Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:50:03.059Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use and variation of French diacritics on an Internet dating site

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 July 2010

RÉMI A. VAN COMPERNOLLE
RÉMI A. VAN COMPERNOLLE*
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
*
Address for correspondence: Rémi A. van Compernolle, Department of Applied Linguistics, The Pennsylvania State University, 305 Sparks Building, University Park, PA 16802, USA e-mail: compernolle@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article explores sociolinguistic variation in the use of French accents and diacritics—where they would be expected in the formal written language—in electronic personals posted on an Internet dating site. Results of a series of VARBRUL analyses show both age (i.e., 18–25 years vs. 36–45 years) and gender to be significant social variables in accent/diacritic variation. Three potential explanations of the variation are addressed: (i) the eventual loss of accents and diacritics in computer-mediated French, (ii) stable variation with differences between ‘digital natives’ and ‘digital immigrants’, and (iii) a change in progress whereby accents and diacritics are becoming ‘prestige variants’ in computer-mediated contexts.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of French Language Studies , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , July 2011 , pp. 131 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Anis, J. (1999). Chats et usages graphiques du français. In: Anis, J. (ed.), Internet Communication et Langue Française. Paris: Hermès Sciences, pp. 71–90.Google Scholar
Anis, J. (2007). Neography: Unconventional spelling in French SMS text messages. In: Danet, B. and Herring, S. C. (eds), The Multilingual Internet: Language, Culture, and Communication online. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 87–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres-Bennett, W. (1994). A History of the French Language through Texts. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bailey, G. (2002). Real and apparent time. In: Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P., and Shilling-Estes, N. (eds), The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 312–332.Google Scholar
Bargh, J. A., McKenna, K. Y. A. and Fitzsimons, G. M. (2002). Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the ‘true self’ on the Internet. Journal of Social Issues, 58: 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, N. (2008). Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben-Ze'ev, A. (2004). Love Online: Emotions on the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheshire, J. (2002). Sex and gender in variationist research. In: Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P., and Shilling-Estes, N. (eds), The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 423–443.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crystal, D. (2006). Language and the Internet. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curzan, A. (2000). The end of Modern English? American Speech, 75: 299–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellison, N., Heino, R. and Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11: 415–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
Groom, C. J. and Pennebaker, J. W. (2005). The language of love: Sex, sexual orientation, and language use in online personal advertisements. Sex Roles, 52: 447–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardey, M. (2004). Mediated relationships: Authenticity and the possibility of romance. Information, Communication and Society, 7: 207–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herring, S. C. (2001). Computer-mediated discourse. In: Schiffrin, D., Tannen, D., and Hamilton, H. E. (eds), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 612–634.Google Scholar
Herring, S. C. (2002). Computer-mediated communication on the Internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36: 109–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herring, S. C. (2004). Slouching toward the ordinary: Current trends in computer-mediated communication. New Media & Society, 6: 26–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herring, S. C. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@Internet, 4: Article 1 [np]. Retrieved February 22, 2008 from http://www.languageatinternet.de/articles/2007/761/index_html/Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1963). The social motivations of a sound change. Word, 19: 273–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1966). The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1990). The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change. Language Variation and Change, 2: 205–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liénard, F. (2007). Analyse linguistique et pragmatique de l’écriture électronique: Le cas du SMS tchaté. In: Gerbault, J. (ed), La Langue du Cyberespace: De la Diversité aux Normes. Paris: L'Harmattan, pp. 265–278.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, M. L., Osbourne, K. K., and Ellison, N. (1997). Virtual community in a telepresence environment. In: Jones, S. G. (ed), Virtual Culture: Identity and Communication in Cybersociety. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 146–168.Google Scholar
Milroy, J. and Milroy, L. (1997). Varieties and variation. In Coulmas, F. (ed.), The Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Cambridge University Press, pp. 47–64.Google Scholar
Netclub. (2008a). Netclub.com homepage (French). Retrieved February 21, 2008 from http://www.netclub.com/index2.aspGoogle Scholar
Netclub. (2008b). Netclub.com publicité. Retrieved February 21, 2008 from http://www.netclub.com/aide/publicite.aspGoogle Scholar
Paolillo, J. C. (2002). Analyzing Linguistic Variation: Statistical Models and Methods. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Parks, M. R. and Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of Communication, 46: 80–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellat, J-C. and Andrieux-Reix, N. (2006). Histoire d’É ou de la variation des usages graphiques à la différentiation réglée. Langue Française, 151: 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierozak, I. (2003). Le Français Tchaté. Une Étude en Trois Dimensions—Sociolinguistique, Syntaxique et Graphique—d'usages d'IRC. Ph.D. Thesis, Université de Provence Aix-Marseille I.Google Scholar
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants: A new way to look at ourselves and our kids. On the Horizon, 9: [np]. Retrieved March 5, 2008 from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/.Google Scholar
Rickard, P. (1993). A History of the French Language. 2nd edition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Roberts, L. D. and Parks, M. R. (1999). The social geography of gender-switching in virtual environments on the Internet. Information, Communication & Society, 2: 521–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, D., Tagliamonte, S. and Smith, E. (2005). Goldvarb X: A variable rule application for Macintosh and Windows. Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Sigley, R. (2003). The importance of interaction effects. Language Variation and Change, 15: 227–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. A. (2006). Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannen, D. (1990). You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: Ballantine Books.Google Scholar
Tapscott, D. (1999). Growing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Utz, S. (2000). Social information processing in MUDs: The development of friendships in virtual worlds. Journal of Online Behavior, 1: [np]. Retrieved February 22, 2008 from http://www.behavior.net/JOB/v1n1/utz.htmlGoogle Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A. (2008a). Sociopragmatic norms in Québébcois online dating advertisements. In: Koop, M-C (ed), Le Québec à l'Aube du Nouveau Millénaire: Entre Tradition et Modernité. Québec, Canada: Presses de l'Université du Québec, pp. 139–147.Google Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A. (2008b). Language variation in online personal ads from Quebec: The case of ne. Language@Internet, 5: Article 1 [np]. Retrieved March 15, 2008, from http://www.languageatinternet.de/articles/2008/1666/index_html/Google Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A. (2008c). Second-person pronoun use and address strategies in on-line personal advertisements from Quebec. Journal of Pragmatics, 40: 2062–2076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A., and Williams, L. (in press). Orthographic variation in electronic French: The case of l'accent aigu. French Review.Google Scholar
Warschauer, M. and Grimes, D. (2008). Audience, authorship, and artifact: The emergent semiotics of Web 2.0. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 27: 1–23.Google Scholar
Watts, F. (1991). Réflexions sur la proposition de réforme de l'orthographe et sa polémique. The French Review, 65: 84–90.Google Scholar
Whitty, M. T. and Carr, A. N. (2006). Cyberspace Romance: The Psychology of Online Relationships. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yurchisin, J., Watchravesringkan, K. and McCabe, D. B. (2005). An exploration of identity re-creation in the context of Internet dating. Social Behavior and Personality, 33: 735–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar