Search

This study is dedicated to the question whether French possesses (optional) DOM, i.e. direct object marking, which it answers in a negative way. French is traditionally considered to lack a differential marker for the direct object (cf. e.g. Körner, 1987). However, Fagard and Mardale (2014) claim in their large corpus study (12–13 billion tokens) that differential object marking (DOM) is an optional phenomenon in some non-standard varieties of French. Our data, stemming from an acceptability study plus a corpus analysis, do not confirm these findings, as native speakers show a wide range of negative responses in the acceptability tests. As for potential non-standard French varieties more prone to DOM, our data hint to a (very) weak regional effect (South-Western France).

Our contribution is dedicated to the empirical testing of alleged regional variants of object clitic clusters in modern French in France, Belgium and Switzerland. We provide some intriguing new insights into the regional distribution of non-standard variants and discuss one hypothesis on their nature and two hypotheses to explain their coming into being: language-contact (with Francoprovençal, Occitan and Oïl dialects, H1) and/or analogical leveling (H2), on the one hand, and their postsyntactic, rather than syntactic, nature, on the other (H3). Our main results reveal that the three non-standard variants where order in object clitic clusters is concerned are not regionally well-distributed, i.e. the observed distribution does not correspond to any cohesive area. In contrast, only one variant where the selection of the form (me vs. moi) is at issue seems to be regionally confined: it is found in French-speaking Switzerland, in Gascony, plus some rare attestations of it in the North of France. All in all, variation in object clitic clusters indicates a genuinely new geographical articulation of regional French that does not coincide with traditional dialectal areas.

This study investigates the drop of the first clitic element, ne, of French sentential negation. It is based on 4,628 French text messages taken from the newly established corpus sms4science.ch. It shows that regional or stylistic factors do not play a major role in triggering ne deletion or ne retention, and that the only relevant language-internal factor is subject type, more precisely clitic subjects (also in subject doubling structures) and subject drop, which seem to favour or even trigger categorically ne deletion. Our findings are in keeping with those by R. van Compernolle (2008) on European French in online chats, and thereby indicate partially specific regularities in French computer-mediated communication (CMC). The findings question traditional assumptions on ne drop as a variety marker in French, irrespective of the phonic or graphic nature of the data (cf. P. Koch and W. Oesterreicher 2011). In fact, even in graphically deviant data, ne drop seems to follow the observed robust language-internal regularities. Some data seem to indicate that the graphic nature of SMSes plays a role also in ne-drop (cf. similar conclusions by R. van Compernolle 2008 for chats); this has to be checked by examining a larger number of French text messages.