Authorizing a tradition: Theory, criticism and (self-) canonization in French Caribbean writing

As critics have noted, Antillean literature has developed in tandem with a strong (self-) critical and theoretical body of work. The various attempts to theorize Antillean identity (négritude, antillanité, créolité) have been controversial and divisive, and the literary scene has been characterized as explosive, incestuous and self-referential. Yet writers aligned with, or opposed to, a given theory often have superior visibility. Meanwhile writers who claim to operate outside the boundaries of theory, such as Maryse Condé, are often canny theoretical operators who, from prestigious academic or cultural positions, manipulate readers’ responses and their own self-image through criticism. While recent polemics have helped to raise the critical stock of the islands generally, they have particularly enhanced the cultural capital of Chamoiseau and Condé, whose literary antagonism is in fact mutually sustaining. Both writers, through a strong awareness of (and contribution to) the critical field in which their work is read, position themselves as canonical authors.

A genome-wide association study provides evidence for association of chromosome 8p23 (MYP10) and 10q21.1 (MYP15) with high myopia in the French population.

PURPOSE. Myopia is a complex trait affected by both genetic and environmental factors. High myopia is associated with increased risk of sight-threatening eye disorders such as retinal detachment. The purpose of this genome-wide association study was to identify susceptibility genes contributing to high myopia in the French population. METHODS. High myopic cases were genotyped using Affymetrix SNP 6.0 chips and population controls were selected from the GABRIEL French dataset in which samples were genotyped by Illumina Human610 quad array. The association study was conducted using 152,234 single nucleotide polymorphisms that were present on both manufacturers' chips in 192 high myopic cases and 1064 controls to identify associated regions. Imputation was performed on peak regions. RESULTS. Associations were found at known myopia locus MYP10 on chromosome 8p23 and MYP15 on chromosome 10q21.1. Rs189798 (8p23) and rs10825992 (10q21.1) showed the strongest associations in these regions (P=6.32x10-7 and P=2.17x10-5, respectively). The imputed results at 8p23 showed 2 peaks of interest. The first spanned 30kb including rs189798 between MIR4660 and PPP1R3B with the most significant association at rs17155227 (P=1.07x10-10). The second novel peak was 4kb in length, encompassing MIR124-1 and the MSRA gene, with the strongest association at rs55864141 (P=1.30x10-7). The peak of imputed data at 10q21.1 was 70kb in length between ZWINT and MIR3924, with rs3107503 having the lowest P value (P=1.54x10-7). CONCLUSION. We provide evidence for the association of MYP10 at 8p23 and MYP15 at 10p21.1 with high myopia in the French population and refine these regions of association.

Variation and Change in French Morphosyntax: The Case of Collective Nouns

Collective nouns such as majorité or foule have long been of interest to linguists for their unusual semantic properties, and provide a valuable source of new data on the evolution of French grammar. This book tests the hypothesis that plural agreement with collective nouns is becoming more frequent in French. Through an analysis of data from a variety of sources, including sociolinguistic interviews, gap-fill tests and corpora, the complex linguistic and external factors which affect this type of agreement are examined, shedding new light on their interaction in this context. Broader questions concerning the methodological challenges of studying variation and change in morphosyntax, and the application of sociolinguistic generalisations to the French of France, are also addressed.

Reviews:

‘Cet ouvrage constitue un apport majeur dans le champ de la linguistique variationniste et diachronique, tant par les résultats mis au jour que par la qualité de sa démarche méthodologique.’ — Sophie Prévost, French Studies 69.4, October 2015, 578-79

‘While language variation and change have been the focal point for linguists on this side of the Atlantic, Tristram argues that studies on morphosyntactic variation in French studies are lacking due to a focus on phonology and dialectology as well as denial of variation and change in the French language. Tristram’s book is thus a welcome contribution.’ — Samira Hassa, French Review 89.3, 2016, 108

‘Anyone teaching variation in French will want to talk about the findings and reflections reported in this study. A remarkable amount of ground is covered in a small compass. This is a highly welcome addition to the Legenda list, and one must hope that further linguistics titles will be added to it before very long.’ — Nigel Armstrong, Journal of French Language Studies 26.2, 2016, 211-13