1887
Volume 6, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1879-9264
  • E-ISSN: 1879-9272
GBP
Buy:£15.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This paper reports on interrogative (question) use in the informal spontaneous speech of near-native second-language French speakers. Interrogatives present considerable variation in French, and choices of interrogative form depend on semantics, communicative function, and register. Using a corpus of spontaneous conversations between near-native (NNSs) and native speakers (NSs), the inventory of interrogatives used is described; A detailed examination is then given of the question marker (“is it that”), a candidate for overuse in L2 French ( Zwanziger 2008, p. 91 ). The results, from 825 occurrences of interrogative structures, reveal that the NNSs possess extremely similar inventories of interrogative forms to their NS interlocutors and that their interrogative choices are both communicatively and socio-stylistically appropriate. What appears quantitatively as overuse of by two NNSs is, from a communicative point of view, entirely felicitous: Like NSs, the NNSs reserve for several marked interrogative contexts. The results suggest that the NNSs successfully integrate syntactic, semantic, communicative, and sociolinguistic information in spontaneous conversation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lab.14024.don
2016-03-01
2019-01-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abrahamsson, N. , & Hyltenstam, K.
    (2008) The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 481–509. doi: 10.1017/S027226310808073X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310808073X [Google Scholar]
  2. Andringa, S.
    (2014) The use of native speaker norms in Critical Period Hypothesis research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36, 565–596. doi: 10.1017/S0272263113000600
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263113000600 [Google Scholar]
  3. Armstrong, N. R.
    (2001) Social and stylistic variation in spoken French: A comparative approach. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/impact.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.8 [Google Scholar]
  4. Ashby, W. J.
    (1977) Interrogative forms in Parisian French. Semasia, 4, 35–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bayley, R. & Regan, V.
    (2004) Introduction: The acquisition of sociolinguistic competence. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8, 323–338. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2004.00263.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2004.00263.x [Google Scholar]
  6. Belletti, A. , Bennati, E. , & Sorace, A.
    (2007) Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 25, 657–689. doi: 10.1007/s11049‑007‑9026‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-007-9026-9 [Google Scholar]
  7. Birdsong, D.
    (1992) Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68, 706–755. doi: 10.1353/lan.1992.0035
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1992.0035 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2009) Age and the end state of second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), The new handbook of second language acquisition (pp.401–424). Bingley, UK: Emerald.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (2014) The Critical Period Hypothesis for second language acquisition: Tailoring the coat of many colors. In M. Pawlak & L. Aronin (Eds.), Essential topics in applied linguistics and multilingualism (pp.43–50). Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑01414‑2_3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01414-2_3 [Google Scholar]
  10. Birdsong, D. , & Molis, M.
    (2001) On the evidence for maturational constraints in second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 235–249. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2000.2750
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2750 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bley-Vroman, R.
    (1989) What is the logical problem of foreign language learning?In S. M. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp.41–68). New York: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524544.005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524544.005 [Google Scholar]
  12. Canale, M. & Swain, M.
    (1980) Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–47. doi: 10.1093/applin/1.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/1.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  13. Coveney, A.
    (1997) L’approche variationniste et la description de la grammaire du français: Le cas des interrogatives. Langue française, 115, 88–100. doi: 10.3406/lfr.1997.6224
    https://doi.org/10.3406/lfr.1997.6224 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2002) Variability in spoken French: A sociolinguistic study of interrogation and negation. Bristol, UK: Elm Bank.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. DeKeyser, R. M.
    (2000) The robustness of Critical Period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499–533.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Dekydtspotter, L. , & Miller, A. K.
    (2013) Inhibitive and facilitative priming induced by traces in the processing of wh-dependencies in a second language. Second Language Research, 29, 345–372. doi: 10.1177/0267658312467030
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658312467030 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dewaele, J.-M.
    (2000) Structures interrogatives dans le discours français oral d’apprenants et de locuteurs natifs. In A. Englebert , M. Pierrard , L. Rosier , & D. Van Raemdonck (Eds.), Actes du XXIIe Congrès International de Linguistique et de Philologie Romanes (vol.IX, pp.69–76). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. (2004) Retention or omission of ne in advanced French interlanguage: The variable effect of extralinguistic factors. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8, 433–450. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2004.00268.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2004.00268.x [Google Scholar]
  19. Dewaele, J.-M. & Regan, V.
    (2002) Maîtriser la norme sociolinguistique en interlangue française: Le cas de l’omission variable de ‘ne’. Journal of French Language Studies, 12, 123–148. doi: 10.1017/S0959269502000212
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959269502000212 [Google Scholar]
  20. Di Vito, N. O’Connor.
    (1997) Patterns across spoken and written French: Empirical research on the interaction among forms, functions, and genres. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Donaldson, B.
    (2011a) Left dislocation in near-native French. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 399–432. doi: 10.1017/S0272263111000039
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263111000039 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2011b) Nativelike right dislocation in near-native French. Second Language Research, 27, 361–390. doi: 10.1177/0267658310395866
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658310395866 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2012) Syntax and discourse in near-native French: Clefts and focus. Language Learning, 62, 902–930. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2012.00701.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00701.x [Google Scholar]
  24. Doughty, C. J.
    (2013) Optimizing post-critical-period language learning. In G. Granena & M. Long (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment (pp.153–176). Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.35.06dou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.35.06dou [Google Scholar]
  25. Edmonds, A.
    (2010) Qu’est-ce qui s’est passé? Des questions stéréotypées chez les apprenants du français. Revue textes & contextes, 5, [online journal].
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Etienne, C. , & Sax, K.
    (2009) Stylistic variation in French: Bridging the gap between research and textbooks. Modern Language Journal, 93, 584–606.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Felser, C. , & Roberts, L.
    (2007) Processing wh-dependencies in a second language: A cross-modal priming study. Second Language Research, 23, 9–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Forsberg Lundell, F. , Bartning, I. , Engel, H. , Gudmundson, A. , Hancock, V. , & Lindqvist, C.
    (2014) Beyond advanced stages in high-level spoken L2 French. Journal of French Language Studies, 24, 255–280. doi: 10.1017/S0959269513000057
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959269513000057 [Google Scholar]
  29. Gadet, F.
    (1997) Le français ordinaire. Paris: Armand Colin.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Geeslin, K. & Long, A. Y.
    (2014) Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition: Learning to use language in context. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Granena, G. & Long, M.
    (2013) Introduction and overview. In G. Granena & M. Long (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment (pp.ix–xvi). Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.35.002int
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.35.002int [Google Scholar]
  32. Grevisse, M. & Goosse, A.
    (2008) Le bon usage (14th ed). Brussels: De Boeck.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Hopp, H.
    (2009) The syntax-discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 463–483.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Jefferson, G.
    (1984) Transcript notation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social interaction (pp.ix–xvi). New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Johnson, J. S. & Newport, E. L.
    (1989) Critical Period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Katz, S. L. & Blyth, C. S.
    (2007) Teaching French grammar in context. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Lambrecht, K.
    (1981) Topic, antitopic, and verb agreement in non-standard French. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pb.ii.6
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pb.ii.6 [Google Scholar]
  38. Long, M.
    (2013) Maturational constraints on child and adult SLA. In G. Granena & M. Long (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment (pp.3–42). Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.35.01lon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.35.01lon [Google Scholar]
  39. Marinova-Todd, S. H.
    (2003) Comprehensive analysis of ultimate attainment in adult second language acquisition. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Mougeon, R. , Rehner, K. , & Nadasdi, T.
    (2004) The learning of spoken French variation by immersion students from Toronto, Canada. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8, 408–432. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2004.00267.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2004.00267.x [Google Scholar]
  41. Mougeon, R. , Nadasdi, T. , & Rehner, K.
    (2010) The sociolinguistic competence of immersion students. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Myers, L. L. & Pellet, S.
    (2014) Pourquoi in spoken French: Corpus-based function-form mapping. In S. Katz Bourns & L. L. Myers (Eds.), Perspectives on linguistic structure and context (pp.157–182). Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.244.08mye
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.244.08mye [Google Scholar]
  43. Myers, L. L.
    (2007)  Wh-interrogatives in spoken French: A corpus-based analysis of their form and function. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Pohl, J.
    (1965) Observations sur les formes d’interrogation dans la langue parlée et dans la langue écrite non-littéraire. InXe Congrès International de Linguistique et Philologie Romanes (vol.2, pp.501–513). Paris: Klincksieck.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Price, G.
    (1971) The French language: Present and past. London: Edward Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Quillard, V.
    (2001) La diversité des formes interrogatives: Comment l’interpréter?Langage et Société, 95, 57–72. doi: 10.3917/ls.095.0057
    https://doi.org/10.3917/ls.095.0057 [Google Scholar]
  47. Regan, V.
    (1996) Variation in French interlanguage: A longitudinal study of sociolinguistic competence. In R. Bayley & D. R. Preston (Eds.), Second language acquisition and linguistic variation (pp.177–201). Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/sibil.10.08reg
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.10.08reg [Google Scholar]
  48. Rehner, K.
    (2002) The developent of aspects of linguistic and discourse competence by advanced second language learners of French. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Toronto, Canada.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Rothman, J.
    (2009) Pragmatic deficits with syntactic consequences? L2 pronominal subjects and the syntax-pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 951–973. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.07.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.07.007 [Google Scholar]
  50. Rowlett, P.
    (2007) The syntax of French. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511618642
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618642 [Google Scholar]
  51. Sax, K. J.
    (2003) Acquisition of stylistic variation in American learners of French. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Slabakova, R. , Kempchinsky, P. , & Rothman, J.
    (2012) Clitic-doubled left dislocation and focus fronting in L2 Spanish: A case of successful acquisition at the syntax-discourse interface. Second Language Research, 28, 319–343. doi: 10.1177/0267658312447612
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658312447612 [Google Scholar]
  53. Söll, L.
    (1983) L’interrogation directe dans un corpus de langage enfantin. In F.-J. Hausmann (Ed.), Études de grammaire française descriptive (pp.45–54). Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Sorace, A.
    (2011) Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–33. doi: 10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor [Google Scholar]
  55. (2012) Pinning down the concept of interface in bilingual development: A reply to peer commentaries. Linguistic Approaches to Billingualism, 2, 209–216. doi: 10.1075/lab.2.2.04sor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.2.2.04sor [Google Scholar]
  56. Sorace, A. & Filiaci, F.
    (2006) Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22, 339–368. doi: 10.1191/0267658306sr271oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr271oa [Google Scholar]
  57. Valdman, A.
    (1988) Classroom foreign language learning and language variation: The notion of pedagogical norms. World Englishes, 7, 221–236. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.1988.tb00233.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.1988.tb00233.x [Google Scholar]
  58. (2000) Comment gérer la variation dans l’enseignement du français langue étrangère aux Etats-Unis. The French Review, 73, 648–666.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. van Compernolle, R.
    (2015) Native and non-native perceptions of appropriateness in the French second-person pronoun system. Journal of French Language Studies, 25, 45–64. doi: 10.1017/S0959269513000471
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959269513000471 [Google Scholar]
  60. van Compernolle, R. & Williams, L.
    (2009) Learner versus nonlearner patterns of stylistic variation in synchronous computer-mediated French: Yes/No questions and nous versus on . Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 471–500.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. White, L. , & Genesee, F.
    (1996) How native is near-native? The issue of age and ultimate attainment in the acquisition of a second language. Second Language Research, 12, 233–265. doi: 10.1177/026765839601200301
    https://doi.org/10.1177/026765839601200301 [Google Scholar]
  62. Zwanziger, E.
    (2008) Variability in L1 and L2 French wh-interrogatives: The roles of communicative function, wh-word, and metalinguistic awareness. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Boston University.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lab.14024.don
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/lab.14024.don
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error