Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T05:17:09.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What counts as (contact-induced) change

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2011

SHANA POPLACK ,
LAUREN ZENTZ  and
NATHALIE DION
SHANA POPLACK*
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
LAUREN ZENTZ
Affiliation:
University of Arizona
NATHALIE DION
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
*
Address for correspondence: Shana Poplack, 70 Laurier East, Suite 422, Ottawa, ON, CanadaK1N 6N5[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

We are most grateful to our commentators for their careful reading of our Keynote Article (henceforth KA) and their incisive observations on contact-induced change, and for the many challenging and thought-provoking issues they raise. We welcome the opportunity to respond to (some of) them, especially since, perhaps not surprisingly, these are symptomatic of the very issues in the field of contact linguistics that prompted us to write this KA in the first place.

Type
Authors response
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , April 2012 , pp. 247 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Budzhak-Jones, S., & Poplack, S. (1997). Two generations, two strategies: The fate of bare English-origin nouns in Ukrainian. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 1 (2), 225–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, L. (2006). Areal linguistics: A closer scrutiny. In Matras, Y., McMahon, A. & Vincent, N. (eds.), Linguistic areas: Convergence in historical and typological perspective, 1–31. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dion, N. (2003). L'effacement du que en français canadien: une étude en temps réel. M.A. mémoire, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
Dion, N., & Blondeau, H. (2005). Variability and future temporal reference: The French of Anglo-Montrealers. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 10 (2) (Selected Papers from NWAV 32), 77–89.Google Scholar
Elsig, M. (2009). Grammatical variation across space and time: The French interrogative system (Studies in Language Variation 3). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsig, M. (2011). Benchmark varieties and the individual speaker: Indispensable touchstones in studies on language contact. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, doi:10.1017/S1366728911000228. Published online by Cambridge University Press, November 2011.Google Scholar
Elsig, M., & Poplack, S. (2006). Transplanted dialects and language change: Question formation in Québec. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 12 (2) (Selected Papers from NWAV 34), 77–90.Google Scholar
Kaiser, G. A. (2011). Preposition stranding and orphaning: The case of bare prepositions in French. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, doi:10.1017/S136672891100023X. Published online by Cambridge University Press, November 2011.Google Scholar
King, R. (2000). The lexical basis of grammatical borrowing: A Prince Edward Island French case study (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 209). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, R., & Roberge, Y. (1990). Preposition stranding in Prince Edward Island French. Probus, 2, 351–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lealess, A. V., & Smith, C. T. (2011). Assessing contact-induced language change: The use of subject relative markers in Quebec English. Cahiers linguistiques d'Ottawa, 36, 20–38.Google Scholar
LeBlanc, C. (1999). Du conditionnel dans les propositions hypothetiques en si: Cet intrus. MA thesis, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
LeBlanc, C., & Poplack, S. (2003). Les si chassent les -rais? Une étude du conditionnel en temps réel. Presented at Canadian Linguistic Association, Dalhousie University.Google Scholar
Leroux, M., & Jarmasz, L.-G. (2006). A study about nothing: Null subjects as a diagnostic of convergence between English and French. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 12 (2) (Selected Papers from NWAV 34), 1–14.Google Scholar
Martineau, F., & Mougeon, R. (2003). A sociolinguistic study of the origins of ne deletion in European and Quebec French. Language, 79, 118–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mougeon, R., & Béniak, E. (1991). Linguistic consequences of language contact and restriction: The case of French in Ontario, Canada. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muysken, P. (2011). Another icon of language contact shattered. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, doi:10.1017/S1366728911000277. Published online by Cambridge University Press, November 2011.Google Scholar
Otheguy, R. (2011). Concurrent models and cross-linguistic analogies in the study of prepositional stranding in French in Canada. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, doi:10.1017/S1366728911000290. Published online by Cambridge University Press, November 2011.Google Scholar
Otheguy, R., Zentella, A. C., & Livert, D. (2007). Language and dialect contact in Spanish in New York: Toward the formation of a speech commuity. Language, 83, 770–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S. (1989). The care and handling of a mega-corpus: The Ottawa-Hull French project. In Fasold, R. & Shiffrin, D. (eds.), Language change and variation, pp. 411–451. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S. (1997). The sociolinguistic dynamics of apparent convergence. In Guy, G., Baugh, J. & Schiffrin, D. (eds), Towards a social science of language: Papers in Honor of William Labov, pp. 285–309. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S., & Dion, N. (2009). Prescription vs. praxis: The evolution of future temporal reference in French. Language, 85 (3), 557–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S., & Levey, S. (2010). Contact-induced grammatical change: A cautionary tale. In Auer, P. & Schmidt, J. E. (eds.), Language and space: An international handbook of linguistic variation (vol. 1): Theories and methods, pp. 391–419. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Poplack, S., & Malvar, E. (2007). Elucidating the transition period in linguistic change. Probus, 19 (1), 121–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S., & St-Amand, A. (2007). A real-time window on 19th-century vernacular French: The Récits du français québécois d'autrefois. Language in Society, 36 (5), 707–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S., Zentz, L., & Dion, N. (2011). Phrase-final prepositions in Quebec French: An empirical study of contact, code-switching and resistance to convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, doi:10.1017/S1366728911000204. Published by Cambridge University Press, 11 August 2011.Google Scholar
Roberge, Y. (2011). On the distinction between preposition stranding and orphan prepositions. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, doi:10.1017/S1366728911000289. Published online by Cambridge University Press, November 2011.Google Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C. (1994). Language contact and change: Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomason, S. (2001). Language contact: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Thomason, S. (2011). Is morphosyntactic change really rare? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14 (2), 146–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, R. (2011). A milestone study: Structured variability as the key to unraveling (contact-induced) language change. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, doi:10.1017/S1366728911000241. Published online by Cambridge University Press, November 2011.Google Scholar
Torres Cacoullos, R., & Travis, C. E. (2011). Using structural variability to evaluate convergence via code-switching: Priming and the structure of variable subject expression. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15, 241–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zentz, L. (2006). “C'est ça je travaille dessus”: Orphaned prepositions and relativization in Canadian French. MA thesis, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar