Department of French

Good usage and sociolinguistic variation: Diachronic perspectives and national traditions

Murray Edwards College, University of Cambridge, 16-18 July 2009

Call for papers

One of the most typical and recurrent themes in the history of linguistic thought in France is the desire to identify 'good usage'. This notion of 'good usage' - which today carries elitist, indeed even archaic, connotations - is often considered to consist of a collection of normative prescriptions which reflect a particular socio-cultural model.

In this conference we wish to explore this question from a number of different angles:

How did the notion of 'good usage' emerge and evolve? What factors have helped shape our conception of 'good usage'? How does it relate to different socio-cultural factors?

In elaborating good usage grammarians and remarqueurs, from Tory to Vaugelas and his successors, have relied on observing different types of usage, whether literary, non-literary or oral. A typical problem is that of the choice of the social and geographical origin of the speakers selected to represent 'good usage'. According to the period, the relative importance attributed to written or spoken usages and socio-cultural features, whether religious or political, models of good usage have varied greatly and have relied variously on educated usage, the usage of the law courts or the King's court.

The conference will focus on the period from the 16th century - period of the production of the first grammars of French - to the present day.

We also wish to consider the extent to which works on 'good usage' are prescriptive: does the elaboration of 'good usage' always imply the reduction of variants?

In 1689 the remarqueur Andry de Boisregard wrote: 'it is a common mistake amongst grammarians to imagine that as soon as something can be said in two different ways, we have to condemn one in order to authorize the other. Why can't they both be acceptable?'. If Vaugelas in his Remarques sur la langue Françoise (1647) often relied on a prescriptive model, at times he adopted a stance which is more 'sociolinguisitic' in orientation. In other words, he recognized the relative value of different usages and presented a nuanced analysis according to which different usages are more or less acceptable according to the context, register, style, etc.

Following on from this, we would like to examine the extent to which texts which prescribe 'good usage' provide us with valuable information about sociolinguistic variation, especially for earlier periods in the history of the language.

How far do these texts furnish us with information about regional and popular usages when they use expressions such as 'Don't say X...' or 'X is incorrect'? Do they constitute valuable sources for the study of 'non-standard' language, something which is often difficult to describe for periods for which no sociolinguistic surveys are available? When these texts refer to differences between written and spoken usages can we use them to build up a picture of spoken language for those periods for which no recordings are available?

How is this tradition developing today? Is Grevisse's famous work, Le Bon Usage, typical of a certain genre?

We should like to consider the direct and indirect influences between the different texts which make reference to 'good usage'. To what extent does Grevisse, described in one of the Prefaces to his work as 'the 20th-century Vaugelas', follow in the footsteps of the remarqueurs? To what extent do the different national traditions influence each other?

We are therefore proposing to open up the discussion to include consideration of other national traditions in order to look at the different interpretations of this notion in relation to different languages.

If our reflections on the topic began with the French tradition and particularly with the tradition of the remarqueurs, we would like to contextualize this discussion by considering the tradition of 'good usage' in other European countries. To what extent is it possible to identify common features which unite all the traditions? To what extent do 'good usage' grammarians adapt their discussion and analysis to the particular national context?

Conference organization

This conference is taking place under the auspices of the AHRC funded project 'Observations on the French language' (Art and Humanities Research Council of Great Britain). The organizers are Wendy Ayres-Bennett and Magali Seijido, University of Cambridge.

Organizing committee

Wendy Ayres-Bennett, University of Cambridge
Philippe Caron, Université de Poitiers
Jean-Marie Fournier, Université de Paris III
Douglas Kibbee, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Francine Mazière, Université Paris XIII
Gilles Siouffi, Université Paul Valéry Montpellier III

Invited speakers

Sylvie Archaimbault (Directrice du laboratoire d'histoire des théories linguistiques UMR 7597 - CNRS/Université Paris-Diderot) : on the Russian tradition
Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (Universiteit Leiden): on the English tradition
Nicola McLelland (University of Nottingham): on the German tradition
Danielle Trudeau (San José State University): author of Les Inventeurs du bon usage (1529-1647), Minuit 1992.

Practical information

Papers may be given in French or English.

Abstracts of papers, which should not exceed 350 words in length, should be sent by e-mail attachment by 15 January 2009 to the following address: ms693@cam.ac.uk. Colleagues will be informed whether their paper has been accepted by 28 February 2009 at the latest.

Practical details of the conference venue, accommodation and programme will be posted on the conference website in due course: http://www.mml.cam.ac.uk/french/observations/conference.html

For any further information please contact Magali Seijido: ms693@cam.ac.uk