| dc.description.abstract | Using the combined approach of Variationist Sociolinguistics and
Cognitive Linguistics, this thesis undertakes the classification and
analysis of certain prepositions in spoken Quebec French. The study
examines 21 interviews that make up part of the Corpus de français
parlé au Québec (CFPQ).
The aim of this thesis is to examine the use of the variables expressing
the concept of ‘possession’, and those equivalent to English before/in
front of and after/behind. These three variables are represented as
(POSS), (ANTE) and (POST). An initial quantification of the variants is
carried out, which establishes the contexts of production, and helps
determine the areas of linguistic analysis to be explored.
For the (POSS) variable, the data is examined in terms of linguistic
factors such as the reference of the possessor, the avoidance of
hiatus, and inalienable/alienable possession. Interpersonal variation is
also considered, including age and gender in addition to level of
education. From the Cognitive Linguistic perspective, we investigate
‘reference point theory’ and how it can shed light on the alternation
between the variants.
The (ANTE) and (POST) variables are studied in terms of the type of
reference (i.e. locative or temporal), the locating noun category, and
the age, sex, and level of education of the speakers. The Cognitive
Linguistic theory of ‘subjectification’ is also considered for these two
variables.
For the (POSS) variable, the reference of the possessor and the level
of education are seen to be important factors for the use of possessive
à. In addition, the ‘reference point theory’ contributes to our
understanding of the use of this variant.
With the (ANTE) and (POST) variables certain variants are seen to be
employed both with and without an overt complement. The variant
devant is predominantly found in contexts involving narrative
discourse, and the variants en avant and en avant de are preferred for
locative reference. Once again, the Cognitive Sociolinguistic approach
highlights the possibility that the difference in variant choice is linked
to the speakers’ cognitive construal of the situation. | en_GB |
