Diane Vincent

On the narrative vs non‐narrative functions of reported speech: A socio‐pragmatic study

Reported utterances have often been analyzed with regard to their narrative function. While it is true that this narrative function applies to a large group of cases, we have observed that reported speech can fulfil other functions, which are incompatible with the properties of a narrative utterance. This study, based on spontaneous discourse, will focus on the non-narrative functions of reported speech, that is, the appreciative, the support and the authority functions. We will first define the semantico-pragmatic properties of these functions of reported speech, on the basis of examples that are univocal in their contexts. Next, we will turn to examples more complex, in which there seems to be a conflict between functions considered to be incompatible. Finally, we will present the results of a distributional analysis, relating the functions of reported speech to linguistic and extralinguistic factors. The results will lead us to propose hypotheses concerning the strategic diversification of discourse behaviours by speakers.

The sociolinguistics of exemplification in spoken French in Montréal

Exemplification is considered to be a rhetorical procedure used to illustrate a point. In spoken discourse, we can attribute to it an argumentative and pragmatic character. In this study, the data base is constituted of utterances marked by exemplification particles ( par exemple, comme, genre, style, mettons , and disons ‘for example’, ‘like’, ‘of the (…) kind’, ‘of the (…) variety’, ‘lets say’) extracted from two corpora of spoken French in Montreal. One goal is to describe the constraints which govern the choice of discourse variant and at the same time to get the deepest insights possible into the procedure that interrelates these constraints. The main objective is to observe to what extent we can have access to the characteristics of a complex rhetorical phenomenon by using sociolinguistic data.

The circulation of discourse: The case of deprecating remarks on trash radio

Because it is provocative and is based on the denigration of absent third parties, shock jock discourse stimulates reactions that go well beyond the initial circle of listeners. Trash radio supporters and detractors alike take up the hosts’ deprecating remarks, reinterpret them and put them back into circulation. As the repetitions multiply, interweaving private speech and public speech, a complex web of circulation forms, attesting to the contagiousness of the discourse and the influence of the radio hosts. In order to capture and explain this mechanism of propagation, we propose a model of analysis that combines elements of linguistic, discursive and pragmatic description. The model is illustrated by a case study. We are led to observe that the extent and rate of propagation of deprecating remarks inevitably affect the image of the person targeted and, more fundamentally, tend to make an aggressive mode of expression part of the natural speechscape.

Evaluative metadiscursive comments and face-work in conversational discourse

In this article, we analyze the relationship between evaluative metadiscursive comments and face work in conversational interaction. Speakers, in their use of evaluative metadiscursive comments, accept responsibility for the unpleasing or unexpected content of their utterances, all the while signaling that they themselves should not be prejudiced by a negative judgment that may stem from their talk. We first discuss three features of these comments that can differently affect the image speakers construct of themselves in conversation: (a) the type of qualifier at the centre of the comment (evoking either the unusual nature of talk or a negative judgment or emotion on the part of the interlocutor); (b) the face-threat to the speaker that stems from the talk targeted by the comment (a negative judgment on the speakers self-worth or an objection to the discourse itself); and (c) the location of the comment in the speakers discourse (either prefacing or following the targeted talk). Then, we relate the quantitative differences observed in their use in a corpus of sociolinguistic interviews to characteristic features of this type of speech activity. The evaluative metadiscursive comments analyzed are taken from the sociolinguistic interviews that form the 1984 Montreal corpus of spoken French.