Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T16:15:40.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does language loss follow a principled structural path? Evidence from Jersey Norman French

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2018

MARI C. JONES
MARI C. JONES*
Affiliation:
Peterhouse, University of Cambridge
*
Address for correspondence: e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examines contact-induced change in Jèrriais, the severely endangered Norman variety currently spoken by some 1% of the population of Jersey, one of the British Channel Islands. Today, English dominates all linguistic domains of island life, and all speakers of Jèrriais are bilingual. The analysis uses original data to test empirically whether Myers-Scotton's (2002) five theoretical assumptions about the structural path of language attrition (broadly defined as language loss at the level of the individual) also have relevance for the process of language obsolescence (broadly defined as language loss at the level of the community). It explores i) whether Jèrriais is undergoing contact influenced language change owing to its abstract grammatical structure being split and recombined with English, a hypothesis related to Myers-Scotton's Abstract Level model; and ii) whether different morpheme types of Jèrriais are related to the production process in different ways and are, accordingly, more or less susceptible to change during the process of language obsolescence, a hypothesis related to Myers-Scotton's 4-M model. In addition to its contribution to linguistic theory, this study increases existing knowledge about Jèrriais and makes data from this language available for systematic comparison with other languages.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of French Language Studies , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , November 2018 , pp. 399 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

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.)

Footnotes

*This article is dedicated to the memory of my father, Philip Griffith Jones, whose love and encouragement have always been constant and irreplaceable.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aikhenvald, A.Y. (1996). Areal diffusion in Northwest Amazonia: the case of Tariana. Anthropological Linguistics, 38: 73–116.Google Scholar
Appel, R. and Muysken, P. (1993). Language Contact and Bilingualism. London: Arnold (1st edition 1987).Google Scholar
Bentahila, A. and Davies, E.E. (1998). Codeswitching: an unequal partnership? In: Jacobson, R. (ed.), Codeswitching Worldwide. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 25–51.Google Scholar
Bhat, G., Choudhury, M. and Bali, K. (2016). Grammatical constraints on intra-sentential codeswitching: from theories to working models. arXiv:1612.04538(cs.CL). Available online at: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.04538v1.pdf (last accessed 8 February 2018).Google Scholar
Birt, P. (1985). Lé Jèrriais Pour Tous. A Complete Course on the Jersey Language. Jersey: Le Don Balleine.Google Scholar
Boretzky, N. and Igla, B. (1999). Balkanische (südosteuropäische) Einflüsse im Romani. In: Hinrichs, U. and Büttner, U. (eds), Handbuch der Südosteuropa-Linguistik. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, pp. 709–731.Google Scholar
Bowern, C. (2010). Fieldwork in contact situations. In: Hickey, R. (ed.), The Handbook of Language Contact. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 340–358.Google Scholar
Clyne, M. (2003). Dynamics of Language Contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1981). The Languages of the Soviet Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Deuchar, M. (2006). Welsh-English code-switching and the Matrix Language Frame Model. Lingua, 116: 1986–2011.Google Scholar
Deuchar, M., Muysken, P. and Wang, S.L. (2007). Structural variation in codeswitching: towards an empirically-based typology of bilingual speech patterns. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10/3: 298–340.Google Scholar
Dorian, N.C. (1981). Language Death: The Life Cycle of a Scottish Gaelic Dialect. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Durand, J., Laks, B. and Lyche, C. (2009). Le projet PFC: une source de données primaires structurées. In: Durand, J., Laks, B. and Lyche, C. (eds), Phonologie, variation et accents du français. Paris: Hermès, pp. 19–62.Google Scholar
Fischer, W. (1961). Die Sprache der asabischen Sprachinsel in Uzbekistan. Der Islam, 36: 232–263.Google Scholar
Fuller, J.M. (1996). When cultural maintenance means linguistic convergence: Pennsylvania German evidence for the Matrix Language Turnover Hypothesis. Language in Society, 25/4: 493–514.Google Scholar
Fuller, J.M. (1997). Pennsylvania Dutch with a southern touch? A theoretical model of language contact and change. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of South Carolina.Google Scholar
Fuller, J.M. (2000). Morpheme types in a Matrix Language turnover: the introduction of system morphemes from English into Pennsylvania German. International Journal of Bilingualism, 4/1: 45–58.Google Scholar
Gardani, F. (2008). Borrowing of Inflectional Morphemes in Language Contact. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Gardner-Chloros, P. (2009). Code-switching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gilliéron, J. and Edmont, E. (1902–1910). Atlas linguistique de la France. Paris: Honoré Champion (35 volumes).Google Scholar
Gilliéron, J. and Edmont, E. (1920). Atlas linguistique de la France. Suppléments. Volume 1. Paris: Honoré Champion.Google Scholar
Grinevald, C. and Bert, M. (2011). Speakers and communities. In: Austin, P. K. and Sallabank, J. (eds), The Cambridge Handbook of Endangered Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 45–65.Google Scholar
Gross, S. (2000). When two become one: creating a composite grammar in creole formation. International Journal of Bilingualism, 4/1: 59–90.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1950). The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language, 26: 210–231.Google Scholar
Hock, H.H. and Joseph, B.D. (1986). Language History, Language Change and Language Relationship. An Introduction to Historical and Comparative Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Jake, J.L. (1998). Constructing interlanguage: building a composite Matrix Language. Linguistics, 36: 333–382.Google Scholar
Jones, M.C. (2000). The subjunctive in Guernsey Norman French. Journal of French Language Studies, 10/2: 177–203.Google Scholar
Jones, M.C. (2001). Jersey Norman French: A Linguistic Study of an Obsolescent Dialect. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jones, M.C. (2005a). Some structural and social correlates of single word intrasentential codeswitching in Jersey Norman French. Journal of French Language Studies, 15/1: 1–23.Google Scholar
Jones, M.C. (2005b). Transfer and changing linguistic norms in Jersey Norman French. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 8/2: 159–175.Google Scholar
Jones, M.C. (2015). Variation and Change in Mainland and Insular Norman: A Study of Superstrate Influence. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Kroskrity, P.V. (1993). Language, History and Identity: Ethnolinguistic Studies of the Arizona Tewa. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Lane-Clarke, L. (1978) [1880] Guernsey French. Guernsey: Toucan Press.Google Scholar
Lebarbenchon, R-J. (1988). La Grève de Lecq. Littératures et cultures populaires de Normandie. Cherbourg: Isoète.Google Scholar
Le Maistre, F. (1966). Dictionnaire Jersiais-Français. Jersey: Le Don Balleine.Google Scholar
Lepelley, R. (1999). La Normandie dialectale. Petite encyclopédie des langages et mots régionaux de la province de Normandie et des îles anglo-normandes. Condé-sur-Noireau: Presses Universitaires de Caen.Google Scholar
Liddicoat, A.J. (1994). A Grammar of the Norman French of the Channel Islands. The Dialects of Jersey and Sark. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
MacSwan, J. (2005). Codeswitching and generative grammar: A critique of the MLF model and some remarks on ‘modified minimalism’. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 8/1: 1–22.Google Scholar
Marquis, Y, and Sallabank, J. (2013). Speakers and language revitalisation: a case study of Guernésiais (Guernsey). In: Jones, M.C. and Ogilvie, S. (eds), Keeping Languages Alive. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 331–354.Google Scholar
McWhorter, J.H. (2002). What happened to English? Diachronica, 19: 217–272.Google Scholar
Milroy, L. (1987). Observing and Analysing Natural Language. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Milroy, L. and Gordon, M. (2003). Sociolinguistics: Method and Interpretation. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Muysken, P. (2000). Bilingual Speech: A Typology of Code-Mixing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. (1993). Duelling Languages. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. (1998). A way to dusty death: the matrix language turnover hypothesis. In: Grenoble, L.A. and Whaley, L.J. (eds), Endangered Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 289–316.Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. (2002). Contact Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. (2008). Language contact: why outsider system morphemes resist transfer. Journal of Language Contact, Thema 2: 21–41.Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. and Jake, J.L. (2000a). Four types of morpheme: evidence from aphasia, codeswitching and second language acquisition. Linguistics, 38: 1053–1100.Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. and Jake, J.L. (2000b). Testing the 4-M model: an introduction. International Journal of Bilingualism, 4/1:1–8.Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. and Jake, J.L. (2017). Revisiting the 4-M model: codeswitching and morpheme election at the abstract level. International Journal of Bilingualism, 21/3: 340–366.Google Scholar
Nchare, A.L. (2010). The morphosyntax of Camfranglais and the 4-M model. Available online at: ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/001448 (last accessed 8 February 2018).Google Scholar
Polinsky, M. (1997). American Russian: Language loss meets language acquisition. In: W. Browne, E. Dornish, N. Khondrashova and D. Zec (eds), Annual Workshop on Formal approaches to Slavic Languages, pp. 370–406. Available online at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284410507_American_Russian_Language_loss_meets_language_acquisition (last accessed 8 February 2018). (Cited in Myers-Scotton 2002:185).Google Scholar
Poplack, S. and Meechan, M. (1998). How languages fit together in code-mixing. International Journal of Bilingualism, 2:127–138.Google Scholar
Poplack, S. and Sankoff, D. (1984). Borrowing: the synchrony of integration. Linguistics, 22: 99–135.Google Scholar
Poplack, S. and Sankoff, D. (1988). Code-switching. In: Ammon, U., Dittmar, N. and Mattheier, K. J. (eds), Sociolinguistics. An International Handbook of the Science of Language and Society. Volume 2. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 1174–1180.Google Scholar
Poplack, S., Sankoff, D. and Miller, C. (1988). The social correlates and linguistic processes of lexical borrowing and assimilation. Linguistics, 26: 47–104.Google Scholar
Priya, D.P. (2015). Bilingualism: A test of MLF Model. Language in India, 15: 135–143. Available online at: http://www.languageinindia.com/dec2015/padmapriyabilingualismfinal.pdf (last accessed 8 February 2018).Google Scholar
Rahimi, M. and Dabaghi, A. (2013). Persian-English codeswitching: a test of the Matrix Language Frame (MLF) model. System, 41/2: 322–351.Google Scholar
Roseano, P. (2014). Can morphological borrowing be an effect of codeswitching? Evidence from the inflectional morpholology of borrowed nouns in Friulian. Probus, 26/1: 1–57.Google Scholar
Schmitt, E. (2000). Overt and covert codeswitching in immigrant children from Russia. International Journal of Bilingualism, 4/1: 9–28.Google Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C. (1994). Language Contact and Change: Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Société Jersiaise (2008a). Dictionnaithe Jèrriais-Angliais. Jersey: Le Don Balleine.Google Scholar
Société Jersiaise (2008b). Dictionnaithe Angliais-Jèrriais. Jersey: Le Don Balleine.Google Scholar
Sommerfelt, A. (1925). Un cas de mélange de grammaires. In: Avhandlinger utgitt av Det Norske Videnskaps-Akademi II no.4, Oslo, pp. 3–11.Google Scholar
Spence, N.C.W. (1957). L'Assibilation de l’r intervocalique dans les parlers jersiais. Revue de Linguistique Romane, 21: 270–288.Google Scholar
Spence, N.C.W. (1960). Glossary of Jersey French. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Spence, N.C.W. (1993). A Brief History of Jèrriais. Jersey: Le Don Balleine.Google Scholar
States of Jersey (2012). Jersey Annual Social Survey 2012. Available online at: http://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20JASS2012%2020121204%20SU.pdf (last accessed 8 February 2018).Google Scholar
Thomas, A.R. (1982). Change and decay in language. In: Crystal, D. (ed.), Linguistic Controversies: Essays in Linguistic Theory and Practice in Honour of F.R. Palmer. London: Arnold, pp. 209–219.Google Scholar
Thomason, S.G. (2007). Language contact and deliberate change. Journal of Language Contact, 1/1: 41–62. Available online at: http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.1163/000000007792548387 (last accessed 8 February 2018).Google Scholar
Thomason, S.G. (2008). Social and linguistic factors as predictors of contact-induced change. Journal of Language Contact, 2/1:42–56. Available online at: http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.1163/000000008792525381 (last accessed 8 February 2018).Google Scholar
Thomason, S.G. and Kaufman, T. (1988). Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford: University of California Press.Google Scholar
von Wartburg, W. (1922–). Französiches etymologisches Wörterbuch: eine Darstellung des galloromanischen Sprachschatzes. Tübingen: JCB Mohr.Google Scholar
Wei, L. (2000). Types of morphemes and their implications for second language morpheme acquisition. International Journal of Bilingualism, 4/1: 29–43.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in Contact. (Reprt. 1964). London: The Hague; Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar