Introduction

Most of us have a good idea of what slang is, in that we can recognise slang words or expressions in our native language, and we know when it is appropriate to use them. Based on our knowledge of our own culture, we might also judge slang, as inferior and a form of deformation of a proper variety of language, or alternatively, as cool and innovative. Moreover, the use of slang may form the basis for value judgements we make of those people who use it, as sloppy and uneducated or as trendy and in touch with contemporary life for example. But as learners of French, we need an account of slang which is sufficiently detailed for us to appreciate the significance of slang in the French language and to speakers of French, that is to French culture. In other words, or indeed as linguists might express this, we need to provide a rigorous account of slang.

We will begin our answer to the question of providing a useful account of slang by looking at the wider context, language variation in French, in order to determine how slang fits in with other kinds of variation in French.

The language encountered by learners during the course of their studies, either in the class-room, or in the supporting materials that have been specially prepared, tends to be homogenous in that a single word is generally taught as representing a single referent. If we stop to think about this however, this neat and unambiguous relationship between language and meaning in the real world, the context of language use, does not reflect what we know about language, based on our experience of our own native language.

The phenomenon of variation in language is well illustrated by the following text. The language featured in the conversation in this extract is clearly a non-standard variety of English.

Those of us who live or study in the north east of England will have little difficulty understanding the extract from Jonathon Tullock's novel, The Season Ticket, featuring a written representation of Geordie as it is spoken in Gateshead. The non-standard features we find when we examine this extract in greater detail provide us with some useful clues as to the sort of differences to be found between non-standard and standard varieties of a language.

Linguists would categorise the differences we can identify from this text under several headings:

(a) pronunciation, ie phonological (eg: ah, cannet, kna, dee, oot)
(b) words, ie lexical (eg: hinny, wor, ye, bairn)
(c) grammar, ie syntax (eg: geet early, she's canny badly, what ye two deeing the day)

The analysis of distinct phonological, lexical and syntactic features allow linguists to distinguish any number of varieties of a given language.

The variety of language we use depends on both the use, the situation or context in which the language is used, and on the individual using the language, the user.

To add: flow chart

As you can see by the flow chart, the phonological, lexical and syntactic choices that individuals make provide an indication of the register, and the dialect, terms we use to denote varieties of language pertaining to different uses and users respectively.

Language variation according to use

From your own experience of language, you know that the words and constructions you choose are quite different when you meet with your bank manager to arrange an overdraft, and when you get together with your mates. When you talk to your friends your pronunciation is likely to be less 'careful' with sounds run together, ie elision and weak vowels omitted, ie deletion, your lexis probably includes dialectal or colloquial terms and you probably use a limited range of less complex syntactic constructions. By contrast, the language you address to the bank manager is likely to be carefully pronounced, with no regional or colloquial terms, put together in more complex and varied syntactic constructions. These differences arise, at least in part, because of the different relationship you have with these different people. This variation is expressed in terms of tenor.

Tenor is also reflected in the linguistic choices French speakers make. Pronunciation would be equally varied, according to the addressee, ranging from careful enunciation and clearly produced liaisons with the bank manager, to less careful pronunciation incorporating elision and the deletion of the weak vowel in words such as 'je', 'le' and 'ne' with friends. Just as in English, the use of colloquial or regional terms would vary as would the variety and complexity of syntactic structures. In addition, French speakers would use the pronoun 'vous' to talk to the bank manager, but among friends are likely to choose 'on', even if this follows another pronoun such as 'nous', as in the following example:

Nous, on est allé au cinoche hier soir.
(NB 'cinoche' is a colloquial synonym of 'cinéma')

Similarly, the language you use to speak to your bank manager will be quite different from the language you use if you communicate in writing. Whereas in spoken language different phonetic features can be identified, in the written form, it is the layout of the language which is significant. Choices of lexis and syntactic structure also vary considerably, because of the different nature of spoken and written language. We can see that the linguistic choices you make vary according to whether the language is spoken or written, that is, the mode of language you use.

It is important to note however that we are not necessarily looking at differences in degrees of formality when we contrast spoken and written language. The language you use in writing a letter to a friend will be much less formal than the language you use to talk in a job interview for example. Moreover, the written/spoken contrast is not as clear cut as it may first appear. A speech may be written in order to be read aloud as if it were spoken language for instance. And it looks as though the analysis of the language used in electronic communication is likely to provide us with some interesting findings.

In French you will have noticed that there are a great many differences between written and spoken language. As well as featuring longer and more complex syntactic structures, certain forms are commonly used in written French but never in the spoken language. This point is well illustrated by the case of the past historic tense, 'le passé simple'. You will perhaps hear the past historic being spoken if someone reads aloud, or in the pre-written speech of a tour guide or a politician, but you will never encounter it in everyday conversation. Another example: differences in number and gender which can be seen from verb forms and agreements in written French may only be apparent from the determiner in spoken French, that is words such as 'le', 'la' and 'les' (for further discussion of the differences between spoken and written French, see Ager, 1990: 210-213).

Finally, the language you use will vary according to the topic you are talking about. You will draw on different linguistic resources to speak about the dodgy referee at the recent Newcastle match to those you use to discuss the recent controversy concerning the Euro and its repercussions for the national economy. The language in this case can be distinguished in terms of field. The notion of field also enables us to distinguish the varieties of language associated with particular sub-groups within a particular speech community. Scientists for instance use specialised lexis, or jargon, with precisely defined meanings, and a high proportion of impersonal and passive constructions.

French scientists also tend to use more impersonal constructions. Their language can be characterised by a predominance of complex noun phrases in preference to verbs and by a high number of precisely defined technical terms. The lexicon of many scientific disciplines also includes terms borrowed from Latin and Greek, and more recently, English.

The choices of language determined by the tenor, the mode and the field combined contribute to the distinctive characteristics of a particular stretch of language. Together, tenor, mode and field constitute the register of a piece of language. The notion of register provides a useful tool for describing the differences between certain texts, both spoken and written, and may be usefully applied in tasks such as translation or comparative analysis (for the application of the notion of register in translation see for example Bell, 1991:198-192, Hatim and Mason,1997:97-110).

We can also apply the notion of register to looking at the use of slang in French, in that its use will depend on the relationship between language users, the tenor; on whether the language is spoken or written, the mode; and the topic area which forms the focus of the language, the field. So from the analyses of texts featuring slang we might find that slang is used in spoken language between close friends discussing intimate issues. But the analysis of language in terms of register, that is in terms of language use, only provides part of the picture.

Language variation acccording to users

We began by examining a written representation of Geordie, a regional variety of English, the use of which is determined by the geographical origins of the language user.

Do you know what a 'charabang' is? This lexical item, referring to a bus or a coach, is generally used by English speakers over 50. It would not be used and is even unlikely to be understood by native speakers of English of a younger generation. The sentence below, on the other hand, would probably be meaningless to most older English speakers, but its use would be unproblematic to younger generations.

Linguistics is great, not.

The lexical and syntactic variation we are dealing with here is temporal. Language changes through time. The language used by different generations features phonological, lexical and syntactic differences. These differences may be generated by changes in life style such as a change in job or profession, or cultural changes, such as a move from a rural to an urban-based economy. Language changes may equally arise from the normal evolution of languages as some sounds are gradually altered or dropped and certain syntactic structures simplified over time. Evidence of such changes is often provided by the differences between the written form of a word and its modern day pronunciation (for a clear account of how French has evolved, see Walter, 23-113).

Language also varies according to the social background of users. Standard English, known as RP by linguists but often termed BBC English, is not associated with any particular geographic region of the English speaking world, but is associated with a particular socio-economic group, the upper middle classes.

To summarise the discussion so far, from our knowledge of English, we can see that the linguistic choices made by an individual are also in part determined by the identity of that language user, by their age, their geographic origins and location, and by their social background and aspirations.

When we look at French we can see that the language used by French speakers is also influenced by the geographical, temporal and social characteristics of the language user.

Although this discussion aims to provide a rigorous account of contemporary slang, we cannot overlook the significance of the language spoken in France in the past. Contemporary French has been strongly influenced by its history and by the history of the regional languages against which it became dominant because of social and economical factors. Indeed, it is important to note that up until the First World War, for most of the people living in France, French was not the language spoken in everyday interaction.

So although French was the language which was written in France at the turn of the twentieth century, and spoken among the elite, most ordinary people, particularly those living outside the major urban centres of France, spoke little or no French. They spoke dialects of regional languages, which linguists classify into three distinct groups: Langue d'oc, spoken in the south of France; Langue d'oïl, spoken in the north; and Franco-provençal spoken in the Lyon area and the Alpes. Dialects of Franco-provençal were also spoken in Switzerland, and in the Val d'Aoste in Italy.

Latin and Greek remained the languages of learning until the end of the 19th century, but legal and administrative documents were written in French from 1539 when François I issued the 'Ordonnance of Villiers', stating that French should be used for legal and administrative purposes. Henceforth French was to replace Latin or the dialects of the regional languages which had been used increasingly for administrative tasks from about the 13th century. This had little actual impact on the language used by most people however, for the majority of the population were illiterate.

French belongs to the family of romance languages, which includes languages such as Italian, Spanish and Catalan. These are languages which evolved from the everyday language used by the Romans, Vulgar Latin, but have also been influenced by subsequent political and socio-cultural events so that they developed the distinct forms we know today.

A number of quite distinct languages which are unrelated to these romance languages were also spoken in certain regions of France. These include the Celtic language Breton, closely related to Cornish and Welsh but also related to Gaelic, which was spoken in Brittany. Flemish, a Germanic language related to Dutch, was spoken in the north east of France. Alsacien and Lorrain are also Germanic languages which were spoken in the east Basque was spoken in the extreme south west of the country. Basque is the oldest language, it was probably spoken before the arrival of the Celts and certainly predates the Roman invasion of Gaul. It is one of the few languages spoken in Europe which does not belong to the Indo-European family of languages, and is perhaps most closely related to an early form of Hungarian (see Ager,1990:50-81 for a good account of the recent history and current situation of these languages).

The various regional languages spoken in France share common origins to some extent in that they are all romance languages which evolved as a result of contact between Roman settlers and the local, indigenous population. The differences between the regional languages are argued to be the consequence of numerous factors: the different languages spoken by different indigenous groups coming in contact with the Roman speakers of vulgar latin; different trading relationships with other speech communities, and the subsequent influence of different migrant or invading groups for example.

The Langue d'oïl dialects spoken in the north were particularly influenced by contact with the Germanic languages spoken by migrant groups, most notably the Francs but also the Vikings, whose descendants were granted lands on the channel coasts and became known as the 'Normands' (hommes du nord). The Langue d'oc dialects by contrast reflect the more extensive romanisation of the south of France and contact with Spanish and Catalan speaking communities. The Franco-provençal dialects were influenced by the Burgondes who spoke a Germanic language and settled in Burgandy, but they were equally influenced by contact with neighbouring speakers of Langue d'oc dialects. Indeed Battye and Hintz (1992:302) suggest that the Franco-provençal dialects "can be characterised as a zone of transition between the dialects of Oïl and those of Oc". By the end of the middle ages, when the feudal system isolated speech communities from even their nearest neighbours, people from different regions of France were unable to understand each other's language. (Bec 1986:15-22 discusses the likely influence of various factors on the development of the Langue d'oïl and the Langue d'oc languages in some depth)

Modern day French comes from the dialect Francien, spoken in Paris and the 'Ile de France' region. This regional dialect became increasing prestigious with the increasing socio-economic and cultural dominance of the ruling classes. The language spoken in the king's court and by the 'bourgeoisie', and written in their literature, spread to become the language spoken in influential circles throughout the land.

As the use of the French language became more socially advantageous, attempts were made to codify the language, to prescribe correct forms which should be used. To that end the 'Académie Française' was founded in 1635 by Richelieu. The forty members of the Académie were to compile the definitive dictionary and grammar of the French language.

Although French was being used increasingly in towns and by the upwardly mobile, in 1790-1791 Abbé Grégoire's language survey revealed that only 12% of the population of France were able to speak French. He found that at least 30 different dialects were spoken in France:

The situation changed dramatically with the onset of the First World War. To begin with, conscripts were organised in regiments according to their regional origins, but following the massive losses of the early battles, soldiers from all over France were grouped together. This meant that they were no longer able to communicate effectively using their regional languages. Indeed the only language these soldiers shared in common was the language they had had to learn at school, standard French. So from being the language of education and urban centres, French became the language of communication for speakers from all over the country. And many of these young men continued to speak French after the war, often because they took up work opportunities in other regions or urban centres but also because French represented the language of progress and they wanted their families to benefit from the social changes of this period.

Following the war, French also became increasingly significant in the everyday lives of the people in France through the influence of the broadcast media. In 1921, radio was shown at the Paris exhibition, today, over 90% of homes in France have a TV set, and spend an average of just under 3 hours per day watching. Even on local TV channels broadcasts are largely produced in Standard French. We see some evidence of regional variation from the occasional use of regional words and from some regional pronunciation which has infiltrated the pronunciation of standard French. So we can see how regional languages, which had been the main language encountered in the home for many people, was rapidly usurped by French.

Meanwhile, in school the use of regional dialects was severely frowned upon. Teachers were generally appointed to schools outside their local area, where they could not understand the regional language. Punishments were commonly metered out to any child heard using a regional word during school time. Regional languages together with the localised dialects derived from them were referred to as 'patois', a term with pejorative connotations.

Today there are very few people, if any, who only speak their regional language and many of those who speak their regional language during the course of their everyday interaction are elderly people living in rural communities.

Various attempts have been made to ensure that these languages do not die out entirely. The 'loi Deixonne', passed in 1951 has often been considered as a major change in national policy, but its provisions were limited to the right of primary school teachers to request an hour per week to be devoted to teaching the local language and the right to dedicate an hour per week of the timetable in secondary schools to local languages and literature. This law nevertheless met with stiff opposition:

The survival of the regional languages of France is not helped by the problem of agreeing upon a written form for languages that have been spoken more than they have been written. In order to agree upon a written form one of the many dialects of the language must be selected as the basis of that form.

Nevertheless, since the seventies, more and more texts are being published in regional languages and the local language and literature are increasingly being taught in schools with the support of local heritage organisations and centres of research in regional universities.

So what is slang?

We can use in-group markers to identify ourselves with others from the same geographic location, but in-group markers can also be used by speakers from a particular social group. Certain language varieties enable us to identify with others from our social group regardless of our geographical location. They are spoken throughout the country by people who feel that they belong to a particular group, because of their age or their profession for example.

We are now in a position to address the question which we began this presentation by posing: what is slang? Slang is a variety of language used in certain contexts by means of which people express their sense of belonging to a particular group within the community which is not specific to any geographic location.

In the second of our presentations we will take a closer look at two types of slang which are commonly used as in-group markers by young people today.

If you would like to know more

Have a look at the following texts, while the extracts from some of the recently published literature in regional languages. The first text is taken from the memoires of a miner written in one of the dialects of the Nord region of France, while the second text is taken from a museum guide, written in occitan. What differences can you see between the language used in these texts and standard French?

In dévnot mineur et d'père in fils …

Ch'est comme cha qu'in dévnot mineur et d'père in fils. In n'savot faire que cha. Pou nous autes, y avot pon d'problème:quind in sortot d'l'école, certificat ou pon, in savot déjà dû qu'in allot, pou certains d'intre nous, s'artrouver. Faut dire aussi qu'à ch momint-là, ch'carbon y l'étot in pleine expinsion. In comptot pus d'chint mille mineurs dins l'bassin du Nord-Pas-de-Calais.

Pis, faut l'dire aussi, y'avot grammint et t'tiotes intreprisses qui travaillotent pou les mines. Ch'est pou cha qu'dins l'région, ch'carbon y faijot vife énormémint d'monte. Jusqu'à chés bistrotiers! Jé n'peux pon vous les énumérer tertous, mais j'peux vous dire qu'un jour, in avot eu l'idée, avec un camarate, et d'les compter. Y n'avot pus t'tros chint, cha in faijot du monte, tou cha!

Et m'vie, alle a arprins comme d'habitude. Y avot des hiauts et des bas, comme alle dit Annie Cordy dins s'canchon. J'avos pon l'timps d'm'innuyer. Ch'cangeot d'boulot tous les jours: un n'fos, j'étos à l'coupe par chi, un n'aute fos ch'étot par là, ou bin j'allos au matériel. J'étos jamais à l'même plache, ch'est pou cha qué l'timps y m'simblot pon long.
Claude Milan 1993 Min Metier d'Mineur Edité et Imprimé par le Foyer Culturel de l'Houtland

 

Musée du Rouergue

En 1978, lo musèu de Roergue foguèt creat pel Despartament. Per amassar, far vérser, e tanben estudiar çò que faguèron autres còps los Roergasses; per far comprene lor anar e ne servar lo sovenir. I a pas qu'un musèu de Roergue, mas se tròba escampilhat en sèt airals.

Es un per son concèpte, per son metòde, e per son but. Nos vòl fas soscar e nos tornar far trobar nòstre èime vièlh. Totes aqueles sovenirs materials e morals noiriràn çò que sonam nòstra cultura, la nòstra arma de Roergasses.

Sèt airals per nos far passejar. A Espalion veirem de causas que nos fan comprene las costumas e lo biais de vuire. A Salas-Comtal, veirem los mestièrs, lo saber far d'un còp èra. A Salmièg, lo carreg. A Montrosièr, l'arqueologia. A Aubin, la mina, lo carrbon e lo fèrre. De musèus associats presentan a Pradinàs, lo Segalar d'un còp èra, a Sant-Crespin, lo pais vièlh de las monanhas de Lacuana.
Aveyron, Conseil Général
Mission Departementale de la Culture

Have a look on the following site:

www.liberation.fr/languesregio/index-html

Bibliography and further reading:

Ager, Denis 1990 Sociolinguistics and Contemporary France Cambridge University Press

Battye, Adrian & Hintz, Marie-Anne 1992 The French Language Today London: Routledge

Bec, Pierre 1986 La langue occitane (5e édition) Que sais-je Paris: Presses Universitaires de France

Bell, R 1991 Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice Harlow, Longman Group UK

Duneton, C 1973 Parler croquant Paris: Stock

George, Ken 1993 Alternative French in Sanders, C (ed) French Today pp 155-170 Cambridge University Press

Hatim, Basil and Mason, Ian 1997 The Translator as Communicator London: Routledge

Lodge, R A, Armstrong, N, Ellis, Y & Shelton, J 1997 Exploring the French Lanuage London: Arnold

Walter, Henriette 1988 Le français dans tous les sens Paris: Editions Robert Laffont