2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.03.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Discourse-pragmatic variation in Paris French and London English: Insights from general extenders

Abstract: This paper examines the use of general extenders (GEs), such as and stuff in English and et tout in French, in Paris French and London English. We aim to compare the social and the linguistic conditioning of extender use in the two languages, discuss the different kinds of spread in the two cities and reflect on the specificity of discourse-pragmatic variation.The study shows that GE forms as well as frequencies vary across factors such as gender, age and ethnicity, while some variants also appear to be gramma… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
16
0
7

Year Published

2018
2018
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
16
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…A similar result is obtained for the general extender et tout , displaying a score of 0.16. This positive result is consistent with previous research suggesting that et tout is grammaticalising and rising in frequency in spoken French, especially among younger generations (Secova, 2017).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A similar result is obtained for the general extender et tout , displaying a score of 0.16. This positive result is consistent with previous research suggesting that et tout is grammaticalising and rising in frequency in spoken French, especially among younger generations (Secova, 2017).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…A similar result is obtained for the general extender et tout, displaying a score of 0.16. This positive result is consistent with previous research suggesting that et tout is grammaticalising and rising in frequency in spoken French, especially among younger generations(Secova 2017).Lastly within this category, intensifiers are worth scrutinising, as they commonly display a tendency to change from generation to generation and reveal a preference among young people for specific variants(Tagliamonte 2016). As our results show, some intensifiers such as grave and trop are extremely popular, while others are (now) disfavoured (e.g.…”
supporting
confidence: 90%
“…Most scholars assume that the earliest uses of genre are as a noun (e.g. Danon-Boileau & Morel 1997; Fleischman & Yaguello 2004:130; Secova 2011; Davidse et al 2013; Dufaye 2016; Isambert 2016). For the seven older age groups in CFPP2000 this is by far the most frequent use of genre .…”
Section: Quotative Genre As An Independent Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… 2 At present, the two less frequent similarity quotatives seem to have specialised functions that relate to their uses as discourse markers. Secova (2011: 141) notes that as a discourse marker en mode is associated with descriptions of a state of mind or mood. In our data the quotative en mode , similarly, introduces imagined speech or thought associated with a state of mind or mood, as in the example below.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The in situ form is, in fact, the only variable that displays significant gender differences in the quantitative analyses of the MPF corpus. It is important to note that if we compare grammatical with discourse-pragmatic innovations (see Secova, 2017 for general extenders and Cheshire and Secova, this volume, for quotatives), we find that they do not pattern in the same way. While innovative discourse features overall are used more often by female speakers, gender was not significant for individual variants.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 81%