The coming together of linguistics and sociology in the 1960’s, most notably via the work of William Labov, marked a revolution in the study of language. Labovian quantitative methods have been employed successfully in many Anglo-Saxon countries, but have had surprisingly little resonance in France, a country which poses many challenges to orthodox sociolinguistic thinking. Why does a nation with unexceptional scores on income distribution and social mobility show an exceptionally high degree of levelling of regional or local speech forms? Why does French appear to abound in ‘hyperstyle’ variables, which show greater variation on the stylistic than on the social dimension although, in theory, such variables should not occur?
This volume brings together leading sociolinguists and sociologists from both sides of the Channel to ask: what makes France ‘exceptional’? In addressing this question, sociolinguists reassess the accepted interdisciplinary consensus, asking whether concepts and definitions have been transposed in a way which meaningfully preserves their original sense and, crucially, takes account of recent developments in sociology. Sociologists, for their part, focus on the implications of language variation for social theory. The debate presented here therefore transcends the case study of a particularly enigmatic country and raises important theoretical questions for both disciplines.
Mari C. Jones is Reader in French Linguistics and Language Change at the University of Cambridge and Fellow in Modern and Medieval Languages at Peterhouse. David Hornsby is Senior Lecturer in Linguistics at the University of Kent.
Reviews:
‘From a variationist’s perspective, this is an insightful volume, methodical in its approach to the subject matter, and careful to consider existing research from across the social sciences. Its overarching aims are very well addressed, and the proposals outlined by the contributors will undoubtedly form an important part of future research on Metropolitan French. The volume’s undoubted strength and significant contribution comes from the break in the ‘reciprocal ignorance pact’ (Fishman 1991) that characterises the relationship between sociology and sociolinguistics. As Pooley rightly suggests (p. 209), it is this break in tradition that must now spearhead new avenues of research.’ — Jonathan R. Kasstan, Journal of French Language Studies 26.2, July 2016, 209-11
This Legenda title was first published by Modern Humanities Research Association and Maney Publishing but rights to it are now held by Modern Humanities Research Association and Routledge.
Routledge distributes this title on behalf on Legenda. You can search for it at their site by following this link.
