French liaison in the light of corpus data

Abstract

French liaison has long been a favourite testing ground for phonological theories, a situation which can undoubtedly be attributed to the complexity of the phenomenon, involving in particular phonology/syntax, phonology/morphology, phonology/lexicon interfaces. Dealing with liaison requires stepping into all the components of the grammar, while at the same time tackling the quick sands of variation. The data on which a number of formal analyses are based have often been a source of concern since liaison, in part because of its intrinsic variable character, requires extensive and robust data. In the wake of the results from the study of other corpora, we present here extensive results based on the PFC database (Phonologie du français contemporain: usages, variétés et structures) and point to their implications for models of linguistic structure. While we do not believe that a motivated theoretical account can be mechanically extracted from the data, we conclude that future analyses will have to take explicitly into account the results of extensive corpus work as well as sociolinguistic surveys, acquisition studies, experimental phonetics and (neuro-)psycho-linguistic investigations, including the relationship between speech and writing. As stressed in Chevrot, Fayol and Laks (2005), these analyses will have to acknowledge that French liaison is not a homogeneous locus but a multi-faceted phenomenon requiring us to accept, without demur, the crossing of disciplinary boundaries.

Variable and invariable liaison in a corpus of spoken French

“…As shown below, the results contrast with those of previous studies in two respects: first, previous studies often do not find a significant difference in liaison rates for subjects drawn from different social classes or having more or less formal education (Durand et al, 2011;Mallet, 2008), or they neglect this factor (Durand & Lyche, 2008;Green & Hintze, 1990Ranson, 2008). If they find such a difference, the result has in all cases been that higher social class or more formal education is tied to higher liaison rates (Ashby, 1981;Booij & De Jong, 1987;de Jong, 1989ade Jong, , 1994.…”

“…While most classificatory systems for liaison acknowledge the existence of this category, no clear defining criteria have been put forward (cf. also Durand & Lyche, 2008). A list of all lexicalized constructions found in the corpus and considered as such is given in Table 4.…”

“…At first sight a liaison rate of 100 percent for sequences of Adj and N might be surprising, given that it is generally taken that liaison with prenominal adjectives is systematic, but not invariable, with a general tendency towards non-realization of the liaison consonant (Post, 2000;Sampson, 2001;Durand & Lyche, 2008). Yet, on closer inspection, the present results fit well into the overall picture established by previous research.…”

French Speech Segmentation in Liaison Contexts by L1 and L2 Listeners

“…ti. t#a .mi] 'boyfriend'; Durand & Lyche, 2008). These processes render word segmentation heuristics that rely on alignment between syllable and word onsets, like SOSH, far less reliable.…”

“…Of the six consonants that participate in liaison (/z, n, t, ʁ, p, g/), three consonants, /z/, /n/, and /t/, make up approximately 99% of all cases of liaison, according to the Phonologie du Français Contemporain corpus of spoken French (Durand & Lyche, 2008). However, these three consonants differ in their distribution as a liaison versus underlyingly word-initial consonant: /z/ is more likely to be heard in liaison than word-initially, while /t/ is a more frequent word-initial versus liaison consonant.…”