The potential for synthesis between variationist sociolinguistics and theoretical linguistics has been recognised by researchers in both sub-disciplines (e.g. Henry 1995; Adger and Smith 2005) but it has been difficult to move beyond a description of this unified approach towards an account of variation that can explain both ‘social’ and ‘linguistic’ phenomena in the same theoretical framework. Chambers (2005: 217) suggests that such a synthesis is currently “well beyond our reach and hardly even foreseeable”. I argue that this is partly because most of the theories on which attempts to address this issue are modelled are fundamentally asocial in their design and in order to improve the synthesis between sociolinguistics and theoretical linguistics, it is necessary to first begin with a theory in which social and linguistic knowledge are inherently and inextricably linked in cognition. The aim of this thesis is therefore to consider to what extent it is possible to synthesise variationist sociolinguistic methods of data collection and analysis with usage-based models of interpretation. Using the ethnographic technique of participant observation, the data for this thesis were collected over a 2 year period from a group of 54 speakers who play together in West Fife High Pipe Band (WFHPB). These data form a corpus of 38 hours of conversation (roughly 360,000 words). Two different phonological variables are discussed in this thesis: th-fronting, which is a consonantal change in progress in this community, and variation in the BIT vowel, which is reported to be a stable variable in this variety. Using quantitative methods that are typically considered appropriate in variationist sociolinguistics (i.e. varbrul and multiple regression), this thesis correlates variation in both of these variables with a number of different ‘social’, ‘linguistic’ and ‘cognitive’ factors and shows that this is one way to explore the potential for synthesis. However, it is vital not only to incorporate these factors into a quantitative analysis of variation; it is also necessary to be able to explain the outcome of the quantitative analysis by invoking principles of the theoretical framework. By adding the theoretical assumptions of the usage-based approach to an analysis of variation that is already grounded in current sociolinguistic practices of data collection and interpretation, I suggest that it is possible to reach a more unified and insightful explanation of linguistic variation and change in this community and a more unified and insightful approach to linguistic theory; one in which “everything fits, and everything fits together” (Langacker 1987: 32).

Diplomarbeit--Freie Universität, Berlin, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 116-127).

This study represents a sociolinguistic contribution to the analysis of Past Participle Agreement (PPA) in [avoir+PP] constructions. In spoken French, this agreement is marked only for gender, and is subject to much variation in the production of speakers of French. The objectives of this thesis are twofold: firstly, to observe the variable in the context of production, by a quantitative study of several corpora. Variation in the production of PPA is tested against linguistic factors, such as the position of the participle in the verbal group where it appears. Social and stylistic factors are also considered, notably the socioprofessional category of the speaker. These analyses reveal that agreement is conditioned by a complex interaction of these factors. The second objective is the design of a Matched Guise Test, based on scripted conversations. This test was carried out with a view to measuring the extent to which the presence or absence of marked PPA, often considered a typical result of normative pressures, affects the stereotypical social representation of a speaker. Differences in informants' judgements were modest, and two issues are discussed with regard to this: firstly, the validity of the methodology, and secondly, the evaluation of PPA as a sociolinguistic marker. Both parts of this thesis reflect the methodological issues pertaining to the investigation of a rare variable.

The subject of this thesis is the French language in the Franco-Belgian borderland. More specifically, it investigates language, linguistic perceptions and language attitudes in the French-speaking part of Belgium which borders France. The study takes a variationist approach and is grounded in sociolinguistic theory, but it also draws on theories and methodologies from elsewhere in the social sciences. Two questions are at the heart of this study: how do people speak French in the Belgian borderland and why do they speak that way? To answer the research questions, speech and questionnaire data were gathered from 39 informants living in the borderland city of Tournai and its surrounding area. With this data, a variety of analyses were performed. Sociophonetic investigations were carried out on two phonological variables, namely the vocalic oppositions /e/-/ɛ/ and /o/-/ɔ/, draw-a-map task perceptual data were analysed through a ‘visual methods’ lens, and attitudinal data were also examined. Social variation in linguistic behaviour, perceptions and language attitudes was also analysed. The notions of ‘space’, ‘place’ and ‘spatiality’ were accorded considerable importance: the interactions between language and ‘space’ as the factors of ‘mobility’, ‘media consumption’, ‘sense of place’ and ‘regional belonging’ were also examined. The findings include that French in the Belgian borderland is more similar to that in France than to elsewhere in Francophone Belgium and that this is due to a number of factors. Moreover, the French in the borderland appears to be converging on that in France, although some differences persist. It was also found that spatial factors interact with both linguistic and social ones. Finally, it was concluded that whilst there is no longer a physical barrier at the national border, it persists to an extent as a psychological one, and this has ramifications for borderlanders’ behaviour: be it linguistic or otherwise.

Participants in an intercultural situation of communication, trying to understand the intentions of their co-Iocutors from their own cultural perspective, can frequently commit misinterpretations that lead to misunderstandings of intention and meaning. Intercultural communication studies, for the majority, focus on unveiling and discovering differences that they believe to be at the core of such misunderstandings. Such studies have probed the varying cultural values, to mention a few, on the levels of individualism versus collectivism, of low-context versus high-context, of varying concepts of time or of silence (e.g. Hofstede 1980, Hofstede 1991, Hall 1959, Hall & HaU1990). The present study suggests that the perspective of one's primary socialisation culture should be studied on a more specific level if one is aiming to discover possible cultural differences. The level that is proposed to be studied is the production and interpretations of patterns of talk-in-interaction such as pauses, overlaps, speaker changes, simultaneous talk, prosody and intonation patterns, and so on. It is the stance of the present inquiry that these above-mentioned turntaking patterns play a key role in the processes through which the participants interpret each other's meanings and intentions, although the processes themselves remain mostly entirely subconscious. The present study was inspired by a case study that was conducted comparing the turn-taking behaviour between Americans and French conversing in French (Wieland 1991). Wieland conducted recordings of ordinary dinner table conversations, and later interviewed the participants in order to elicit insights into their interpretations of the interaction. However, little work has been done to further compare the culturally varying interaction patterns and the participants' reactions to them. The majority ofstudies into intercultural communication remain on more abstract levels of cultural values rather than addressing the actual arena of talk-in-interaction, although some have broken this unploughed ground, e.g. Moerman (1988) in his combination of conversation analysis and ethnography. The stance of the present study is that it is this very level of talk-in-interaction that holds the key to understanding what exactly happens in possible misunderstandings in situations of intercultural communication. Studies on talk-in-interaction focus on conversational turn-taking (Psathas 1995, Ten Have & Psathas 1995, Sacks, Schegloff & Jefferson 1974, Schegloff 2000). They therefore bring to light behavioural patterns - and their respective interpretations - that most of the time remain subconscious in the minds of the interactants, as those patterns are learned and internalised early on in the primary socialisation process (Berger & Luckmann 1966). Sample analyses on the conversational overlaps of French speakers carried out previously by the researcher (Kohonen 2000) served as a basis for the hypothesis development. These earlier analyses made evident the importance of gaining access to participants' perceptions on the interaction, as well as the access into parameters that allow a comparative approach. The present research is an exploratory, qualitative case study that allowed comparisons to be made between the overlap patterns of the native French and the native British English participants conversing in native and mixed groups, furthermore gaining access to participants' perceptions of the interaction. The present study is not intended to be taken as a strictly conversation analytical research, as the Literature Review will show. The aim of the present study is on the contrary to explore the possible theoretical and methodological triangulations available in the field of social sciences, and to discover how the triangulation of theories and methods could enhance the study of talk-in-interaction, in both native and intercultural settings.

No description available.