-Marie is located in La Butte which is nearly 20 km further south.
Statistics Canada data from 1991, the year in which the Grosses Coques
Sociolinguistic Corpus was constructed, show that the population of Grosses Coques in
1991 was 1,270 (Statistics Canada 1991c). Despite being near the northern border of the municipality (it is near the predominantly English-speaking village of Weymouth),
Grosses Coques is a majority French village as 76% (N=970) of residents reported only
French (N=930) or both French and English as a mother tongue (I only include half of these, N=40 out of a Total N=80) in the 1991 Canada Census.
14 The Bay of Fundy, which nearly separates Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, is home to arguably the highest tides in the world. While the tides in Baie Sainte-Marie (a smaller bay within the Bay of Fundy) are not the highest reported, they are still quite high. 73 5.6 Meteghan
Further south along the coast lies the village of Meteghan, a major hub for fisheries and
one of the most populous villages in Baie Sainte-Marie. It is surrounded by the village of
Le-Centre-de-Meteghan to the north and the village of L'Anse-a-l'Ours to the south. The
Meteghan wharf is currently the most active wharf in the region and there are numerous
fish processing plants located in the community as well as businesses such as restaurants,
grocery stores, furniture stores, and pharmacies. The lumber industry used to be an
important part of the local economy although in 20th century it had been overtaken by the
fisheries. While residents are able to conduct all of their day-to-day activities in
Meteghan, they may also leave the village to access other services, such as the skating arena and swimming pool at Universite Sainte-Anne in Pointe-de-l'Eglise. There is an elementary school in Meteghan and the regional high school is located in nearby La
Butte.
The 1991 Canada Census reports the population of Meteghan and Le-Centre-de-
Meteghan to be 3,350 and a majority (83%, N=2,915) of these have either French only or
French and English as a mother tongue (Statistics Canada 1991c). Thus, Meteghan, like
Grosses Coques and like Baie Sainte-Marie overall, is predominantly French-speaking.
6.1 The Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French corpora
While sociolinguistic corpora will always be limited in terms of their representativeness of a particular variety since they represent one particular context of interaction, the sociolinguistic interview, they nevertheless represent the best source of data for gaining an overall linguistic picture of a speech community. They provide relatively large samples of speech from informal or at most semi-formal interaction. To analyze Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French, I make use of two sociolinguistic corpora: the Butler
Grosses Coques Sociolinguistic Corpus and the Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse,
both of which are described in Sections 6.2 and 6.3, respectively. Where the corpora do
not provide sufficient information for a particular linguistic feature in the present study, I
make use of my own native speaker intuitions as well as grammaticality judgments from
other native speakers.
6.2 The Butler Grosses Coques Sociolinguistic Corpus
The Butler Grosses Coques Sociolinguistic Corpus was constructed in 1989-1990 under the direction of Gary R. Butler. Interviews were conducted by residents of Grosses
Coques (see Map 3.2) and a total of 31 consultants were interviewed. While there are some consultants (N=9) who live in adjacent villages, such as Pointe-de-l'Eglise or Bas- de-la-Riviere, the majority of consultants were born and raised in Grosses Coques. The corpus also includes a few interviews with speakers from more distant villages, such as
La Butte and Concessions. However, these speakers were excluded from the Grosses
Coques sample due to the possibility of interdialectal variation.
The Butler Grosses Coques Sociolinguistic Corpus comprises 30 sociolinguistic interviews of 31 community residents with each interview lasting at least an hour. The interviews are semi-directed by the interviewer and no questionnaire was followed.
Instead, interviewers were instructed by the project director to encourage the telling of narratives, including narratives of personal experience, community narratives, local legends, etc. The interviews also include conversational data which focus on consultants' life histories as well as discussion of day-to-day life in the community. Some interviews are conducted in a group setting. The audio recordings were carefully transcribed in an orthography which captures grammatical variation and is largely modeled on standard orthography. That is, following standard sociolinguistic methodology, no effort is made to mirror the speakers' pronunciation.
The speech of a sub-sample of speakers was selected for analyses. The decision to exclude consultants was based on their village of origin (there were a few interviews with speakers from villages at some remove from Grosses Coques). Following standard practice, an attempt was made to select an equal number of males and females and speakers representative of different age groups. The social characteristics of the consultants are provided in Table 3.1.
76 Consultant35 Gender Age Education Nicole Female 20 12 years Marie Female 25 12 years Carole Female 25 university Martin Male 25 8 years Denise Female 26 10-11 years Sam Male 27 uncertain David Male 29 8 years Joanne Female 33 12 years Richard Male 34 7 years Aimee Female 35 12 years Dianne Female 36 12 years Michelle Female 36 12 years Evelyn Female 46 8 years Hector Male 52 6 years Hilaire Male 61 8 years Amelie Female 63 8 years Zabeth Female 65 8 years Louise Female 65 8 years Patrick Male 68 10 years Elze Male 77 8 years Eric Male 79 8 years Edwin Male 84 8 years TABLE 3.1. The Grosses Coques consultants.
As Table 3.1 shows, there are consultants of both genders (12 females and 10 males) representative of a wide age range (20 years old to 84 years old). Information on the consultants' level of education was usually available. It should be noted that there is a correlation between level of education and age, as older speakers tend to have a lower level of education while younger speakers tend to have higher levels of education.36
Therefore, level of education was not considered as a social factor in this study since it would interact with age in the Goldvarb (multiple regression) analyses. Information on
35 These are pseudonyms. 36 This is not a design flaw of the sample: see Section 5.3 for a discussion of the history of education in Baie Sainte-Marie in the 20th century. 77 consultant's level of contact with English was not obtained. The consultants were grouped into three categories based on their age: younger (for consultants younger than
30), middle-aged (for consultants between 30 and 55 years old), and older (for consultants older than 60 years old).
6.3 Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse
The Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse is a sociolinguistic corpus comprising interviews collected in the mid-1990s under the direction of Karin Flikeid (in collaboration with Michelle Daveluy) from four Acadian regions in Nova Scotia: Argyle,
Baie Sainte-Marie, Cheticamp, and lie Madame (see Map 3.1). Flikeid had constructed a much larger Nova Scotia Acadian French corpus in the 1980s. The Corpus acadien de la
Nouvelle-Ecosse is the result of a resampling of some communities some ten years later.
The Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse includes a number of interviews from each region: 25 from Argyle, 17 from Baie Sainte-Marie, 16 from Cheticamp, and 8 from lie
Madame. The corpus comprises semi-directed interviews conducted by community residents who occasionally used a questionnaire designed to elicit narratives of personal experience, community narratives, information on traditions, and general conversation.
Thus, the data in this, corpus are fairly similar to the Grosses Coques data, which allows for a comparison across villages. However, the interviews vary in length, with some interviews lasting longer than an hour and some lasting only 15 minutes. Clearly, short interviews are problematic, particularly for the analysis of grammatical variation, which requires large amounts of data. Since data for the other Acadian communities tended to be limited, only data for Baie Sainte-Marie were retained for this study. The interviews were transcribed according to the same protocol as the Butler Grosses Coques
Sociolinguistic Corpus in order to facilitate comparison of data for the two corpora.
The interviews for Baie Sainte-Marie in the Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-
Ecosse are predominantly from the village of Meteghan (see Map 3.2). There are 10
interviews which were retained for the present study. The Baie Sainte-Marie data also
include seven interviews with consultants from villages other than Meteghan and thus not
included in the sample under investigation due to the possibility of interdialectal
variation. The consultants whose interviews were retained are shown in Table 3.2.
Consultant37 Gender Age Trina Female 18 Anique Female 21 Tina Female 22 Veronique Female 22 Benoit Male 22 Roger Male 22 Francis Male 23 Claudette Female 29 Rose Female 65 Lanette Female 69 Luc Male 74 TABLE 3.2. The Meteghan consultants.
As Table 3.2 shows, there are 11 consultants in the Meteghan sample from the Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse. There are consultants for both genders, although there are more females (N=7) than males (N=4). There are consultants who are younger (29 years and younger) and older (65 years and older), but there are no consultants in the middle- age range, unlike the Grosses Coques sample.
37 These are pseudonyms. 79 Information pertaining to the consultants' level of education was not available.
However, as with the Grosses Coques Corpus, it is likely that age correlates with level of education since the education policies which affected Grosses Coques also affected
Meteghan. As in the Grosses Coques case, we would not be able to test the effect of level of education separately from speaker age. Finally, information on consultant's level of contact with English was likewise not collected.
7. Conclusion
This chapter presented the theoretical and methodological approaches used in the present study. Following a description of generative theory and variation theory along with variationist methodology, a description of recent socio-syntax approaches was presented.
Next we turned to a sociohistorical outline of the community under investigation. Finally, the source of the data for the study, two Baie Sainte-Marie sociolinguistic corpora, were presented. The following chapters will present analyses of two kinds of grammatical variation found in the corpora, variation in mood choice and in the expression of future temporal reference.
80 Chapter 4: The subjunctive mood
in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French
1. Introduction
This chapter presents an analysis of the subjunctive mood in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French. In this variety of Acadian French, the subjunctive mood, as shown in 1, varies (in
io certain contexts) with the indicative mood, shown in 2, and the conditional, shown in 3.
(1) Jecrois point qu' il ait plus que son grades-, 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG.M have.PRES.SBJV.SG more than his grade S-
[...] huh six ou sept huh six or seven 'I don't think he has more than his grade s-, [...] huh. Six or seven.' (Carole, M-298)
(2) But jecrois point que c' est passe encore, but 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG be.PRES.lND.SG passed yet 'But I don't think it's passed yet.' (Carole, GC-6)
(3) J'aurais point cru qu' elle aurait pu le 1 have.COND.SG NEG thought that 3.SG.F have.PRES.COND.SG could him
stander, ielle asteure non plus. stand.lNF her now no more 'I wouldn't have thought that she could stand him now, her either.' (Zabeth, GC-12)
This analysis presents evidence that the subjunctive mood in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French is stable and semantically productive. Despite claims in the literature that the subjunctive mood is in decline in minority varieties in contact with English (Laurier
3H While both negators pas and point are used in this variety, point is the general negator (Comeau 2007b), therefore when refering to the subjunctive-selecting pas croire context in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, 1 will instead refer to it as point croire. Likewise, the preverbal negator ne is omitted. 81 1989, Neumann-Holzschuh 2005), the evidence presented here suggests that the
subjunctive is not in decline in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. Likewise, studies of
other varieties of French have concluded that the subjunctive is not semantically
productive (e.g. Poplack 1992, 1997, 2001). This study suggests that this is not the case
in the variety under study here. Following a quantitative analysis of the subjunctive
mood, a formal account of the data is presented.
2. The French subjunctive mood
The French subjunctive mood has been the subject of much prior research. The various analyses and interpretations of this mood, as well as data from different varieties, suggest a complex system, aspects of which remain heavily debated. This section will present a
history of the French subjunctive followed by an overview of the current literature on this mood in French.
2.1 The history of the French subjunctive mood
Historically, the French subjunctive is derived from the Latin subjunctive, which itself is argued to have developed from two Indo-European moods: the subjunctive and the optative (Hahn 1953). Despite the fact that the morphology of these two moods collapsed into one Latin subjunctive morphological system, researchers still distinguish two separate functions for the Latin subjunctive: the subjunctive function which involves futurity (and so behaves more like a tense) and the optative function which is generally more like a grammatical subjunctive mood. Hahn (1953), who presents an analysis of the development of the Latin subjunctive and its relationship to the future, argues that these distinctions carried over from Indo-European.
82 The Old French subjunctive, like the Latin subjunctive, involved two distinct
functions: the subjunctive, which expresses doubt, and the optative, which expresses
volition. Similar to the Latin system, Old French had one morphological system for these
two functions. Jensen (1974:33) refers to the volitive meaning as 'the strongest area of
the use of the subjunctive, an area where only relatively few changes have occurred down
through the centuries'. He provides examples which show how the subjunctive was used
to express volition, as in 4 (de la Sale 1726, cited in Jensen 1974).
(4) M' amie, il fault que je aille a 1' armee. my friend 3 be.necessary.PRES that I.SG go.PRES.SBJV to the army 'My friend, I need to go into the army.'
(de la Sale 1726, my translation)
Further, in Old French, the subjunctive could occur in a range of contexts: in a main clause, in a relative clause, in a subordinate clause, and in adverbial clauses.
Martineau (1995) provides an analysis of the subjunctive in Older French (a term she uses to refer to Old French and Classical French). She argues that Older French differs from Modern French in that there were no obviation effects. Obviation is a phenomenon which involves a constraint against co-referentiality between the pronominal subject of the embedded clause and the subject of the matrix clause, as shown in 5, taken from Martineau (1995:405, my translation).
(5) *Je, veux que je, parte demain. 1 want.PRES.SG that 1 leave.PRES.SBJV tomorrow *'I want that I leave tomorrow.'
83 Martineau likewise argues that there was much more semantic productivity in Older
French than there is today and that the subjunctive was not constrained by a main clause element (verb, adverbial, etc.), as is the case in Modern French.
2.2 The imperfect subjunctive
Historically, in order to express a past temporal reference subjunctive, Latin had an imperfect subjunctive and a pluperfect subjunctive. This imperfect subjunctive is derived from the punctual aspect of the Indo-European optative (Hahn 1953). By the Old French period, the Latin pluperfect gave rise to the French imperfect subjunctive:'chantast < chantasset < cantavissef (Fournier 1998:335). While both the imperfect subjunctive and the pluperfect subjunctive occurred in Old French, the imperfect could take on the functions of the pluperfect, though this had ceased by the 13th century. While the pluperfect subjunctive persists in Modern French (albeit infrequently in spoken language corpora), the imperfect subjunctive has largely been lost from most spoken varieties of the language. The imperfect subjunctive was gradually replaced by the conditional and past conditional with the beginning of its decline dating from the early 17th century
(Fournier 1998:335). Despite this decline, however, the imperfect subjunctive persists in enclaves such as in the Channel Islands (Jones 2000) and particular Acadian communities.
Several studies of varieties of Acadian French attest to the presence of the imperfect subjunctive, despite its moribund status in most other varieties. For instance,
Flikeid and Peronnet (1989) report use of the imperfect subjunctive in data collected in the 1980s in five Nova Scotia Acadian communities (Baie Sainte-Marie, Cheticamp, lie
84 Madame, Richmond, and Pubnico). However, they do not provide an in-depth analysis of this mood, since their study focuses instead on the overall preservation of inflectional morphology. Gesner (1979) and Ryan (1982b) provide descriptive accounts of the imperfect subjunctive in data collected in Baie Sainte-Marie in the 1970s. Gesner reports that he found 24 tokens of the imperfect subjunctive in six out of eight interviews in his
Meteghan corpus, constructed in 1975-1976. The lack of tokens in the speech of the remaining two consultants may be due to the fact that his corpus is quite small, at approximately 16,000 words. Gesner notes that the imperfect subjunctive occurs following particular matrix verbs (falloir 'to be necessary', aimer 'to like', pas croire 'to not think') as well as after particular adverbials and gerunds (pour que 'so', en attendant que 'while waiting', jusqu 'a ce que 'until', etc.). He also states that the imperfect subjunctive is only found in embedded clauses and that there are no tokens of the pluperfect subjunctive in his data. Furthermore, he notes the homophony between the simple past tense and the imperfect subjunctive, as do Flikeid and Peronnet (1989), as shown in 6-7 and mentioned in Chapter 2.
(6) Moi 9a me fit rien. me 3.SG me make.SP.lND.SG nothing 'It didn't do anything to me.' (Amelie, GC-27)
(7) lis avont calle pour bailler cinquante piastres a Pierre pour 3.PL have.PL called in.order.to give.lNF fifty dollars to Pierre in.order.to
qu' il fit une smile. that 3.SG.M make.lMP.SBJV.SG a smile 'They had called to give fifty dollars so that Pierre would smile.' (Evelyn, GC-27)
85 Note that the simple past token in 6 fit does not occur in a subjunctive-selecting context
while in 7 the imperfect subjunctive token fit is selected by the adverbial pour que 'in
order to', which selects the (unambiguous) subjunctive. The simple past and the
imperfect subjunctive, though homophonous, involve different forms depending on the
verb class: the singular [i] suffix is used for -er (e.g. manger 'to eat'), -ir (e.g.finir 'to
finish') and -re (e.g. vendre 'to sell') verbs and [y] is used for -oir verbs (e.g. boire 'to
drink'). The plural is the same for both conjugations, that is, [ir] or [yr]is used for all
persons (e.g.je mangirent 'we ate', vous mangirent 'you ate', ils mangirent 'they ate').
This simplified morphological system contrasts with standard French, which has a more
complex morphological system for the imperfect subjunctive (e.g .je mangeasse 'I ate',
nous mangeassions 'we ate', vous mangeassiez 'you ate', etc.), a point to which we will
turn below.
Ryan (1982b, 1985) also discusses the imperfect subjunctive forms in Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French. However, he disputes Gesner's analysis of two distinct
verbal tenses (i.e. simple past and imperfect subjunctive). Ryan works within the functionalist framework of Martinet (1955) within which one of the most important
components is an economy principle. In the face of phonetically identical variants, Ryan
argues that forms Gesner would label as the imperfect subjunctive are, in fact, cases of
the simple past. That is, there is no homophony, only the simple past. However, Ryan
ignores the contextual facts, which predict where each form occurs. Gesner (1982:48) points out that there is in fact a contextual difference between the two: 'the frequent use of the passe simple in the narration of a series of past events and the use of the imperfect 86 subjunctive after, for example, "fallait que" and certain conjunctions'. It is possible to
distinguish between these two homophonous forms based on the surrounding context and
on the basis of the distribution of the unambiguous present subjunctive.
Homophony between the imperfect subjunctive and the simple past has a
historical basis which originated prior to Acadian settlement in the New World. As noted
above, there were originally three conjugations of the simple past: the -/ variant for -ir
and -re verbs (e.g.finir, vendre), the -a variant for -er verbs (e.g. parler), and the -u
variant for some -oir verbs and for irregular verbs (e.g. boire, etre). However, 16th
century grammarians commented on the replacement of the -a conjugation by the -/
variant. Lodge refers that this replacement is commented upon by 16th century
grammarians who 'express a preference for the -a- variant' (Lodge 2004:134). Lodge
also mentions that the -i variants persisted into the 19th century in lower-class Parisian
French. Brunot (1966) also comments on the history of the forms of the simple past. He suggests that the replacement of the -a variant by the -/ variant occurred as early as the
fifteenth century. Likewise, he discusses the use of imperfect subjunctive endings which
'semblent appartenir a l'indicatif39. Clearly, Brunot is making reference to the syncretism between the simple past and the imperfect subjunctive, as shown in 8 cited by
Brunot (1966).
39 'seem to belong to the indicative' (my translation). 87 (8) Mais de grace, Monsieur, le voudriez -vous permettre, but please mister it will.COND.2.PL 2.PL permit.lNF
Que je f!s, s' il vous plaist, response a ceste lettre? that 1 make.lMP.SBJV.SG if it 2.PL please respond to this letter 'But please, mister, would you permit,that I make, please, a response to this letter?'
This extract, taken from the L 'Espadon satyrique (de Esternod 1626), shows an imperfect subjunctive Que je fis 'that I make', which is homophonous with the simple past. Since examples of this homophony are found in European French in the 17th century, Gesner
(1982) interprets this as evidence that the homophony between the simple past and the imperfect subjunctive predates Acadian settlement.
The regularization of the plural marker [r] for both the imperfect subjunctive and the simple past, as shown in Table 2.1, is likewise a feature which was carried over by the first Acadian settlers. The [r] conjugation for the first person plural, developed via analogy from the third person plural, is found in maps 0360 and 1154 of the Atlas linguistique de la France (Gillieron & Edmont 1969 [1902—1910]). 40 Map 0360, which provides regional variants of the pronunciations for the bolded first person plural simple past form, were attested in regions of France (Target phrase: Nous crumes qu 'ilyfut.
'We thought that he had gone.').
(9) Nous crurent. I.PL think.Sp.lND.PL 'We thought.' (Gillieron & Edmont 1969 [1902-1910], Point 57, my translation)
40 I thank Yves Charles Morin for pointing this out. 88 Map 0360 shows that there are areas where the consultant used a final -r (i.e. crurent
[kryr]). Likewise, the -r conjugation is found in Map 1154 (Target phrase: Nous ne le
revimesplus. 'We didn't see him again.'), as shown in 10.
(10) Je ne le revurent plus. I.PL NEG him see.again.SP.LND.PL no.more 'We didn't see him anymore.' (Gillieron & Edmont 1969 [1902-1910], Point 58, my translation)
These attestations suggest that the plural -r conjugation may be a conservative feature
which was carried over at the time of settlement. However, the location of these two
points is not in the centre-ouest, but rather in northeastern France. Therefore, it may be
that the same conjugations developed independently in Acadie and in France or it may be
the case that these conjugations initially had a wider distribution in France and only survived in these northeastern regions. While these two maps involve the simple past, note that the homophony between the two tenses predates the collection of the atlas data.
Use of the -r variant has also been observed in dialectology studies of varieties in
areas from which Acadians originated. For instance, evidence from the Marais-Vendee
region in France (one source area for Acadian settlers) shows that the -r plural marker
has spread throughout the plural paradigm for the simple past form (Svenson 1959).
There is a difference, however, in that the conjugations also include an agreement suffix, which follows the -r, indicating the grammatical person, as shown in Table 4.1.
89 finir 'to finish' donner 'to give'
1 Person Plural [finiraq] [dujiiraq]
2 Person Plural [finirei] [dujiireiJ
3 Person Plural [finrat] [dujiirat] TABLE 4.1. Plural conjugations of the simple past in Marais-Vendee (Svenson 1959).
The forms in Table 4.1 show that the -r simple past suffix was well-established in
Marais-Vendee French, which suggests that it is not a New World innovation. However,
the lack of a person agreement in Acadian varieties may either have been a later
development or person agreement may have developed in Marais-Vendee independently,
following the emigration of Acadian settlers.
Beyond varieties of Acadian French, the imperfect subjunctive is preserved in
another French enclave: the island of Guernsey in the English Channel (Jones 2000).
Jones' analysis of Guernsey Norman French involves both speech (interviews conducted
with adults aged 50 and over) and writing (an annual bulletin written in the local variety).
The community underwent a shift in the 20th century from being French-dominant to
English-dominant. She reports that both the present subjunctive and imperfect subjunctive are used in this variety. However, she argues that the subjunctive is triggered lexically rather than semantically in that it is particular matrix verbs and nonverbal
matrices which select the subjunctive (cf. Harris 1978, Poplack 1992). In contexts where
the imperfect subjunctive potentially could have occurred, she finds it to be used at a rate of 57% (N=105) in her spoken-language data and at a rate of 67% (N=180) in the written sources. She interprets this finding as suggesting that the imperfect subjunctive 'is at least
90 being used productively to some extent by most speakers and is far from the moribund
state of its standard French counterpart' (2000:89). Close analysis of the spoken data
reveals that the imperfect subjunctive varies with the present subjunctive and the
conditional while in the written data it varies only with the present subjunctive. Despite
variability with the conditional and the present subjunctive, the imperfect subjunctive is
nevertheless used by speakers of Guemesiais.41
2.3 The subjunctive mood in Modern French
The transition from Classical French (17th century) to Modern French was greatly
influenced by the standardization of the language (Lodge 2004). The process of standardization involved the creation of institutions devoted to the French language (such
as the Academie fran^aise) and the proliferation of writings by grammarians,
commentators, and purists who were devoted to the maintenance and preservation of the
language. During the Classical French period, a substantial amount of attention was devoted to the distribution and functions of the subjunctive mood by such writers. In her review of the writings of grammarians and commentators from the Classical French period, Fournier states that variation between moods was less constrained than it is today in both main and subordinate clauses (Fournier 1998:332). In her discussion of variation between the indicative mood and the subjunctive, she notes that many writers attempted to distinguish between the subjunctive and the indicative, such as Maupas's (1607) distinction of the indicative as displayingy'wgewen/ 'judged as truthful' and the
41 The data which Jones' analyses is different from spoken-language corpora in that some data are from written sources. In addition, she does not conduct the same statistical tests which are used in the present study. 91 subjunctive as suspension du jugement 'judged as a lack of truth'. Literary data from this
period also confirms that the subjunctive occurred in a range of contexts: main clauses,
relative clauses, and subordinate clauses.
In Modern French, however, the subjunctive is prescribed in specific contexts and
specific functions. For instance, Grevisse (1964:667) states that the subjunctive is used in
order to express something which has not yet occurred: 'un proces simplement envisage
dans la pensee, un fait que Ton considere comme non existant ou non encore existant'.42
Grevisse adds that the subjunctive, while largely found in embedded clauses following a
subjunctive-selecting verb, is also found in main clauses and in relative clauses. It may be
used as an optative, to indicate a supposition, and to express irrealis. In Le Grand Robert
de la langue franqaise, the subjunctive is defined as involving both volition and doubt:
'mode de la tension psychologique (volonte, sentiment) et de la subjectivite (doute,
incertitude)'43 (Rey 2011).
The use of the subjunctive mood in French has been a heavily debated topic in the
linguistics literature. Some researchers have sought to uncover its functions and meanings
within the grammar (see, for example, Nordahl 1969), and a considerable amount of work
has sought to understand the obviation effects discussed in Section 2.1 (Barbaud 1991,
Farkas 1992, Kempchinsky 2009, Martineau 1995). Work in sociolinguistics, however, has mainly focused on variation in usage between the subjunctive and other moods. For instance, Laurier (1989) is one of the first variationist analyses of the French subjunctive.
42 'A process simply considered in the mind, a fact which we consider as non existent or not yet existing' (my translation). 43 'mood of psychological tension (volition, feeling) and subjectivity (doubt, uncertainty)' (my translation). 92 His analysis of varieties of French spoken in Ontario is based on the Mougeon-Beniak
1978 corpus which is composed of data for high school adolescents (grades 9, 10, and 12) from five communities. His analysis involves contexts for which the standard language requires the presence of the subjunctive (e.g. with falloir 'to be necessary' as a main clause verb), where it is optional, as is the case with relative clauses (as in La seule personne quipuisse/pourrait/peut m'aider 'The only person who could help me', Laurier
1989:112, my translation), and where prescriptive norms do not allow the subjunctive, which he labels hypercorrection (e.g. following esperer 'to hope'). He suggests that contact with English (a language which has almost entirely lost the subjunctive mood) is contributing to the loss of the subjunctive in Franco-Ontarian communities since the subjunctive occurs variably in environments in the corpus where the standard requires categorical usage of the subjunctive. On this basis he suggests that the subjunctive is losing semantic and stylistic functions in Ontario French and that this is due to contact with English.
Auger (1990), in another early variationist study, analyzes the subjunctive in impersonal constructions (e.g. following expressions like ilfaut 'it is necessary' and gase peut que 'it may be that', etc.) in a corpus of adolescents and their parents from two
Quebec City neighbourhoods (Saint-Sauveur and Sainte-Foy). She finds that some contexts admit no variation while others allow variation between moods. Her results show that the subjunctive largely occurs with particular impersonal constructions in the main clause (e.g. ga sepeut 'it might be', c'est mieux que 'it's better that', etc.).
93 Poplack (1992, 1997, 2001) presents variationist analyses of the subjunctive mood
in a corpus of spoken French for five neighbourhoods in the Ottawa-Hull region. Her
analyses consider the linguistic constraints (1992) as well as the social conditioning
(1997) of the variable following main clause verbs (and nonverbal matrices in the case of
Poplack 1997). She defines the variable context differently than Laurier: she does not
consider contexts where the standard language prescriptively requires the subjunctive.
Instead, she first extracts all tokens of the subjunctive and then takes the set of main
clause verbs which precede tokens of the subjunctive as the defining criteria for
determining the variable context. Her results show that the greatest predictor of mood
variation is the main clause verb, the main clause tense, the presence of the
complementizer que 'that',44 and the morphological form and frequency of the embedded
verb. Since the subjunctive-selecting verbs could not be grouped in semantic classes, she
(rather controversially) argues that the subjunctive mood is not only currently devoid of
meaning, but that it was never associated with particular meanings in the history of the
French language. In the same vein, St-Amand (2002) analyzes mood variation following non-verbal matrices in the Ottawa-Hull corpus in and older data (the Recits du fran9ais quebecois d'autrefois corpus) and finds similar results, in that she reports that the selection of the subjunctive is conditioned by particular lexical items (the non-verbal matrices such as mais que 'when' and pour que 'so') rather than semantic factors (irrealis versus realis, based on whether or not the event or state had occurred at the moment of
44 In colloquial French, the complementizer que 'that' may be omitted (cf. King & Nadasdi 2006, Martineau 1988, Sankoff 1980). 94 speech). Thus semantic factors had no effect on the variant choice in studies of mood
variation in Ottawa-Hull French.
In studies of European French, Blanche-Benveniste (1990,2006) argues that the
subjunctive shows no sign of loss and that it can be used with a range of verbal and
nonverbal selectors. She reports that in corpora collected as part of the GARS (Groupe
Aixois de Recherches en Syntaxe) project there were 452 tokens of the subjunctive in 27
hours of recorded speech and that it was used by all speakers in their data. In Blanche-
Benveniste 2006, the author notes that the imperfect subjunctive has been lost from the spoken language, leaving the present subjunctive to express this mood. She reports that
more than 50 subjunctive-selecting matrices (verbal and nonverbal) occur in her
European French data. Therefore, she argues that the subjunctive in European French
remains productive, as opposed to the French of the Ottawa-Hull region, as argued by
Poplack (2001).
Research on varieties of Acadian French reveals a different system. The literature on Acadian French (e.g. Arrighi 2005, Gesner 1979, Peronnet 1990) shows not only that
the present subjunctive is in robust use in many varieties, but also that the imperfect subjunctive is also attested, a tense widely regarded to have been lost from spoken varieties of French. Peronnet (1990) provides a detailed analysis of the morphological system for southeast New Brunswick Acadian French. While she does not provide an in- depth analysis of the subjunctive, she does include the morphological forms for both the present subjunctive and the imperfect subjunctive. Her study provides evidence that both
95 the present and imperfect subjunctive are in use in varieties of New Brunswick Acadian
French.
Gesner's (1979) analysis of eight interviews from Meteghan likewise shows that the subjunctive occurs in the Baie Sainte-Marie variety. He also reports that both the present subjunctive and the imperfect subjunctive are found. While he does not report rates of occurrence of the present subjunctive, he notes 24 tokens of the imperfect subjunctive. He also found four contexts where the imperfect subjunctive did not occur, but where one might expect the subjunctive based on usage in other varieties (following apres que, after a superlative, after pas croire, and after jusqu 'a tant que). All of these, with the exception of pas croire, involve a past temporal reference embedded verb.
Ryan's (1982) analysis of Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French likewise shows that the subjunctive is maintained in this variety.45 While he does not provide rates of use, he does provide examples which attest to the existence of both the present subjunctive and the imperfect subjunctive (though he in fact argues that the latter are examples of the simple past, as we saw above).
A number of other studies attest to the use of the subjunctive in varieties of
Acadian French. Both the present subjunctive and imperfect subjunctive are attested in lie Madame (Julia Hennemann, personal communication), Cheticamp (Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse), and in New Brunswick (Arrighi 2005). Gerin (1982) also describes a variety of contexts in which the subjunctive is found in data from newspapers. Despite
45 Ryan's study is based mainly on the speech of an older female from the village of Riviere-aux-Saumons. He supplements these data with interviews from consultants from other villages in Baie Sainte-Marie. 96 these various attestations, which directly or indirectly make reference to the presence of
the subjunctive, no in-depth analysis of the subjunctive has been performed yet, a gap
that the present study will attempt to fill.
2.4 Conclusion
The literature presented in this section shows that the subjunctive is a heavily-debated
feature of French. The present study contributes to this body of research by providing a
large-scale empirical study of this mood in a conservative variety of Acadian French.
3.1 Quantitative analysis
In the Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French corpora, the subjunctive is largely found in embedded clauses following particular verbal and nonverbal matrices. The focus of the quantitative analysis is on mood variation in these particular contexts. In the Baie Sainte-
Marie corpora, the subjunctive mood varies with the indicative and the conditional moods, as shown in 1-3 from above, repeated here as 11-13.
(11) Je crois point qu' il ait plus que son grades-, 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG.M have.PRES.SBJV.SG more than his grade s-
[...] huh six ou sept huh six or seven 'I don't think he has more than his grade s-, [...] huh. Six or seven.' (Carole, M-298)
(12) But je crois point que c' est passe encore, but 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG be.PRES.LND.SG passed yet 'But I don't think it's passed yet.' (Carole, GC-6)
97 (13) J'aurais point cru qu' elle aurait pu le 1 have.CoND.SG NEG thought that 3.SG.F have.PRES.COND.SG could him
stander, ielle asteure non plus. stand.INF her now no more 'I wouldn't have thought that she could stand him now, her either.' (Zabeth, GC-12)
The following sections describe how the envelope of variation is defined, the linguistic
and social factors which are considered, and the results of the quantitative analyses.
These quantitative analyses will be used to inform the formal analysis. Together they will
provide a complete account of the subjunctive system of Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French.
3.2 The variable context
Determining the potential environments where the subjunctive can actually occur is a much debated issue within the sociolinguistics literature on the French subjunctive. Some
researchers (e.g. Laurier 1989, Neumann-Holzschuh 2005) have used prescriptive sources to determine which environments obligatorily require the subjunctive (such as with falloir) as opposed to considering environments which variably take the subjunctive in the spoken-language corpus (such as with pas croire). Laurier's definition of the variable context is problematic for a number of reasons. Generally, speakers' exposure to the standard is highly variable and the standard may not adequately reflect a speaker's actual usage. This is certainly the case for historically isolated communities such as Baie Sainte-
Marie where exposure to standard French has been minimal. For instance, some consultants for the present study have obtained only a grade six level of education (see
Chapter 3 for a discussion of the social profile of the Baie Sainte-Marie consultants and
98 for a history of education in Baie Sainte-Marie) and would not be expected to follow
prescriptive grammar or, in some cases, even be aware of prescriptive norms regarding
subjunctive usage.
Ultimately, defining the variable context according to prescriptive norms or to
norms external to the community gives an erroneous description of the mood system. In
fact, just such misinterpretations have led researchers to claim that the subjunctive is in
decline. For instance, Laurier's (1989) Ontario French study reports that the subjunctive
is used variably in contexts where prescriptive sources state that it should occur
categorically, and that English-dominant speakers use the subjunctive overall less than
other speakers (French-dominant speakers or balanced bilinguals). He interprets the
variability as an indicator of the decline of the subjunctive and of the loss of its semantic
value. The fact that English largely lacks a productive subjunctive system is argued by
Laurier to contribute to the decline of the subjunctive in Franco-Ontarian French.
However, Restorick (2010) shows that despite the fact that the subjunctive is somewhat
restricted in its use in varieties of Canadian English, it nevertheless remains sociolinguistically constrained. Thus defining the variable context based on the standard
may well provide the erroneous result that the subjunctive is in decline. Laurier's.study
contrasts with Poplack's (1992) who does not define the variable context according to
prescriptive sources. Instead, she first extracts all tokens of the subjunctive and then considers the set of main clause verbs which precede tokens of the subjunctive as the defining criteria for the variable context. Likewise, Poplack does not interpret variation as
99 necessarily indicative of change. For Poplack and other variationists, variation between the subjunctive and the other moods may exemplify inherent variability.
In order to determine the potential contexts where the subjunctive can occur in the
Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, I adopt Poplack's (1992) approach whereby community norms are taken to be the model for the variable context of the subjunctive instead of the standard language. In order to determine all possible contexts where the subjunctive can occur, I first extracted all tokens of the subjunctive from the corpus based on the morphological forms of the verb, following standard variationist practice. In most varieties of French, the only unambiguous subjunctive forms for verbs which end in -er
(e.g. parler 'to speak', manger 'to eat', etc.) are with a first person plural subject or a second person plural subject, shown in 14 and 15 respectively.
(14) Faut j'allions mesurer back 9a. be.necessary.PRES 1 go.PRES.SBJV.PL measure.lNF again that 'We have to go measure that again.' (Aimee, GC-11)
(15) Je dis « Avant que vous alliez a Yarmouth la, 1 said before that 2.PL go.PRES.SBJV.2.PL to Yarmouth there
faut que vous grimpiez la dessus. » is.necessary.PRES that 2.PL grab.PRES.SBJV.2.PL there on 'I said "Before you go to Yarmouth, there, you.have to grab ahold of it.'" (Evelyn, GC-13)
In contrast, tokens with the indicative mood are distinct (i.e. allons and allez). Since the tokens in 14 and 15 are clearly subjunctive, I then categorized both falloir 'to be necessary' and avant que 'before' as matrix elements which may select the subjunctive.
This extraction process enabled me to produce a complete list of the verbs and non-verbal
100 constructions which select the subjunctive at least once in the corpus. This extraction
method also revealed subjunctive-selecting contexts which are not referred to in the
literature, as in the case of next time que 'next time that', as shown in 16.46
(16) Oui, next time je voie [wej]47 Tammy, yes next time 1 see.PRES.SBJV.SG Tammy
faut je m' informe. be.necessary.PRES 1 REFL inquire.PRES.LND?/PRES.SBJV?.SG 'Yes, next time I see Tammy, I have to ask her.' (Carole, GC-21)
For verbs ending in —ir (e.g.Jinir 'to finish', guerir 'to heal', etc.), the subjunctive is distinguished from the indicative by the suffix [is], as shown in 17.
(17) Faut jeme guerisse quelque mode de fa^on. is.necessary.PRES 1 REFL heal.PRES.SBJV.SG some type of way 'I've somehow got to heal myself.' (Sam, GC-36)
The indicative counterpart to 17 does not involve an [s] suffix (i.e.je me gueris 'I'm
healing myself), despite its presence in the standard orthography. For verbs ending in
-re (e.g. vendre 'to sell') or -oir (e.g. boire 'to drink'), the subjunctive form is distinguished by the retention of the final consonant, as shown in 18.
(18) So mais que je sorte [sort] de la, jedoirai rien. so when that 1 leave.PRES.SBJV.SG from there 1 owe.FuT.SG nothing 'So when I leave, I'll owe nothing.' (Francis, M-341)
In contrast with 18, the indicative counterpart does not have the final consonant of the stem pronounced (i.e.je sors de la 'I'm leaving there'). By extracting tokens based on the
46 In the two subjunctive-selecting in 16 (i.e. next time and faut) the complementizer que 'that' is deleted. 47 The present subjunctive of voir 'to see' [wej] is distinct from the present indicative [wa] in this variety (see Nyrop 1967 [1899] for the history of monopthongization of the subjunctive forms in French, which did not occur in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French). 101 morphological form of the verb, I was thus able to establish a list of the matrix clause
elements (verbal and nonverbal) which select the subjunctive in the embedded clause.
Table 4.2 shows the main clause verbs and the main clause non-verbal constructions
which select the subjunctive at least once in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora.
Main clause verb Main clause non-verbal element aimer 'to like' apres que 'after' avoirpeur 'to be afraid' autremis que 'unless' point croire 'to not think' avant que 'before' esperer 'to hope' ga me tente dur que'I can't wait' falloir 'to be necessary' c'est aussi bien que 'it is as well that' guetter 'to wait'48 c 'est le temps que 'it's time that' valoir la peine que 'to be worthwhile' c 'est mieux que 'it's best that' vouloir 'to want' c'est utile que 'it's necessary' . ,49 en tout cas que cin case how about que 'how about' jusqu 'a tant que 'until' mais que 'when' next time que 'next time' pour que 'in order to' pourtant que 'as long as' TABLE 4.2. Subjunctive selectors in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora.
As Table 4.2 shows, the subjunctive only occurs with a small set of main clause verbs and a slightly longer list of nonverbal matrices. Once the list of subjunctive-selecting matrices was determined, I was then able to extract all tokens (be they subjunctive,
48 While guelter has the meaning of'to wait' in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French, in standard French it means 'attendre un evenement que Ton prevoit ou espere' ('to wait for an event that you foresee or hope for', my translation) (Rey 2011). 49 In this variety, en tout cas means the same as standard French an cas ou. 102 indicative, or conditional) which occur in an embedded clause following either a matrix
verb or a nonverbal matrix element shown in Table 4.2.
3.3 Excluded tokens
A common methodological issue in analyses of the subjunctive involves the frequent
occurrence of ambiguous forms. For the class of verbs ending in -er in their infinitival
form, these are homophonous in both the subjunctive and indicative in most varieties of
French, as shown in 19 and 20, for all grammatical subjects except for the first and
second person plural.
(19) Puis la, faut je retourne. and then be.necessary.PRES 1 return.PRES.IND?/PRES.SB;V?.SG 'And then, I have to go back.' (Hector, GC-13)
(20) Mais je t' attraperai avant que tu te but 1 you catch.FuT.l.SG before that 2.SG REFL
couches. go.to.bed.PRES.lND?/PRES.SBJV?.SG 'Well, I'll catch you before you go to bed.' (Patrick, GC-18)
For Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French, like other varieties of Canadian French, this does
not hold for verbs conjugated with a subject of either the first or the second person in the
plural where the subjunctive and the indicative have distinct forms, as shown in 21 and
22.
(21) Well faut j'allions souper then. well be.necessary.PRES 1 go.PRES.SBJV.PL eat.supper.lNF then 'Well, we should go eat supper then.' (Carole, GC-19)
103 (22) Je dis « Avant que vous alliez a Yarmouth la, 1 said before that 2.PL go.PRES.SBJV.2.PL to Yarmouth there
faut que vous grimpiez la dessus. » is.necessary.PRES that 2.PL grab.PRES.SBJV.2.PL there on 'I said "Before you go to Yarmouth, there, you have to grab ahold of it."' (Evelyn, GC-13)
The indicative forms are clearly distinct from the subjunctive ones (e.g. the indicative counterpart to the verb in 21 would be allons and in 22 it would be grimpez) in that is the
[i] of the subjunctive is absent. However, falloir does not admit variation in the Baie
Sainte-Marie corpora (it always selects the subjunctive) and so no equivalent examples could be used to show indicative counterparts. For cases of homophony between these two moods, most researchers choose to exclude tokens of-er verbs which have either a singular subject or a third person plural subject from the analyses, since they are ambiguous with regards to the grammatical mood used. With these tokens, it is impossible to determine whether the subjunctive or the indicative is used. However, in his analysis of the subjunctive in Ontario French, Laurier (1989) includes the ambiguous tokens with the unambiguous tokens of the subjunctive (i.e. they are considered as unambiguously subjunctive tokens). Conversely, Poplack (1992) excludes ambiguous tokens from the analysis since it is impossible to determine whether or not these tokens are in the subjunctive or indicative mood. This decision resulted in the exclusion of approximately half of the potential tokens from the Ottawa-Hull corpus. In the Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French corpora, the situation is improved since the preservation of the traditional -ont ending on third person plural verbs entails that they have distinct forms depending on the mood, as shown in 23 below.
104 (23) Puis si que 9a manque, ils ont point de repairman and if that 3.SG break.down.PRES.SG 3,PL have.PRES.PL NEG of repairman
puis faut qu' ils calliont la compagnie et puis, and be.necessary.PRES that 3.PL call.PRES.SBJV.PL the company and then 'And if it breaks down, they don't have a repairman so they have to call the company and then.' (Evelyn, GC-12)
The token in 23 is shown with the traditional -ont conjugation (calliont) and it is distinct from the indicative form (callont). Due to the rich verbal morphology of this variety (as outlined in Chapter 2), tokens with a third person plural subject are not ambiguous with respect to mood and so these tokens do not have to be excluded. This differs from many other varieties of French, where the traditional third person plural ending -ont has not been preserved, such as varieties of Laurentian French. Therefore, in the Baie Sainte-
Marie data, all plural forms for the class of -er verbs were retained for analysis since they have distinct morphological forms and all singular verbs for this class of verbs were excluded. Thus, I was able to retain a slightly higher proportion of tokens than Poplack
(1992) since roughly 14% of the 629 non-ambiguous tokens are with a third person plural subject. Therefore, only 24% of tokens had to be excluded due to ambiguous forms
(N=195 ambiguous forms out of a total N=824 extracted tokens).
Another methodological issue involves syncretism between forms of the imperfect subjunctive and the simple past in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. Gesner
(1979), along with Flikeid and Peronnet (1989), report homophony between the two in varieties of Acadian French. Ryan (1982b), however, disagrees with Gesner and assumes that the forms of the imperfect subjunctive are examples of the simple past, as we have seen. Homophony between these two has been observed in the history of the language
(cf. Barral 1980) and were attested in France before the Acadian settlement in the New
World, as discussed in Section 2.2. By way of illustration, 24 shows an example of the simple past tense of the verb faire 'to make', while 25 shows an example of the imperfect subjunctive with the same verb.
(24) Moi 9a me fit rien. me 3.SG me make.Sp.lND.SG nothing 'It didn't do anything to me.' (Amelie, GC-27)
(25) lis avont calle pour bailler cinquante piastres a Pierre 3.PL have.PRES.3.PL called in.order.to give.INF fifty dollars to Pierre
pour qu' il fit une smile. in.order.to that 3.SG.M make.lMP.SBJV.SG a smile 'They had called to give fifty dollars so that Pierre would smile.' (Evelyn, GC-27)
While both verbs express past temporal reference, the token in 24 is in the simple past tense, which prior research has shown to occur predominantly in narratives in this variety
(Gesner 1982, Comeau et al. 2013). In addition, the token in 24 is not selected by a subjunctive-selecting matrix clause verb or a nonverbal matrix element, while the token in 25, an imperfect subjunctive, is selected by the subjunctive-selecting construction pour que 'in order to'. Close examination of the surrounding discursive context reveals that the token in 25 is not contained in a narrative. Since previous research has determined that the simple past is by far the narrative tense in this variety, I excluded tokens which occurred in a subjunctive-selecting context and which also occurred in a narrative, as the underlined in 26.
106 (26) knockit a la porte puis 3.SG knock.Sp.LND.SG at the door and
fallait ie pris garde a Marie. was.necessary 1 take.Sp.lND?/lMP.SBJV?.SG care of Marie 'There was a knock at the door and I had to take care of Marie.' (Joanne, GC-11)
The example shown in 26 involves a narrative of personal experience in which the
narrator is telling the story of a vendor who visited homes to sell apples which, in this
particular instance, resulted in frightening both the narrator and her sister. In an analysis of the simple past tense in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French, Comeau, King, and Butler
(2013) adopt Labov and Waletzky's (1967) methodology in coding clauses as either
narrative or non-narrative; the same methodology is used here. Each narrative clause is
identified by structural type: abstract, coda, complicating action, evaluation, or
orientation. The full narrative is reproduced in 27 using the following codes in the left
margin: OR indicates an orientation clause, CA indicates a complicating action clause, and EV indicates an evaluation or coda.
(27) OR Puis moi j'avais peur de eux.
Puis mame et eux etiont partis dans le jardinage.
CA Puis God dinche! £a icitte, knockit a la porte.
OR Puis fallait ie pris garde a Marie,
mais c'etait un petit bebe et moi j'y etais moi itou.
J'etais point grande.
CA Puis je nous fourrirent les deux de nous-autres,
je la halis dans, dans la closet
107 Puis je fermis la porte de la closet.
Puis nous voila les deux a brailler.
OR Moi puis Marie, puis lui icitte voulait savoir si je voulions des pommes
ou quelque affaire.
CA So mame arrivit
puis elle venit nous querir.
EV Oh, je te dis.
Translation:
OR And I was scared of them.
And mom and them were in the garden.
CA And God darn! He knocked at the door.
OR And I was taking care of Marie,
but she was a little baby and so was I.
I wasn't old.
CA And I put both of us,
I pulled her in, in the closet
and I closed the closet door.
And there we were the two of us crying.
OR Me and Marie, and he wanted to know if we wanted apples or something.
CA So mom came
and she came to get us.
EV Oh, I tell you.
108 Since we know the contexts where the simple past occurs (predominantly in narratives)
and we know where the subjunctive occurs (following subjunctive-selecting matrices), it
is only at the intersection of these two contexts where there is ambiguity. That is, it is
only for verbs which occur both in a past tense subjunctive-selecting context and in a
narrative which are ambiguous and must be excluded for this reason. As such, the token
underlined in 27 was excluded.50
3.4 Overall results for the subjunctive mood in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French
The results for mood variation are presented below followed by a detailed analysis of the
mood following each verbal or nonverbal matrix element. Tokens for each village
(Grosses Coques and Meteghan) were initially analyzed separately. However, since they
pattern similarly, the data for both villages are combined. The results for tokens
following a matrix verb are presented below followed by the results following nonverbal
matrices.
Table 4.3 presents the rate of subjunctive per matrix verb for the Grosses Coques
data.
50 Note, though, that while orientation clauses favour the simple past in this variety, they do not favour it as strongly as complicating action clauses (Comeau et al. 2013). Even so, a favouring environment for the simple past makes this token ambiguous. 109 Matrix Verb N= % Subjunctive aimer 'to like' 10 100 avoir peur 'to be afraid' 1 100 point croire 'to not think' 13 62 esperer 'to hope' 4 100 falloir 'to be necessary' 213 100 guetter 'to wait' 3 100 vouloir 'to want' 23 100 Total N= 267 TABLE 4.3. Rate of subjunctive per matrix verb for Grosses Coques.
As these results show, the subjunctive occurs categorically for almost all matrix verbs; point croire is the exception as it occurs with the subjunctive at a rate of only 62%.
Table 4.4 presents the results for tokens following matrix verbs for the Meteghan corpus.
Matrix Verb N= % Subjunctive aimer 'to like' 1 100
avoir peur 'to be afraid' 0 - point croire 'to not think' 2 0
esperer 'to hope' 0 - falloir 'be necessary' 36 100 guetter 'to wait' 1 100 vouloir 'to want' 3 100 Total N= 43 TABLE 4.4. Rate of subjunctive per matrix verb : or Meteghan.
As Table 4.4 shows, the matrix verbs which select the subjunctive are similar to those found for Grosses Coques with the exception of esperer and point croire, though I interpret this difference to result from the fact that the sample size for Meteghan was much smaller than for Grosses Coques (267 tokens for Grosses Coques vs. 43 tokens for
Meteghan). Likewise, there was no matrix verb which selects the subjunctive in the
Meteghan data that did not select the subjunctive in the Grosses Coques data. Thus, the
110 data for both Baie Sainte-Marie villages are combined into one data set, as shown in
Table 4.5.
Matrix Verb N= % Subjunctive aimer 'to like' 11 100 avoir peur 'to be afraid' 1 100 point croire 'to not think' 15 53 esperer 'to hope' 4 100 falloir 'be necessary' 249 100 guetter 'to wait' 4 100 vouloir 'to want' 26 100 Total N= 310 TABLE 4.5. Rate of subjunctive per matrix verb for the Baie Sainte-Marie data (both Grosses Coques and Meteghan).
The combined results in Table 4.5 show that the only matrix verb which allows variation
is point croire, while the remaining matrix verbs categorically select the subjunctive. This
finding contrasts with findings from studies of other varieties of French which have
variability with different matrix verbs. For example, Poplack (1992) reports that in
Ottawa-Hull French, the subjunctive occurs with falloir at a rate of 89%. Laurier (1989)
likewise reports that the subjunctive occurs with falloir at a rate of 81% in Ontario
French. The Baie Sainte-Marie data, as in other data sets, involves many instances of the
lexical verb falloir. In fact, it accounts for 81% of all matrix verbs in the Baie Sainte-
Marie data set. If we expected to see variation with a matrix verb, we might have
expected that even a few tokens with the highly frequent matrix verb falloir would have
been in the indicative, but this is not the case. Rather, it is only tokens with point croire
which display variability.
Variability with croire has been noted by grammarians. For instance, Grevisse
(1964) states that when croire is used negatively, it may take either the subjunctive or the 111 indicative based on whether the speaker wants to emphasize the reality of the action
denoted by the verb (indicative) or not (subjunctive). If the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-
Marie Acadian French does involve a semantic value, we might expect less variability
than if it were not semantically motivated (i.e. if it was simply a morphological marker of
subordination). Poplack (1992), for instance, argues that the subjunctive in Ottawa-Hull
French is not related to any semantic feature. Furthermore, she argues that the
subjunctive historically never had a semantic value and that it alternated with other
moods simply due to inherent variability, though her analysis focuses mainly on synchronic data from the Ottawa-Hull region. The Baie Sainte-Marie data, therefore,
provide a counterargument to the claim that inherent variability in mood choice is a
historical precursor to current varieties who are perhaps less conservative than the Baie
Sainte-Marie one (e.g. Ottawa-Hull French). The lack of variability in the Baie Sainte-
Marie variety suggests that variability in other varieties is likely a recent development.51
Following a discussion of the overall rate of the subjunctive following a nonverbal matrix element, a closer analysis for each matrix verb will be provided.
Table 4.6 provides rates of subjunctive following particular nonverbal matrices in the Grosses Coques data.
51 The other logical possibility would be that subjunctive usage has become near-categorical in the Baie Sainte-Marie variety. The first hypothesis is more attractive since, as we saw in Chapter 2, this variety clearly preserves older usage. 112 Nonverbal Matrices N= % Subjunctive apres que 'after' 31 10 avant que 'before' 21 71 jusqu 'a tant que 'until' 8 88 mais que 'when' 59 98 pour que 'in order to' 11 100 infrequent (<3 tokens) 18 94 Total N= 148 TABLE 4.6. Rate of subjunctive per nonverbal matrix for Grosses Coques.
As Table 4.6 shows, the subjunctive is more variable following nonverbal matrices than
with verbal matrices. The only context where there is no variability is with pour que 'in
order to', which selects the subjunctive at a rate of 100%. The other nonverbal matrices,
with the exception of apres que 'after', also have high rates of the subjunctive (between
71% and 98%).
Table 4.7 shows rates of subjunctive per nonverbal matrix for the Meteghan data.
Nonverbal Matrices N= % Subjunctive apres que 'after' 15 11 avant que 'before' 9 67 jusqu 'a tant que 'until' 9 22 mais que 'when' 4 50 infrequent (<3 tokens) 0 - pour que 'in order to' 2 100 Total N= 39 TABLE 4.7. Rate of subjunctive per nonverbal matrix for Meteghan.
The set of nonverbal matrices which select the subjunctive in Meteghan is identical to the list for Grosses Coques with the exception of the infrequent selectors, which are not found in the Meteghan data. However, due to the substantially smaller sample for
Meteghan (N=39), this is perhaps not an unexpected finding. The rates for subjunctive
113 usage are much lower than in Grosses Coques, however, the smaller sample size might
account for these quantitative differences. A similarity is that there is a considerably
lower rate of the subjunctive for apres que, as was found for Grosses Coques, despite the
fact that this was the most frequent nonverbal matrix (N=15). Due to the small sample
size for the Meteghan data, I have combined the data for both villages, shown in Table
4.8.
Nonverbal Matrices N= % Subjunctive apres que 'after' 46 10 avant que 'before' 30 67 jusqu 'a tant que 'until' 17 50 mais que 'when' 63 95 pour que 'in order to' 13 100 infrequent (<3 tokens) 18 94 Total N= 187 TABLE 4.8. Rate of subjunctive per nonverbal matrix br Baie Sainte-Marie (both Grosses Coques and Meteghan).
When the data for both villages are combined, the only context which does not have variability is with pour que. In fact, pour que is the only nonverbal matrix which is not temporal in nature among the more frequent nonverbal matrices. In addition, most nonverbal matrices select the subjunctive at rates at or above 50% with the exception of apres que. Following a close analysis of each verbal matrix, I present an analysis of
mood variability following each nonverbal matrix.
3.5 Mood variability with verbal matrices
This section presents analyses of the subjunctive mood with each verbal matrices. The data examined in this section include tokens of all forms of the subjunctive (i.e. the present subjunctive, the imperfect subjunctive, and the past subjunctive).
114 3.5.1 Aimer
Aimer 'to like' is a verb which selects the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French, as shown in 28.
(28) Euh non, elle aimerait qu' il movit. uh no 3.SG.F like.COND.SG that 3.SG.M move.lMP.SBJV.SG 'Uh no, she'd like for him to move.' (Evelyn, GC-27)
28 shows that aimer conjugated in the conditional selects, in this case, the imperfect subjunctive, despite the fact that the imperfect subjunctive does not have past temporal reference. Likewise, the embedded clause verb is of English origin, that is, mover 'to move'. It should be noted that the use of the imperfect subjunctive with a verb of English origin is an important indicator of its productivity.
Historically, aimer has been observed by grammarians to be a subjunctive- selecting verb. Fournier (1998) provides early attestations of aimer with the subjunctive;
29 is an example from de La Rochefoucauld's Maximes etpensees diverses (1665, my translation).
(29) J'aime qu' elle soit serieuse, 1 like.PRES.SG that 3.SG.F be.PRES.SBJV.SG serious.F
et que la morale en fasse la plus grande partie. and that the morality some make.PRES.SBJV.SG the most big part 'I like for it [the conversation] to be serious and for morality to be the largest proportion of it.'
Evidence such as 29 shows that aimer historically selected the subjunctive, which continues to do so in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
115 In contemporary studies, Gesner (1979) found one token of the subjunctive with aimer in his Meteghan data. Poplack (1992) likewise reports its use with the subjunctive in Ottawa-Hull French at a rate of 67%. She reports that aimer, along with vouloir 'to want', are the two most frequent subjunctive-selecting matrices afterfalloir. In his study of Ontario French, Laurier (1989) also reports that aimer selects the subjunctive, and he reports that it occurs less frequently than il faut que, vouloir, and pour que.
In the Baie Sainte-Marie corpus, aimer selects the subjunctive at a rate of 100%
(N=l 1). Clearly, eleven tokens is a small number to analyze. However, there are discernible patterns in the data. Aimer forms part of the list of volitive verbs and as such selects the subjunctive in the embedded clause. All but two tokens of aimer which select a CP complement are in the conditional. Table 4.9 shows that most tokens (N=9) with aimer select the imperfect subjunctive in the Baie Sainte-Marie data.
Main Clause Tense Conditional Imperfect Past Conditional Embedded Verb Tense Total N= Imperfect Subjunctive 9 1 0 10 Past Subjunctive 0 0 1 1 Total N= 9 1 1 TABLE 4.9. Tenses for aimer and embedded verbs.
One token involves aimer in the imperfect and this yields the imperfect subjunctive on the embedded verb. Also, a past conditional conjugation of aimer triggers the past subjunctive on the embedded verb, as shown in 30.
116 (30) Maisj'aurais aimequetu aies ete icitte but 1 have.COND.SG liked that 2.SG have.PsT.SBJV.SG been here
F annee passee. the year past 'But I would have liked that you had been here last year.' (Eric, GC-23)
The high rate of occurrence of the conditional with the subjunctive is perhaps unsurprising as the conditional is also part of the domain of irrealis. However, the two tokens of past tense forms of aimer (either past conditional and imperfect) also allow for the subjunctive to surface due to the fact that this verb can take on a volitive meaning. It used to express a wish or a preference and this use seems largely confined to aimer in the conditional.
3.5.2 Avoir peur
There is only one token of avoir peur 'to be afraid' and it selects the subjunctive, as shown in 31.
(31) D'une fa?on j'aimerais point d'y aller parce of a way 1 like.CoND.SG NEG to PART go.lNF because
j' ai peurqu'elle dise qu' il va 1 have.PRES.SG fear that 3.SG.F say.PRES.SBJV.SG that 3.SG go.PRES.SG
avoir du mort dans la famille have.lNF some death in the family 'In some sense, I wouldn't like to go because I'm scared she will say there will be a death in the family.' (Sam, GC-36)
A related verb, craindre 'to be afraid', is mentioned by Fournier as selecting the subjunctive in Corneille's (1970 [1674]) Surena, shown in 32 (as cited by Fournier
1998:347, my translation).
117 (32) Je crains qu' elle n' ait pas ce que plus je 1 fear.PRES.SG that 3.SG.F NEG have.PRES.SBJV.SG NEG this that more 1
souhaite. wish.PRES.SG 'I fear that she has no more than what I wish.'
While craindre does not occur in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, the use of a similar expression, avoir peur, expresses the same meaning and thus selects the subjunctive in this variety.
3.5.3 Esperer
Another verb which forms part of the class of volitives and which selects the subjunctive in the Baie Sainte-Marie data is esperer 'to hope', as shown in 33.
(33) J'esp£re j'en aie.52 1 hope.PRES.SG 1 some have.PRES.SBJV.SG 'I hope I'll have some.' (Hector, GC-13)
The example in 33 shows that esperer functions as a verb of volition and the subjunctive occurs in the embedded clause.
Historically, esperer selected the subjunctive, but in most varieties of Modern
French, it no longer occurs with this mood (Cohen 1965). An early example of the subjunctive with esperer is found in La princesse de Cleves (de La Fayette 1678, cited by
Fournier 1998), shown in 34 (my translation).
52 The present subjunctive form of avoir (que j 'aie fcej]), is distinct from the present perfect (/''ai [3c]) in this variety. 118 (34) Comment pouviez -vous esperer que je conservasse how can.lMP.2.PL 2.PL hope.LNF that 1 conserve.lMP.SBJV.SG
de la raison? some the reason 'How could you hope that I maintain reason?'
In studies of Acadian French, there is only one source which explicitly mentions esperer as selecting the subjunctive; it is found in data for New Brunswick collected by
Wiesmath, as shown in 35 (Wiesmath 2006).
(35) esp£rons pas que les autres vienniont hope.PRES.PL NEG that the others come.PRES.SBJV.PL 'Let's not hope that the others come.' (NB, RW - 10, XI59, my translation)
Beyond varieties of Acadian French, Poplack (1992) reports that esperer occurs with the subjunctive at a rate of 21% in Ottawa-Hull French. Laurier (1989) also mentions the use of the subjunctive with esperer although he does not provide quantitative information for this verbal matrix.
In the Baie Sainte-Marie data, esperer occurs with the subjunctive at a rate of
100%. However, as with other volitive verbs with the exception offalloir, it is quite infrequent. There are only four tokens of esperer, all of which are present tense, and the embedded verb is always in the present subjunctive.
3.5.4 Falloir
Among the matrix clause verbs which select the subjunctive in the embedded clause, falloir 'to be necessary' is generally regarded as the matrix verb par excellence which
119 selects the subjunctive. 36 shows an example offalloir with the subjunctive in the Baie
Sainte-Marie data.
(36) Faut que tu seyes bilingue.53 be.necessary.PRES that 2.SG be.PRES.SBJV.SG bilingual 'You have to be bilingual.' (Veronique, M-296)
Falloir selects the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French and it historically selected the subjunctive. Fournier (1998) provides historical evidence from the 17th century which shows that falloir selected the subjunctive in earlier stages of the language, as shown in 37-38.
(37) II faut que tout perisse, ou que 3 be.necessary.PRES that all perish.PRES.SBJV.SG or that
je sois heureux. 1 be.PRES.SBJV.SG happy 'All must perish or else I must be happy.' (Racine 1665, my translation)
(38) II faudrait que je fusse dans un etat 3 be.necessary.CoND that 1 be.lMP.SBJV.SG in a state
plus heureux pour vous 1' oser dire. more happy than 2.PL it dare.lNF say.lNF 'I should be in a happier mood in order for me to dare say it to you.' (de La Fayette 1678, my translation)
Along with these two literary sources, Fournier also cites Maupas (1607), who lists falloir among the verbs which selects the subjunctive.
Research on contemporary varieties of French likewise note a strong association between falloir and the subjunctive. In Acadian French, falloir has been reported to select
53 It is common for the matrix subject offalloir, expletive il 'it', to be omitted in colloquial French. Note as well that seyes [sej] is a vernacular pronuncication of sois [swa]. 120 the subjunctive in numerous studies (Arrighi 2005, Gesner 1979, Peronnet 1990, Ryan
1982b, Ryan 1985, Wiesmath 2006). For Laurentian varieties, quantitative studies report
that falloir is the most frequent matrix verb to select the subjunctive. Poplack (1992)
analyzes falloir separately in her data due to its high rate of occurrence, since its
inclusion with other matrix verbs would skew the quantitative results. She reports that the
subjunctive is used with falloir at a rate of 89% in Ottawa-Hull French. Due to the high
rate of subjunctive usage with this verb, she sets out to account for when the subjunctive
does not occur with falloir (i.e. to account for the remaining 11% tokens). She finds three
linguistic factors which account for the non-subjunctive tokens, the most important of
which is the tense of the matrix verb. When the matrix verb is in the conditional, the
subjunctive has a factor weight of .10 (the only context which disfavours the
subjunctive). She reports a high rate of concordance with the conditional (93% of matrix
conditionals are followed by a conditional). The second strongest constraint, the presence
of intervening material between the matrix verb and the embedded verb, reduces the strength offalloir to select the subjunctive in the embedded clause. This finding is
interpreted as evidence of the relation between the matrix lexical verb and the embedded
verb in that particular matrix verbs select the subjunctive mood. Finally, Poplack argues
that the morphological form of the embedded verb also plays a role: regular
morphological verb forms are more likely to occur with moods other than the subjunctive
than suppletive verb forms in the Ottawa-Hull corpus. She argues that this morphological effect is due to frequency effects (i.e. suppletive verb forms, like etre, are highly frequent). Poplack concludes that the falloir facts are reflective of the inherent variability
121 of the subjunctive in French throughout its history. Laurier (1989) likewise reports high
rates of the subjunctive with falloir in the Ontario French corpus he studied. He reports
that in his corpus il faut que (present tense falloir) is the most frequent matrix element which selects the subjunctive.
In the Baie Sainte-Marie data, the subjunctive occurs with falloir at a rate of
100%, as noted above. Likewise, it is by far the most frequent subjunctive selector in
Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French as it accounts for 85% of the verbal data. The subjunctive occurs with falloir regardless of the matrix verb tense (conditional, imperfect, simple past, present). However, the various forms of the subjunctive (present, imperfect, past) are largely constrained by the matrix verb tense, as shown in Table 4.10. There is a tendency for the present subjunctive to occur with present tense falloir, while the past subjunctive occurs more frequently when falloir is in the conditional. The imperfect subjunctive is more likely to occur when falloir is conjugated in the imperfect and may also occur when it is in the conditional. The association of the imperfect subjunctive with the conditional in the Baie Sainte-Marie data may shed light on the differences between the variety under study and Ottawa-Hull French. Poplack (1992) found matrix verb tense to be the strongest conditioning factor group for use of the subjunctive with falloir. The only matrix verb tense which disfavoured the subjunctive was the conditional; all other matrix verb tenses favoured the subjunctive for the falloir tokens. Thus, the loss of the imperfect subjunctive in Laurentian varieties may have resulted in a system whereby the conditional strongly disfavours the subjunctive. In contrast, the data for the Baie Sainte-
Marie variety, which has not lost the imperfect subjunctive, shows that tokens offalloir 122 in the conditional are most likely to be followed by the imperfect subjunctive and the past
subjunctive. The strong association between the imperfect subjunctive and the
conditional suggests that the loss of the imperfect subjunctive in Ottawa-Hull French may
have created an environment for other moods to occur with falloir.
Main clause tense Present Simple Imperfect Conditional tense Past Embedded Verb Tense Total N= Imperfect Subjunctive 61 21 0 1 83 Past Subjunctive 5 11 1 4 21 Present Subjunctive 3 9 132 0 144 Total N= 69 41 133 5 TABLE A .10. Tenses for falloir and embedded verbs.
Table 4.10 reveals that for the most frequent matrix verb, falloir, there is tense
concordance, with the presence of a present matrix verb likely to result in a present tense
embedded verb. An imperfect matrix verb is likely to result in the imperfect subjunctive.
On the other hand, a conditional matrix verb is likely to result in the imperfect
subjunctive and, to a lesser degree, the past subjunctive.
In addition to instances offalloir as a conjugated verb, a fixed expression (derived
from falloir) deserves mention. The expression le faut que 'it must be that' never selects
the subjunctive, as shown in 39, where the consultant Carole asserts that she is not
pregnant because she does not like dill pickles.
(39) Bien,jedis «Le faut que j' y suis point parce j' well 1 say.Sp.LND.Sc it must.be that 1 PART be.PRES.LND.SG NEG because 1
aime point 9a ». Jike.PRES.SG NEG that 'Well, it must be that I'm not [pregnant], because I don't like that.' (Carole, GC-21) 123 Since le faut que never selects the subjunctive, it was not included as part of the variable
context.54
3.5.5 Guetter
Another matrix verb which selects the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie is guetter 'to
wait', as shown in 40.
(40) Moijevas guetter qu' ils veniont icitte. me 1 go.PRES.SG wait.lNF that 3.PL come.PRES.SBJV.PL here 'Me, I'm going to wait for them to arrive.' (Eric, GC-23)
This particular use of guetter is a vernacular form, as it has a slightly different meaning
than in standard French. According to Le Grand Robert de la langue franqaise (Rey
2011), a current meaning of guetter is 'attendre avec impatience' ('to wait impatiently').
This definition differs slightly from Baie Sainte-Marie usage, which has the more
generalized definition of simply 'to wait'. The loss of the 'with impatience' meaning
allows guetter is synonymous with attendre, which is unattested in the Baie Sainte-Marie
corpus and is a more formal lexical variant than guetter in this variety.
While no sources which I have consulted specifically mention guetter as a subjunctive-selector, I did, however, find reference to the verb attendre, which
historically has selected the subjunctive, as shown in 41, in Le Grand Robert.
54 To my knowledge, le faut que is unattested in other varieties of French. 124 (41) Nous attendons qu' il revienne pour 1 .Pl wait.PRES. 1.Pl that 3.SG.M come.back.PRES.SBJV in.order.to
nous en aller. I.PL PART go.lNF 'We're waiting for him to come back so we can leave.' (Rey 2011, my translation)
There is also diachronic evidence which suggests that attendre selected the subjunctive in earlier stages of the language, such as in Old French, as shown in 42, from Le roman de
Renart (cited in Jensen 1974, my translation).
(42) Chascun atent qu' il soit vengiez. each wait that 3.SG.M be.PRES.SBJV.SG avenged 'Each waits to be avenged.'
Since attendre is historically a subjunctive-selecting verb, the change in meaning of guetter in Baie Sainte-Marie may well have allowed it to become a subjunctive-selecting verb as well.
In the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, there are four tokens of guetter and they all select the subjunctive. Two tokens are conjugated in the imperfect and these trigger the imperfect subjunctive. The remaining two tokens are in the present tense and these trigger the present subjunctive.
3.5.6 Point croire
Point croire is another matrix verb which selects the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French as shown in 43.
(43) Je crois point que ?a seye grave. 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG be.PRES.SBJV.SG serious 'I don't think it's serious.' (Carole, GC-11)
125 While 43 shows croire with the negator point, it can also occur with pas, the less frequent variant, as shown in 44.
(44) Ohjecrois pas j'y alle aujourd'hui. oh 1 think.PRES.SG NEG 1 PART go.PRES.SBJV.SG today 'Oh, I don't think I'm going to go today.' (Elze, GC-18)
Unlike other matrix verbs, point croire is not a volitive verb, rather it is a negated verb of opinion expressing doubt. Doubt, or dubitative, is one of the two original functions of the subjunctives in Latin along with the optative mood (volition).
Point croire has also been observed to select the subjunctive in Classical French.
Early grammarians such as Maupas (1607) cite it as a context which selects the subjunctive. De Vaugelas, Corneille, and Patru (1687) also provides examples whereby negated croire selects the subjunctive, as shown in 45, while affirmative croire selects the indicative, as shown in 46 (both my translation).
(45) je ne croi pas que personne puisse dire. 1 NEG think.PRES.SG not that nobody can.PRES.SBJV.SG say.lNF 'I don't think that anyone can say.'
(46) je croi que tu ne peux m' accuser 1 think.PRES.SG that 2.SG NEG can.PRES.LND.SG me accuse.LNF 'I think that you can not accuse me.'
Such attestations suggest that negated croire selected the subjunctive at least as far back as the Classical French period.
In Acadian varieties, Ryan (1982b) finds that point croire selects the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French as does Gesner (1979), although no rates of occurrence are given for this matrix verb. Pas croire is also reported to select the
126 subjunctive in Cajun French (Papen & Rottet 1997). Work on Laurentian varieties likewise report that pas croire can select the subjunctive. Poplack (1992) reports that it occurs with the subjunctive at the fairly low rate of 13%. Laurier (1989), however, does not provide quantitative information on this matrix verb, but he does provide examples which involve pas croire with the subjunctive, providing further evidence that it selects the subjunctive in Ontario French. In the 2005 corpus of Ontario French (Mougeon et al.
2005), pas penser is the more typical way of expressing doubt and while it does occur with the subjunctive, more often than not it occurs with the conditional or the periphrastic future (Raymond Mougeon, p.c.).
In the Baie Sainte-Marie data, though, point croire is the only matrix verb which variably selects the subjunctive. Table 4.5, shown above, reports that out of the 15 tokens which occur with point croire, only 53% occur with the subjunctive. There were, however, more than 15 tokens of point croire in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, but these were determined to not be part of the variable context. Table 4.11 shows all tokens of point croire which were extracted from the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora.
127 Main Clause Tense Present Imperfect Past Conditional Embedded Verb Tense Present Subjunctive 7 Past Subjunctive 0 Imperfect Subjunctive 1 Periphrastic Future 2 Present Indicative 2 Present Conditional 1 Past Conditional 1 Imperfect Indicative 1 4 Present Perfect 3 Total N= 17 4 1 TABLE 4.11. Tense for point croire tokens in the Baie Sainte-Marie data (both Grosses Coques and Meteghan).
Table 4.11 shows that it is only when point croire is conjugated in the present tense that
the subjunctive occurs. Therefore, tokens with point croire conjugated in something other
than the present tense do not form part of the variable context and are thus excluded. The
subjunctive forms vary with the present indicative, the conditional, the imperfect
indicative, and the present perfect. The formal analysis presented below will provide an
account of the variability.
3.5.7 Valoir la peine
There is one token of valoir la peine 'to be worthwhile' and it selects the subjunctive, as
shown in 47.
(47) Bien 9a vaut pas la peine qu' ils y alliont. well 3.SG be.worth.PRES.SGNEG the effort that 3.PL PART go.PRES.SBJV.PL 'Well, it's not worthwhile that they go.' (Amelie, GC-27)
Jensen (1974) notes that valoir followed by an adjective requires the subjunctive, though
he provides no example. Other studies of Acadian French or Laurentian varieties do not
128 mention its use, likely due to the fact that expressions with valoir select an infinitive in
Laurentian varieties (Raymond Mougeon, p.c.)
3.5.8 Vouloir
Vouloir 'to want' is another verb of volition which selects the subjunctive in the Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian data, as shown in 48.
(48) Tu veux point qu' il s' en vienne. 2.SG want.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG.M REFL PART come.PRES.SBJV.SG 'You don't want him to come back.' (Joanne, GC-11)
Historically, grammarians cite vouloir as a subjunctive-selecting verb. For instance,
Maupas (1607) includes it along with other verbs of volition, permission, and necessity, such as desirer 'to desire', souhaiter 'to wish', etc. As a verb of volition, it is part of the class of verbs which historically have been considered as a subjunctive-selecting context.
Research on contemporary varieties of French likewise note the presence of vouloir as a subjunctive-selecting matrix verb. In Acadian varieties, vouloir has been reported to select the subjunctive in varieties spoken in lie Madame, Nova Scotia (Julia
Hennemann, p.c.), in New Brunswick varieties (Arrighi 2005), and in Cajun French
(Papen & Rottet 1997). In his Laurentian corpus, Laurier (1989) reports that he found more than 16 tokens of vouloir, the second-most frequent matrix verb following falloir in his study of Ontario French. Poplack's (1992) study of Ottawa-Hull French reports that the subjunctive occurs with vouloir at a rate of 91%. These studies thus confirm that vouloir is firmly established as a subjunctive-selecting verb of volition across varieties of
French.
129 In Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French, vouloir selects the subjunctive at a rate of
100% (N=26). Both the present subjunctive and the imperfect subjunctive are found following vouloir, although the tense depends on the matrix tense, as shown in Table
4.12.
Main Clause Tense Present Imperfect Simple Past Embedded Verb Tense Imperfect Subjunctive 0 12 1 Present Subjunctive 12 0 Total N= 12 12 1 TABLE 4.12. Tenses for vouloir and embedded verbs.
As Table 4.12 shows, tense concordance is in effect. When vouloir is in the present tense, the embedded verb will be in the present subjunctive. When vouloir is in the imperfect or in the simple past, the embedded verb will be in the imperfect subjunctive.
3.6 Mood variability with nonverbal matrices
This section will present analyses of mood variation with nonverbal matrices. As in the previous section, tokens of all forms of the subjunctive (i.e. the present subjunctive, the imperfect subjunctive, and the past subjunctive) are included.
3.6.1 Apres que
Apres que 'after' is a nonverbal matrix construction which occurs with the subjunctive in
Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. Table 4.8 above shows that out of all nonverbal matrices, apres que selects the subjunctive the least frequently, at an overall rate of 10%
(N=46). 49 shows an example of the subjunctive with apres que.
130 (49) Jevoulons aller en Europe apres j'ayons gradue 1 want.PRES.PL go.lNF to Europe after 1 have.PRES.SBJV.PL graduated
et apresj' ayons fait un petit d'argent. and after 1 have.PRES.SBJV.PL made a little of money 'We want to go to Europe after we graduate and after we make a little money.' (Trina, M-295)
As 49 shows, the use of apres que (in this example que is absent in both tokens) involves
an event with future temporal reference.
Apres que is a heavily debated context in the literature on the French subjunctive.
Some regard use of the subjunctive with apres que to be a recent innovation, modelled on avant que, a well-established subjunctive-selecting context to be discussed in the following section. For instance, Rigaud (1970) suggests that apres que developed as a subjunctive-selecting context by analogy with avant que only since World War I in
European French. Despite this claim, there are in fact earlier attestations of the subjunctive with apres que. For instance, Fournier (1998) cites Richelet (1973 [1680]), who mentions that both the indicative and the subjunctive can occur with apres que.
Despite this early attestation, its association with the subjunctive may not in fact be much older than the Classical French period since Jensen (1974) reports that he finds no examples of the subjunctive with apres que in his Old French data. In a confirmation of
Richelet's findings, Haase (1965 [1898]) notes that the subjunctive could occur with apres que in Classical French. Le Bidois and Le Bidois (1967) suggest the use of the subjunctive with apres que is as an exception rather than a norm.
In Acadian varieties, Gesner (1979) reports that the subjunctive is not used following apres que in his Meteghan data (however, it must be noted that he only had four tokens). In St-Amand's (2002) study of Laurentian French, she reports that the
subjunctive does not occur with this expression in Ottawa-Hull French (N=90), but that it
does occur in her older data (in Recits du franfais quebecois d'autrefois corpus) at a rate
of 2% (N=202). Laurier (1989) notes that in his Ontario French data, he finds one token
of the subjunctive with apres que, though he does not provide a total number of tokens of
apres que for comparison.
In the Baie Sainte-Marie data, apres que is the context which has the lowest rate
of subjunctive as compared with any other nonverbal matrix or matrix verb: 11% (N=46).
Three out of the five subjunctive tokens are in the past. Table 4.13 shows that most
tokens following apres que are in the past tense in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora.
Embedded Verb Tense N= Imperfect Subjunctive 2 Present Subjunctive 3 Imperfect Indicative 4 Pluperfect Indicative 9 Present Indicative 6 Present Perfect 22 Total N= 46 TABLE 4.13. Tenses for tokens following apres que.
As Table 4.13 shows, the tokens in the past tense account for 87% of all tokens with apres que. As other nonverbal temporal matrices have a tense constraint (discussed in
Section 4), the fact that most tokens occurring with apres que are in the past may account
for the low rate of the subjunctive.55
5S Grevisse (1964) provides contemporary data from journalists and politicians in which apres que occurs with the subjunctive. All of these examples are with a past tense verb. I thank Raymond Mougeon for pointing this out. 132 3.6.2 Avant que
Another nonverbal matrix construction which selects the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-
Marie is avant que 'before', as shown in 50.
(50) As -tu de quoi a dire avant je faisions cte partie icitte? have 2.SG some thing to say.LNF before 1 make.PRES.SBJV.PL this part here 'Do you have something to say before we do this part?' (Tina, M-298)
Historically, avant que is a subjunctive-selecting context. Jensen (1974) states that it appears late in the Old French period and that it occurs with both indicative and subjunctive moods, although tokens in the indicative are in the past. Fournier (1998) also provides evidence that avant que occurred with the subjunctive in Classical French in the form of an excerpt from Racine's Bajazet (1802 [1672], my translation).
(51) Avant qu' un fils, naissant eut rassure 1' etat before that a son born have.IMP.SBJV reassured the state 'Before a son, born had reassured the state.'
Both Richelet (1973 [1680]) and Haase (1965 [1898]) report that avant que selects the subjunctive in Classical French.
In Modern French, avant que remains a subjunctive-selecting context. Le Bidois and Le Bidois (1967) argue that it marks anteriority and that it selects the subjunctive as well. It is attested in a number of recent studies of North American varieties of French.
For instance, it is mentioned as selecting the subjunctive in New Brunswick (Arrighi
2005, Peronnet 1990, Wiesmath 2006), Prince Edward Island (Ruth King, p.c.), Nova
Scotia, specifically lie Madame (Julia Hennemann, p.c.), and Cajun French (Rottet 2001).
As for Laurentian varieties, St-Amand (2002) reports that in the Recits du fran9ais quebecois d'autrefois data, avant que occurs with the subjunctive at a rate of 27%
(N=33), while in the more recent data for Vieux-Hull (part of the 1982 Ottawa-Hull corpus), the subjunctive occurs with avant que at a rate of 87% (N=31). These studies confirm the use of the subjunctive with avant que in contemporary varieties of French.
In the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, avant que occurs with the subjunctive at a rate of 67% (N=30). Despite this high rate, there is clearly a tense constraint in effect in that indicative forms only occur with a past tense, as shown in Table 4.14.
Embedded Verb Tense N= Imperfect Subjunctive 1 Past Subjunctive 9 Present Subjunctive 10 Imperfect Indicative 1 Pluperfect Indicative 2 Present Perfect 7 Total N= 30 TABLE 4.14. Tenses for tokens following avant que.
As Table 4.14 shows, all present tense tokens are in the subjunctive while there are both subjunctive and indicative tokens for past tense tokens. Half of these tokens are in the subjunctive while half are in the indicative. This tense distinction suggests that variation between moods is only possible in a past temporal context.
3.6.3 Jusqu'a tant que
Another temporal nonverbal matrix construction which selects the subjunctive in Baie
Sainte-Marie is jusqu 'a tant que 'until' as shown in 52.
134 (52) Mais faudrait je guette but be.necessary.COND 1 wait.PRES.lND?/PRES.SBJV?.SG
jusqu'& tant qu' il ait une place. until that 3.SG have.PRES.SBJV.SG a place 'Well, 1 will have to wait until there's a place.' (Hector, GC-13)
Historically, jusqu 'a tant que is argued to have occurred with either the subjunctive or the indicative. Jensen (1974) notes that the history of jusqu'a tant que is in fact a combination of jusque 'until, up to' and tant que 'until'. It is likewise mentioned by
Fournier (1998) as a subjunctive-selecting construction which admits both the subjunctive and the indicative in Classical French, depending on the degree of assertion on the part of the speaker. She provides an example from de Sales' Introduction a la vie devote (1609, my translation).
(53) il chemine autant que Dieu lui commande, pesamment he continue.PRES.SG as.much that God him command.PRES.SG heavily
neanmoins et lentement jusques a tant qu' il ait nevertheless and slowly until that 3.SG.M have.PRES.SBJV.SG
atteint a la devotion. achieved to the devotion 'He continues as long as God commands him, heavily nevertheless and slowly until he achieves devotion.'
These early attestations confirm jusqu'a tant que's history as a subjunctive-selecting matrix element.
In Acadian and related varieties, jusqu 'a tant que has been reported as a subjunctive-selecting matrix in New Brunswick (Arrighi 2005, Wiesmath 2006). In Baie
Sainte-Marie, Gesner (1979) reports that there is just one token with jusqu 'a tant que and
135 it occurs with the indicative mood. It is likewise attested with the subjunctive in Prince
Edward Island Acadian French (Ruth King, p.c.) and in Cajun French (Papen & Rottet
1997). In Laurentian varieties, St-Amand (2002) reports its use in both the Recits du fran9ais quebecois d'autrefois data as well as in the Ottawa-Hull corpus (Vieux-Hull). In
the older data, she reports that it is used with the subjunctive at a rate of 36% (N=14) while it is used more frequently in Vieux-Hull, at a rate of 82% (N=17).
In the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, jusqu 'a tant que, like most other temporal nonverbal matrices, exhibits a tense constraint. In fact, the tense constraint is most apparent with this temporal nonverbal matrix. Table 4.15 shows the tenses of the embedded verb followingy'wsgw 'a tant que.
N= Embedded Verb Tense Imperfect Subjunctive 1 Past Subjunctive 1 Present Subjunctive 7 Imperfect Indicative 3 Pluperfect Indicative 2 Present Perfect 3 Total N= 17 TABLE 4.15. Tense for tokens fo lowingyw-vgw 'a tant que.
As the data in Table 4.15 shows, all present tense tokens are in the subjunctive while almost all past tokens are in the indicative. The relevance of this tense distinction will be discussed in the formal analysis below.
136 3.6.4 Mais que
The most frequent nonverbal matrix in the Baie Sainte-Marie data which selects the subjunctive is mais que 'when', as shown in 54.56
(54) Mais que tu seyes dans grade deux, tu pourras y aller. when that 2.SG be.PRES.SBJV.SG in grade two 2.SG can.FuT.SG PART go.lNF. 'When you'll be in grade two, you'll be able to go.' (Michelle, GC-29)
Diachronic evidence provides support for the association between mais que and the subjunctive, although its meaning has changed over the centuries. Jensen (1974) provides examples of mais que which indicates a restriction (it is translated as 'provided that, on condition that'). Haase (1965 [1898]) notes that it is used in the 17th century with the subjunctive and comments that Modern French uses pourvu que 'provided that' instead.
Both Richelet (1973 [1680]) and de Vaugelas (1996 [1687]) attest to mais que's more generalized meaning of quand 'when', which does not enforce a condition on the event, as shown in 55 (my translation).
(55) venez -moi querir mais qu' il soit venu come.PRES.2.PL me fetch.lNF when that 3.SG.M be.PRES.SBJV.SG arrived 'Come fetch me when he arrives.'
Both Richelet and Vaugelas comment on mais que's association with colloquial style and the spoken language, both of which suggest that use of mais que for 'when' was heavily stigmatized during the Classical French period.
Recent studies show that mais que is used with the subjunctive in both Acadian and Laurentian varieties of French. With respect to Acadian French, it is attested in New
56 In Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French, mais que is pronounced either as [mek(o)] or [mes(k)(3)]. 137 Brunswick (Wiesmath 2006) and Prince Edward Island (Ruth King, p.c.). In Laurentian varieties, it is attested in both Vieux-Hull and in the Recits du fransais quebecois d'autrefois (St-Amand 2002). St-Amand (2002) reports that mais que selects the subjunctive at a rate of 74% (N=19) in the Recits data and at a rate of 91% (N=35) in
Vieux-Hull.
In the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, mais que occurs with the subjunctive at a rate of
95% (N=63). As Table 4.16 shows, most tokens following mais que are in the present subjunctive (79% of all tokens occurring with mais que).
Embedded Verb Tense N= Imperfect Subjunctive 4 Past Subjunctive 6 Present Subjunctive 50 Present Indicative 3 Total N= 63 TABLE 4.16. Tenses for tokens following mais que.
The results presented in Table 4.16 show that use of the indicative with mais que is quite rare. In fact, only 5% of tokens are in the indicative.
3.6.5 Pour que
Pour que 'in order to' is another nonverbal matrix element which selects the subjunctive in the Baie Sainte-Marie data, as shown in 56.
(56) Puis la ils ont calle pour qu' il jouit and then 3.PL have.PRES.PL called in.order.to that 3.SG.M play.lMP.SBJV.SG
une tune a Smiley Bates su le guitare. a tune of Smiley Bates on the guitar 'And then, they called so that he would play a song by Smiley Bates on the guitar.' (Evelyn, GC-27)
138 Pour que, unlike the other frequent nonverbal matrices such as mais que 'when' or avant
que 'before', does not directly express a temporal meaning.
Historically, pour que was associated with the subjunctive. Jensen (1974)
provides the earliest attestation of pour que, found in Chanson de Roland (my
translation).
(57) Baptiziez la, por quei Deux en ait 1' anme. baptise.PRES.2.PL her in.order.to that God some have.PRES.SBJV.SG the soul 'Baptise her, so that God has her soul.'
According to de Vaugelas (1996 [1647]), on s 'en sert en plusieurs fagons qui ne valent
toutes rien 'we use it in different ways, all of which are worth nothing'. He also notes
that pour que is synonymous with afin que 'so that', another subjunctive-selecting
nonverbal matrix element (Fournier 1998). Fournier reports no attestations of pour que in
Classical French texts, though she notes that it was proscribed by grammarians and
commented on as a feature of the spoken language.
In several varieties of Acadian French, pour que has been reported to select the
subjunctive: in lie Madame, Nova Scotia (Julia Hennemann, p.c.), in New Brunswick
varieties (Arrighi 2005), in Newfoundland (Wiesmath 2006), and in Louisiana French
(Papen & Rottet 1997). Gesner (1979) reports its use in his Meteghan data. In Laurentian
French, St-Amand reports high rates of the subjunctive with pour que: 71% in the Recits data (N=59) and 98% (N=54) in the Vieux-Hull data. It is also mentioned by Laurier
(1989) as a frequent (>60 tokens) nonverbal matrix which selects the subjunctive in
Ontario French.
139 In the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, pour que categorically selects the subjunctive
(N=13). I suggest that the invariability is due to the nontemporal nature of this nonverbal
matrix. In comparison, other nonverbal matrices which do relate temporal information
(e.g. mais que 'when', avant que 'before', etc.) show a tense constraints (past tense
tokens display variability while present tense tokens largely do not). Despite the small
amount of data with pour que, it is clear that the subjunctive occurs with both past tense
and present tense tokens, as shown in Table 4.17.
Embedded Verb Tense N= Imperfect Subjunctive 7 Past Subjunctive 1 Present Subjunctive 5 Total N= 13 TABLE 4.17. Tenses for tokens following pour que.
Since pour que is not a temporal matrix element, it appears that it is not sensitive to the
tense constraint, as is the case with other nonverbal matrices.
3.6.6 Infrequent nonverbal matrices
Along with the nonverbal matrices discussed above, there are a number of infrequent
matrices which select the subjunctive in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora. These are
enumerated in Table 4.18.
140 Infrequent Subjunctive-Selecting Nonverbal Matrices N= autremis que 'unless' 1 Qa me tente dur 'I can't wait for' 2 en tout cas que 'in case' 2 etre aussi bien que 'might as well' 2 etre mieux que 'be better than' 2 etre utile que 'worthwhile' 3 how about que 'how about' 1 next time que 'next time' 2 pourtant point que 'as long as' 2 Total N= 17 TABLE 4.18. Infrequent subjunctive-selecting nonverbal matrices.
Among the infrequent nonverbal subjunctive selecting matrices shown in Table 4.18,
there is only one which occurred with the indicative, en tout cas que 'in case', which has
one token which occurs in the indicative, as shown in 58, while the other occurs with the subjunctive, as shown in 59.
(58) Mais je voulais vacuumer en tout cas qu'elle l'a but 1 want.lMP.SG vacuum.lNF in all case that 3.SG.F it have.PRES.lND.SG
mis a terre. put on.the ground 'But I wanted to vacuum in case she had left it on the ground.' (Dianne, GC-21)
(59) Oh, en tout cas qu' il s' en vienne? oh in all -case that 3.SG.M REFL PART return.PRES.SBJV.SG 'Oh, in case he returns?' (Joanne, GC-11)
The use of the indicative with en tout cas que involves a past tense (present perfect), as shown in 58, while the subjunctive token involves a nonpast, as shown in 59. The other subjunctive tokens are largely nonpast.
141 There are two infrequent nonverbal matrices which are of English origin in the
Baie Sainte-Marie corpora: how about que 'how about that', shown in 60, and next time
que 'next time that', shown in 61.
(60) Bien, how about que je disions jeudi qui vient? well how about that 1 say.PRES.SBJV.PL Thursday that come.PRES.SG 'Well, how about next Thursday?' (Carole, GC-36)
(61) Oui, next time je voie Tanya, faut yes next time 1 see.PRES.SBJV.SG Tanya be.necessary.PRES
je m' informe.57 1 REFL informe.PRES.LND?/PRES.SBJV?.SG 'Yes, next time I see Tanya, I'll have to ask her.' (Carole, GC-21)
As the data in 60-61 show, the subjunctive occurs with innovation expressions of English origin. Examples such as these demonstrate the productivity of the subjunctive in this variety of Acadian French.
3.7 Forms of the subjunctive
The data presented above provide a description of use of the subjunctive mood following each particular matrix element (verbal or nonverbal). The data included tokens for the present as well as the past and imperfect forms of the subjunctive (i.e. all forms of the subjunctive are included). This section will focus in more detail on the use of the imperfect subjunctive in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora, largely lost from other spoken varieties.
57 In this example, the que is absent from the nonverbal matrix next time que. 142 The imperfect subjunctive involves the imperfective aspect in addition to the
subjunctive mood. In Baie Sainte-Marie, the imperfect subjunctive can be used to denote
a past temporal reference event, as shown in 62, if the matrix verb is in the past or a
future temporal event, as shown in 63, if the matrix vierb is in the conditional.
(62) Avant, elle voulait je lui montris comment before 3.SG.F want.lMP.SG 1 her show.lMP.SBJV.SG how
jouer le guitare. play.lNF the guitar 'Before, she wanted me to teach her how to play guitar.' (Benoit, M-340)
(63) Euh non, elle aimerait qu' il movit. uh no 3.SG.F like.COND.SG that 3.SG.M move.lMP.SBJV.SG 'Uh no, she would like for him to move.' (Evelyn, GC-27)
The data presented above show how the imperfect subjunctive is used for both past and
nonpast events, based on the matrix clause tense. In addition, the example in 61 shows how the imperfect subjunctive is used with a verb of English origin, mover 'to move', noted above as evidence of its productivity in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
In Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian, the use of the imperfect subjunctive is governed by the matrix verb tense. Table 4.19 shows that it typically occurs when the matrix verb is either conjugated in the imperfect indicative or in the conditional. In order to establish the contexts wherein the imperfect subjunctive is possible, I first extracted all the tokens of the imperfect subjunctive to determine what matrix tenses occur in conjunction with it. It was clear that there were only three tenses which occur with the imperfect subjunctive: the imperfect indicative, the conditional, and the simple past. Based on this finding, I then
143 expanded the context for all verbs which occur following these three tenses. This exercise
turned up a few tokens of the present subjunctive and the past subjunctive, as shown in
Table 4.19. The matrix verb in the token for these two tenses was falloir.
Matrix Tense Imperfect Conditional Simple Past Present Indicative Indicative Imperfect Subjunctive 75 30 3 0 Present Subjunctive 2 8 0 148 Past Subjunctive 4 9 3 1 Total N= 81 47 6 149 TABLE 4.19. Matrix tense of verbal matrices which occur with the imperfect subjunctive in the Baie Sainte-Marie data (both Grosses Coques and Meteghan).58
As Table 4.19 shows, the tense of the matrix clause will greatly determine what form of
the subjunctive occurs in the embedded clause. The context for the imperfect subjunctive
is predominantly following a matrix verb in the imperfect indicative as well as that
following a conditional. I also considered the tense of the embedded verb following
present tense matrix verbs, but these do not occur with the imperfect subjunctive. In fact,
99% of the relevant present tense matrix verbs occur with the present subjunctive. The
past subjunctive, which is infrequent, occurs mainly with a main clause conditional and a
main clause imperfect indicative verb. While there are little data for the past subjunctive,
it is evident that it occurs primarily with past tense and conditional matrix verbs.
The results for Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French show no sign of loss of the
imperfect subjunctive. If we consider the fact that the imperfect subjunctive typically
occurs following a matrix verb in either the imperfect indicative or in the conditional
58 These data do not include tokens with point croire, which must occur in the present tense in order to select any form of the subjunctive. See Section 3.5.6. 144 (Total N=128), the imperfect subjunctive occurs at a rate of 82% (N=105). Likewise,
Poplack (1992) reports that for tokens with falloir, the strongest factor group is matrix clause verb tense, with conditionals strongly disfavouring the subjunctive and all other tenses favouring the subjunctive. In light of the Baie Sainte-Marie results, it may have been the case that loss of the imperfect subjunctive opened a space for wider use of the conditional.
The imperfect subjunctive has been attested in a number of studies of Acadian
French. For instance, Gesner (1979) notes its use in Baie Sainte-Marie. It is likewise observed in Cheticamp (Wiesmath 2006), lie Madame (Julia Hennemann, p.c.), New
Brunswick varieties (Arrighi 2005), and in Prince Edward Island (Ruth King, p.c.). As noted above, it has likewise been observed in Guernsey Norman French (Jones 2000) where Jones finds that it is in variation with the present subjunctive and the conditional.
In comparison with Jones' findings, the results from Table 4.19 suggest that the actual variant competing with the imperfect subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French is the present subjunctive, but not the conditional. In fact, with verbs other than point croire, we find no indicative or conditional embedded verbs, thus suggesting that the imperfect subjunctive shows no signs of decline.
3.8 Concluding remarks on the variationist analysis
The quantitative analyses presented in Section 3 reveal a number of tendencies with regards to the subjunctive mood in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. Unlike what has been found for other modern varieties of French studied to date, the subjunctive mood exhibits little variation with other moods. The lack of variation in many contexts suggests
145 two important facts about Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French: 1) the subjunctive mood is not in decline in this variety of Acadian French, and 2) the quantitative results suggest that the subjunctive mood may expresses a semantic value rather than simply inherent variability (cf. Poplack 1992).
The robust use of the subjunctive suggests a stable situation. This result runs counter to claims in the literature which suggest that it is in decline in Acadian French
(cf. Neumann-Holzschuh 2005). In fact, the contrasting interpretations of the status of the subjunctive in Acadian French are likely the result of the methodological differences across studies. In studies where the standard language is used to define the variable context (Laurier 1989, Neumann-Holzschuh 2005), the results may suggest a loss of the subjunctive mood. However, if the variable context is based on community norms
(Poplack 1992), as is the case for the present study, then the evidence for loss disappears.
The quantitative results suggest that, in fact, there is actually little variability and the few contexts where there is variation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French can be accounted for in a straightforward fashion. With verbal matrices, variation was only found with point croire, a verb which is not part of the same semantic class as the other matrix verbs; the formal analysis presented below will account for this variation. With nonverbal matrices, the indicative is largely found when the token is in a past tense whereas present tense tokens are largely in the subjunctive mood. While Poplack
(1992:257) generalizes her Ottawa-Hull results to earlier stages of the language to argue that the subjunctive mood really had no meaning 'at least since the time of Classical
146 Latin', the Baie Sainte-Marie data suggest the contrary, as will be discussed in greater detail in the formal analysis.
4.1 The formal account of mood variation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French
This section presents the formal analysis of mood variation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French. I first present previous work on the French subjunctive followed by a discussion of previous accounts of mood variation. I then present the formal analysis of the Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French data.
4.2 Previous accounts of the French subjunctive mood
The French subjunctive mood has been studied from a wide variety of approaches which has resulted in a range of interpretations. Some view the subjunctive as a purely syntactic phenomenon (Foulet 1966, Poplack 1992), whereby it is argued to result from the presence of a syntactic or lexical element in the matrix clause. Generative work has likewise argued that the subjunctive mood results from syntactic effects (Barbaud 1991,
Lalaire 1998). There has also been functionalist work which argues that the subjunctive performs particular functions and which focuses on its specific meanings (Cohen 1965,
Nordahl 1969). In addition, some scholars have sought to consider the role of speakers perspective (Damourette and Pichon 1911-1940). From the range of approaches which has sought to account for the use of the French subjunctive, the approach taken here is based in part on generative work which assumes a semantic function for the subjunctive.
Within the generative literature, there have been many accounts to explain the distribution of the subjunctive mood. While some studies have been focused on the variation between the indicative and subjunctive moods (e.g. Abouda 2002, Kempchinsky 2009, Lachet 2010), a considerable amount of research has been devoted to
explaining obviation effects (e.g. Barbaud 1991, Farkas 1992, Martineau 1995). As
discussed in Section 2.1, obviation is a phenomenon which has been observed in
conjunction with the subjunctive. It involves a constraint against co-refereritiality
between the pronominal subject of the embedded clause and the subject of the matrix
clause, as shown in 64, taken from Martineau (1995:405, my translation).
(64) *Je,veux que je, parte demain. 1 want.PRES.SG that 1 leave.PRES.SBJV.SG tomorrow * 'I want that I leave tomorrow.'
In cases of co-referential subjects, an infinitive clause is typically used, as shown in 65.
(65) Je, veux PRO, partir demain. 1 want.PRES.SG PRO, leave.lNF tomorrow 'I want to leave tomorrow.'
The subject of the infinitive remains null and is typically represented as PRO (Chomsky
1981a). While a considerable amount of research has been devoted to explaining
obviation effects, other studies have been devoted to understanding the precise nature of
the subjunctive mood.
Within the French generative literature, mood is argued to exist as a distinct functional head in the inflectional domain above the T(ense)P(hrase) (Cinque 1999). In
order to account for the presence of subjunctive morphology, most generative accounts of
mood variation posit the existence of some feature, though the precise nature of this feature varies across studies. For instance, Abouda (2002) assumes the feature to be assertion [±Ass(ertion)], with [-Ass] triggering the subjunctive and [+Ass] triggering the
indicative. This semantic feature involves the assertion of a particular event being true
148 and, as Rowlett (2007) argues, even includes a presupposition of a prior assertion, as
shown in 66 and 67, taken from Rowlett (2007:149).
(66) Je sais qui a appele. I.SG know.PRES.SG who have.PRES.LND.SG called 'I know who called.'
(67) Je ne sais pas si je viens. I.SG NEG know.PRES.SG not if I.SG come.PRES.lND.SG 'I don't know if I'm coming.'
Rowlett argues that 66, which involves a finite subordinate interrogative clause, has the
indicative mood because it presupposes a prior assertion, in that it presupposes that a call
was made. 67 likewise triggers the indicative since, according to Rowlett, it only makes
sense if the speaker assumes the hearer anticipates the speaker will come: this also
constitutes a prior assertion. In contrast, the subjunctive is used when there is no
presupposition of a prior assertion, as in 68, taken from Rowlett (2007:149).
(68) Jean veut qu' il pleuve. Jean want.PRES.SG that 3.SG rain.PRES.SBJV.SG 'Jean wants it to rain.'
Examples like 68, Rowlett argues, show that the subjunctive is possible because of the
lack of an assertion.
Similar features have been proposed in the literature, such as W(orld)
(Kempchinsky 2009), [+Realis] (Lalaire 1998), [±certain] and [±factual] (Lachet 2010), etc. Likewise, the relation between the embedded verb and the matrix clause has been argued to relate to either the Fin head or the Force head within the embedded
C(omplementizer) P(hrase) layer. In fact, the explosion of the CP proposed by Rizzi
149 (1997) presented a variety of functional heads exist within the left periphery, as shown in
69.59
(69) [cp ForceP > TopP > FocusP > FinP] > TP > vP
Thus, the expansion of the CP into various functional heads created positions for targets of movement operations as well as for the representation of illocutionary information within the syntactic structure.
4.3 Previous accounts of mood variation in French
While most studies on the French subjunctive have focused on obviation effects or on the semantic value (or not) of the subjunctive, there are also studies which seek to account for apparent mood variability between the subjunctive and the indicative. For instance,
Abouda (2002) provides an analysis of indicative - subjunctive alternation with verbs of opinion which are either negated or which are used in interrogative constructions. His analysis involves the existence of a semantic feature [Ass(ertive)] which can be either specified positively [+Ass] or negatively [-Ass] (the former yields an indicative while the latter a subjunctive). The [+Ass] feature involves assigning a truth value to the clause while [-Ass] does not. For cases of the subjunctive with negated verbs of opinion (e.g. pas croire 'to not think'), he argues that the negative polarity is sufficient to initiate a rewrite rule whereby the [+Ass] feature is changed to [-Ass]. He stipulates, however, that both negative markers ne and pas are required to instigate the rewrite rule. In order to explain variation, he argues that in cases where the verb is in the indicative mood, as shown in 70, the negative elements originated in the subordinate clause and have
59 While additional functional heads have been proposed, 1 represent a subset of these in 69. 150 subsequently climbed from the subordinate clause to the main clause, as shown in 71. In
the case of verbs marked for the subjunctive, as shown in 72, the negative markers would
have originated in the main clause.
(70) Je ne pense pas que Pierre est un bon candidat. 1 .SG NEG think.PRES.SG not that Pierre be.PRES.LND.SG a good candidate 'I don't think that Pierre is a good candidate.'
(71) Je pense que Pierre n' est pas un bon candidat. 1 .SG think.PRES.SG that Pierre NEG be.PRES.lND.SG not a good candidate 'I think that Pierre isn't a good candidate.'
(72) Je ne pense pas que Pierre soit un bon candidat. 1 .SG NEG think.PRES.SG not that Pierre be.PRES.SBJV.SG a good candidate 'I don't think that Pierre is a good candidate.'
Thus, mood variation with negated verbs of opinion depends on where the negation
originated, the matrix clause or the embedded clause.
Recent cross-linguistic research has examined the role of subjunctive - indicative
alternation in relation to obviation effects. In fact, a 2009 issue of Lingua was devoted to
this topic. Among the articles included in this issue, Kempchinsky (2009) provides an
analysis of mood alternation across Romance languages by arguing that obviation effects
can inform us about mood variation. She bases her analysis on Bianchi 2001 whereby the subject of the embedded clause (i.e. the subject of the verb with the subjunctive
morphology) has a referential feature [+R(eferential)] which is selected by the head Fin
of the embedded clause, the lowest head in the left periphery (Rizzi 1997). If Fin is
negatively specified (i.e. as is the case with nonfinite clauses), then the [R] feature of the embedded clause anaphorically links to the matrix clause subject, as shown in 73.
151 (73) Je, veux PRO, partir. I.SG want.PRES.SG PRO leave.INF 'I want to leave.'
She assumes that cases of obviation can be accounted for by assuming that there is a
clash between the referential requirement as specified on the embedded clause Mood
head, which has [-R], and Fin, which has a specification of [+R]. The clash, she argues,
forces the [-R] feature to extend beyond the CP into the discourse domain and blocks co-
referentiality between the embedded clause subject and the main clause subject. Her
analysis entails that there is an uninterpretable W(orld) feature on the Force and Fin
heads within the embedded clause's CP layer. This concept of world originated in the
semantics literature on possible world semantics and relates to assertion and truth values
(Stalnaker 2002). While Kempchinsky's analysis is based on Bianchi 2001, she further
proposes that the W feature is a syntactic feature which can be either interpretable or
uninterpretable. In her analysis, the W feature occurs on four heads: on the higher clause
verb, Force and Fin of the embedded clause's CP layer, and on the embedded clause
Mood head. However, the W feature on these four heads differ in terms of whether they
are interpretable features or uninterpretable features. She assumes that on Force and Fin,
W is an uninterpretable feature (wW) and as such it must be valued by an interpretable
feature. The higher clause verb has the W feature as interpretable, as it selects the feature on Force, as shown in 74, taken from Kempchinsky 2009.60
60 Evidently, Kempchinsky's analysis departs somewhat from minimalism in that the embedded verb's feature should not be visible to the matrix verb as the embedded clause constitutes a phase in the sense of Chomsky (2001), 152 (74) ...VW [CP [FORCEP FORCE[WW] ] [FINP [FIN[»W] Op] [ip (DP) [MOODP [V+T+MW] [TP-••]]]] I 11 I I selection checking (Agree) (identification)
The checking of «W feature on the other heads (i.e. Fin and Mood) is accomplished by a checking operation (agree). This process of selection and checking accounts for subjunctives occurring in embedded clauses governed by a matrix predicate. For cases of polarity subjunctives (her term for verbs which select the subjunctive based on sentential polarity, such as to not think), the subjunctive isn't triggered automatically by the matrix verb as in 72. In these cases, the W feature, she argues, is interpretable in the embedded clause inflectional domain and the uninterpretable feature on Force is checked and valued by the verb in the embedded clause itself (rather than receiving a value from the matrix clause verb). To account for obviation, she argues that these effects are related to the presence of an operator in Fin which provides instructions on how to bind the embedded subject pronoun (Kempchinsky 2009). This operator, she argues, provides instructions to the semantics component on how to interpret the pronominal subject of the embedded clause.
These analyses attempt to account for mood variation by positing the existence of a particular feature (in the case of Abouda (and Rowlett), assertion, and in the case of
Kempchinsky, World).61 In these analyses, the feature in question which relates the matrix clause and the embedded clause is semantic in nature. In both cases, the analyses
61 Other features have been proposed, such as Lachet's (2010) analysis of the subjunctive whereby she proposes that it is the combination of two features: [±certain] and [±factual] which accounts for mood variation.
153 rely on the left periphery of the embedded clause in the valuing of the embedded verb as
a subjunctive verb.
4.4.1 Mood variation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French
This section provides a formal analysis of mood variation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French. The analysis first provides an account of mood variation with matrix verbs followed by an analysis of mood variation with nonverbal matrices.
4.4.2 Mood variation following verbal selectors in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French
In considering the Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French data, a few preliminary remarks should be made with regards to the distribution of the subjunctive. In terms of the tokens which occur following a verb in the main clause, Table 4.20 shows that the list of verbal subjunctive selectors is quite limited. In fact, only seven verbs select the subjunctive: aimer 'to like', avoirpeur 'to be afraid', esperer 'to hopt\falloir 'to be necessary', guetter 'to wait\ point croire 'to think not', and vouloir 'to want'. Among these matrix
verbs, there is only one matrix verb which allows variation: point croire, as the remaining
matrix verbs categorically select the subjunctive in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpus. It is
likewise worth noting that the matrix verb which allows variation, point croire, is not part of the class of optatives (verbs of volition), but rather is a verb of doubt. The fact that it is
the verb of doubt which allows variability rather than any optative verb supports distinguishing these semantic classes. All verbs of volition (optatives) categorically select
the subjunctive, as shown in Table 4.5, repeated here as Table 4.20, while the only verb
154 of doubt, point croire, exhibits different patterns: it permits variation in terms of mood
choice in the embedded clause.
Matrix Verb N= % Subjunctive aimer 'to like' 11 100 avoir peur 'to be afraid' 1 100 point croire 'to not think' 15 53 esperer 'to hope' 4 100 falloir 'be necessary' 249 100 guetter 'to wait' 4 100 vouloir 'to want' 26 100 Total N= 310 TABLE 4.20. Rate of subjunctive per matrix verb for the Baie Sainte-Marie data (both Grosses Coques and Meteghan).
The distribution of the Baie Sainte-Marie data will serve as the basis for the formal analysis.
In order to account for the presence of the subjunctive, I assume the existence of a semantic feature, Assertion (Abouda 2002). In the spirit of Abouda's (2002) and
Kempchinski's (2009) analyses, we can assume that this feature, [ASS(ERTIVE)], specifies degree of factuality (i.e. assertion vs. non-assertion) on C heads. Indicative CPs are thus marked for [CASS: IND] while subjunctive CPs are marked [CASS: SBJV]. Since verbs of volition can only select non-assertive CPs, these are inserted in the derivation with a CP non-assertive specification which has to check against a subjunctive CP. We can formalize this as in the schema in 75-76.
(75) [TP Verb[„ASS:SBJv] ... [CP [FORCKP Force [ASS: SBJV] ] [FINP [FIN[ASS: SBJV] Op] [TP [VerbjASS: SBJV)]]]]
Selecting Agree
155 (76)
[TP VerbfMSSrSBJv] • • • [CP [FORCLP Force [ASS: SBJV] ] [FINP [FIN(ASS: SBJV] Op] ] [TP [Verb[ASS: SBJV)]]]] I 11 I I Checking Agree
Cases of optatives are straightforward and require no exceptions to this analysis, as attested by the categorical nature of the subjunctive with this class of verbs, shown in
Table 4.20. Regardless of the tense of the matrix verb, the feature remains the same; that is, if the matrix verb is conjugated in the past tense, as in 77, then the embedded verb will be conjugated in the past as well, but it will have subjunctive morphology nonetheless
(imperfect subjunctive or past subjunctive). The same is true for nonpast verbs, as in 78.
(77) lis vouliont que lui y fut itou. 3.PL want.LMP.PL that 3.SG.M PART go.LMP.SBJV.SG also 'They also wanted him to go.' (Zabeth, GC-12)
(78) Jeveux rien qu' ils compreniont 1 want.PRES.SG only that 3.PL understand.PRES.SBJV.PL 'I just want them to understand.' (Benoit, M-340)
The semantics of volition entails that the matrix verb selects a CP, regardless of the tense, as is the case in both 77 and 78. In 77, a past tense vouloir selects the subjunctive
(imperfect subjunctive in this case) since the matrix predicate expresses a desire for something to occur (i.e. that a particular individual go somewhere) without asserting that it actually does. The same is found in nonpast matrix verbs, as shown in 78. The matrix subject of 78 wants a particular group of people to understand something, but there is no assertion as to whether they have understood or will understand what the speaker wants to convey. Therefore, in cases of verbs of volition, the assertion feature is always
156 negatively valued as there is no assertion that the matrix clause predicate is true. Thus, the subjunctive is always triggered on the embedded clause verb in this variety of French.
The situation is different with cases of negated verbs of opinion (which express doubt). A necessary first step in the analysis involves further refining the variable context to determine whether each token of point croire can potentially select the subjunctive in the embedded clause. Table 4.21 shows the raw number of tokens following pas croire per matrix tense and embedded clause tense.
Main Clause Tense Present Imperfect Past Present Conditional Perfect Embedded Verb Tense Present Subjunctive 7
Past Subjunctive 0 - Imperfect Subjunctive 1 Imperfect Indicative 1 4 1 Past Conditional 1 Periphrastic Future 2 Present Conditional 1 Present Indicative 2 Present Perfect 3 Total N= 17 4 1 TABLE 4.21. Use of the subjunctive per tense for point croire in the Baie Sainte-Marie data (both Grosses Coques and Meteghan).
As Table 4.21 shows, the subjunctive is only possible when the matrix clause tense is present, as in 79; when it is past tense (imperfect, past conditional, or present perfect), it will result in a indicative embedded verb, as in 80.
157 (79) Bien, je crois point qu' elle pouve trouver well 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG.F can.PRES.SBJV.SG fmd.lNF
la fournaise. the furnace 'Well, I don't think she'll be able to find the furnace.' (Marie, GC-11)
(80) Je croyais point qu' elle 6tait mariee. 1 think.lMP.SG NEG that 3.SG.F be.lMP.LND.SG married 'I didn't think that she was married.' (Marie, GC-6)
My analysis departs slightly from Abouda (2002) in that he assumes that both ne and pas
are necessary to change the value of the CP which is selected from [CASS: IND] to [CASS:
SBJV]. As in other vernacular varieties of Canadian French (Martineau & Mougeon
2003, Sankoff & Vincent 1977), ne is extremely rare in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French as it appears only in fixed expressions, such as n 'est-cepas? 'isn't it so?'. As 79 shows, in the case of a present tense matrix verb of doubt, the embedded verb can be in fs) the subjunctive (though it is not always the case). In the case of a matrix verb conjugated in a past tense, as in 80, the embedded verb cannot be in the subjunctive. I argue that this results from the semantics involving verbs of doubt and temporal reference. In the case of a past tense matrix verb of doubt, the expression of doubt no longer pertains to the speaker at the moment of speech, and, crucially, presupposes an assertion of the embedded clause event and selects a CP with an indicative value for the feature assertion [CASS: IND]. In 80, the speaker expresses that in the past, she did not
62 All tokens of point croire have a matrix subject in the first person singular (i.c.je T). Although it might be argued that present tense point croire is a frozen expression (je crois point...) that triggers the subject, I argue that this is not the case. The fact that both negative markers pas and point can occur with the subjunctive provides evidence against such an analysis. 158 believe a particular individual to be married. In fact, the surrounding discourse reveals
that this utterance is in response to a statement that the individual in question is married,
as shown in 81.
(81) Marie: Elle est-ti mariee avec ce dude 1&? Carole: Je crois que oui. [...] Bien, celle la de la Motor Mart est point mariee, n'est-ce pas? Non, so faut que ?a seye 1'autre. Marie: Je crois point que Claire a la Trans Am. Carole: Oui. Marie: Je croyais point qu'elle etait mariee. Carole: Bien peut-etre point. Peut-etre j 'ai mal compris.
Translation: Marie: Is she married to that dude, there? Carole: I think so. [...] Well, the one from Motor Mart isn't married, is she? No, so it has to be the other one. Marie: I don't think Claire has the Trans Am. Carole: Yes. Marie: I didn't think she was married. Carole: Well, maybe not. Maybe I misunderstood.
As the surrounding discourse context reveals, there is a prior assertion that the particular
individual under question is married (cf. Marie: Elle est-ti mariee avec ce dude la?
Carole: Je crois que oui). Thus, the use of a verb of doubt conjugated in the imperfect
indicative does not involve a [Cass: SBJV] feature since there is, in fact, an assertion in
the surrounding context that the individual is currently married. Thus, past tense verbs of doubt do not involve a [Cass: SBJV] feature and are not included as part of the variable context in terms of the possible contexts where the subjunctive can occur. The variable context of tokens with point croire is thus reduced to tokens in which the matrix verb is in the present tense, shown in Table 4.22.
159 Embedded Verb Tense N= Past Subjunctive 0 Present Subjunctive 7 Imperfect Subjunctive 1 Imperfect Indicative 1 Periphrastic Future 2 Present Indicative 2 Present Conditional 1 Present Perfect 3 Total N= 17 TABLE 4.22. Use of the subjunctive for present tense point croire in the Baie Sainte- Marie data (both Grosses Coques and Meteghan).
Table 4.22 shows that out of the tokens where the subjunctive could have occurred
(N=17), eight of these tokens (47%) are in the subjunctive mood. We must therefore consider the tokens which occurred with the indicative mood in order to discern any pattern.
In the case of negated verbs of opinion, I argue that these verbs involve a [HCASS:
SBJV] feature on the matrix clause which selects the subjunctive in the embedded clause.
Most importantly, the verb of opinion must be negated, as an affirmative verb of opinion constitutes an assertion, as shown in 82.
(82) Jecrois j'allons aller faire la Halloween la itou. 1 think.PRES.SG 1 go.PRES.LND.PL go.LNF make.LNF the Halloween there also 'I think we're also going to go there to celebrate Halloween.' (Francis, M-341)
As 82 shows, an affirmative use of a verb of opinion, such as croire, involves an assertion of the truth of the embedded clause predicate. Thus, the same analysis is proposed for negated verbs of opinion as for optatives. What remains to be explained are the indicative tokens which occur with a nonpast point croire.
160 Out of the seventeen nonpast point croire tokens, nine are not in the subjunctive and must be accounted for. Two of these can be eliminated on the basis that they are interrogatives, shown in 83 and 84.
(83) Tu crois point qu' il minderait? 2.SG think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG.M mind.PRES.COND.SG 'You don't think he will mind?' (Carole, GC-36)
(84) So tu crois point que tu vas rester so 2.SG think.PRES.SG NEG that 2.SG go.PRES.LND.SG stay.lNF
dans Clare pour le restant de ta vie? in Clare for the rest of your life 'So, you don't think you'll stay in Clare for the rest of your life?' (Anique, M-338)
In these two tokens, the interrogation functions to select a CP with a [CASS: IND] rather than [CASS: SBJV]. In fact, this is what Abouda (2002) proposes in terms of interrogation and negation: the two toggle the assertion value and cancel each other out. The Baie
Sainte-Marie data support Abouda's proposal as there are no interrogatives with point croire which occur with the subjunctive and the two tokens which do appear in interrogatives occur with the indicative. Clearly, additional data would strengthen this analysis, but in the absence of such data, I argue, along the same lines as Abouda (2002), that interrogation functions to change what type of CP is selected, which ultimately results in the presence of the indicative mood in the embedded clause. The exclusion of these two tokens leaves seven indicative tokens with nonpast point croire which must be accounted for.
161 The remaining seven tokens with nonpast point croire which occur with an indicative embedded verb can be analyzed as cases where the negation has moved from the embedded clause to the matrix clause following the valuing of the [ASS] feature in the CP layer and on the embedded verb.63 Abouda (2002) provides a number of syntactic tests to determine whether the negation originates in the embedded clause or whether it originates in the matrix clause. One of these is pseudo-clefting, as shown in 85 (Abouda
2002, my translation).
(85) a. Je ne pense pas que Pierre soit un bon candidat. 'I don't think that Pierre is a good candidate.'
a'. ??Ce que je ne pense pas, c'est que Pierre est un bon candidat. 'What I don't think, is that Pierre is a good candidate.'
a". Ce que je pense, c'est que Pierre n'est pas un bon candidat. 'What I think, is that Pierre is not a good candidate.'
b. Je ne pense pas que Pierre soit un bon candidat. '1 don't think that Pierre is a good candidate.'
b'. ??*Ce que je ne pense pas, c'est que Pierre soit un bon candidat. 'What I don't think is that Pierre is a good candidate.'
b". *Ce que je pense, c'est que Pierre ne soit pas un bon candidat. 'What I think is that Pierre is not a good candidate.'
By means of pseudo-clefting, Abouda demonstrates with the data in 85a-a" that the indicative is permitted depending on whether the matrix verb pas penser is negative or affirmative. In 85a', the immediate matrix clause to que Pierre est un bon candidat is affirmative and this is acceptable to some with the embedded verb in the indicative. The
63 Alternatively, the subjunctive could have an operator in CP that needs licensing from the main clause negation (in the spirit of Progovac 1993). 162 sentence in 85a" shows that once the negation is no longer on the matrix verb, but on the
embedded verb, this is also grammatical. Abouda interprets this to suggest that polarity
subjunctive sentences with an indicative embedded verb are the result of negation having
climbed from the embedded clause to the matrix clause. The data in 85b" show that if the
negation occurs within the embedded clause, the subjunctive cannot occur (i.e. it yields
an ungrammatical sentence). If the negation occurs in the matrix clause, as in 85b', the
sentence is still ungrammatical since it is no longer the matrix verb to the embedded
clause (i.e. it is now c'est que). The results of these tests suggest that polarity sentences in
the indicative may in fact be the result of negation originating in the embedded clause
while polarity subjunctive sentences involve negation originating in the matrix clause.
In order to test whether this analysis accounts for the Baie Sainte-Marie data, I
have applied this test to indicative point croire tokens, as shown in 86 and 87.
(86) Non, moi je crois point que 9a fait trop peur. no me 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG make.PRES.lND.SG too scary 'No, I don't think it's too scary.' (Marie, GC-6)
(87) Mais je crois pas que 9a va travailler. but 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG go.PRES.LND.SG work.LNF 'But I don't think it's going to work.' (Sam, GC-36)
By applying the pseudoclefting test to 86 and 87, we can determine whether the negative polarity could have originated in the embedded clause. Thus, this at least opens the
163 possibility that negation may have climbed from the embedded clause to the matrix in the
case of indicative embedded verbs. 88 shows the pseudocleft test applied to 86.64
(88) a. Non, moi je crois point que 9a fait trop peur. 'No, I don't think it's too scary.'
a'. Ce que je crois point, c'est que 9a fait trop peur. 'What I don't think, is that it is too scary.'
a". Ce que je crois, c'est que 9a fait point trop peur. 'What I think, is that it isn't too scary.'
b. Non, moi je crois point que 9a faise trop peur. 'No, I don't think it's too scary.'
b'. ??*Ce que je crois point, c'est que 9a faise trop peur. 'What I don't think, is that it is too scary.'
b". *Ce que je crois, c'est que 9a faise point trop peur. 'What I think, is that it isn't too scary.'
The data in 88 show that if negation occurs in the embedded clause or not in the immediate matrix clause, the embedded verb can be in the indicative since it does not require its matrix clause to be negative, as shown in 88a'-a". However, the data in 88b'- b" shows that the subjunctive cannot occur if the embedded clause's matrix clause is not negative. Thus the possibility that negation may have climbed from the embedded clause to the matrix clause is a possibility with indicative embedded verbs, but not with subjunctive embedded verbs.
To be certain as to whether the negation in 86 resulted from negative raising, there is another test we can apply. Abouda (2002) makes use of substitution in order to determine whether the negation has raised, as shown in 89 below.
64 The acceptability of these utterances is based on my native speaker intuitions. 164 (89) a. - Tu ne penses pas que Pierre est un bon candidat? 'You don't think that Pierre is a good candidate?'
- Non, je ne le pense pas. 'No, I don't think so.'
??* - Non, je ne pense pas. 'No, I don't think so.'
b. - Tu ne penses pas que Pierre soit un bon candidat? 'You don't think that Pierre would be a good candidate?'
?? - Non, je ne le pense pas. 'No, I don't think so.'
- Non, je ne pense pas. 'No, I don't think so.'
In 89a, the substituted pronoun le 'it' replaces the subordinate clause and in the case of an embedded indicative verb (est 'be.PRES.lND'), the pronoun is required. Repeating only the matrix verb without the pronoun in the reply yields an ungrammatical utterance. In contrast, when the embedded verb is in the subjunctive mood (soit 'be.PRES.SBJV'), the more acceptable sentence is the one which doesn't include the pronoun which substitutes for the embedded clause. If we take the indicative sentence in 86, we can again see that the pronoun is required if the embedded verb is in the indicative mood, as shown in 90a, but with a subjunctive embedded verb the pronoun renders the sentence less acceptable.
(90) a. - Tu crois point que 9a fait trop peur? 'You don't think it's too scary?'
- Non, je le crois point. 'No, I don't think so.'
??*- Non, je crois point. 'No, I don't think so.' b. - Tu crois point que 9a faise trop peur? 'You don't think it's too scary?'
?? - Non, je le crois point. 'No, I don't think so.'
- Non, je crois point. 'No, I don't think so.'
90 provides further evidence suggesting that the negation could have moved from the embedded clause to the matrix clause. Therefore, I argue that cases of indicative nonpast tokens with point croire may be explained in terms of negative climbing.
The quantitative evidence presented in Section 3.4 shows that point croire patterns differently from verbs of volition. In fact, this distinction is similar to one made in the literature between intensional subjunctives (e.g. verbs of volition) and polarity subjunctives (e.g. negated verbs of opinion), such as proposed by Quer (1998). For Quer, intensional subjunctives are distinguished from polarity subjunctives on the basis of four characteristics: 1) constraint on the sequence of tenses, 2) alternation with the indicative,
3) locality of triggering, and 4) obviation effects. An examination of the Baie Sainte-
Marie verbal data for these four characteristics suggests that such a distinction may be warranted in this variety.
4.4.3.1 Constraint on the sequence of tenses
The first characteristic involves, in the case of intensional subjunctives, a prohibition on a present tense matrix verb co-occurring with a past tense embedded verb. Table 4.23 gives a breakdown of the distribution of tenses in the Baie Sainte-Marie data.
166 Matrix Tense Embedded Tense Present Nonpresent Present 151 3 Nonpresent 139 TABLE 4.23. Tense concordance for intensional subjunctives.
Thus, the tense constraint largely captures the pattern found in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French, with the exception of just one token (indicated in grey in Table 4.23) shown in 91.
(91) Bien dimanche, Carl a amene Bobby John well Sunday Carl have.3.SG brought Bobby John
et faut que Sonny ait ete calle and be.necessary.PRES that Sonny have.PRES.SBJV.SG gone called
Henry qu' il venit le querir. Henry that 3.Sg.M come.SP.SG him fetch.LNF 'Well Sunday, Carl brought Bobby John and Sonny had to call Henry to come pick him up.' (Denise, GC-21)
Despite this one exception where falloir occurs in the present tense and the embedded verb occurs in the past subjunctive, the data pattern closely to the first characteristic.
4.4.3.2 Alternation with the indicative
The second characteristic is said to distinguish intensional and polarity subjunctives in that the polarity subjunctives can occur with indicatives while intensional subjunctives cannot. In fact, the results presented in Table 4.5, repeated here as Table 4.24, shows that only polarity subjunctives can occur with the indicative.
167 Matrix Verb N= % Subjunctive aimer 'to like' 11 100 avoir peur 'to be afraid' 1 100 point croire 'to not think' 15 esperer 'to hope' 4 100 falloir 'be necessary' 249 100 guetter 'to wait' 4 100 vouloir 'to want' 26 100 Total N= 310 TABLE 4.24. Rate of subjunctive per matrix verb for the Baie Sainte-Marie data (both Grosses Coques and Meteghan).
In Table 4.24, the grey box shows that only point croire can occur with the indicative (at a rate of 53%) while the intensional subjunctives are uniformly found in the subjunctive.
Quer (1998:36) suggests that this alternation is not a case of free variation, but rather that
'the choice of mood has immediate consequences for the interpretation of the embedded clause'. The analysis of the point croire data presented here likewise suggests that the mood alternation is not optional or free.
4.4.3.3 Locality of triggering
The third characteristic which distinguishes intensional predicates from polarity subjunctives involves the locality of triggering. More precisely, with intensional predicates, the subjunctive can only occur in the immediately embedded CP and it may not extend to further embedded CPs. On the other hand, with polarity subjunctives, there is no such constraint and the subjunctive can occur in consecutively embedded CPs. An inspection of the Baie Sainte-Marie data reveals two tokens with an additional embedded
CP, shown in 92-93, both of which occur with an intensional predicate and neither involve a subjunctive beyond the immediately embedded CP.
168 (92) II veut qu' ils saviont que c' est 3.SG.M want.PRES that 3.PL IOIOW.PRES.SBJV.PL that 3.SG be.PRES.lND.SG
point une vieille maison. NEG an old house 'He wants them to know that it's not an old house.' (Carole, GC-6)
(93) Faut point qu' il croie qu' il be.necessary.PRES NEG that 3.SG.M believe.PRES.SBJV.SG that 3.SG.M
va jouer de la musique toute la nuit puis/ go.PRES.lND.SG play.lNF some the music all the night and 'He shouldn't think he can play music all night and/' (Eric, GC-23)
In both 92 and 93, the immediately embedded CP involves a subjunctive, while the
further embedded CP does not. Unfortunately, since there were no tokens with polarity subjunctives which involved more than one embedded CP, I could not test whether
multiple embedded CPs can in fact occur with the subjunctive in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora. However, I submitted two constructed sentences, one with an additional embedded CP in the subjunctive, as shown in 94, and one with an additional CP in the indicative, as shown in 95, to native speakers of the Baie Sainte-Marie variety to determine the grammaticality of both sentences.
(94) Jecrois point qu' il save qu' elle 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG.M IOIOW.PRES.SBJV.SG that 3.SG.F
veuille y aller. want.PRES.SBJV.SG PART go.LNF 'I don't think he knows that she wants to go.'
169 (95) Je crois point qu' il save qu' elle 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG.M know.PRES.SBJV.SG that 3.SG.F
veut y aller. want.PRES.lND.SG PART go.lNF 'I don't think he knows that she wants to go.'
Native speakers of the Baie Sainte-Marie variety consistently accepted both 94 and 95, although some ascribed particular meanings to each sentence. This result suggests that polarity subjunctives allow multiple CPs to occur with the subjunctive mood.
4.4.3.4 Obviation effects
The final characteristic presented by Quer is that embedded subjunctives with intensional predicates are said to be subject to obviation effects while this is not the case with polarity subjunctives. In fact, there are two tokens which occur with a coreferential subject, shown in 96-97.
(96) J'espere j' en aie. 1 hope.PRES.SG 1 some have.PRES.SBJV.SG 'I hope I'll have some [water in his well when he goes home later].' (Hector, GC-13)
(97) Oh, je crois pas j'y alle aujourd'hui. oh 1 think.PRES.SG NEG 1 PART go.PRES.SBJV.SG today 'Oh, I don't think I'll go today.' (Elze, GC-18)
The example in 96 shows an apparent violation of the obviation effects in that the embedded clause subject and the matrix subject are coreferential and this token is with the intensional predicate esperer 'to hope'. Recall, though, that esperer selects the subjunctive at a rate of 100%. In 97, we see again coreferential subjects with a polarity subjunctive. Aside from these two examples, no tokens with both intensional and polarity
170 subjunctives have coreferential subjects. Additional data for both types of subjunctives would determine whether obviation effects are generally observed with intensional subjunctives, but not with polarity subjunctives.
4.4.4 Concluding remarks on intensional subjunctive and polarity subjunctives
These data thus show that at least some of these characteristics outlined by Quer are found in the Baie Sainte-Marie data. With regards to the first characteristic, the tense effect is overwhelming in that intensional predicates in the present tense cannot occur
(with one exception) with a past tense embedded verb. In terms of the second characteristic, alternation with the indicative is only found with polarity subjunctives, as predicted. With regards to the third characteristic, the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora do not shed light on the matter as there are no tokens of multiple embedded CPs with polarity subjunctives. However, grammaticality judgments with native speakers confirm that multiply embedded CPs with the subjunctive are possible with polarity subjunctives in
Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. With regards to the fourth characteristic, there were insufficient data to determine whether intensional subjunctive are subject to a locality constraint: the two cases with coreferential subjects do not warrant a split. Clearly, additional data for Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French would permit a more in-depth investigation as to whether subjunctives can be divided into two types, intensional and polarity. While an examination of the data suggest that Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French has both types of subjunctives, this is an area which would benefit further research involving a larger data set.
171 One puzzle remains: we find use of the subjunctive with the matrix verb dire 'to
say'. Despite the fact that dire is not a subjunctive-selecting context, there was one
subjunctive token out of a total of 114 dire tokens.65
(98) J'ai dit«Tu diras a Erin a Marc qu' elle vienne 1 have.SG said 2.SG tell.FUT.SG to Erin of Marc that 3.SG.F come.PRES.SBJV.SG
dehors me parler». outside to.me speak.lNF 'I said "Tell Erin, Marc's daughter, to come outside to speak to me'". (Marie, GC-6)
We might wonder why dire would select the subjunctive as this verb is not a subjunctive- selecting verbal matrix. Dire is not a verb of volition nor is it a negated verb of opinion.
The literature on the subjunctive, however, does mention cases where the subjunctive is used as an indirect imperative (e.g. Rivero 1994). Abouda (2002) provides similar examples where the subjunctive is triggered by unusual predicates in the matrix clause.
However, he claims that it is the imperative which triggers a subjunctive, as shown in 99
(Abouda 2002:18, my translation).
(99) a. Dis-lui qu' il vienne! tell him that 3.SG.M come.PRES.SBJV.SG 'Tell him to come!'
b. Imagine qu' il ait eu un empechement! imagine that 3.SG.M has.PRES.SBJV had an obstacle 'Imagine that he had an obstacle!'
Therefore, we may assume that 99a-b involve a case whereby the subjunctive is used as a surrogate imperative. Such cases do not necessarily contradict the argument that the
651 excluded this one token of dire from the matrix verb quantitative analysis since, as 1 argue here, it is not the semantic class of dire which selects the subjunctive, but rather the semantics involved in this particular example. 172 subjunctive is triggered by a semantic feature, such as assertion. In fact, if we consider the data in 98, there is no assertion of the truth of the embedded clause, despite the fact that the speaker utters a command. The command does not necessarily assert the truth of the outcome or result. In other words, while the speaker commands someone to fetch someone else, the entire utterance does not contain an assertion as to whether or not Erin actually comes to talk to the speaker nor is there a presupposition embedded within the structure.
4.4.5 Mood variation following non-verbal selectors
This section will provide a formal theoretical account of mood variation with nonverbal matrix selectors. Results from the quantitative analysis of mood choice following nonverbal selectors show that most nonverbal matrices allow variation, as shown in Table
4.25.
Nonverbal Matrices N= % Subjunctive apres que 'after' 46 10 avant que 'before' 30 71 jusqu 'a tant que 'until' 17 50 mais que 'when' 63 95 pour que 'in order to' 13 100 infrequent (<3 tokens) 18 94 Total N= 187 TABLE 4.25. Rate of subjunctive per nonverbal matrix for Baie Sainte-Marie (both Grosses Coques and Meteghan).
As Table 4.25 shows, the only nonverbal matrix which does not allow variation is pour que, while the remaining nonverbal matrices have rates of subjunctive usage between
10% and 94%.
173 In order to account for mood variation following nonverbal matrices, I suggest
that the same semantic feature, assertion, is relevant for these constructions. The first
piece of evidence is a tense constraint, which is in effect for most temporal matrices (e.g.
mais que 'when', avant que 'before', etc.). This constraint allows past temporal reference
verbs to be indicative, which most nonpast verbs are not. Table 4.26 shows the tense
constraint.
Token Past Tense Token Nonpast Tense Nonverbal N= % % Subjunctive % Indicative % Subjunctive Matrices Indicative apres que 46 88% (35/40) 13% (5/40) 100% (6/6) 0% (0/6) 'after' avantque 30 50% (10/20) 50% (10/20) 0% (0/0) 100% (10/10) 'before' jusqu 'a tant 17 80% (8/10) 20% (2/10) 0% (0/7) 100% (7/7) que 'until' mais que 63 0% (0/11) 100% (11/11) 6% (3/52) 94% (49/52) 'when' pour que 'in 13 0% (0/8) 100% (8/8) 0% (0/5) 100% (5/5) order to' infrequent 18 50% (1/2) 50% (1/2) 0% (0/17) 100% (16/16) (<3 tokens) Total N= 187 TABLE 4.26. Rates of mood per tense for nonverba matrix for Baie Sainte-Marie (both Grosses Coques and Meteghan).
As the data in Table 4.26 show, the indicative tokens are much more likely to be
conjugated in a past tense than in a nonpast tense. This is true for most nonverbal
matrices, with the exception of pour que, which is not a temporal matrix, and mais que.
argue that this tense constraint is further evidence that the subjunctive mood relates to assertion, a semantic feature. While the data are not categorical (i.e. there are cases of
174 past tense subjunctives), I argue that the past tense indicative tokens involve a completed
event, as shown with the pluperfect token in 100.
(100) Elle tenait ecole euh, avant qu' ils aviont ete a Boston. 3.SG.F hold.lMP.SG school uh before that 3.PL have.PRES.LND.PL gone to Boston 'She was a schoolteacher before they went to Boston.' (Elze, GC-18)
The embedded clause verb phrase in 100 aviont ete a Boston 'went to Boston' expresses
a completed event. It is expressed with the indicative mood rather than the subjunctive
mood, despite the fact that avant que is a subjunctive-selecting matrix. We might consider, then, how past tense subjunctive forms can in fact occur with these nonverbal matrices if indicative tokens tend to occur in this context. Upon close inspection, we find that the past tense subjunctive tokens largely involve non-realized events, unlike 100 above, in which case the trip to Boston had already taken place at the utterance time. For instance, 101 shows that Evelyn had ordered a couch from a store, but, even at the utterance time, she still has not received a phone call to inform her that it had arrived at the store.
175 (101) Jem' en avais ordere un su Comeau Home mais il y 1 REFL PART have.LMP.SG ordered one at Comeau Home well 3.SG PART
a deux ans. II m' avait dit qu' il me have.been two years 3.SG.M me have.lMP.SG told that 3.SG.M me
recallerait mais qu' il fut venu et il call.again.COND.SG when that 3.SG.M be.lMP.SBJV.SG arrived and 3.SG.M
est point venu encore. be.PRES.lND.SG NEG arrived yet 'I had ordered one from Comeau Home [a local furniture store], well, it must be two years ago. He had told me he would call me once it arrived and it still hasn't arrived.' (Evelyn, GC-12)
Tokens like 101 show that despite the fact that the tense is past, in this case, the event of
the token predicate (i.e. the arrival of the couch) has still not yet occurred at the utterance
time and the imperfect subjunctive is used. Therefore, I argue that the assertion feature on
the nonverbal matrix (in this case mais que) is specified to select a [CASS: SBJV].
In the case of apres que, the vast majority of past tense tokens results in a high
rate of indicative usage. This involves a CP specified as [CAss: IND], although in some
cases a subjunctive CP is selected, as shown in 102.
(102) Maisj'avons trouve ?a beau apres que ?a fut fini. but 1 have.PRES.PL found 3.SG nice after that 3.SG be.lMP.SBJV.SG finished 'But we thought it was funny after it was over.' (Sam, GC-36)
Along with (infrequent) exceptions like 101, there are other examples where a subjunctive CP is selected, as in 103.
176 (103) Jevoulons aller en Europe apres j'ayons gradue et apres 1 want.PRES.PL go.lNF to Europe after 1 have.PRES.SBJV.PL graduated and after
j'ayons fait un petit d'argent. 1 have.PRES.SBJV.PL made a little of money 'We want to go to Europe after we graduate and after we've made a little money.' (Trina, M-295)
The context of apres que shows some variation, as it infrequently selects the subjunctive
(at an overall rate of 10%) but this variation is most likely due to the fact that this nonverbal matrix is overwhelmingly with past tense tokens.
4.5 Comparison across varieties of Acadian French
The preceding section presented my arguments that the subjunctive mood in Baie Sainte-
Marie Acadian French has a semantic value related to the feature [ASS], which expresses the speaker's assertion as to the truth value of the embedded clause verb. The variable context was defined as per community norms by means of a systematic extraction protocol which involved extracting all the subjunctive tokens. Following this step, a complete list of the environments where the subjunctive is possible was established for
Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. In the analysis of the verbal and nonverbal matrices, I have presented the historical origins of subjunctive usage with particular matrix elements, such as with falloir, vouloir, etc., and also presented cases of innovation, as with how about que, next time que, etc.
There are, of course, limitations as to the degree to which a sociolinguistic corpus accurately represents the totality of speech of a particular community. A corpus is not designed to fulfill such an immense task, but rather it provides a snapshot of the linguistic mechanisms of a particular variety. It is, therefore, important to consider studies of other
177 varieties of Acadian French in order to determine whether there are contexts which select
the subjunctive in those varieties, but not in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. If the
subjunctive is truly semantically productive, a verb which involves assertion should
likewise select the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie if it occurs at all in this variety.
One limitation of sociolinguistic corpora is that there may be no occurrences of a
particular linguistic construction, although the analyst should never interpret this alone to
suggest its absence from the variety. One such example for the subjunctive is the use of
the subjunctive without a matrix clause verb or a nonverbal matrix. In actual fact, there
was one occurrence, shown in 104.
(104) Qu'il lesave ouqu' il le save point, that 3.SG.M it 1OIOW.PRES.SBJV.SG or that3.SG.Mit 1OIOW.PRES.SBJV.SG NEG
Moi, je lui ai point dit. me 1 him have.PRES.SG NEG said 'That he knows it or not. Me, I didn't tell him.' (Evelyn, GC-12)
Constructions like 104 were quite rare in the Grosses Coques corpus and nonexistent in
the Meteghan data. Clearly, it involves the speaker asserting that she does not know whether a particular individual knows something. Another study of Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French, Gesner 1982, notes the existence of such a construction, as shown in
105.
(105) Que 9a seye une partie de cartes ou que 9a seye that 3.SG be.PRES.SBJV.SG a round of cards or that 3.SG be.PRES.SBJV.SG
un concert, alle y va. a concert 3.SG.F PART go.PRES.SG 'Whether it be a round of cards or whether it be a concert, she goes.'
178 105 also involves the speaker suggesting that he or she does not know what the particular
event is, which triggers the subjunctive. Despite the rareness of such constructions in
corpora from Baie Sainte-Marie, it is important to note that they do occur in this variety
and their behaviour lends support to an analysis of the subjunctive as a marker of [ASS].
The presence of subjunctive-selecting matrices in other varieties provides an
important basis for comparison as well. Upon close inspection, many subjunctive-
selecting matrices found in corpora for Laurentian varieties of French simply do not
occur in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French (e.g. concevoir 'to design', desirer 'to
desire', etc.). They are not part of the variable context and therefore cannot trigger the
subjunctive. Those which do occur in both Laurentian varieties and in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French (e.g.falloir 'to be necessary', vouloir 'to want', etc.) select the
subjunctive in both.
Perhaps the most important comparison to be made with the Baie Sainte-Marie
data is with data for other varieties of Acadian French. If subjunctive-selecting matrices
occur in other varieties of Acadian French, we would expect them to likewise trigger the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French given their common ancestry. A review
of the extant literature reveals which verbal and nonverbal matrices select the subjunctive
in other varieties of Acadian French (either through explicit reference or by way of examples). Based on these sources, there is only one matrix element which triggers the subjunctive in a variety of Acadian French which does not do so in the Baie Sainte-Marie variety, despite its occurrence in the corpus: paspenser 'to not think'. It is attested in
Prince Edward Island Acadian French (Ruth King, p.c.), as shown in 106.
179 (106) Jepense pas qu' il y ait even des french fries. 1 think.PRES.SG NEG that 3.SG PART be.PRES.SBJV.SG even some french fries 'I don't even think there are french fries.' (SL-26)66
The use of pas penser as a negated verb of opinion is also attested in Laurentian varieties
(Poplack 1992). As this is the only matrix element which selects the subjunctive in other
varieties of Acadian and which also occurs in the Baie Sainte-Marie variety, it is
important to account as to why it does not select the subjunctive in the latter variety. In
fact, the reason pas penser is not a subjunctive-selecting matrix element in Baie Sainte-
Marie Acadian French is due to the fact that it does not form part of the semantic class of
verbs expressing doubt as it is not a verb of opinion. The example in 107 shows that to express doubt, negated croire is used.
(107) Elze: Tu connais Pierre a Rosina? 2.SG know.PRES.SG Pierre of Rosina 'Do you know Pierre, Rosina's son?'
Carole: Non, je crois pas. no 1 think.PRES.SG NEG 'No, I don't think so.' (GC-18)
The use of pas croire in the response in 107 shows the use of croire as a verb of opinion.
In varieties where penser is a verb of opinion, it would be a reasonable substitute to
Carole's answer (i.e. Non,jepensepas 'No, I don't think so.') However, in Baie Sainte-
Marie Acadian French, the use of penser in such a context is not part of the local vernacular, but rather signals the use of an external feature (i.e. penser as a verb of opinion) which may be used in more formal contexts or when interacting with speakers of
66 This example comes from King's 1987 Prince Edward Island corpus for the community of Saint-Louis. 180 external varieties of French. In other words, penser does not function as a verb of opinion
in the local vernacular, but, when used it literally means 'to think', as shown in 108.
(108) Je regarde su Clarence la, des fois quandj'y vas, 1 look.PRES.SG at Clarence there some times when 1 PART go.PRES.SG
puisjepense «£a c' est assez cute.» and 1 think.PRES.SG 3.SG 3.SG be.PRES.lND.SG enough cute 'I look at Clarence's there, sometimes when I go, and I think "That's too cute".' (Dianne, GC-21)
The use of penser in 108 involves not the speaker's opinion, but rather what she is
actually thinking at that particular moment in time. Since penser does not function as a
verb of opinion, it does not form part of the verbs which select the subjunctive in this
variety of Acadian French. The fact that it is the semantics of penser, rather than the
lexical item itself, which accounts for why it does not select the subjunctive in Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French lends support to the claim that the subjunctive is semantically-motivated in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. If pas penser did select the subjunctive, despite the fact that it does not occur as a verb of opinion, then this would be
evidence that it is the lexical item itself (penser) which selects the subjunctive, rather
than the semantics of the verb.
Comparisons with other studies of Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French confirm the
patterns uncovered in the present study. Ryan (1982b) and Gesner (1979) provide examples of the subjunctive and they involve the same verbal and nonverbal matrices as
found here. Gesner also provide examples where he anticipated finding the subjunctive,
but found the indicative instead. The contexts are the same contexts where variability is found in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora examined here: with apres quejusqu 'a tant que,
181 point croire, and a superlative lepluspesant que 'the heaviest that'. This finding further
confirms the analysis presented above where the only verbal context which allows the
indicative is point croire. The examples for the nonverbal matrices found in these sources
are in the past tense, further confirming the pattern noted above.
The literature on other varieties of Acadian French does provide a few examples
of subjunctive-selecting matrices which do not occur in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora.
An example of this is the use of demander as a verb of volition, as shown in 109 from a
New Brunswick variety of Acadian French (Wiesmath 2006).
(109) i demandent que les personnes soient bilingues. 3.PL ask.PRES that the people be.PRES.SBJV.PL bilingual 'They ask that people be bilingual.' (7, 0339, my translation)
While there were no examples of demander as a verb of volition in the corpus, native speakers confirm that it can indeed occur with the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French. Its absence from the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora highlights the limitations of sociolinguistic corpora as they are not a complete record of a particular variety. Finally, the fact that there were no subjunctive-selecting matrices in other varieties of Acadian French which did not select the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French (with the exception of pas penser) supports the argument in favour of a semantic value for this mood.
4.6 Conclusion
In this chapter, I have argued that the subjunctive mood has a semantic value in Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French. The quantitative analysis of the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora
182 reveals that variation between the subjunctive and other moods are subject to semantic
constraints. With verbal matrices, only point croire, the only verb of doubt, admits
variation, whereas the verbs of volition (a much larger group of verbs) categorically
select the subjunctive. This observation suggests that this is a conservative pattern since
Jensen (1974) found that in Old French, volitives were the strongest domain of the subjunctive. With nonverbal matrices, a tense constraint limits the occurrence of the subjunctive. A detailed treatment of each matrix element includes historical information
basis for most matrices. The use of English-origin matrices (e.g. next time que 'next time that') provides evidence for the productivity of the subjunctive mood. Thus, the subjunctive in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French may be characterized by both conservatism and innovation.
The formal account of the data provides a detailed analysis of the variability, which ultimately supports the role of the subjunctive as a semantically productive mood.
The data likewise show that the imperfect subjunctive is still used in this variety of
French, despite its moribund status in most spoken varieties of French.
The analysis presented here incorporates both quantitative variationist sociolinguistics and current generative theory. The methodological aspects of the quantitative analysis are in line with variationist methods and run counter to a number of other studies of the French subjunctive (Laurier 1989, Neumann-Holzschuh 2005) which may account at least in part for different sets of conclusions. Most importantly, the subjunctive mood in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French is not in decline. In fact, there is little variability which cannot be accounted for. The hypothesis that the French
183 subjunctive is in decline due to contact with English receives no support in the case of
Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.67 Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French, while
linguistically conservative in some respects, shows evidence of contact with English- speaking communities (Flikeid 1989). This is also the case with innovative nonverbal
matrices, as we have seen above. The patterns observed for the verbal matrices provides support for distinguishing particular semantic classes. Finally, the imperfect subjunctive shows no sign of decline and it, too, is productive with verbs of English origin. The evidence presented here suggests that the subjunctive mood in this variety of Acadian
French retains aspects of a conservative system and remains productive.
67 Mougeon (p.c.) notes that a finely-grained consideration of degree of language restriction (as defined by Mougeon & Beniak 1991) may play a role in the Baie Sainte-Marie case. However, we do not have the relevant data for the consultants to investigate this factor here. 184 Chapter 5: The expression of future temporal reference
in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French
1. Introduction
The expression of future temporal reference in French has been the object of much
grammatical commentary and recent linguistic research. Primarily, it involves variation
between a synthetic form, as shown in 1; a periphrastic construction composed of the
verb aller 'to go' followed by the infinitive lexical verb, as shown in 2; and use of a
lexical verb in the present tense with a future temporal reference, referred to in the
literature as the futurate present, as shown in 3.
(1) Je reviendrai demain. 1 come.again.FuT. 1 .SG tomorrow 'I'll come back tomorrow.' (Patrick, GC-18)
(2) Et la apresjevas rouvrir ma own petite besogne dans Meteghan. and then after 1 go.PRES.SG open.lNF my own little business in Meteghan 'And then I'm going to open my own little business in Meteghan.' (Veronique, M-296)
(3) Je braquons back dans le mois de [...] mai.68 1 start.PRES.PL back in the month of May 'We start again in the month of [...] May.' (Sam, GC-36)
While there have been numerous studies of the variable for Laurentian varieties (e.g.
Emirkanian & Sankoff 1985, Poplack & Turpin 1999, Grimm & Nadasdi 2011, etc.),
there have been few studies of this variable for Acadian varieties (to my knowledge there
68 The surrounding context shows that this token is not a habitual. 185 is only Chevalier 1996, King & Nadasdi 2003, and one unpublished study, Chiasson
2009). Studies of Acadian varieties show a different system than that reported for
Laurentian varieties, both in terms of use of rates of the variants as well as the constraints governing variation. As we shall see, the present analysis is in line with King and
Nadasdi's 2003 study on the variable in Acadian French. As in the previous chapter, the quantitative analysis is first presented, followed by a formal analysis of the future temporal reference variable in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
2.1 The history of the variants
Variation in the expression of future temporal reference involves a long history of competition in the French language. However, while all three present-day variants have existed throughout a substantial period of the history of the language, they have not always consistently expressed future temporal reference. This section will present a historical overview of the development of the three variants of future temporal reference, that is, the inflected future, the periphrastic future, and the futurate present.
The Modern French inflected future descends from a Vulgar Latin future periphrastic construction composed of the modal auxiliary habere 'to have' along with the infinitive verb (Fleischman 1982). While the construction is generally regarded as a
Vulgar Latin construction, it originated during the Classical Latin period to denote obligation (Bourciez 1967), as shown in 4.
(4) Classical Latin Vulgar Latin cantare habeo sing.lNF have 'I have to sing.' -> 'I will sing.'
186 This Vulgar Latin future construction occurred concurrently with an older, synthetic
form, the -bo future suffix, as shown in 5 (Fleischman 1982).
(5) cantabo sing.FuT '1 will sing.'
The transition from Vulgar Latin to French (and to other Romance languages) involved
the loss of the -bo future construction as well as the reanalysis of reduced reflexes of the
habere auxiliary as a suffix, as shown in 6.
(6) Vulgar Latin Old French cantare habeo chanterai
There is some debate as to whether the new inflected form carried over from Vulgar
Latin into the Romance languages or whether it was an innovative feature of the newly-
formed Romance varieties (see Fleischman 1982 for discussion). Nevertheless, it is clear
that the new synthetic form did occur in the earliest documents for French as it is found
in Les Serments de Strasbourg (843 C.E.), as shown in 7 (Gaste 1888:10, my translation).
(7) prindrai take.FUT 'I will take'
Thus, French from its beginnings has had a synthetic form available to express futurity.
The periphrastic future originated as a verb of spatial movement with the verb aller 'to go' followed by the infinitive verb, as in je vais aller 'I'm going to go'.69
According to Fleischman (1982:84), its earliest attestations (in Middle French) as a verb
69 The use of verbs of movement (sometimes referred to as go-futures) to express futurity occurs in other languages as well (see Torres Cacoullos & Walker 2009 for an analysis of going to in Canadian English). Another periphrastic form with devoir 'require' + infinitive historically marked futurity in French (Gougenheim 1971), though it is unattested in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. 187 denoting futurity were 'initially accompanied by a point-of-time adverb which by itself carried the meaning of (generally proximal) futurity'. Fleischman (1982:84) provides an example of such an adverb as shown in 8, taken from Moliere's Les femmes savantes
(1854 [1672] III, 4) where Philaminte informs Henriette that she will soon reveal her reasons as to why she needs to speak to Henriette.
(8) Venez, on va dans peu vous les faire savoir. come.PRES.2.PL one go.PRES.SG in little 2.PL them make.lNF know.lNF 'Come, we're going to reveal them to you in a little while.'
Thus Fleischman argues that association of these adverbs with the verb of movement likely resulted in the transmission of futurity from the adverbial to the verb phrase.
From the introduction of the periphrastic future as a marker of future temporal reference in the 15th century, grammarians and other commentators have tried to distinguish its functions from those of the inflected future on the basis of a number of factors; most prominent among these is the association of the periphrastic future with proximate events. Maupas (1607) is the first to observe the association between the periphrastic future and proximate temporal reference. Abbe Antonini (1753:327) comments on this association as well and he labels the future variant comprisingy'e vais accompanied by the infinitive as futurprochain 'near future'. Along with Maupas and
Antonini, other grammarians have also characterized the periphrastic future as denoting proximity (Maupas 1607 and Mauvillon 1754 as cited by Gougenheim 1971). Along with commentary on the part of grammarians, textual data from the 15th and 16th centuries likewise show use of the periphrastic future, as noted by Gougenheim (1971). He notes that the periphrastic future was used for a range of functions, such as to express
188 inchoative aspect.70 While grammarians report a range of functions associated with this
variant, the use of the periphrastic future with proximate events appears to be the most consistent association (as noted by Poplack & Dion 2009). The association between the periphrastic future and proximity continues to this day (Grevisse & Goosse 2011 §820), though some argue that it can also be used with distant events (e.g. Confais 1990,
Fleischman 1982). Despite its use as a generalized future marker, commentators referred to the periphrastic future as a colloquial variant in comparison with the inflected future as recently as the early 20th century (see Bauche 1928).
A third variant, the futurate present, involves the use of the present tense with a future temporal reference. The use of a present tense verb with future temporal reference occurred as far back as Classical Latin (e.g. Cicero made use of the so-called praesens pro futuro, as noted in Grandgent 1910) and it continues to be a future variant in
Romance languages, including Modern French.71 Early grammarians, such as Oudin
(1645) and Antonini (1753), note the use of the present tense to denote a future time event along with its association with a temporal adverbial, which helps disambiguate the temporal reference (present vs. future).
2.2 Contemporary studies of the future temporal reference variable
Since the three variants of the future temporal reference variable have co-existed for centuries in French, it is not surprising that there have been numerous studies providing
70 Gougenheim (1971) also comments on the use of .s 'en alter followed by a verb in the infinitive along with the periphrastic future. He notes that while it was an acceptable variant (according to prescriptive sources) up to the end of the 17lh century, it became stigmatized in the 18th century. 71 Fleischman (1982:77) also reports that the futurate present is the generalized marker of future temporal reference in most of southern Italy. 189 commentaries, descriptions, and analyses of this variable. Some studies focus on the
development of the actual forms of the variants, while others examine their nontemporal
functions.
The variants of the expression of future temporal reference have been argued to
have other functions besides marking tense, such as conveying modal distinctions. For
instance, the inflected future has historically been used to express habitual actions. In fact, Haase (1965 [1898]) provides evidence of the inflected future being used to express
habituality in Classical French; he goes on to state that it retains this function in Modern
French. Along with habituality, the future variants have other nontemporal functions.
Within the framework of discourse representation theory, Vet (1993) provides a functional analysis of the future variants. He argues, like Haase, that the variants can be used for functions other than tense, such as aspectual distinctions or modal functions. For instance, Vet argues that the periphrastic future, depending on the context, can be used to denote prospective aspect and also serve in other contexts as a future tense marker. It can likewise be used with a habitual function, as shown in 9, Vet (1993, my translation).
(9) Quand Pedro va prendre une douche, when Pedro go.PRES.SG take.lNF a shower
il fume un cigarillo. 3.SG.M smoke.PRES.SG a cigarillo 'When Pedro takes a shower, he smokes a cigarillo.'
Vet argues that there are contexts where the periphrastic future is a true future variant alongside the inflected future and the futurate present.
190 Using Culioli's (1990) enunciation theory as a framework for investigating the future variants, Laurendeau (2000) argues that the distinction between the periphrastic future and the inflected future involves different modalities. Laurendeau's analysis, based on data from sociolinguistic interviews conducted in two neighbourhoods of Quebec City
(Sainte-Foy and Saint-Sauveur, see Deshaies & Laforge 1981 for a quantitative analysis of the same data), proposes that the periphrastic future involves the assertion of the future event, while the inflected future involves a lack of assertion. He observes a near- categorical effect of sentential polarity on variant choice (the inflected future occurs in negative contexts while the periphrastic future occurs in affirmative contexts). To explain this difference, Laurendeau proposes that the inflected future functions as a marker of non-assertive modality. Negation further serves to increase the non-assertive modality and therefore it occurs with the inflected variant.
The use of the future variants with nontemporal (modality-related) functions has given rise to a debate regarding their status as tense markers. For instance, Bybee
(1985:157) argues that since future inflections may exhibit functions other than conveying temporal information, it should not belong to the same category (tense) as present or past tense inflections. Smith (2009), however, provides a counterargument to
Bybee by arguing that the French inflected future should be considered a tense, based on a number of criteria. While Bybee argues that the multiple functions of the inflected future is evidence that it should not be regarded as a marker of grammatical tense, Smith argues that other tenses (such as the past and present) are also involved in nontemporal
191 uses. For instance, 10 shows the imperfect being used with a conditional function (Smith
2009).
(10) Si Jean passait 1' examen, il yreussiait. if Jean take.lMP.SG the exam 3.SG.M it pass.lMP.SG 'If Jean took the exam, he would succeed it.'
As 10 shows, the imperfect, like the inflected future, can be used without a strictly
temporal function. Smith (2009:188) also argues that French past tense inflections can
also convey aspectual information since the imperfect often conveys an imperfective
viewpoint while the pluperfect conveys perfective viewpoint aspect. Smith concludes,
then, that the inflected future should indeed be considered a tense marker, despite the fact
that it can be used for other functions.
Along with analyses which focus on functions of the variants, other studies
propose formal analyses. For instance, Roberts (1993) proposes a generative account of
how the morphological forms of the inflected future developed in Romance languages
from Classical and Late Latin. In a similar vein, D'hulst (2004) proposes an analysis
which accounts for the development of the inflected future as well as the conditional in
French and Italian. While Roberts' (1993) account turns on reanalysis as a mechanism,
D'hulst makes use of Giorgi and Pianesi's (1997) framework for representing time in grammatical structure. Roberts concludes that the grammaticalization of the habere construction into Romance futures can be accounted for from a diachronic syntax perspective. D'hulst focuses on the development of the conditional as a future in the past which is linked to the evolution of the future and conditional in Romance languages from the habere construction.
192 In another strand of research, Helland (1995) argues that the variability between the periphrastic future and the inflected future can be accounted for within a semantico- pragmatic approach. He argues that the periphrastic future is formally more complex than the inflected future due to the fact that the temporal perspective of the periphrastic includes the present as well as the future. In the case of the inflected future, the temporal perspective involves solely the future, detached from the present. Helland's approach assumes that all French verb tenses involve abstract information related to the speech time, the reference time, and the event time (based in part on Reichenbach 1947). This information is provided via semantic operators which express either finite information and, in the case of complex tenses, nontemporal operators. He argues that the structure for the periphrastic future involves an operator, ALLER, which blocks a following finite verb. The presence of this operator results in a present tense conjugation of aller 'to go' and it likewise links the temporal perspective to the present, as shown in 11.
(11) PRESENT (ALLER (il venir)) PRESENT (il aller venir)) II va venir.
In the case of the inflected future, the structure is less complex, as in 12.
(12) FUTUR (proposition basique)72
His analysis leads him to make a series of predictions with regards to the presence of adverbial temporal specification. For instance, the effects of proximity are said to disappear in the presence of a temporal adverbial. Likewise, he hypothesizes that the periphrastic future is less likely to occur with extra specification than the inflected future.
72 'FUTURE (basic clause)', my translation. 193 There have thus been analyses of the future variants from a number of theoretical perspectives, most of which involve nontemporal functions or which propose accounts for the inflected future's development from the earlier Latin habere constructions. These studies (both functionalist and generativist) show that the future variants can be used to convey more than grammatical tense in both earlier stages of the language as well as in
Modern French. In addition to the functional and formal analyses of the future variants, there have also been a number of corpus-based studies which seek to account for future temporal reference in contemporary spoken French, to be discussed in the next section.
2.3 Quantitative studies
There has also been a proliferation of quantitative sociolinguistic studies of future temporal reference for varieties of French spoken in Canada and Europe. The first sociolinguistic study of this variable was conducted by Deshaies and Laforge (1981).
Their analysis of data from 54 interviews with young male and female speakers (ranging from 10 years old to 17 years old) from Sainte-Foy and Saint-Sauveur (neighbourhoods in Quebec City) shows that the periphrastic variant occurs nearly categorically in affirmative contexts (99.5%) and the inflected variant occurs predominantly in negative contexts (96.9%). This study, however, does not include the futurate present as a third variant. It does reveal the presence of a polarity constraint in this variety of Laurentian
French (see Laurendeau 2000 for a possible explanation of this finding, mentioned above). Deshaies and Laforge also examine other contexts which show variability (e.g. in the matrix clause of a mais que + subjunctive, imperatives, etc.). However, the constraint found to exert the strongest effect on variant choice is sentential polarity. They also
194 report that the periphrastic future situates the future temporal reference event in relation
to the present, unlike with the inflected future, which detaches the event's temporal
reference from the present. They likewise note the association of the inflected future with
the hypothetical, as shown in 13, taken from Deshaies and Laforge (1981:30).
(13) Si i disent qu' on parle mal, i viendront nous 1' if 3.PL say.PRES.PL that we speak.PRES.SG bad 3.PL come.FuT.3.PL us it
dire dans face. tell.lNF in face 'If they say we speak bad, they will come tell us to our faces.'
It should be noted that Deshaies and Laforge do not exclude tokens which have a nontemporal function (e.g. hypothetical, habituals, etc.). Thus, the results are not directly comparable to those for later studies, although the strong effect of sentential polarity on variant choice is confirmed by later studies which refine the variable context. Finally, they argue that the near-categorical use of the periphrastic future mirrors a similar linguistic change which has come to completion in this variety and in most other varieties of French: the replacement of the simple past by the present perfect.
Following on the Deshaies and Laforge study, Emirkanian and Sankoff (1985) examined this sociolinguistic variable in the 1971 corpus of Montreal French (Sankoff et al. 1976). Emirkanian and Sankoff s study, like Deshaies and Laforge's (1981) study, does not exclude nontemporal uses of the variants (e.g. habituals, verbs of spatial movements, etc.), though they do exclude fixed expressions from their analysis. They do not include the futurate present as a third variant. They report that the periphrastic future is used at an overall rate of 79% while the inflected future occurs at an overall rate of
195 21%. The authors report a strong effect of sentential polarity on variant choice in that the
inflected future is used more frequently in negative contexts while the periphrastic future
is used exclusively in affirmative contexts, similar to Deshaies and Laforge's findings.
Unlike Deshaies and Laforge's study, however, Emirkanian and Sankoff tested the effect
of social factors, such as age, on variant choice. They report that younger speakers prefer
the periphrastic future while older consultants use the inflected future more than younger
consultants, which, according to the apparent-time construct, suggests that the
periphrastic future is increasing in use while the inflected future is losing ground. They
also report that socioeconomic class influences variant choice with the higher classes
using the inflected future more than lower classes.
Zimmer (1994) provides an analysis of data from the 1984 Montreal corpus (a
resampling of the community first investigated in 1971) and compares her findings with
those of Emirkanian and Sankoff s (1985) study. Zimmer reports that the periphrastic future has undergone a slight increase in overall usage (83% in the 1984 corpus in comparison with 79% in the 1971 corpus). She also reports that while the periphrastic future did not occur in negative contexts in the 1971 corpus, there are a few tokens of the periphrastic future in negative contexts (N=14) in the 1984 corpus, which she interprets as the expansion of the periphrastic future in a context previously solely occupied by the inflected future. While Zimmer's methodology is identical to Emirkanian and Sankoff s in that she does not exclude nontemporal uses of the variants, she does highlight the methodological problem of including nontemporal tokens and she suggests that in future
196 research the variable context should not include tokens such as habituals and other 'false
futures'.
Recognizing the methodological problems with previous studies of the Montreal
corpus, Blondeau (2006) provides a real-time analysis of three time periods of the
Montreal corpora (1971, 1984, and 1995) while refining the variable context to exclude
nontemporal uses of the future variants. Rather than examining community behaviour,
Blondeau follows 12 individuals across a 24-year timespan (1971 consultants
reinterviewed for the 1984 and 1995 corpora) in order to examine whether their linguistic
patterns remain the same or whether they changed across their lifespan.73 She reports that
from the 1971 to the 1984 corpus, all of the consultants in her sample increased use of the
inflected future from an overall of 14% in 1971 to a rate of 22% by 1995. This increase is
perhaps somewhat surprising, as previous studies suggested that the inflected future is in
decline. However, Blondeau argues that the increase in use of the inflected future is in
fact a case of age-grading rather than reflective of an actual change in the system. Since
the consultants were much younger in the 1971 sample (with an average age of 23), she
proposes that this cohort's entry into the workforce was accompanied by an increase of
standard variants (in this case, the inflected future). In terms of linguistic factors,
Blondeau found once again the strong effect of sentential polarity on variant choice for
all three time periods. Temporal distance and adverbial specification, however, played no
role in conditioning variant choice.
73 The Montreal corpora has allowed researchers to study various dimensions of expression of future temporal reference not afforded by synchronic studies. Its longitudinal focus allows for individuals' linguistic behaviour to be tracked throughout their lifespans and can serve as a comparison with the wider community behaviour. 197 Sankoff and Wagner (2006) conducted another study on change in individuals'
behaviour using the Montreal corpora. While Blondeau studied 12 individuals, Sankoff
and Wagner analyzed data for 60 individuals who were interviewed in 1971 and in 1984,
along with 12 who were also reinterviewed in 1995. They report an overall rate of 74%
for the periphrastic future and a 26% rate for the inflected future (total N=5,473). Their
study also takes into consideration a number of social factors, such as age, sex, and
socioeconomic status, the latter measured on a six-point occupational scale based on
Thibault & Vincent 1990. Since the inflected future occurs almost exclusively in negative
contexts (i.e. there is hardly any variation), they exclude the negative tokens. Despite the
fact that the results for the community suggest that the periphrastic future is gaining
ground, only consultants who were in the higher social classes actually increased their
use of the inflected future, thus suggesting that the inflected future, along with its
decrease in frequency, has become a formal variant, at least in comparison with the
periphrastic future. In contrast, consultants in the other socioeconomic categories
remained stable with regards to their use of the inflected and periphrastic future. Results
of multiple regression analyses reveal that speaker age is significant, as younger speakers use the periphrastic future at higher rates than do older consultants.
These studies of Quebec French have shown that, overall, the periphrastic future is increasing in usage and that the inflected future, while decreasing, has taken on the role of a formal feature. Likewise, the analyses of the linguistic system have allowed researchers to discern the linguistic environments which condition variant choice. By and large, the strongest factor across studies of Quebec French has been the effect of
198 sentential polarity on variant choice, with the inflected future occupying negative contexts while the periphrastic is reserved for affirmative contexts. Recent data suggest that while the inflected future may have firmly held ground in negative contexts, the periphrastic future has begun to invade this last bastion of the inflected variant.
There has also been research for this variable in the Laurentian variety spoken in the Ottawa-Hull region. Poplack and Turpin's (1999) study of the future temporal reference in Ottawa-Hull provides an important methodological contribution to the literature in that the authors further delineate what constitutes the variable context in contrast with earlier studies for this variable. For instance, they exclude tokens which denote habitual events, verbs denoting spatial movement, protases of ^/-clauses, or contexts which admit no variation (e.g. fixed expressions, songs, quotations from literary sources). Habituals do not refer to future temporal reference and so do not form part of the variable context. Verbs denoting spatial movement are ambiguous for the periphrastic future as they might have present temporal reference and so are excluded. Protases of conditional clauses do not admit the inflected future and fixed expressions do not admit variation. Thus, Poplack and Turpin circumscribe the variable context not by the actual forms of the future, but rather by explicit future temporal reference. They also operationalize a number of hypotheses from the literature into testable factor groups. For instance, they test whether the proximity of the future event has an effect on variant choice. As grammarians and commentators have long remarked on the association between the periphrastic future and proximal states and events (e.g. Antonini 1753,
Maupas 1607), Poplack and Turpin coded each token as involving either proximal or
199 distal temporal reference. They also test whether the presence of temporal adverbial
modification has an effect on variant choice (either specific, non-specific or absence) as
has been suggested in earlier quantitative studies (Emirkanian & Sankoff 1985, Jeanjean
1988) as well as in formal analyses (Helland 1995). Another factor group they included is
that of imminence, which relates to prospective aspect and which has been suggested in
the literature to have an effect on variant choice (Blanche-Benveniste 1990, Vet 1993).
They also test whether the use of the future variants are dependent on another event (i.e.
contingent vs. assumed), as proposed by Deshaies and Laforge (1981) who suggest a
hypothetical value for the inflected future. Poplack and Turpin also consider the effect of grammatical subject on variant choice in order to test whether the periphrastic future is more subjective than the inflected future. If it is, it is expected to occur more frequently with a first person singular subject. They also test the effect of sentential polarity on variant choice. While grammarians and commentators do not mention the association of polarity with respect to variant choice, earlier quantitative studies do suggest an association between polarity and the future variants (e.g. Deshaies & Laforge 1981,
Emirkanian & Sankoff 1985). While the underlying mechanisms which account for the link between variant choice and polarity are not entirely clear, there are some hypotheses put forward in the literature, such as that negative contexts involve a modal function
(non-assertion), as suggested by Laurendeau (2000). Poplack and Turpin also consider whether the lexical verb may be associated with particular future variants.
The authors examined all three variants in the Ottawa-Hull corpus and find that, overall, the inflected future is used at a rate of 20%, the periphrastic at a rate of 73%, and 200 the fiiturate present at a rate of 7%. They conduct separate multivariate analyses for each variant (each pitted against the other two) in order to determine what linguistic and social factors condition choice of each variant. Overwhelmingly (and perhaps unsurprisingly considering the results of the previous Montreal and Quebec studies), sentential polarity is the strongest predictor of variant choice for both the periphrastic and inflected variants in the Ottawa-Hull corpus. The presence of adverbial specification is also significant, with non-specific adverbs favouring the inflected future, specific adverbs favouring the futurate present, and the absence of adverbials favouring the periphrastic future. They also find that imminence, grammatical person, and contingency condition the variants, although less so than polarity and adverbial specification. They find that non-imminent contexts favour the futurate present, but did not surface as significant in the analyses for the other two variants. In terms of grammatical person, they report that formal vous favours the inflected future while other grammatical persons favour the periphrastic future. Grammatical person is not selected as significant for the analysis of the futurate present. The association of the inflected future with formal vous is interpreted by the authors as evidence of the association of the inflected future with a more formal speech style. Contingency was only selected as significant in the analysis of the inflected future variant with contingent events favouring the inflected future. While Poplack and Turpin included this factor group to test whether assumed events would be associated with the periphrastic future, it did not surface as significant in the periphrastic future analysis.
They point out that the magnitude of effect is small, with a range of only 6. However, they argue this result to be an epiphenomenon related to adverbial specification. Finally,
201 temporal distance plays a (small) role in that proximate contexts tend to favour the
inflected and periphrastic futures while the distal contexts tend to favour the futurate
present. Temporal distance is, however, far outweighed in importance by sentential
polarity, the latter absent from centuries grammatical commentary. Thus, Poplack and
Turpin argue that, contrary to prescriptive norms, the periphrastic future has become the
default future marker while the inflected future remains productive only in negative
contexts and in fixed expressions.
A more recent study of the future in Ottawa-Hull French (Poplack & Dion 2009)
compares the results for Ottawa-Hull French with usage in diachronic sources (folklore
recordings made in a number of regions in Quebec by Luc Lacourciere (1946) and
Carmen Roy (1981) with speakers born as early as the mid-19th century). Poplack and
Dion also conduct a meta-analysis of commentary on the forms of the future in grammars
and prescriptive sources ranging from 1530 to the present (though it should be noted that
the bulk of these sources are from the 19th and 20th centuries). Their goal is to compare
prescriptive discourses surrounding the future temporal reference variable with actual
usage as exhibited in the Ottawa-Hull corpus and in the Recits du fran^ais quebecois
d'autrefois corpus. Of course, earlier grammarians did not comment on Laurentian
varieties in particular since the discussion is largely centred on the variety spoken in the
Paris area. While Poplack and Dion's meta-analysis reveals a mixture of comments
regarding variant use, the only overwhelmingly consistent finding across grammarians
and across the time periods is that the periphrastic future is argued to occur with
proximate or immediate future eventualities. Interestingly, there are virtually no
202 comments regarding the effect of polarity on the three variants.74 Poplack and Dion
conclude on the basis of these facts that prescriptive sources neither influence nor do they
accurately represent actual spoken usage. While one might debate this generalization, it is
still striking that the Laurentian results differ dramatically from grammatical
commentary.75
Studies of future temporal reference have also been conducted for Laurentian
varieties spoken in Ontario. Grimm and Nadasdi (2011) examine future temporal
reference in four communities in Ontario (Cornwall, Hawkesbury, Pembroke, and North
Bay). Their data are taken from the Mougeon and Beniak 1978 Ontario French corpus
(Mougeon & Beniak 1991). Grimm and Nadasdi's results show that the inflected future
occurs at lower rates (11%) than any other variety of French studied thus far and that the
polarity constraint is, in communities such as Hawkesbury, categorical. In another study
of Ontario French, Grimm (2010a) conducts a real-time study of this variable in
Hawkesbury with data from 1978 and 2005. The 2005 corpus (Mougeon et al. 2005) is a
resampling of the communities from the 1978 corpus. Perhaps the most striking finding from this real-time study is that while the 1978 data showed that all negative tokens were in the inflected future and all affirmative tokens were in the periphrastic future, the 2005 data showed that the periphrastic future had crept into negative contexts at a rate of 26%.
Thus, if the negative context is the last remaining stronghold for the inflected future, the
74 Poplack and Dion (2009) note that there is only one case of a grammarian (in work published in 1995) who notes the association between the inflected future and negative contexts. 75 See Lodge (2004) and King, Martineau, and Mougeon (2011) for a different perspective on the utility of grammatical commentary in sociolinguistic research. 203 increase of the periphrastic future in this context may be evidence that the change is
nearing completion.
There have also been studies of this variable in varieties of Acadian French. As is
the case with the early studies of Laurentian French (Deshaies & Laforge 1981,
Emirkanian & Sankoff 1985), the first Acadian study of this variable (Chevalier 1996) did not exclude nontemporal uses of the future variants. Rather, Chevalier examines the morphological forms of the future (the inflected and periphrastic futures), which includes habitual and other nontemporal tokens along with true cases of future temporal reference.
She reports that the periphrastic future is used at a rate of 62% (total N=242) in southeastern New Brunswick, much lower than in any of the Laurentian varieties. While she does not conduct statistical significance tests on the variable (only percentages and raw numbers are provided), she argues that negative contexts and embedded clauses introduced by quand 'when' seem to occur with higher rates of the inflected future (67%, total N=30, and 60%, total N= 15, respectively) than the overall rate of 37% (total
N=242). Due to these methodological differences, the results of this study are not directly comparable with more recent studies, such as Blondeau (2006), King and Nadasdi
(2003), and Poplack and Turpin (1999).
King and Nadasdi (2003) provide an analysis of future temporal reference in varieties of Acadian French spoken in Prince Edward Island (for the villages of Abram-
Village and Saint-Louis) and in Newfoundland (for the village of L'Anse-a-Canards). In their study, they define the variable context as did Poplack and Turpin (1999) in that only tokens which express future temporal reference are included, which allows for a
204 straightforward comparison with Poplack and Turpin's study.76 They also adopt Poplack
and Turpin's (1999) model for the operationalizing of hypotheses as to which linguistic factors may condition variant usage.
Their results show that, in contrast with studies of Laurentian varieties, the
inflected future is used at a much greater overall proportion (53%). Further, they show
the Acadian French linguistic system for this variable to be different than for Laurentian
varieties. The strongest factor conditioning variant choice is temporal distance, with the periphrastic future being more likely with events anticipated to occur up to a week after the utterance time while the inflected future is more likely to occur with actions anticipated to occur in more than a week after the utterance time and with continuous actions. This finding, they argue, confirms early grammarians' characterizations of the periphrastic future as le futur proche. The second strongest factor group is certainty, with certain events favouring the periphrastic future. They also report that the presence of quand favours the inflected future, as suggested by Chevalier (1996). The other factor groups (e.g. adverbial specification, contingency, grammatical subject, and polarity) are not selected as significant. They argue that the lack of an effect of adverbial specification is due to the fact that futurate present tokens were excluded, a variant often associated with time adverbials. Perhaps the most striking finding is a complete lack of effect for sentential polarity for all three communities, a sharp contrast with studies of Laurentian varieties of French. While many studies of Laurentian varieties report this to be the strongest constraint on variant choice, King and Nadasdi's study shows that this is not the
76 They exclude the futurate present from their analysis since it was infrequent in their data. 205 case in three varieties of Acadian French. Thus, their study points to an important
difference between Acadian French and Laurentian French with respect to this variable.
A recent unpublished study of the future variants in media data (specifically, the
Acadieman cartoon TV series which aired on Rogers TV from 2005 to 2009) examined
linguistic and social constraints on variant choice (Chiasson 2009). While media
representations are not directly comparable with studies which analyze sociolinguistic
interviews, they can nevertheless be examined to determine whether in very general
terms similar factors exert an influence on variant choice.77 Chiasson finds that the
inflected future is used at higher rates (33%, total N=505) than found in Laurentian
varieties. This rate is lower than what King and Nadasdi (2003) found in sociolinguistic
corpora of Acadian French, but it is much higher than in any Laurentian variety of
French. She also reports a high frequency of the futurate present (25%), much higher than do other studies. The statistical analysis is, however, perhaps most revealing. Chiasson conducted separate multivariate analyses for each variant and reports that the strongest
linguistic factor on variant choice is temporal reference with proximate events favouring the periphrastic future. She also found that a number of other factors were statistically significant: adverbial specification, grammatical person, polarity, and etymology of the verb.78 Though the effects of these factors were less significant than for temporal distance, she did find that non-specific adverbials favour the inflected future and specific adverbials favour the futurate present. The absence of adverbial specification favours the
77 See Coupland 2007 for discussion of language use in such media and its relation to use in face-to-face interaction. 7S As outlined in Chapter 2, verbs of English origin are morphologically integrated in varieties of Acadian French (cf. Comeau 2007a). 206 periphrastic future. Second person subjects favour the futurate present while first and
third person subjects favour the other variants. Two factor groups were only significant in
the analysis with the inflected future as the application value: sentential polarity and
etymology of the verb. She found that the inflected future is favoured in negative contexts and when the verb is of French origin. While an analysis of media data should not be taken as a source of data directly comparable with sociolinguistic interviews, her analysis nevertheless shows that the linguistic system in 'high' performance data79 is fairly similar to spoken language data for Acadian varieties, except for the surprising
OA association of the inflected future and negation.
Stelling (2008) conducts an analysis of future temporal reference in varieties of
American French spoken in the communities of Southbridge, Massachusetts and
Woonsocket, Rhode Island. He considers a number of linguistic and social factors in an analysis of data from the two communities and reports that the inflected future is used a the low rate of 12% (N=969) in his data for both communities. His multivariate analyses reveal that some social factors condition use of the periphrastic variant, namely age
(younger consultants favour) and sex (men favour). In terms of linguistic factors, Stelling finds that the strongest predictor of variant choice is sentential polarity, with negative contexts favouring the inflected future. The other two linguistic factors which were selected as statistically significant are presence of quand 'when' and the presence of an
79 While language use arguably involves performance, the representations found in media such as TV shows is typically referred to as artistic or high performance. 80 It may be the case that there is cross-dialectal variation with respect to the polarity constraint as Chevalier's (1996) study of New Brunswick Acadian French also argues that the inflected future occurs at higher rates in negative contexts. We must await more rigorous studies of traditional sociolinguistic corpora to draw firm conclusions. 207 adverbial. The absence of quand favours the periphrastic future while the lack of adverbial specification favours the inflected future. Stelling reports that factors pertaining to the grammatical subject (person and number) and contingency (^/-clause) were not selected as significant. He did not consider temporal reference as a potential conditioning factor, so we do not know whether this factor group may have an effect in the American varieties he studied. Nevertheless, it is important to note that he reports a low overall rate of the inflected future and the strong effect of polarity, both of which have been reported for Laurentian varieties.
There have also been studies of the future for varieties of European French. For instance, Jeanjean (1988) provides an account of the periphrastic and inflected variants in the European French GARS (Groupe Aixois de Recherches en Syntax) data. Though she reports that the inflected future is used more frequently than the periphrastic variant (58% inflected future, total N=450), she does not exclude so-called false futures, such as use of future morphology to express habitual aspect, and this precludes a direct comparison of her results with North American variationist work.
Blanche-Benveniste (1990) reports on the same GARS data as Jeanjean (1988), although she focuses on the different functions of the periphrastic and inflected future variants. She argues that the periphrastic future can be used to denote prospective aspect and that the inflected future is used more frequently with stative verbs. Despite these different functions, she argues that the inflected future shows no sign of loss. Obviously, the different methodology prevents a direct comparison with North American variationist studies.
208 A recent Master's thesis (Roberts 2010) does provide comparable results with the
North American studies outlined above. Roberts investigates the future temporal
reference variable in the Beeching Corpus, an online corpus of spoken speech collected
between 1980 and 1990 for Brittany and Paris in the north and Lot and Minervois in the
south.81 The overall distribution of the variants are different than in Laurentian varieties,
but similar to Acadian varieties, in that the inflected future is used at a rate of 41% (total
N=433). However, an analysis of the linguistic and social factors governing variant
choice reveals that sentential polarity is once again the most significant factor group, with
the periphrastic variant favoured in affirmative contexts and the inflected variant favoured in negative contexts. Roberts also considers the effect of priming (i.e. whether the variant of the previous token has an effect on variant choice) and found that the periphrastic future tends to occur more frequently if preceded by a periphrastic future.82
The inflected future is, however, not conditioned by priming. In terms of social factors,
Roberts finds that level of education correlated positively with use of the inflected future.
The fact that the same linguistic constraint, sentential polarity, is operative in both
Laurentian varieties and in European varieties suggests that the constraint might have originated in Europe prior to settlement in the New World, even though it is absent from grammatical commentary. The lack of such an effect in varieties of Acadian French might be due to the fact that Acadians originated from different parts of France than did
Quebec settlers. On the other hand, the sentential polarity constraint might have
81 It must be noted that this corpus is highly heterogeneous. 82 See Poplack and Tagliamonte (1996) for discussion of the effect of priming on past temporal reference in English. 209 developed independently in European and Laurentian French. Since Acadian French is linguistically conservative in many respects, it should follow that if the polarity constraint predates New World settlement, it may be found in the most conservative varieties of
Acadian French, such as the Baie Sainte-Marie variety. However, this is not the case. It is left for future research to shed light on the polarity constraint since few explanations and no consensus has emerged. Roberts' results, in fact, bring into question the hypothesis that the negative context is the inflected future's last productive domain. If this were the case, we might have anticipated a comparable overall frequency of the inflected future
(i.e. somewhere closer to the 20% reported in the Laurentian varieties rather than the 41%
Roberts' reports). Nevertheless, we cannot rely on overall variant frequency when comparing results from corpora that may not be entirely comparable due to different data collection methodologies.
While there have been sociolinguistic studies of the future temporal reference variable using a range of data and different methodologies, there are a number of patterns which can be discerned. First and foremost, the inflected future appears to be in decline in Laurentian varieties of French, giving way for the periphrastic future to become the default variant. While this may be the case in Laurentian varieties, the situation is different in varieties of Acadian French, which consistently show higher rates of the inflected future. Aside from overall frequency, studies of Laurentian varieties also report that sentential polarity to be the strongest factor group to condition variant choice.
83 For instance, Deshaies and Laforge (1981) and Jeanjean (1988) suggest that a hypothetical function associated with both negation and the inflected future might account for this association. Laurendeau (2000) proposes the association between negation and the inflected future results from modal functions of both (i.e. they are both non-assertive). 210 Conversely, prior research on varieties of Acadian French reports a lack of effect for the
polarity constraint.84 Instead, temporal reference is the strongest factor group for Acadian
French, a factor group which is quite weak in Laurentian varieties. Taken together, these
findings suggest differences between Laurentian varieties and Acadian varieties with
respect to the expression of future temporal reference. The present study investigates the
variable in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French and thus contributes to our understanding of the future temporal reference system.
3.1 Future temporal reference in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French
The analysis presented here involves a variationist analysis of the future temporal reference variable in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French. The analysis will determine whether the system in this community patterns like that of other Acadian varieties which retain rich inflectional verbal morphology (i.e. those of Prince Edward Island and
Newfoundland, King & Nadasdi 2003). The three variants for this variable are the inflected (or morphological) future formed with a suffix, shown in 1 (repeated here in
14), the periphrastic future formed by the verb aller 'to go' with a verb in the infinitive, shown in 2 (repeated here in 15), and the futurate present which has the same morphological form as a present tense verb, but which has future temporal reference, shown in 3 (repeated here in 16).
(14) Je reviendrai demain. 1 come.again.FuT.l.SG tomorrow 'I'll come tomorrow again.' (Patrick, GC-18)
84 The two exceptions are Chevalier 1996, a study which included nontemporal tokens, and Chiasson 2009, a study which analyzes media data. Both studies present analyses of New Brunswick varieties of Acadian French. 211 (15) Et la apresjevas rouvrir ma own petite besogne dans Meteghan. and then after 1 go.PRES.SG open.lNF my own little business in Meteghan 'And then I'm going to open my own little business in Meteghan.' (Veronique, M-296)
(16) Je braquons back dans le mois de [...] mai. 1 start.PRES.PL back in the month of May 'We start again in the month of [...] May.' (Sam, GC-36)
The quantitative analysis of the Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French data will also determine how the variants are linguistically and socially constrained. Following this, the formal analysis will show how linguistic constraints may be represented in the grammar.
3.2 The variable context
The delimitation of the variable context involves ensuring that all tokens express an event or state which occurs in the future. An important distinction must be made between the morphological forms of the future and future temporal reference: the former refers to the actual morphological forms themselves while the latter refers to the expression of an event or a state at a time following the utterance time. In this analysis, the variable context is defined as ways of expressing an event or a state which occur posterior to the utterance time. Thus the approach adopted here is similar to other variationist sociolinguistic studies of this variable in varieties of French spoken in North America
(e.g. King & Nadasdi 2003, Poplack & Turpin 1999) thus enabling a direct comparison of results across studies.
In order to ensure that every occurrence of the variable was extracted, the transcripts of the sociolinguistic interviews in the sample were reviewed. Each
212 occurrence of any of the three variants was extracted manually. This was a necessary step since the futurate present has no morphological form distinct from the present tense (i.e.
there is no easily searchable morphological ending, as with the inflected future, and there
is no distinct form, as is the case with the verb alter with the periphrastic future).
Following this initial extraction phase, I ran a search using the concordance program
MonoConc Pro to capture any remaining inflected and periphrastic future tokens.
3.3 Excluded tokens
As with all sociolinguistic variables, it is necessary to remove tokens which do not form part of the variable context. Any verb form for either of the three variants which does not make reference to a time posterior to the utterance time had to be excluded from the variable context. An example of a 'false future' is habituals, as shown with the inflected future in 17 and with the periphrastic future in 18.
(17) Elle arrivera puiselle dira «Well,j'ai 3.SG.F arrive.FUT.SG and 3.SG.F say.FuT.SG well 1 have.PRES.l.SG
la night off. » the night off 'She'll come here and say "Well, I have the night off.'" (Marie, GC-6)
(18) Des temps la, j'allons diner la. some times there 1 go.PRES.PL dine.lNF there 'Sometimes, we'll go eat dinner there.' (Marie, GC-6)
Tokens such as those in 17-18 were excluded from the data set since these do not make reference to a future time, but rather to a habitual one.
213 Tokens of the periphrastic future with a verb of movement (such as aller 'to go',
venir 'to come', etc.) are likewise excluded since they are ambiguous as to whether the
token in question describes a present temporal reference event or whether it describes a
future temporal reference one. 19-20 show examples which were excluded due to this
ambiguity.
(19) Maismoijevas aller voir. but me 1 go.PRES.SG go.lNF see.lNF 'But me, I'll go see.' (Sam, GC-36) (20) Je vas aller le fermer. 1 go.PRES.SG go.lNF it close.lNF 'I'm going to go close it.' (Michelle, GC-29)
Since we cannot determine whether these are cases of the periphrastic future or the present tense (denoting an event taking place at the moment of speech), tokens such as these were excluded from the variable context.
Another context which was excluded are contexts for which there is no variation, such as in fixed expressions, as in 21-22.
(21) Bientu reviendras, Patrick! well 2.SG come.again.FUT.SG Patrick 'Well, come again, Patrick!' (Evelyn, GC-18)
(22) Euh, [...] j' allons dire « Bangor ». Uh 1 go.PRES.PL say.LNF Bangor 'Uh, [...] we're going to say "Bangor."' (Benoit, M-340)
With these two particular expressions, use of other variants is not possible and as such these do not constitute contexts which form part of the envelope of variation. The leave-
214 taking expression Tu reviendras! 'Come again!' has the form of an inflected future, but
the periphrastic future or the futurate present cannot be used in this context. Likewise, the
expression J'allons dire ... 'We're going to say ...' allows the speaker to provide an
approximate answer, but it does not permit the other variants (i.e. the inflected future or
the futurate present) and so must be excluded from the analysis.
Another context which must be excluded involve use of imperative commands
which can occur with either the inflected future, as shown in 23, or the periphrastic
future. While these tokens involve a reference time posterior to the speech time, this
particular construction involves modality and not distinctly future temporal reference.
(23) Tu t' emoyeras.85 2.SG REFL ask.FuT.SG 'Ask them.' (Martin, GC-19)
Following common practice, another context which was excluded is the reported
speech of others, as shown in 24. This environment was excluded since we cannot be
certain whether the consultant is reporting the speech verbatim.
O/r (24) Elle a dit«Oh je vas me larguer su le couch. » she had said oh 1 go.PRES.SG REFL let.go.LNF on the couch 'She said "Oh I'm going to lie down on the couch.'" (Marie, GC-6)
Tokens with false starts and hesitations, as in 25, were also excluded.
(25) Parce que [...] ils allont patiner de, de quoi/ because that 3.PL go.PRES.PL skate.INF some some thing 'Because [...] they will go skating some-, something/' (Evelyn, GC-13)
85 The Acadian verb s 'emoyer means 'to inquire'. See Poirier 1993 for its etymology. S6 The French preposition su (from sur 'on') without the final r is an archaic feature originating in France (see Mougeon & Beniak 1991). 215 As 25 shows, Evelyn does not finish her utterance and the only part that is intact is the subject ils 'they' and the verb allontpatiner 'go skating.' Thus, we cannot determine whether there are verb complements or adverbials which may constrain variant choice.
Tokens where the consultant repeats a fully-formed utterance were only included once and occurrences where the utterance is clearly interrupted were also excluded from the data set.
3.4 Social constraints
In order to determine whether variation in expressing future temporal reference is socially constrained, I consider whether two social factors might have an effect on variant choice: sex and age of the consultant.
Some studies which have shown the effect of sex on the future temporal reference include Grimm 2010b, while others report that it is not statistically significant (Poplack &
Turpin 1999, Roberts 2010). Each token is coded for the sex of the consultant who uttered it.
As others have claimed that the inflected future may be in decline in varieties of
Canadian French, I tested the effect of age on variant choice. While some studies conducted real-time analyses (Blondeau 2006, Grimm 2010b, Sankoff & Wagner 2006), others make use of the apparent-time construct in order to study whether the future temporal reference system is undergoing change. For instance, Poplack and Turpin
(1999) found that older speakers (those 55 years old and above) favour the inflected future while middle-aged speakers (those between 35 and 54 years old) and younger speakers (those between 15 and 34 years old) favour the periphrastic future. They
216 interpret this finding as indicative of a change in progress, with the periphrastic future
replacing the inflected future. I include the consultant's age to test whether this factor
group has an effect on usage. I used the same breakdown for age as used for the
subjunctive analysis: younger (for consultants younger than 30), middle-aged (for
consultants between 30 and 55 years old), and older (for consultants older than 60 years
old). While there are data for younger and older consultants for both Grosses Coques and
Meteghan, there are data for middle-aged consultants for Grosses Coques only. If there is
a change in the future temporal reference system in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French,
we should be able to find evidence of this by comparing across ages, according to the
apparent-time construct. Alternatively, if the Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French future
temporal reference system is not undergoing change, then age should not be selected as
significant in the multivariate analysis assuming that variant frequency is not affected by
age-grading.
3.5 Linguistic constraints
In order to test what linguistic factors may condition the future temporal reference system, I operationalized a number of conditioning factors based on prior studies of this
variable (King & Nadasdi 2003, Poplack & Turpin 1999).
3.5.1 Temporal reference
Historically, the periphrastic future has been referred to as le futurproche 'the near future', suggesting a distinction between the inflected and periphrastic variants based on temporal reference. In order to determine whether temporal reference has any effect on variant choice, each token was coded based on the temporal reference: within the hour, within the day, within the week, longer than a week, longer than a year, and
indeterminate, shown in 26-31. Studies of Laurentian French have found this factor group to play a minor role (e.g. Poplack & Turpin 1999) while the King and Nadasdi
(2003) study of three varieties of Acadian French found it to be the most significant factor group. The data in 26-31 provide the breakdown which was adopted here, based, in part, on King and Nadasdi (2003). While the particular breaks in time are somewhat arbitrary, these factors are used to compare the Baie Sainte-Marie system with the varieties studied by King and Nadasdi (2003).
(26) Within the hour Well, je vas changer la tape de bord. well 1 go.PRES.SG change.INF the tape of side 'Well, I'm going to change the tape to the other side.' (Carole, GC-6)
(27) Within the day Je vas jouer 9a de soir, voir quoi ce-que c'est. 1 go.PRES.SG play.INF that this evening see.LNF what that it be.PRES.SG 'I'll play that tonight to see what it is.' [referring to playing a cassette] (Carole, GC-23)
(28) Within the week Ala fin de la semaine, je pourrai mettre mes pipes la. at the end of the week 1 can.FUT. 1 .SG put.lNF my pipes there 'At the end of the week, I'll be able to put my pipes there.' (Eric, GC-23)
(29) Longer than a week, shorter than a year So mais que 9' arrive a New Year's, j'aurons des tickets, so when that 3.SG arrive.PRES.SG at New Year's 1 have.FuT.PL some tickets 'So when New Year's comes, we'll have tickets.' (Francis, M-341)
218 (30) Longer than a year J'allons rester la quatre, cinq ans puis la j'allons 1 go.PRES.PL stay.lNF there four five years and then 1 go.PRES.PL
venir back par icitte. come.lNF back over here 'We're going to stay there four, five years and then we're going to come back here.' (Carole, GC-23)
(31) Indeterminate temporal reference £a va -ti se marier? 3.SG go.PRES.SG INTREFL marry.LNF 'Are you going to get married?' (Tina, M-296)
As the examples in 26-31 show, a distinction was made for temporal reference based on within the hour, within the day, within the week, within the month, within the year, longer than a year, and indeterminate temporal reference. King and Nadasdi's (2003) breakdown was similar in that they coded for within the hour, within the day, within the week, longer than a week, and continual. A slightly narrower breakdown was adopted in the present study in order to determine whether different time periods condition the variants differently.
3.5.2 Adverbial specification
Previous studies on the future temporal reference system report that particular adverbs favour particular variants. For instance, Poplack and Turpin (1999) report that non specific adverbs favour the inflected future, specific-time adverbs favour the futurate present, and the periphrastic future is favoured when there are no time adverbials. The association of specific adverbs with the futurate present is argued by Poplack and Turpin to help disambiguate it from present temporal reference. The use of a non-specific
219 adverbial with the inflected future is argued by Poplack and Turpin to express avoidance
of the eventuality while the association of the periphrastic future with no adverbial is a
default. King and Nadasdi (2003), however, report that this factor group is not significant
in their Acadian data. They suggest that this factor may, in fact, be most relevant for the
futurate present (in order to disambiguate between present temporal reference tokens and
futurate present tokens). Since this particular variant was not robust enough to be
included in their multivariate analysis, this may account for the lack of effect in their
actual findings. Since the futurate present is likewise infrequent in the Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French data (N=58), I was not able to include this variant in the multivariate
analysis, although I did include the adverbial specification factor group. 32 shows an
example with a specific time adverbial while 33 shows an example with a non-specific
time adverbial. 34 shows the absence of a time adverbial.
(32) Specific adverbial Je suis busy demain. 1 be.PRES. 1 .SG busy tomorrow 'I'm busy tomorrow.' (Elze, GC-18)
(33) Nonspecific adverbial Je ferai ?a bientot. 1 make.FuT.l.SG that later 'I'll do that later on.' (Tina, M-295)
(34) No adverbial specification Quoi ce-que toi tu vas t' habiller dedans? what that you 2.SG go.PRES.SG REFL dress.INF into 'What are you going to dress up in?' [i.e. for Hallowe'en] (Anique, M-341)
220 3.5.3 Certainty (Imminence)
Another potential linguistic factor is that of degree of certainty, that is, how certain the
speaker is with regards to the realization of the event in question. The literature suggests
that the periphrastic future may be more likely to occur with events which are more likely
to occur. Poplack and Turpin (1999) adopt Vet's (1993) definition of imminence whereby
the eventuality is impending. From all accounts, this is a difficult notion to operationalize
as a factor group since the analyst cannot enter into the mind of each speaker to
determine their level of certainty with regards to what they say. Despite this problem, 1
adopted as objective a coding practice as possible in order to ensure that my results
would be comparable with other studies which have included this factor group (King &
Nadasdi 2003, Poplack & Turpin 1999). King and Nadasdi (2003) developed a procedure
to aid in the operationalization of this factor group. Their criterion involves adding sans
aucun doute 'without any doubt' to the token: if the event was more certain with sans
aucun doute, then they coded it as uncertain. If, however, the event was no more certain,
then they coded it as certain. This criterion was most useful in cases where there was
nothing else in the clause which made the event clearly certain (e.g. pour sur 'for sure')
or clearly uncertain (e.g. peut-etre 'maybe').
(35) Certain II va avoir deux ans dans mars. 3.SG go.PRES.SG have.LNF two years in March 'It'll be two years in March.' (Hilaire, GC-35)
221 (36) Uncertain Puis c' est suppose qu' elle va avoir and 3.SG be.PRES.SG supposed that 3.SG.F go.PRES.SG have.lNF
un autre presentation a Noel. an other show at Christmas 'And supposedly she'll have another show at Christmas.' (Francis, M-341)
The example in 35 involves the consultant saying how long his wife has been deceased. I
interpreted the consultant as being certain as to the amount of time which had elapsed since the death of his wife. The example in 36 involves the consultant saying that a local performer will likely have another performance at Christmas and the uncertainty is conveyed with the clause c'est suppose que 'supposedly.'
3.5.4 Sentential polarity
Another potential linguistic factor is the effect of sentential polarity on variant choice. An affirmative sentence is shown in 37 and a negative one is shown in 38 with the negative marker point 'not.'
(37) J'irai dans 1' apres-midi avec toi. 1 go.FUT.l.SG in the afternoon with you 'I'll go in the afternoon with you.' (Anique, M-341)
(38) Je vas bout point rester par icitte.88 1 go.PRES.SG probably NEG stay.lNF over here '1 probably won't stay here.' (Trina, M-295)
87 Grammatical gender is neutralized on the indefinite determiner before a vowel (King 2000). S!i Bout is derived from the English preposition about, as discussed in Chapter 2. It has undergone semantic rcanalysis and has the meaning of'probably'. The initial vowel of English about is omitted (Comeau 2007a). 222 While early grammarians and commentators do not mention sentential polarity, recent work on varieties of Canadian and European French (Grimm & Nadasdi 2011, Poplack &
Turpin 1999, Roberts 2010) report strong associations between the inflected future and negation, as we have seen above. While studies of Laurentian and European varieties report this strong association between the inflected future and negation, King and
Nadasdi (2003) report no such effect. In fact, the lack of a polarity effect is a notable difference between Acadian varieties studied to date and Laurentian varieties. While negative contexts have been referred to as 'the only remaining loci in which the IF is currently used productively' (Poplack & Turpin 1999:155), there exists no satisfactory explanation as to why this is the case. The exact nature of the association between sentential polarity and the future temporal reference has yet to be fully understood.
3.5.5 Other factors
Along with the linguistic factor groups outlined above, the literature reports other linguistic factor groups as conditioning usage in other varieties. While I have coded the data to test the effect of these other factor groups, poor distributions and interactions in the data prevent me from including them in the multivariate analyses. These factor groups include whether the token is contingent on another event, such as in an apodosis of a conditional clause, as in 39, or whether it is not, as in 40. For instance, Poplack and
Turpin (1999) report that tokens contingent on another event (as found in apodosis clauses) favour the inflected future. King and Nadasdi (2003), however, report that this factor group was not selected as significant in their multivariate analyses of Prince
Edward Island and Newfoundland data.
223 (39) Oh bien, bien si que tu es smart, tu iras au college. oh well well if that 2.SG be.PRES.SG smart 2.SG go.FuT.SG to college 'Oh well, well if you're smart, then you'll go to college.' (Michelle, GC-29)
(40) II va ecrire des livres et 9a. 3.SG.M go.PRES.SG write.LNF some books and that 'He's going to write books and stuff.' (Carole, GC-36)
Another factor, which was first suggested by Chevalier (1996), is the presence of quand 'when', as shown in 41.
(41) Quand ce-que vous startez? when that 2.PL start.PRES.2.PL 'When do you start?' (Marie, GC-6).
While Chevalier (1996) does not provide a hypothesis as to why quand might condition variant choice, she does report that the inflected future occurs more frequently in this context than the periphrastic variant. King and Nadasdi (2003) test this factor group on the Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland data and find that the presence of quand strongly disfavour the periphrastic future. While the underlying mechanisms are still unclear, I include this factor group to determine whether it has an effect on variant choice in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
I also considered the grammatical person as other studies have found this to condition variant choice, although with different results; for instance, Grimm (2010a) reports that the first person singular favours the periphrastic future while Poplack and
Turpin (1999) report that formal second person vous is associated with the inflected future (thus suggesting an association with formal speech), although they had initially set
224 out to investigate whether the periphrastic future might be associated with first person
subjects. King and Nadasdi (2003), however, report no effect for grammatical person.
Once I had established a list of the potential conditioning factors (both social and
linguistic), I coded each token for all of these factors. Unfortunately, the relatively small
size of the data sample did not permit me to test all of the above-mentioned linguistic factors in the same run. Therefore, analyses were performed with different combinations of these factor groups in order to determine the best model of the variation, which is
presented below.
3.6 Quantitative results for the future temporal reference variable
The overall distribution of the variants per village is presented below followed by the
results of multivariate analyses for the linguistic and social factors.
The overall distribution of the future temporal reference variants in the Baie
Sainte-Marie corpora for both Grosses Coques and Meteghan villages are shown in Table
5.1.
Grosses Coques Meteghan N Rate N Rate Periphrastic Future 337 54.8% 88 70.4% Inflected Future 222 36.1% 35 28% Futurate Present 56 9.1% 2 1.6% Total 615 125 TABLE 5.1. Overall distribution of variants per village.
Due to the low number of tokens for Meteghan, I was unable to conduct a separate multivariate analysis for this village. The percentages are different for the two villages, although this may be due to the fact that there are fewer tokens from Meteghan. For the
Grosses Coques data set, there are more occurrences of the futurate present than in the 225 Meteghan data set. Since the futurate present occurs infrequently in both data sets
(accounting for less than 8% of the data), I exclude it from the multivariate analyses.
With this variant removed as Table 5.2 shows, the pattern resembles more closely the rates reported by King and Nadasdi (2003) for varieties of Acadian French spoken in
Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, who likewise focused only on the periphrastic future and the inflected future (i.e. the primary variants). They report that the inflected future is used at a rate of 53% while the periphrastic future occurs at a rate of 47%.
Grosses Coques Meteghan N % N % Periphrastic Future 337 60% 88 71% Inflected Future 222 40% 35 28% Total 559 123 TABLE 5.2. Overall distribution of variants per village.
I attribute the slightly different rates (roughly 10% between the variant rates in each village) to the fact that there are so few tokens for Meteghan. Given that the frequency difference is small, I combined the data for both villages for the multivariate analyses, the results of which are presented below.
3.7 Results for linguistic factors
In order to assess the effect of the linguistic factors on variant choice, I analyzed the data using Goldvarb X (Sankoff et al. 2005). The results for the linguistic factors, shown in
Table 5.3, show that two linguistic factors were retained as statistically significant: temporal reference and adverbial specification.
226 Input: .65 Log-likelihood: -433.818 Significance: 0.031 Factor Temporal Reference N= Rate Weight Within an hour .68 103 82% Longer than a year .49 54 65% Longer than a week, up to a year .47 80 60% Within a day .36 45 49% Within a week .31 55 42% Range 37 Adverbial Specification89 Absent .52 512 66% Present .42 170 50% Range 10
Not selected as significant: Certainty, Polarity. TABLE 5.3. Analysis of linguistic factors which condition the periphrastic future.
The strongest predictor of variant choice, temporal reference, is likewise the strongest factor group in King and Nadasdi (2003). The findings are similar in some aspects, but different in others. For instance, in both Baie Sainte-Marie and the varieties studied by
King and Nadasdi, events which will occur within an hour of the utterance time favour use of the periphrastic future. The use of the periphrastic future to denote a proximate temporal event confirms previous characterizations of this variant as le futur proche, a label which may still be applied for Acadian French. However, the remaining factors within this factor group behave differently in Baie Sainte-Marie as compared to the
Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island varieties. King and Nadasdi report that events anticipated to occur up to a week following speech time consistently favour the periphrastic future. With events or states anticipated to occur in more than a week or if
89 Due to poor distribution, I could only test presence versus absence of adverbial specification rather than a three-way division (specific adverbial, non-specific adverbial, and no adverbial). 227 the temporal reference is continuous, the periphrastic future is disfavoured. Conversely,
in the Baie Sainte-Marie data presented here, the 'cut-off point is different than in
Newfoundland or Prince Edward Island for what is considered proximate. For events which will occur in longer than an hour and up to a week following utterance time, the
inflected future is favoured. This system makes a clear distinction between immediate future (i.e. within an hour) and less immediate (i.e. in an hour or more), but there is no
linear correlation between temporal reference and the factor weights. Beyond a week
following utterance time, the effect of temporal reference almost disappears as the factor weights hover around the .5 mark (.47 and .49), which shows that the effect of this factor group for this period is minimal. While the categories are somewhat arbitrary, a finer- grained division (e.g. longer than a week and less than a month; longer than a month and less than a year) yields similar results, that is, roughly 60% of the data are tokens of the periphrastic future. Thus the significant temporal period for the variants appears to be within an hour following utterance time, when the periphrastic future is highly favoured.
The other factor which was retained as significant, adverbial specification, exerts a weaker effect than temporal reference as can be seen by comparing the range for each factor group; adverbial specification has a range of 1.0 while temporal reference has a range of 37. Adverbial specification is not selected as significant in King and Nadasdi's study of Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland varieties of Acadian French. The literature makes certain predictions with this factor group, the most important being that adverbials are associated with the futurate present as adverbials can disambiguate between present temporal reference and future temporal reference. In fact, a closer look 228 at the use of each variant in relation to this factor group shows a marked increase in use
of the futurate present if the adverbial is specific, as shown in Table 5.4. Since the
futurate present was infrequent (it occurs at a rate of 8%) and was excluded from the
multivariate analysis, this factor group was not expected to exert a strong effect on
variant choice.
Periphrastic Future Inflected Future Futurate Present Adverbial Rate N= Total Rate N= Total Rate N= Total Specification Specific 43% 51 118 31% 36 118 31 118 Non-Specific 40% 34 86 57% 49 86 3 86 None 63% 340 536 32% 172 536 24 536 TABLE 5.4. Rate of each variant per type of adverbial specification.
As the shaded portion of Table 5.4 shows, the use of the futurate present is considerably
higher with a specific time adverbial. The inflected future is used more often with a non specific adverbial, which may explain why this factor group was selected as significant in
the multivariate analysis. It may be that the presence of an adverbial does not condition
the periphrastic future, but rather the inflected future (recall that the futurate present was
not included in the multivariate analysis). Thus, the disfavouring factor weight for the presence of an adverbial with the periphrastic future can be interpreted as a favouring factor for the inflected future.90 An analysis which includes the futurate present (made possible with additional data) in the multivariate analysis would probably clarify the effect of the adverbial specification on variant choice.
90 To obtain the factor weights for the inflected future in Table 5.3, subtract the factor weights from 1.0. In this instance, 1.000-.42=.58. 229 3.8 Results for social factors
In order to assess the effects of the social factors on variant choice, I conducted another set of multivariate analyses of the variable. As indicated above, two social factors were considered, sex and age. Due to the fact that middle-aged speakers were only available for the Grosses Coques corpus, I excluded the data for the middle-aged consultants in the multivariate analysis. Table 5.5 shows the results of the multivariate analysis for the social factors.
Input: .64 Log-likelihood:-313.186 Significance: 0.007 Sex laCZ N= Rate Weight Female .55 306 69% Male .42 179 56% Range 13 Not selected as significant: Age. TABLE 5.5. Analysis of social factors which condition the periphrastic future.
As Table 5.5 shows, the only statistically significant factor group is sex. Women favour the periphrastic future slightly more than men, as indicated by the factor weight (.55 vs.
.42). However, the effect is minimal as indicated by the low range (13). The fact that speaker age was not selected as significant suggests that the future temporal reference variable is not undergoing a change nor is it age-graded, in accordance with the apparent- time construct.
The finding that women show a preference for the periphrastic future more than men is perhaps unexpected as other studies have found the opposite effect. For instance,
Grimm (2010b) reports that speaker sex is a significant social factor which conditions the
230 variants, but that men favour the periphrastic variant while women favour the inflected future. He interprets this in that the inflected future is a formal variant, as claimed in the literature on this variable for Laurentian French (Blondeau 2006, Poplack & Turpin 1999,
Sankoff & Wagner 2006). Grimm interprets the fact that women use a formal variant at a higher frequency than men to be in line with other variationist studies which show that women, in cases of stable variation, use formal variants more than men (Labov 2001).
The finding for speaker sex in the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora runs counter to what has been reported in other studies. However, I argue that the inflected future is not a formal variant in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French as it is in Laurentian varieties.
However, the data from the Baie Sainte-Marie corpora do not readily allow testing for the effect of formality. Nevertheless, it is clear that this is a different system from the
Laurentian one, as evidenced by a much higher frequency of the inflected future. Sankoff and Wagner (2006) argue that as use of the inflected futures decreases, it has taken on the role of a feature of formal speech. As Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French is distinguished from Laurentian French by its rich verbal morphology, we can interpret the present finding as men being more conservative in preserving the traditional verbal system since they have higher rates than women for the inflected variant. Nevertheless, the effect of speaker sex is small as the factor weights are near the .5 mark and the range is not large
(13).
3.9 Conclusion
The quantitative analysis of the future temporal reference variable confirms the conservative nature of Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French, certainly in comparison with
231 other varieties of French, such as Laurentian varieties. The inflected future is used at a
much higher rate than in varieties of Laurentian French (Blondeau 2006, Deshaies &
Laforge 1981, Grimm 2010b, Grimm & Nadasdi 2011, Poplack & Turpin 1999) and is
comparable to other studies of Acadian French (King & Nadasdi 2003).
However, beyond a greater frequency of the inflected future, the multivariate
analyses show that the linguistic constraints governing the future variants are clearly distinct from Laurentian and European varieties of French, but quite similar to other varieties of Acadian French. The strength of the temporal reference factor group confirms previous characterizations of the periphrastic future as le futur proche. The lack of a discernible effect of sentential polarity provides further evidence that Acadian French is distinct from Laurentian and European varieties where this factor group is the strongest predictor of variant choice. Conversely, in most Acadian varieties, this factor group does not surface as statistically significant. Thus, the higher frequency of the inflected future coupled with the strength of the temporal reference factor group supports the generalization that Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French preserves a richer verbal morphology system (see Chapter 2 for a discussion of rich verbal morphology in Acadian
French) and is more conservative than the Laurentian varieties.
4.1 Introduction to the formal account of the future temporal reference variable
This section will propose a formal analysis of the future reference temporal reference variable. Following an introduction of the general theoretical framework for tense and time, I briefly present the framework adopted here to allow for variation in the grammar
(based in part on Adger's (2006) combinatorial variability model). Following this, I
232 present a formal analysis of the variants of the future temporal reference variable for Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
4.2 Previous accounts of time and tense
While actual time and grammatical tense are not the same, they are inextricably linked. In a sense, tense is a grammatical expression of time. There have been many studies of tense
(to name but a few Binnick 1991; Comrie 1985; Demirdache & Uribe-Etxebarria 2004,
2007; Hornstein 1990). A seminal work in the field of tense and time is Reichenbach
1947, in which the author argues that each grammatical tense involves the relationship between three primitive points in time: S (the speech time), E (the time of the event), and
R (the reference time). The existence of R, while somewhat controversial as it does not clearly express an actual point in time, is argued to account for distinctions between simple times (where S and R are the same) and complex tenses (where S and R are not the same).91 These three points in time can be ordered differently to correspond to various tenses. For instance, in Reichenbach's model, S,R,E (where commas represent coincidence of time) represents the present tense.
While many researchers have made use of this model, Giorgi and Pianesi (1997) were the first to integrate this model with a minimalist approach. They consider the relationship between the three points in time as a two sets of binary relations rather than a single ternary relation: 1) the relation between S and R\ and 2) the relation between E and
R. They also posit the existence of two tense heads: T1 which involves the relation
91 See Giorgi and Pianesi (1997) for a discussion of the origins of R. 233 between S and R and T2 which involves the relation between E and R, as shown in 42
(Giorgi & Pianesi 1997:27).92
(42) Tl: S_R future T2: E_R perfect R_S past RE prospective (S,R) present (E,R) neutral
The various combinations of the values for both heads result in a range of tenses which
occur in languages. Relevant for the analysis here, I present their schema (adapted from
Giorgi & Pianesi 1997:29) in 43 for the present tense, the future, the proximate future,
and the distant future.93
(43) present: (S,R) • (R,E) = S,R,E future: (S_R) • (R,E) = S_R,E proximate future: (S,R) • (R_E) = S,R_E distant-future: (S_R) • (R_E) = S_R_E
As noted above, the values preceding the symbol are for Tl (the relation between S and R) while the values following the involve T2 (relation between E and R). The resulting combination of the two heads is represented by what follows the equal symbol.
The present tense involves coincidence of all three points and, as such, results in a structure with S,R,E. Likewise, the future involves S_R,E. The analysis presented below for the variants of the future temporal reference is based, in part, on Giorgi and Pianesi's
(1997) framework of time and tense from a minimalist perspective.
92 An underscore indicates that the point to the left precedes the point to the right. A comma indicates coincidence of the two points. 93 While both S and E are taken to be events (which have a time), R is taken to be the link between the two. 234 4.3 Combinatorial variability
As outlined in Chapter 3, recent attempts to account for variation within a generative
framework have made use of distributed morphology (either implicitly, as in Adger &
Smith 2005 or explicitly, as in King 2005b and Parrott 2007). While these studies allow
for mechanisms making it possible for variability to occur, more recent work by Adger
(2006) and Adger and Smith (2010) has sought to account for actual frequencies of
variants based on the featural representation of vocabulary items. In order to illustrate
Adger's model of combinatorial variability, I first present his analysis of variable
agreement phenomena before presenting the analysis of the future temporal reference
variable in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
Much of the work by Adger and his colleagues is focused on variable agreement of past tense auxiliary and copula be as either was or were (Adger 2006, Adger & Smith
2005). In his analysis of data from Buckie, Scotland, the observed pattern is that both was and were are possible with either a first person plural subject or with a second person subject, either singular or plural. With other subjects, there is no variation: categorical was is found with a first person singular and third person singular subject while categorical were is found with a third person plural subject. The paradigm shown in 44 represents the system of be variability in Buckie English (Adger 2006:513).
235 (44)
singular plural 1st was was/were 2nd was/were was/were 3rd was were
In order to account for the variability, Adger proposes an algorithm which generates the various forms shown in 45 (Adger 2006:518).
(45) Seek Maximal Generalization by
a. Generating all n-feature Lis, where n = 1.
b. Mapping them to forms, so that a successful mapping is made if there is a
form which the LI always matches—essentially reduces multiple
exponence (Reject Optionality).
c. Delete any spurious Li's (i.e. delete each n-feature LI and check if
coverage is reduced; if it is, reinstate, if not continue)—essentially reduces
synonymy (Reject Synonymy).
d. Recursing over n = n + 1, with the proviso that if a form has been
successfully analysed in the n-lth step, Lis capturing it in the nth step will
be rejected (Minimize Lexicon).
As the algorithm in 45 shows, the generation of lexical items (Lis) is based on the particular features involved as well as the featural composition of the lexical items.
236 In order to account for was/were variation, Adger and Smith (2010:1112) (based on Adger 2006), propose that three features [singular], [participant], and [author] are involved in the spelling out of was and were, as shown in 46.
(46) (a) [singular:+] was
(b) [singular: -] were
(c) [participants] was
(d) [author: -] were
(e) [author: +] was
As the vocabulary items listed in 46 show, there are multiple ways in which was and were can occur in Buckie English. Based on the schema above, different frequencies are expected based on the grammatical subject. A strength of their proposal is that the model does match quite closely with the actual frequencies observed in Smith's sociolinguistic corpus of Buckie English. In 47 (Adger & Smith 2010:1113), we see the frequencies of was in contexts where there is variability.
(47)
pronoun percentage of was N
2nd singular 69 161 1st plural 67 368 2nd plural 10 10 Thus, the featural composition of both we, shown in 48, and you [plural], shown in 49, are given. With we, was is capable of being inserted two thirds of the time while were is only inserted one third of the time. For you [plural], the combination of the features result in was being inserted only one third of the time. 237 (48) we [singular: - participants, author:+] (b) were; (c) was; (e) was
(49) you (plural) [singular: -, participants, author: -] (b) were; (c) was; (d) were
The fact that for we, shown in 48, was can be inserted twice as much as were is argued to account for its greater frequency in the data (67% as shown in 47). Vox you [plural], while the expected rate of was should be 30%, it actually only occurs at a rate of 10%. Adger and Smith (2010) argue that the low number of tokens (N=10) is the result of the rather low frequency (10%). Adger (2006) proposes a formal analysis which takes into account the effect of internal factors (here, the grammatical subject) on variant choice.
As variationist work has shown, the effect of social factors on variation is important in terms of providing a model of the variable linguistic system, although they are generally assumed to be external to the syntactic-computational system. Clearly, social factors do exert some influence on the observed frequencies, despite their absence from the model and their effect may cause the slight discrepancy between the observed frequencies with the predicted frequencies.
4.4 Accounting for future temporal reference variation in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French
In order to account for variable future temporal reference in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French, 1 make use of recent approaches which argue that variation can be modeled within a generative framework. Adger's combinatorial variability approach is the basis for the analysis presented here as is Adger and Smith's (2005, 2010) studies which argues that the variable insertion of functional heads accounts for variability. I argue that the variability is due to two effects: 1) the variable selection of tense heads which correspond differently to the temporal reference and 2) the featural specification of one tense head
(the generalized future), which can variably spell out as the periphrastic future or the
inflected future. The interplay of these two phenomena account for the variable presence
of the two variants and encode the effect of temporal reference on variant choice within
the formal analysis.
In the quantitative analysis of future temporal reference in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French presented above, the linguistic factor which exerts the strongest effect on
variant choice is temporal reference. Events anticipated to occur within an hour of the
utterance time favour the periphrastic future. Events which are expected to occur in
longer than an hour and up to a week following utterance time favour the inflected future.
Finally, events anticipated to occur in longer than a year did not exert a strong effect on variant choice (the frequencies for these events were near the .5 mark). Thus, a formal account of the future variants must involve the factor group of temporal reference as this is the greatest predictor of variability. In order to formalize the role of this factor group, I assume that there are three schemas available to express future temporal reference, as shown in 50, taken from Giorgi and Pianesi (1997:29).94
(50) future: (S_R) • (IIE) = S_R,E proximate future: (S,R) • (R E) = S,R E distant future: (S_R) • (R_E) = S_R_E
For varieties in which temporal reference does not influence variant choice, I assume that the only schema available to be the one for the future (i.e. (S_R) • (R,E) = S_R,E).
94 Clearly, there is a third variant, the futurate present. However, as this variant was infrequent, it was excluded from the multivariate analyses and is not included in the formal analysis. 239 Alongside the values for T1 and T2 presented above, I argue that the various
morphological forms of the variants are spelled out as shown in 51 in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French.
(51) Schemas Spells out as 'generalized'future: (S_R) • (R,E) = S_R,E ~ PFandlF95 proximate future: (S,R) • (R_E) - S,R_E ** PF distant future: (S_R) • (R_E) = S_R_E ** IF
For the proximate future, I argue that the schema (S,R_E) is always spelled out as the
periphrastic future (at a rate of 100%). Likewise, I argue that the distant future (S_R_E) is
always spelled out as the inflected future (at a rate of 100%). The use of these two schemas (the proximate future and the distant future) represent formally the retention of
the temporal reference constraint in the formal model of the variable. In varieties which have lost this constraint completely, we might assume that they are only left with the
(generalized) future schema.96
For the generalized future, I argue that the vocabulary items which are spelled out are not categorical (as is the case with the proximate and distant futures), but rather there is variability. In addition, there isn't an equal chance that either variant will be spelled out, but rather the periphrastic future occurs two thirds of the time (66%) while the inflected future only occurs one third of the time (33%). Such an unequal distribution has been predicted in other systems, such as in Adger 2006, wherein the featural specification allows for one variant to be spelled out based on different featural specification.
951 use the label 'generalized future' for 'future' to distinguish it from the proximate and distant futures. PF: periphrastic future, IF: inflected future. 96 Note, however, that while the effect of temporal reference in Laurentian varieties is often minimal, it is nevertheless present in many studies and in the expected direction. We might therefore assume that the proximate future and distant future schemas to be likewise present in these varieties' linguistic systems. 240 The spelling out of two variants should not be permitted, according to Adger's
algorithm since the system should not have optionality (Adger's Reject Optionality as
shown above, in 45). However, I propose that the generalized future is spelled out with
the periphrastic future nearly two thirds of the time while the inflected future is spelled
out nearly one third of the time. This uneven distribution is due, in part, to the
underspecification and the synonymy based on an additional feature (certainty). For
illustrative purposes, I will consider certainty as a feature which may play a role in determining variant choice, although the quantitative results above clearly demonstrated
that certainty did not constrain variant choice in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French.
Despite this finding, it was a significant factor conditioning variant choice in Prince
Edward Island and Newfoundland varieties of Acadian French (King & Nadasdi 2003).
While I do not propose that certainty constrains the variation in the same way in Baie
Sainte-Marie Acadian French, I will show that an additional feature (such as the mood feature certainty), may help us understand why variation occurs with the generalized future.97
(52) Generalized Future [FUTURE,...] *-> IF [FUTURE, MOOD: CERTAIN, ...] PF [FUTURE,MOOD: UNCERTAIN, ...] «-» PF
This is not an economical system since it should not permit variable spelling out, and there may be other factors (linguistic and otherwise) which affect the way the generalized future is spelled out. In 52, the inflected feature is not specified for either certain or
97 See Cinque (1999) for an analysis whereby certainty (i.e. realis vs. realis) is taken to be a mood feature. 241 uncertain contexts (i.e. it is underspecified for this feature), but it is rather the periphrastic future which has a value for certainty and it is inserted whether the clause is either certain or uncertain. With these three feature bundles competing for selection, we would thus expect the periphrastic future to surface approximately 66% of the time while the
inflected future to surface 33%, frequencies which are close to the observed frequency for events anticipated to occur in longer than a week following the utterance time. By underspecifying the featural specification of the inflected future and having the periphrastic future spelled out based on certainty, the lack of an effect for this factor in this variety is encoded in the syntactic component as well. Thus, all three vocabulary items have an equal chance of being spelled out. However, the fact that the periphrastic future has twice as many chances of getting inserted in comparison with the inflected future accounts for it occurring 66% of the time.
In terms of the various points in time operationalized in the multivariate analysis
(e.g. within an hour of the utterance time, within a week, etc.), the variants occurred at different rates. However, temporal reference was shown to have a minimal effect with events taking place longer than a week from the utterance time. Therefore, I argue that the proximate and distant schemas are not in competition with each other with events occurring in a week or more following the utterance time since the multivariate analysis revealed that temporal reference was not relevant. However, we still need to account as to why there is an unequal distribution of the variants (i.e. 66% periphrastic future and 33% inflected future). While additional data might help us better understand the system for events occurring in more than a week following utterance time, we can nevertheless
242 assume that there are some features which are relevant in determining variant choice in
the present corpus.
In order to account for the effect of temporal reference on variant choice, this
section will present an analysis for each time period relevant in this variety in order to
account for the variation. The quantitative analyses shown in Section 3 revealed that the
variable was constrained mostly by temporal reference. In Figure 5.1, the frequencies of
the periphrastic future have been grouped into three time periods.
82% PF 49% PF 42% PF 60% PF 65% PF I I I |__ I - UT 60min 1 day 1 week 1 year
Period 1 Period 2 Period 3
FIGURE 5.1. Rates of the periphrastic future (PF) per time period following utterance time (UT).
As Figure 5.1 shows, the rate of the periphrastic future is the same for some time periods
(e.g. for events anticipated to occur in more than an hour, but less than a day, 49%, and
for events anticipated to occur in more than a day, up to a week, 42%). I have grouped
together time periods which appear to behave similarly in terms of frequency of the
variants.98 The analysis presents the variants in competition for each time period.
For Period 1, that is, for events anticipated to occur within an hour following the
utterance time, the periphrastic future is used the most (82%). In fact, this is the time
period during which the periphrastic future has the highest frequency overall. In order to
98 Aside from the raw percentages, the factor weights (shown in Table 5.3) likewise confirm the similar patterning of variants for certain periods. 243 account for this increase, I argue that the proximate future schema (S,R_E) varies with the generalized future schema (S_R,E). As shown above, the proximate future is spelled out as the periphrastic future in 100% of the cases. The generalized future, however, is spelled out two thirds of the time as the periphrastic future and one third of the time as the inflected future, as argued in 52. If we assume that either the proximate future and the generalized future have an equal chance of getting selected by speakers within this time period, the expected rates are as shown in 53.
(53) proximate future 50% chance of getting inserted (i.e. 50% PF) generalized future 50% chance of getting inserted ("i.e. 33% PF. 17% IF) 100% (i.e. 83% PF, 17% IF)
In fact, the variability between the two futures (i.e. the proximate and the generalized) will result in an unequal distribution of the variants. The predicted rates (83% PF; 17%
IF) are strikingly similar to the actual observed frequency for the variants (82% PF; 18%
IF). Thus, I argue that the variable selection of the proximate future or the generalized future with events or states anticipated to occur within an hour of the utterance time results in a high proportion of the periphrastic future.
For Period 2, the quantitative analyses showed that this period entails a disfavouring of the periphrastic future (and, conversely, a favouring of the inflected future). The observed frequencies of the periphrastic future for events occurring in more than an hour, up to a day was 49% while events occurring in more than a day, up to a week was 42%. In order to account for this result, I suggest that Period 2 involves variability among all three futures: the proximate future (S,R_E), the distant future
244 (S_R_E), and the generalized future (S_R,E). Clearly, this may seem counterintuitive as
the proximate future is generally taken to be closest to the utterance time. However, King
and Nadasdi's (2003) study of the future in Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island
varieties of Acadian French showed that the periphrastic future was favoured with events
occurring up to a week following the utterance time. Therefore, we can assume that up to
a week remains, in part, the domain of the proximate future, although not entirely, as we
find the addition of the distant future as well. The distant future encodes the lack of
proximity to the utterance time (at least in terms of not being the immediate future).
Additionally, as in all time periods, the generalized future is used as well. As all three
variants can be selected by consultants for Period 2,1 argue that each future schema has
an equal chance of being selected by speakers (each at a rate of 33%), as shown in 54.
(54)"
proximate future 33% chance of getting inserted (i.e. 33% PF) distant future 33% chance of getting inserted (i.e. 33% IF) generalized future 33% chance of getting inserted fi.e. 21% PF and 13% IF") 100% (i.e. 54% PF and 46% IF)
As shown in 54, the uneven distribution of the generalized future results in a near equal
distribution of both variants (54% PF; 46% IF), which is in fact similar to the observed
frequencies for Period 2 (within the day: 49% PF; 51% IF and within the week: 42% PF;
58% IF). Thus, the equal possibility for each future to occur results in a near equal rate of
each variant.
99 Clearly, the removal of the generalized future would result in variation between the proximate and distant futures with each variant having an equal chance of getting inserted. The results (50%) would match slightly more closely the actual observed frequencies (49% and 42%). 245 For Period 3, the quantitative analysis revealed that temporal reference did not play a major role in determining variant choice. In fact, the factor weights for events anticipated to occur in more than a week, up to a year and for events anticipated to occur in more than a year were close to the .5 mark, thus suggesting a lack of effect for these factors. For event occurring in Period 3,1 argue that neither the proximate future schema nor the distant future schema is selected by consultants. Rather, only the generalized future is selected, as shown in 55.
(55) generalized future (PF and IF) 100% (66% PF and 33% IF)
In fact, the expected rates of the variants (66% PF; 33% IF) are close to the observed rates for this period (more than a week: 60% PF; 40% IF and more than a year: 65% PF;
35% IF). By excluding the proximate and distant futures from the pool of potential futures, the lack of an effect for temporal reference is modelled within the formal analysis. Likewise, the observed frequencies are similar to the predicted rates as well.
4.5 Concluding remarks on the formal analysis
This formal analysis of the future temporal reference variable presented above makes use of minimalist approaches to time and tense (Giorgi & Pianesi 1997) while integrating current socio-syntactic approaches to.variation and generative theory (Adger & Smith
2005, 2010; Adger & Trousdale 2007). In fact, two mechanisms allow for the variable realization of the future variants: variation between functional heads (represented here as future schemas) prior to the syntactic component and underspecification of features (with the generalized future schema) which occurs post-syntax. The predictions made by the
246 formal approach match closely the observed frequencies as shown in the multivariate analysis.
5. Conclusion
The analysis of the future temporal reference variable in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French provide additional information on this variable in another variety of Acadian
French. The plethora of studies which have shown that this variable is largely constrained by sentential polarity may lead some researchers to extend this generalization across (all) varieties of French. In fact, King and Nadasdi (2003) offer the first empirical evidence of a variety with a higher frequency of the inflected future and a linguistic system in which sentential polarity plays no role in constraining variation. The results for Baie Sainte-
Marie Acadian French presented here further confirm that polarity does not constrain the future temporal reference variable in most varieties of Acadian French. Rather, the strongest constraint is that of temporal reference, which is likely a conservative constraint since it was one of the most agreed upon constraints for the future variants by early grammarians.
The formal analysis presented here integrates various aspects of previous studies in this line of research whereby sociolinguistic variation is accounted for in a formal framework. The analysis contributes to this field in accounting for not only the observed frequencies of the variants, but also for the effect of linguistic factors (here, temporal reference) on variant choice.
247 . Chapter 6: Conclusion
1. Overview
This dissertation has presented analyses of two linguistic variables, variation in mood
choice and the expression of future temporal reference, in a conservative variety of
Acadian French spoken in the Baie Sainte-Marie region of southwest Nova Scotia. The
analyses combine two areas of research, variationist sociolinguistics and generative
grammar, to account for linguistic variation. Thus, the study contributes to our
understanding of these variables in Acadian French and in French more generally while
the combined approach proposes mechanisms whereby linguistic variation can be
accounted for within formal theory.
The data analyzed in this dissertation came mainly from two spoken-language
corpora, the Butler Grosses Coques Sociolinguistic Corpus and the Corpus acadien de la
Nouvelle-Ecosse, for two villages in the Baie Sainte-Marie region of Nova Scotia. The
Grosses Coques data were collected in 1990 from the village of Grosses Coques while the
Corpus acadien de la Nouvelle-Ecosse was collected in the mid-1990s in the village of
Meteghan. Both corpora contain a variety of narratives (community narratives, traditional folktales, narratives of personal experience, etc.) as well as conversational data. The recordings were transcribed to facilitate the extraction of the relevant data. In instances in which the sociolinguistic corpora could not provide adequate evidence on a particular aspect of the grammar, grammaticality judgments from native speakers were elicited to
248 provide additional evidence for the analyses of the linguistic system of the Baie Sainte-
Marie variety of French.
The methodology used in this dissertation involved combination of both
variationist methodology and mechanisms made available in minimalist theories, such as
distributed morphology. The variationist methodology requires that the researcher extract
the relevant data, exclude contexts which are not part of the variable context, code for
potential linguistic and social factors, and conduct statistical analyses to determine the
relevance of potential conditioning factors. The potential linguistic factors were taken
from the relevant literature for the two linguistic variables and were operationalized into
testable factor groups. The data were then analyzed with a multiple regression main
effects model through use of the software package Goldvarb in order to determine which
social and linguistic factors condition variant choice. This study has also relied on a
formal theory of grammar, distributed morphology, in order to account for the linguistic
phenomena under investigation. The integration of these two frameworks have provided
mechanisms to account for variable phenomena inside the grammar.
The quantitative results revealed that use of the subjunctive mood is highly
conservative in comparison with other varieties of French. The only contexts which
permit variability are tokens following the matrix verb point croire 'to not think' and
with certain nonverbal matrices (e.g. mais que 'when', apres que 'after'). The remaining
subjunctive-selecting contexts categorically involve use of the subjunctive. These results contrast with what other researchers have found for a number of other varieties of French.
For instance, Poplack's (1992) study of the subjunctive in the French spoken in Ottawa-
249 Hull reports that the subjunctive variably occurs with the matrix verb falloir 'to be
necessary' while in the Baie Sainte-Marie data it occurs with this verb at a rate of 100%.
In addition to nearly categorical rates of the subjunctive, the robust use of the imperfect
subjunctive in my data further suggests that the Baie Sainte-Marie variety is highly
conservative, as the imperfect subjunctive is widely regarded to have been lost from most
varieties of French.
The formal analysis presented here provided an account as to how the subjunctive
has a semantic function which is triggered by the presence of a particular semantic
feature, assertion, which expresses the truth value of the embedded clause verb. This
feature can be specified for subjunctive and indicative moods based on the truth value.
Where there is variability (i.e. with nonverbal matrices and with the matrix verb point
croire 'to not think'), the formal analysis presented mechanisms for capturing it.
Variability with point croire can be accounted for by positing that the negative element
has moved from the embedded clause to the matrix clause and, since affirmative croire
never the selects the subjunctive in this variety of French, the subjunctive is not triggered.
With regards to nonverbal matrices, the pattern observed suggests that the indicative is
possible when the tense of the token verb is in the past, but not when it is nonpast. This
tense constraint appears to be related once again to the truth value of the verb. Therefore,
I propose that the selection of the subjunctive mood is related to the semantic feature assertion.
The analysis of the future temporal reference reveals a system comparable to what has been found in other varieties of Acadian French (King & Nadasdi 2003). King and
250 Nasdasdi report that the inflected future occurs at much higher rates than has been
reported for Laurentian varieties of French and is subject to different constraints. The
strongest predictor of variant choice is temporal reference, with proximate events
favouring the periphrastic future while less proximate events favour the inflected future.
This finding further supports King and Nadasdi's analysis of the future in Acadian
French and is also in line with observations made by early grammarians, who often characterized the periphrastic future as le futur proche.
The formal analysis of the future temporal reference variable involved a minimalist approach to time and grammatical tense which proposes mechanisms by which temporal reference is modeled in the grammar (Giorgi & Pianesi 1997). To capture the effect of temporal reference on variant choice, I posit the existence of three possible future tense schemas for Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French: the proximate future, which categorically spells out as the periphrastic future; the distant future, which categorically spells out as the inflected future; and the generalized future, which variably spells out as both the periphrastic and the inflected future. The variable insertion of these future heads, based on the temporal reference in question, correctly predicts the observed frequencies found in my data. Thus, variation originates, in part, from the variable selection of future heads prior to the syntax. As indicated above, the generalized future variably spells out as the inflected future and the periphrastic future. This variation occurs following the syntactic component, at the vocabulary insertion stage. The model presented here argues that the featural specification of this future head spells out two thirds of the time as the periphrastic future and a third of the time as the inflected future. Thus, the formal
251 analysis proposes two loci of variability: 1) the variable selection of bundles of features
from the numeration prior to syntax, and 2) the vocabulary insertion stage whereby
vocabulary items are inserted to match particular feature bundles, following the syntactic
component. Thus, variation does not occur within the syntactic component itself, but
rather falls out from pre-syntactic and post-syntactic components.
To summarize, the results provide evidence that this variety of Acadian French is
highly conservative in comparison with most other varieties of spoken French. The
quantitative results for mood variation show that variability is quite limited in comparison
to that reported for other varieties of French. The formal analyses for this variable show
that the cases of variation can be accounted for under an analysis in which the subjunctive does indeed express a semantic function. The variation between moods is
limited to particular types of predicates (polarity subjunctives and nonverbal matrices).
The other type (intensional predicates, such as verbs of volition) does not exhibit
variation between moods.
With regards to the future temporal reference variable, the variationist results show that the future system in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French resembles that of other varieties of Acadian French, such as those spoken in Prince Edward Island and
Newfoundland (King & Nadasdi 2003) and differs from many other varieties, such as
Laurentian French (Grimm 2010b, Poplack & Turpin 1999) and European French
(Roberts 2010). The formal account of the future temporal reference variable involves an analysis whereby variation is accounted for by mechanisms made available in distributed morphology. The analysis includes a formal representation of the strongest linguistic
252 constraint (i.e. temporal reference) as well as a model for how variation arises in pre- syntax (i.e. selection of bundles of morphosyntactic features) and post-syntax (variable
insertion of vocabulary items due to underspecification).
2. Research Questions
I now return to the research questions presented in Chapter 1.
1) Are the linguistic systems for the two grammatical variables under
investigation (mood choice and future) similar or different from other
varieties of French?
The analyses of mood choice and of future temporal reference revealed that the linguistic variables under investigation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian French are different in some respects from other varieties of French. With regards to the subjunctive mood, the results show that the subjunctive patterns differently from other varieties of French, such as
Laurentian varieties, as the subjunctive in these varieties simply exhibits inherent variability. In the data presented here, the variability appears highly constrained and is related to the semantic function of the subjunctive.
In terms of the future temporal reference variable, the results presented here suggest that the grammarians' observations that the future variants are constrained by temporal reference is accurate. In fact, this further confirms King and Nadasdi's (2003) findings for varieties of Acadian French spoken in Prince Edward Island and in
Newfoundland that temporal reference is the strongest conditioning factor. While the exact temporal reference system varies slightly from the one reported for Prince Edward
Island and for Newfoundland, in both studies it is the strongest predictor of variant choice
253 with the periphrastic future associated with proximity to utterance time. In contrast with
Laurentian studies, sentential polarity was not a statistically significant constraint on variant choice.
2) Are the grammatical variables under investigation undergoing a change?
The results of both variables suggest that neither are undergoing change. The subjunctive exhibited limited variability. With regards to the future variable, multiple regression analysis did not find speaker age to be statistically significant in terms of conditioning variant choice. Thus, the hypotheses that the subjunctive and the future temporal reference variable are undergoing change is not supported by the data.
3) What linguistic factors condition variability in this variety?
The analyses put forth in this dissertation conclude that the subjunctive is triggered by the presence of a semantic feature, assertion, which is selected by particular matrix verbs and nonverbal matrices. With regards to the future temporal reference variable, the strongest predictor of variant choice is temporal reference. Adverbial specification exerted a small effect on the future variable, although the role of this factor is likely linked to a third variant (i.e. the futurate present) which was not examined here due to its infrequency in the data.
4) What social factors condition variability in this variety?
Since the subjunctive exhibited little variation, no statistical tests were conducted to determine the effects of social factors on mood choice. The social factors considered in this study do not condition this variable. With regards to the future temporal reference variable, sex was selected as a significant factor group with men (slightly) favouring the
254 inflected future and women (slightly) favouring the periphrastic future. The effect suggests that men may preserve the conservative system with rich verbal morphology to a greater degree than do women. However, the strength of this factor group was not great.
The other social factor considered, speaker age, was not selected as significant, thus suggesting that the variants of the future temporal reference variable are in stable variation.
5) What is the role of language contact on variant choice?
Since the subjunctive variable displayed little variation, this provides evidence against the claim that contact with English can lead to the decline of the subjunctive mood. Despite the fact that a number of language contact phenomena have been reported for this variety
(Comeau 2007a, Flikeid 1989), there is no evidence that the subjunctive is in decline. In fact, the analysis presented here suggests that the subjunctive is well preserved, including the imperfect subjunctive, which has been lost in most spoken varieties of French.
6) How might we account for linguistic variation in a formal framework?
The analysis presented here proposed that variation can occur at (at least) two parts of the grammar: 1) the selection of bundles of morphosyntactic features, which is related to the effects of linguistic constraints and 2) at the vocabulary insertion stage. Thus, the analysis presented here maintains a syntactic component which does not contain variable components or optionality. The combined analysis proposed in this analysis is capable of accounting for variables which vary very little (i.e. the subjunctive) and those which display greater variability (i.e. the future variable).
255 3. Limitations of the present study and suggestions for future research
The present study was based on data for two small villages and, as noted from the outset, the amount of data for one of those villages, Meteghan, was relatively small. In terms of the particular variables under study, mood variability with nonverbal matrices would particularly benefit from the addition of more data. While a pattern was observed in the data available in the corpora, additional data might shed light on variation in this context.
With regards to the future temporal reference variable, the addition of more data might help uncover what constraints apply to the data for events or states anticipated to occur in longer than a week following utterance time. The multiple regression analysis revealed that the effects of the temporal reference factor group was minor for this particular time period, which might have been influenced by the amount of data available for this context. Likewise, additional data would allow for the futurate present to be included in the analyses.
Finally, the focus of the analysis of mood choice was on use of the subjunctive mood rather than a detailed analysis of the individual forms of the subjunctive (such as a full-scale analysis of the imperfect subjunctive). However, Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French offers us a unique opportunity to study a linguistic phenomenon which has disappeared from most varieties of spoken French. Future research would involve larger data sets for these villages, which would require the construction of new corpora.
4. Concluding remarks
This dissertation has presented a combined variationist and generative analysis for two aspects of the grammatical system of the Acadian variety spoken in the Baie Sainte- Marie region of Nova Scotia. We have seen that this is a highly conservative variety
which retains constraints which are argued to be lost elsewhere. As such, this study provides a window on the past. The results are in line with prior studies of Acadian
French, which also point to substantial differences between the grammars Acadian
French and other varieties of French (e.g. Laurentian, European, etc.). This dissertation has described the linguistic mechanisms for two linguistic phenomena, shedding light on our understanding of French today and of earlier stages of the language. In addition, it has contributed to recent research which seeks to account for variation within a formal perspective.
257 References
ABOUDA, LOTFI. 2002. Negation, interrogation et alternance indicatif-subjonctif. Journal
of French Language Studies 12.1-22.
ADGER, DAVID. 2003. Core syntax: A minimalist approach. New York: Oxford
University Press.
ADGER, DAVID. 2006. Combinatorial variability. Journal of Linguistics 42.503-30.
ADGER, DAVID, and JENNIFER SMITH. 2005. Variation and the minimalist program. In
Cornips & Corrigan, 149-78.
ADGER, DAVID, and JENNIFER SMITH. 2010. Variation in agreement: A lexical feature-
based approach. Lingua 120.1109-34.
ADGER, DAVID, and GRAEME TROUSDALE. 2007. Variation in English syntax: Theoretical
implications. English Language and Linguistics 11.261-78.
ANTONINI, ANNIBALE. 1753. Principes de la grammaire franqoise, pratique et raisonnee.
Paris: Duchesne.
ARRIGHI, LAURENCE. 2005. Etude morphosyntaxique du frangais parle en Acadie - Une
approche de la variation et du changement linguistique en frangais. Paris: Universite
de la Sorbonne dissertation.
AUGER, JULIE. 1990. Les structures impersonnelles et I'alternance des modes en
subordonnee dans le frangais parle de Quebec. Quebec, QC: Centre international de
recherche en amenagement linguistique.
258 BAAYEN, R. HARALD. 2008. Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to
statistics using R. New York: Cambridge University Press.
BARBAUD, PHILIPPE. 1991. Subjunctive and ECP. New analyses in romance linguistics,
ed. by Dieter Wanner and Douglas A. Kibbee, 125—41. Philadelphia, PA: John
Benjamins.
BARRAL, MARCEL. 1980. L 'imparfait du subjonctif: etude surl'emploi et la concordance
des temps du subjonctif. Paris: Editions A. & J. Picard.
BAUCHE, HENRI. 1928. Le langagepopulaire : grammaire, syntaxe et dictionnaire du
francais tel qu 'on le parle dans le peuple de Paris, avec tous les termes d'argot
usuel. Paris: Payot.
BAYLEY, ROBERT. 2002. The quantitative paradigm. The handbook of language variation
and change, ed. by J. K. Chambers, 117-41. Maiden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
BEAULIEU, LOUISE. 1995. The social function of linguistic variation: A sociolinguistic
study in four rural communities of the northeastern coast of New Brunswick.
Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina dissertation.
BEAULIEU, LOUISE, and WLADYSLAW CICHOCKI. 2008. La flexion postverbale -ont en
francais acadien : une analyse sociolinguistique. Canadian Journal of Linguistics
53.35-62.
BIANCHI, VALENTINA. 2001. On person agreement. Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore, MS.
BINNICK, ROBERT I. 1991. Time and the verb: A guide to tense and aspect. New York:
Oxford University Press.
259 BLANCHE-BENVENISTE, CLAIRE. 1990. Lefrangaisparle: etudes grammaticales. Paris:
Centre national de la recherche scientifique.
BLANCHE-BENVENISTE, CLAIRE. 2006. Linguistic analysis of spoken language - The case
of French language. Spoken language corpus and linguistic informatics, ed. by Yuji
Kawaguchi, Susumu Zaima, and Toshihiro Takagaki, 35-66. Philadelphia, PA: John
Benjamins.
BLONDEAU, HELENE. 2006. La trajectoire de l'emploi du futur chez une cohorte de
Montrealais francophones entre 1971 et 1995. Canadian Journal of Applied
Linguistics 9.73-98.
BOSKOVIC, ZELJKO, and LASNIK, HOWARD, (eds.) 2007. Minimalist syntax: The essential
readings. Maiden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
BOURCIEZ, EDOUARD. 1967. Elements de linguistique romane. Paris: Klincksieck.
BRUNOT, FERDINAND. 1966. Histoire de la langue frangaise : des origines a nos jours,
tome 3: La formation de la langue classique 1600-1660. Paris: A. Colin.
BYBEE, JOAN L. 1985. Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form.
Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
CHAMBERS, J. K. 1995. Sociolinguistic theory: Linguistic variation and its social
significance. Maiden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
CHARBONNEAU, HUBERT, and ANDRE GUILLEMETTE. 1994. Les pionniers du Canada au
XVIIesiecle. In Mougeon & Beniak, 59-78.
CHARBONNEAU, RENE. 1957. La spirantisation du j. Canadian Journal of Linguistics
3.14-7, 72-7.
260 CHEVALIER, GISELE. 1996. L'emploi des formes du futur dans le parler acadien du sud-
est du Nouveau-Brunswick. Les Acadiens et leur(s) langue(s) : quand le franqais est
minoritaire, ed. by Annette Boudreau and Lise Dubois, 75-89. Moncton, NB:
Editions d'Acadie.
CHIASSON, MELISSA. 2009. Le futur dans Acadieman. Ottawa, ON: University of Ottawa,
MS.
CHOMSKY, NOAM. 1981a. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
CHOMSKY, NOAM. 1981b. Principles and parameters in syntactic theory. Explanation in
linguistics: The logical problem of language acquisition, ed. by Norbert Hornstein
and David Lightfoot, 123—46. New York: Longman.
CHOMSKY, NOAM. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
CHOMSKY, NOAM. 2000a. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. STep by step: Essays on
minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. by Roger Martin, David Michaels
and Juan Uriagereka, 89-156. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
CHOMSKY, NOAM. 2000b. New horizons in the study of language and mind. Cambridge,
MA: Cambridge University Press.
CHOMSKY, NOAM. 2001. Derivation by phase. Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. by
Michael Kenstowicz, 1-52. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
CICHOCKI, WLADYSLAW. 2006. Geographic variation in Acadian French /r/: What can
correspondence analysis contribute toward explanation? Literary and Linguistic
Computing 21.529-41.
261 CLCHOCKL, WLADY SLAW. 2008. Retroflex realizations of Acadian French /r/: A
dialectological perspective. All the things you are: A Festschrift in honour of Jack
Chambers, ed. by Sarah Cummins, Bridget Jankowski and Patricia Shaw, 17-30.
Toronto, ON: Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics.
CINQUE, GUGLIELMO. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads a cross-linguistic perspective.
New York: Oxford University Press.
CLARKE, SANDRA. 1997. English verbal -s revisited: The evidence from Newfoundland.
American Speech 72.227-59.
COHEN, MARCEL. 1965. Le subjonctif en francais contemporain. Paris: Societe d'edition
d'enseignement superieur.
COMEAU, PHILIP. 2007a. The integration of words of English origin in Baie Sainte-Marie
Acadian French. Toronto, ON: York University Major Research Paper.
COMEAU, PHILIP. 2007b. Pas vs. Point: Variation in Baie Sainte-Marie Acadian
French. Paper presented at the 36th New Ways of Analyzing Variation
conference, Philadelphia.
COMEAU, PHILIP; RUTH KING; and GARY R. BUTLER. 2013. New insights on an old
rivalry: The passe simple and the passe compose in spoken Acadian French. Journal
of French Language Studies 23.
COMRIE, BERNARD. 1985. Tense. New York: Cambridge University Press.
CONFAIS, JEAN-PAUL. 1990. Temps mode aspect: Les approches des morphemes verbaux
et leurs problemes a I'exemple du franqais et de I'allemand. Toulouse: Presses
universitaires du Mirail.
262 CORMIER, YVES. 1999. Dictionnaire du frangais acadien. Quebec, QC: Fides.
CORNEILLE, PIERRE. 1970 [1674]. Surena. Bordeaux: Ducros.
CORNIPS, LEONIE, and KAREN P. CORRIGAN (eds.) 2005. Syntax and variation:
Reconciling the biological and the social. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
COVENEY, AIDAN. 2000. Vestiges of nous and the 1st person plural verb in informal
spoken French. Language Sciences 22.447-81.
COUPLAND, NIKOLAS. 2007. Style: Language variation and identity. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
CULIOLI, ANTOINE. 1990. Pour une linguistique de I'enonciation - operations et
representations (Tome 1). Paris: Ophrys.
DAMOURETTE, JACQUES, and EDOUARD PICHON. 1911-1940. Des mots a la pensee : essai
de grammaire de la langue franqaise. Paris: Editions d'Artrey.
DE CONDILLAC, ETIENNE BONNOT. 1798. CEuvres completes de Condillac : Tome V. Paris:
L'imprimerie de Ch. Houei.
DE ESTERNOD, CLAUDE. 1626. L 'Espadon satyrique. Paris: Librairie du bon vieux temps.
DE LA FAYETTE, MADAME. 1678. Laprincesse de Cleves. Paris: La compagnie des
librairies associees.
DE LA ROCHEFOUCAULD, FRANCOIS. 1665. Maximes etpensees diverses. Paris: Didiot.
DE LA SALE, ANTOINE. 1726. Quinzes joies. Paris: A. de Rogissart.
DE SALES, FRANCOIS. 1609. Introduction a la vie devote. Paris: Jean Baptiste Loyson.
DE VAUGELAS, CLAUDE FAVRE. 1996 [1647]. Remarques sur la langue franqaise : utiles
a ceux qui veulent bien parler et bien ecrire. Paris: Editions Ivrea.
263 DE VAUGELAS, CLAUDE FAVRE, THOMAS CORNEILLE, and OLIVIER PATRU. 1687.
Remarques de M. de Vaugelas sur la langue franqoise, tome second. Paris: Piget.
DEMIRDACHE, HAMIDA, and MYRIAM URIBE-ETXEBARRIA. 2004. The syntax of time
adverbs. In Gueron & Lecarme, 143-79.
DEMIRDACHE, HAMIDA, and MYRIAM URIBE-ETXEBARRIA. 2007. The syntax of time
arguments. Lingua 117.330-66.
DESHAIES, DENISE, and EVE LAFORGE. 1981. Le futur simple et le futur proche dans le
fran?ais parle dans la ville de Quebec. Langues et linguistique 7.21-37.
DEVEAU, J. ALPHONSE. 1968. Clare ou la ville franqaise - Tome 1 : les premiers cent arts.
Quebec, QC: Editions Ferland.
D'HULST, YVES. 2004. French and Italian conditionals: From etymology to
representation. In Gueron & Lecarme, 181-201.
EMBICK, DAVID, and ROLF NOYER. 2007. Distributed morphology and the syntax-
morphology interface. The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces, ed. by Gillian
Ramchand and Charles Reiss, 289-324. New York: Oxford University Press.
EMIRKANIAN, LOUISETTE, and DAVID SANKOFF. 1985. Le futur simple et le futur
periphrastique. Les tendances dynamiques du franqais parle a Montreal, ed. by
Monique Lemieux and Henrietta J. Cedergren, 189-204. Montreal: Office de la
langue franfaise.
ESTIENNE, HENRI. 1980 [1578]. Deux dialogues du nouveau langage franqois, ed. by
P.M. Smith. Geneva: Slatkine.
264 FARKAS, DONKA F. 1982. Intensionality and romance subjunctive relatives. Bloomington,
IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club
FLEISCHMAN, SUZANNE. 1982. The future in thought and language: Diachronic evidence
from Romance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
FLIKEID, KARIN. 1984. La variation phonetique dans le parler acadien du nord-est du
Nouveau-Brunswick: etude sociolinguistique. Berne: Peter Lang.
FLIKEID, KARIN. 1988. Unity and diversity in Acadian phonology: An overview based on
comparisons among the Nova Scotia varieties. Journal of the Atlantic Provinces
Linguistic Association 10.64-110.
FLIKEID, KARIN. 1989. "Moitie anglais, moitie fran?ais"?: emprunts et alternance de
langues dans les communautes acadiennes de la Nouvelle-Ecosse. Revue quebecoise
de linguistique theorique et appliquee 8.177-251.
FLIKEID, KARIN. 1994. Origines et evolution du fran9ais acadien a la lumiere de la
diversite contemporaine. In Mougeon & Beniak, 275-326.
FLIKEID, KARIN, and LOUISE PERONNET. 1989. N'est-ce pas vrai qu'il faut dire « J'avons
ete? » : divergences regionales en acadien. Frangais moderne 57.3/4.219-28.
FLIKEID, KARIN, and GINETTE RICHARD. 1993. La Baie Sainte-Marie et File Madame
(Nouvelle-Ecosse): comparaison phonetique entre deux varietes acadiennes.
Francophonies d'Amerique 3.129—46.
FOULET, LUCIEN. 1966. Petite syntaxe de I'ancien francais. Paris: H. Champion.
FOURNIER, NATHALIE. 1998. Grammaire du frangais classique. Paris: Belin.
FREI, HENRI. 1993 [1929]. La grammaire des fautes. Geneva: Slatkine Reprints.
265 GARNER, JOHN E. 1952. A descriptive study of the phonology of Acadian French. Austin,
TX: University of Texas dissertation.
GASTE, ARMAND. 1888. Les serments de Strasbourg: etude historique, critique et
philologique. Paris: Eugene Belin.
GERIN, PIERRE. 1982. "Je suis fier que tu as pu venir" : remarques sur le mode, dans
l'usance franco-acadienne, des propositions subordonnees introduites par que
completant des verbes ou locutions exprimant un sentiment. Si que 5.25-41.
GESNER, B. EDWARD. 1979. Etude morphosyntaxique duparler acadien de la Baie
Sainte-Marie, Nouvelle-Ecosse, Canada. Quebec: Centre international de recherche
sur le bilinguisme.
GESNER, B. EDWARD. 1982. Some variations from Standard French in the Acadian dialect
spoken in la Baie Sainte-Marie, Nova Scotia. Geolinguistics 8.41-58.
GESNER, B. EDWARD. 1986. Bibliographie annotee de linguistique acadienne. Quebec,
QC: Centre international de recherche sur le bilinguisme.
GLLLLERON, JULES, and EDMOND EDMONT. 1969. Atlas linguistique de la France (1902-
10). Bologna: Forni.
GIORGI, ALESSANDRA, and FABIO PIANESI. 1997. Tense and aspect: From semantics to
morphosyntax. New York: Oxford University Press.
GOUGENHEIM, GEORGES. 1971. Etudes sur les periphrases verbales de la langue
franqaise. Paris: A.-G. Nizet.
GRANDGENT, CHARLES HALL. 1910. An introduction to Vulgar Latin. London: McGrath-
Sherrill Press. GREVISSE, MAURICE. 1964. Le bon usage: grammaire francaise avec des remarques sur
la langue francaise d'aujourd'hui. Gembloux, Belgium: J. Duculot.
GREVISSE, MAURICE, and ANDRE GOOSSE. 2011. Le bon usage electronique. Gembloux,
Belgium: J. Duculot.
GRIMM, D. RICK. 2010a. A real-time study of future temporal reference in spoken
Ontarian French. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 16.83-
92.
GRIMM, RICK. 2010b. The effect of language restriction in Ontario French: The case of
future temporal reference in diachrony. Paper presented at the 39th New Ways of
Analyzing Variation (NWAV) conference, San Antonio.
GRIMM, D. RICK, and TERRY NADASDI. 2011. The future of Ontario French. Journal of
French Language Studies 21.1-17.
GUERON, JACQUELINE, and JACQUELINE LECARME (eds). 2004. The syntax of time.
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
GUY, GREGORY R. 1988. Advanced VARBRUL analysis. Linguistic change and contact,
ed. by Kathleen Ferrara, 124—36. Austin, TX: Department of Linguistics, University
of Texas at Austin.
GUY, GREGORY R. 1991. Contextual conditioning in variable lexical phonology.
Language Variation and Change 3.223-39.
HAASE, ALFONS. 1965 [1898]. Syntaxe franqaise du XVIf siecle. Paris: Delagrave.
HAHN, E. ADELAIDE. 1953. Subjunctive and optative: Their origin as futures. New York:
American Philological Association.
267 HALLE, MORRIS, and ALEC MARANTZ. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of
inflection. The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain
Bromberger, ed. by Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, 111-76. Cambridge, MA:
The MIT Press.
HARRIS, MARTIN. 1978. The evolution of French syntax. New York: Longman.
HELLAND, HANS PETTER. 1995. Futur simple et futur periphrastique : du sens aux
emplois. Revue romane 30.3-26.
HOFFMAN, MICHOL. 2004. Sounding Salvadorean: Phonological variables in the Spanish
of Salvadorean youth. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto doctoral dissertation.
HORNSTEIN, NORBERT. 1990. As time goes by: Tense and universal grammar.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
JEANJEAN, COLETTE. 1988. Le futur simple et le futur periphrastique en fran?ais parle :
etude distributionnelle. Grammaire et histoire de la grammaire : hommage a la
memoire de Jean Stefanini, ed. by Claire Blanche-Benveniste and Andre Chervel,
235-57. Marseille, France: Universite de Provence.
JENSEN, FREDE. 1974. The syntax of the Old French subjunctive. Paris: Mouton.
JOHNSON, DANIEL EZRA. 2009. Getting off the GoldVarb standard: Introducing Rbrul for
mixed-effects variable rule analysis. Language and Linguistics Compass 3.359-83.
JONES, MARI C. 2000. The subjunctive in Guernsey Norman French. Journal of French
Language Studies 10.73-99.
KEMPCHINSKY, PAULA. 2009. What can the subjunctive disjoint reference effect tell us
about the subjunctive? Lingua 119.1788-810.
268 KING, RUTH. 1989. Le frangais terre-neuvien : aper?u general. Le frangais canadien parle
hors Quebec : apergu general, ed. by Raymond Mougeon and Edouard Beniak, 227-
44. Quebec, QC: Les Presses de l'Universite Laval.
KING, RUTH. 1994. Subject-verb agreement in Newfoundland French. Language
Variation and Change 6.239-53.
KING, RUTH. 2000. The lexical basis of grammatical borrowing: A Prince Edward Island
French case study. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
KING, RUTH. 2005a. Crossing grammatical borders: Tracing the path of contact-induced
linguistic change. Dialects across borders: Selected papers from the 11th
international conference on methods in dialectology (Methods XI), ed. by Markku
Filppula, Juhani Klemola, Maijatta Palander and Esa Penttila, 233-51. Philadelphia,
PA: John Benjamins.
KING, RUTH. 2005b. Morphosyntactic variation and theory: Subject-verb agreement in
Acadian French. In Cornips & Corrigan, 199-229.
KING, RUTH. 2011. Back to back: The trajectory of an old borrowing. University of
Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 17.115-23.
KING, RUTH. In press. Morphosyntactic variation. The Oxford handbook of
sociolinguistics, ed. by Robert Bayley, Richard Cameron and Ceil Lucas. New York:
Oxford University Press.
KING, RUTH, and GARY BUTLER. 2005. Les Franco-Terreneuviens et le franco-
terreneuvien. Le frangais en Amerique du Nord: etat present, ed. by Albert
269 Valdman, Julie Auger and Deborah Piston-Hatlen, 169-85. Quebec, QC: Les Presses
de l'Universite Laval.
KING, RUTH; FRANCE MARTINEAU; and RAYMOND MOUGEON. 2011. The interplay of
internal and external factors in grammatical change: First-person plural pronouns in
French. Language 87.470-509.
KING, RUTH, and TERRY NADASDI. 2003. Back to the future in Acadian French. Journal
of French Language Studies 13.323-37.
KING, RUTH, and TERRY NADASDI. 2006. Que-deletion revisited. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the Canadian Linguistic Association, Toronto.
KING, RUTH; TERRY NADASDI; and GARY R. BUTLER. 2004. First-person plural in Prince
Edward Island Acadian French: The fate of the vernacular variant je ... ons.
Language Variation and Change 16.237-55.
KING, RUTH, and ROBERT RYAN. 1989. La phonologie des parlers acadiens de l'lle-du-
Prince-Edouard. In Mougeon & Beniak, 245-59.
LABOV, WILLIAM. 1963. The social motivation of a sound change. Word 19.273-309.
LABOV, WILLIAM. 2006 [1966]. The social stratification of English in New York City.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
LABOV, WILLIAM. 1969. Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English
copula. Language 45.715-62.
LABOV, WILLIAM. 1972. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
270 LABOV, WILLIAM. 1978. Where does the sociolinguistic variable stop? A response to
Beatriz Lavandera. Working papers in sociolinguistics. Austin, TX: Southwest
Educational Development Laboratories.
LABOV, WILLIAM. 1994. Principles of linguistic change. Volume I: Internal factors.
Cambridge, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
LABOV, WILLIAM. 2001. Principles of linguistic change. Volume II: Social factors.
Maiden, MA: Blackwell.
LABOV, WILLIAM, and JOSHUA WALETZKY. 1967. Narrative analysis. Essays on the
verbal and visual arts, ed. by June Helm, 12-44. Seattle, WA: University of
Washington Press.
LACHET, CAROLINE. 2010. Variation modale et motivation semantique. Cahiers AFLS
16.25-62.
LACOURCIERE, LUC. 1946. La langue et le folklore. Canada frangais (Quebec) 33.489-
500.
LALAIRE, LOUIS. 1998. La variation modale dans les subordonnees a temps fini du
frangais moderne : approche syntaxique. New York: Peter Lang.
LANDRY, FRANCIS. 1985. Etude synchronique des voyelles nasales dans leparler de
Pubnico-Ouest. Montreal, QC: Universite de Montreal master's thesis.
LAURENDEAU, PAUL. 2000. L'alternance futur simple/futur periphrastique : une
hypothese modale. Verbum 22.277-92.
LAURIER, MICHEL. 1989. Le subjonctif dans le parler franco-ontarien : un mode en voie
de disparition ? In Mougeon & Beniak, 105-26.
271 LAVANDERA, BEATRIZ R. 1978. Where does the sociolinguistic variable stop? Language
in Society 7.171-82.
LE BLDOIS, GEORGES, and ROBERT LE BIDOIS. 1967. Syntaxe du frangais moderne: ses
fondements historiques etpsychologiques. Paris: A. Picard.
LENNEBERG, ERIC HEINZ. 1967. Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.
LODGE, R. ANTHONY. 2004. A sociolinguistic history of Parisian French. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
LUCAS, CEIL; ROBERT BAYLEY; and CLAYTON VALLI. 2001. Sociolinguistic variation in
American Sign Language. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.
LUCCI, VINCENT. 1973. Phonologie de I'acadien: parler de la region de Moncton, N.B.,
Canada. Montreal, QC: M. Didier.
MARTINEAU, FRANCE. 1988. Variable deletion of que in the spoken French of Ottawa-
Hull. Advances in romance linguistics, ed. by David Birdsong and Jean-Pierre
Montreuil, 275-87. Dordrecht: Foris.
MARTINEAU, FRANCE. 1995. Verbes de volonte et absence d'obviation en frangais ancien.
Canadian Journal of Linguistics 40.405-21.
MARTINEAU, FRANCE. 2005. Perspectives sur le changement linguistique : aux sources du
frangais canadien. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 50.173-213.
MARTINEAU, FRANCE, and RAYMOND MOUGEON. 2003. A sociolinguistic study of the
origins of ne deletion in European and Quebec French. Language 79.118-52.
MARTINET, ANDRE. 1955. Economie des changements phonetiques : traite de phonologie
diachronique. Bern: A. Francke.
272 MARTINET, ANDRE. 1956. La descriptionphonologique : avec application au parler
franco-provencal d'Hauteville (Savoie). Geneva: Librairie Droz.
MASSIGNON, GENEVIEVE. 1949. Le traitement des voyelles nasales finales dans les parlers
fran9ais du sud de la Nouvelle-Ecosse (Canada). Bulletin de la Societe Linguistique
de Paris 45.129-34.
MASSIGNON, GENEVIEVE. 1962. Les parlers frangais d'Acadie : enquete linguistique. 2
vol. Paris: Klincksieck.
MAUPAS, CHARLES. 1607. Grammaire et syntaxe frangoise. Paris: Adrian Bacot.
MAUVILLON, ELEAZAR. 1754. Cours complet de la langue frangoise. Dresde: G.C.
Walther.
MEIGRET, LOUIS. 1980 [1550]. Le trette de la grammaire frangaise, ed. by F. J.
Hausmann. Tubingen: Gunter Narr.
MEYERHOFF, MIRIAM, and JAMES A. WALKER. 2007. The persistence of variation in
individual grammars: Copula absence in 'urban sojourners' and their stay-at-home
peers, Bequia (St Vincent and the Grenadines). Journal of Sociolinguistics 11.346-
66.
MLLROY, LESLEY. 1987. Language and social networks. New York: Blackwell.
MOLIERE. 1854 [1672], Les femmes savantes comedie en cinq actes. Bielefed: Velhagen
& Klasing.
MOUGEON, RAYMOND, and EDOUARD BENIAK (eds.) 1989. Le frangais canadien parle
hors Quebec : apergu general. Quebec, QC: Les Presses de l'Universite Laval.
273 MOUGEON, RAYMOND, and EDOUARD BENIAK (eds.) 1994. Les origines du franqais
quebecois. Sainte-Foy, QC: Les Presses de l'Universite Laval.
MOUGEON, RAYMOND, and EDOUARD BENIAK. 1991. Linguistic consequences of
language contact and restriction: The case of French in Ontario, Canada. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
MOUGEON, RAYMOND; KATHERINE REHNER, and NATHALIE ALEXANDRE. 2005. Le
franqais parle en situation minoritaire : choix de langue, identite linguistique et
variation linguistique parmi les eleves des ecoles de langue franqaise. Final report
prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Education.
NAGY, NAOMI. 2011. Lexical change and language contact: Faetar in Italy and Canada.
Journal of Sociolinguistics 15.366-82.
NEUMANN-HOLZSCHUH, INGRID. 2005. Le subjonctif en franqais acadien. Franqais
d'Amerique : approches morphosyntaxiques, ed. by Patrice Brasseur and Anika
Falkert, 125^14. Paris: L'Harmattan.
NEVINS, ANDREW, and JEFFREY K. PARROTT. 2010. Variable rules meet Impoverishment
theory: Patterns of agreement leveling in English varieties. Lingua 120.1135-59.
NORDAHL, HELGE. 1969. Les systemes du subjonctif correlatif Etude sur I'emploi des
modes dans la subordonnee completive en franqais moderne. Oslo:
Universitetsforlaget.
NYROP, KR. 1967 [1899]. Grammaire historique de la langue franqaise, tome premier.
Geneva: Slatkine Reprints.
274 OUDIN, ANTOINE. 1645. Grammaire frangoise, rapportee au langage du temps. Paris:
Chez Antoine de Sommaville.
OWENS, JONATHAN; ROBIN DODSWORTH; and TRENT ROCKWOOD. 2009. Subject-verb
order in spoken Arabic: Morpholexical and event-based factors. Language Variation
and Change 21.39-67.
PAPEN, ROBERT A., and KEVIN J. ROTTET. 1997. A structural sketch of the Cajun French
spoken in Lafourche and Terrebonne parishes. French and Creole in Louisiana, ed.
by Albert Valdman, 71-108. New York: Plenum Press.
PAPPAS, PANAYIOTIS. 2008. Object clitic placement in Cypriot Greek: Results from a
variationist analysis. Paper presented at 38th New Ways of Analyzing Variation
(NWAV) conference, Houston.
PARROTT, JEFFREY K. 2007. Distributed morphological mechanisms oflabovian
variation in morphosyntax. Washington, DC: Georgetown dissertation.
PERONNET, LOUISE. 1989. Analyse des emprunts dans un corpus acadien. Revue
quebecoise de linguistique theorique et appliquee 8.229-51.
PERONNET, LOUISE. 1990. Systeme des conjugaisons verbales dans le parler acadien du
sud-est du Nouveau-Brunswick. Linguistica Atlantica 12.81-115.
PERONNET, LOUISE; ROSE MARY BABITCH; WLADYSLAW CICHOCKI; and PATRICE
BRASSEUR. 1998. Atlas linguistique du vocabulaire maritime acadien. Sainte-Foy,
QC: Presses de l'Universite Laval.
POIRIER, PASCAL. 1993. Le glossaire acadien. Moncton: Les Editions d'Acadie.
275 POPLACK, SHANA. 1987. Contrasting patterns of code-switching in two communities.
Aspects of multilingualism, ed. by Erling Wande, Jan Anward, Bengt Nordberg, Lars
Steensland and Mats Thelander, 51-77. Borgstroms: Uppsala.
POPLACK, SHANA. 1989. The care and handling of a mega-corpus: The Ottawa-Hull
French project. Language change and variation, ed. by Ralph W. Fasold and
Deborah Schiffrin, 411-51. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
POPLACK, SHANA. 1992. The inherent variability of the French subjunctive. Theoretical
analyses in romance linguistics, ed. by Christiane Laeufer and Terrell A. Morgan,
235-63. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
POPLACK, SHANA. 1997. The sociolinguistic dynamics of apparent convergence. Towards
a social science of language, ed. by Gregory R. Guy, Crawford Feagin, Deborah
Schiffrin and John Baugh, 285-309. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
POPLACK, SHANA. 2001. Variability, frequency, and productivity in the irrealis domain of
French. Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, ed. by Joan Bybee and
Paul Hopper, 405-28. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
POPLACK, SHANA, and NATHALIE DION. 2009. Prescription vs. praxis: The evolution of
future temporal reference in French. Language 85.557-87.
POPLACK, SHANA, and SALI TAGLIAMONTE. 1996. Nothing in context: Variation,
grammaticization and past time marking in Nigerian Pidgin English. Changing
meanings, changing functions: Papers relating to grammaticalization in contact
languages, ed. by Philip Baker and Anand Syea, 71-94. Westminster, UK:
Westminster University Press.
276 POPLACK, SHANA, and DANIELLE TURPIN. 1999. Does the futur have a future in
(Canadian) French? Probus 11.133-64.
PROGOVAC, LJILJANA. 1993. Subjunctive: The (mis)behavior of anaphora and negative
polarity. The Linguistic Review 10.37-59.
QUER, JOSEP. 1998. Mood at the interface. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.
RACINE, JEAN. 1665. Alexandre Le Grand. Paris: Pierre Trabovillet.
RACINE, JEAN. 1802 [1672]. Bajazet. Paris: Chez Fages.
REICHENBACH, HANS. 1947. Elements of symbolic logic. New York: Free Press.
RESTORICK, AUDREY. 2010. Sociolinguistic variation in the use of the present subjunctive
in Canadian English. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian
Linguistic Association, Montreal.
REY, ALAIN, (ed.) 2011. Le Grand Robert de la langue frangaise [Electronic version,
restricted access] version 2.2. Paris: Dictionnaires Le Robert. Accessed September
9th, 2011.
RICHELET, CESAR-PIERRE. 1973 [1680]. Dictionnaire franqois : contenant les mots et les
choses, plusieurs nouvelles remarques sur la langue franqoise. Hildesheim: Georg
Olms Verlag.
RIGAUD, ANDRE. 1970. « Apres qu'il soit... ». Vie et Langage 215.113-16.
RIVERO, MARIA LUISA. 1994. Clause structure and v-movement in the languages of the
Balkans. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 12.63-120.
277 RlZZi, LuiGI. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. Elements of grammar:
Handbook in generative syntax, ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281-337. Boston: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
ROBERGE, YVES, and NICOLE ROSEN. 1999. Preposition stranding and gwe-deletion in
varieties of North American French. Linguistica Atlantica 21.153-68.
ROBERTS, IAN. 1993. A formal account of grammaticalisation in the history of Romance
futures. Folia linguistica historica XIII 1-2.219-58.
ROBERTS, NICHOLAS S. 2010. >4 variationist study of future temporal reference in
Hexagonal French. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Newcastle master's thesis.
ROSS, SALLY. 2001. Les ecoles acadiennes en Nouvelle-Ecosse 1758 - 2000. Moncton,
NB: Centre d'etudes acadiennes.
Ross, SALLY, and J. ALPHONSE DEVEAU. 1992. The Acadians of Nova Scotia past and
present. Halifax, NS: Nimbus Publishing.
ROTTET, KEVIN J. 2001. Language shift in the coastal marshes of Louisiana. New York:
Peter Lang.
ROWLETT, PAUL. 2007. The syntax of French. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University
Press.
ROY, CARMEN. 1981. Litterature orale en Gaspesie. Montreal: Lemeac.
ROY, MARIE-MARTHE. 1979. Les conjonctions anglaises BUT et SO dans le franfais de
Moncton. Une etude sociolinguistique de changements linguistiques provoques par
une situation de contact. Montreal, QC: Universite du Quebec a Montreal master's
thesis.
278 RYAN, ROBERT W. 1981. Une analyse phonologique d'un parler acadien de la Nouvelle-
Ecosse (Canadaj : region de la Bale Sainte-Marie. Quebec, QC: Centre international
de recherche sur le bilinguisme.
RYAN, ROBERT W. 1982a. Une analyse phonologique du systeme des voyelles nasales du
parler acadien de la region de Meteghan (Nouvelle-Ecosse). Si Que 5.83-98.
RYAN, ROBERT W. 1982b. Analyse morphologique du groupe verbal du parler franco-
acadien de la baie Sainte-Marie, Nouvelle-Ecosse (Canada). Quebec: Centre
international de recherche sur le bilinguisme.
RYAN, ROBERT. 1985. Les phenomenes d'economie, de regularity et de differentiation
observes au sein du systeme des pronoms personnels sujets d'un parler acadien.
Papers from the ninth annual meeting of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistic
Association 9.113-26.
SANKOFF, DAVID. 1988. Problems of representativeness. Sociolinguistics: An
international handbook of the science of language and society, ed. by Ulrich Ammon
and Norbert Dittmar, 899-903. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
SANKOFF, DAVID; GILLIAN SANKOFF; SUZANNE LABERGE; and MARJORIE TOPHAM. 1976.
Methodes d'echantillonnage et utilisation de l'ordinateur dans 1'etude de la variation
grammaticale. Cahier de linguistique 6.85-125.
SANKOFF, DAVID; SALI A. TAGLIAMONTE; and ERIC SMITH. 2005. Goldvarb X: A variable
rule application for Macintosh and Windows. Toronto, ON: Department of
Linguistics, University of Toronto.
279 SANKOFF, GILLIAN. 1980. The social life of language. Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
SANKOFF, GILLIAN, and HELENE BLONDEAU. 2007. Language change across the lifespan:
/r/ in Montreal French. Language 83.560-88.
SANKOFF, GILLIAN, and DIANE VINCENT. 1977. L'emploi productif du NE dans le frangais
parle a Montreal. Le frangais moderne 45.243—256.
SANKOFF, GILLIAN, and SUZANNE EVANS WAGNER. 2006. Age grading in retrograde
movement: The inflected future in Montreal French. University of Pennsylvania
Working Papers in Linguistics 12.1-14.
SLDDLQL, DANIEL. 2010. Distributed morphology. Language and Linguistics Compass
4.524-42.
SMITH, CARLOTA S. 2009. Tense and context in French. Text, time, and context: Selected
papers of Carlota S. Smith, ed. by Richard P. Meier, Helen Aristar-Dry and Emilie
Destruel, 183-201.
ST-AMAND, ANNE. 2002. Le subjonctif suivant une expression non-verbale. Ottawa, ON:
University of Ottawa master's thesis.
STALNAKER, ROBERT C. 2002. Assertion. Formal semantics: The essential readings, ed.
by Paul Portner and Barbara H. Partee, 147-61. Oxford: Blackwell.
STATISTICS CANADA. 1991a. 2A Profile, 1991 - NS - Southern Nova Scotia (21 areas)
(table), 1991 (2A) basic questionnaire, Provinces to Municipalities (database),
Using E-STAT (distributor), http://estat.statcan.gc.ca/cgi-
280 win/cnsmcgi.exe?Lang=E&EST-Fi=EStat\English\SC_RR-eng.htm.
Accessed September 25, 2011.
STATISTICS CANADA. 1991b. 2A Profile, 1991 -N.S. (18 Counties) (table), 1991 (2A)
basic questionnaire, Provinces to Municipalities (database), Using E-STAT
(distributor). http://estat.statcan.gc.ca/cgi-win/cnsmcgi.exe?Lang=E&EST-
Fi=EStat\English\SC_RR-eng.htm. Accessed September 25, 2011.
STATISTICS CANADA. 1991C. 1991 Profile of Enumeration Areas/Cumulation Profiles,
Canadian Census Analyser (database) by the Data Liberation Initiative. Using
CHASS (distributor).
http://dcl.chass.utoronto.ca.ezproxy.library.yorku.ca/census/. Accessed
September 25, 2011.
STELLING, LOUIS E. 2008. Morphosyntactic variation and language shift in two Franco-
American communities. Albany, NY: State University of New York dissertation.
SVENSON, LARS-OWE. 1959. Les parlers du Marais Vendeen phonetique, morphologie et
syntaxe, textes, onomastique, lexique. Goteborg: Elanders.
TAGLIAMONTE, SALI A. 2006. Analysing sociolinguistic variation. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
THIBAULT, PIERRETTE, and DIANE VINCENT. 1990. Un corpus de frangais parle. Quebec:
Universite Laval, Departement de langues et linguistiques.
TORRES CACOULLOS, REN A, and JAMES A. WALKER. 2009. The present of the English
future: Grammatical variation and collocations in discourse. Language 85.321-54.
281 VET, CO. 1993. Conditions d'emploi et interpretation des temps futurs du fran
Verbum 72.71-84.
VINCENT, DIANE; MARTY LAFOREST; and GUYLAINE MARTEL. 1995. Le corpus de
Montreal 1995 : adaptation de la methode d'enquete sociolinguistique pour l'analyse
conversationnelle. Dialangue 6. 29-46.
WALKER, JAMES A. 2010. Variation in linguistic systems. New York: Routledge.
WEINREICH, URIEL; WILLIAM LABOV; and MARTIN HERZOG. 1968. Empirical foundations
for a theory of language change. Directions for historical linguistics, td. by Winfred
P. Lehmann and Yakov Malkiel, 95-195. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
WLESMATH, RAPHAELE. 2006. Le frangais acadien : analyse syntaxique d'un corpus oral
recueilli au Nouveau-Brunswick / Canada. Paris: L'Harmattan.
WOLFRAM, WALT. 1993. Identifying and interpreting variables. American dialect
research, ed. by Dennis R. Preston, 193-221. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
WRENN, PHYLLIS. 1981. Allophonic variation of /E/ and its morphologization in an
Acadian dialect of Nova Scotia. Language and Speech 24.327-47.
ZIMMER, DAGMAR. 1994. « £a va tu marcher, 9a marchera tu pas, je le sais pas » (71: 15)
le futur simple et le futur periphrastique dans le fran?ais parle a Montreal. Langues et
linguistique 20.213-26.
282