Conclusion

The aim of this book is to begin the process of establishing how present-day contact with English will affect French at the level of syntax and to consider the potential implications for theories of language contact and translation studies. It was seen in the Introduction that there is a popular perception in France that contact with English will lead to syntactic borrowing. Having analysed what linguists consider the most likely channel by which innovative syntax can enter the language, it is possible to say at this stage that the popular perception appears to be correct. However, the public may be less well informed about the way in which syntax will be affected by contact. It will be recalled that the Wikipedia definition of franglais emphasized the involvement of adjective placement: “reprise en français de la syntaxe anglaise, en particulier la place de lߣadjectif”. ¹ The work presented in this book has cast doubt over the assumption that adjective position will be affected by contact. It was also seen in the Introduction that the popular perception that contact will lead to syntactic borrowing is not mirrored in the academic community where scholars remain uncertain. The scope of the research discussed here is such that it could not entirely eliminate this uncertainty but a certain amount of clarification has been offered. It is now clear that news translation contains syntactic influence and thus it at least has the potential to lead to syntactic borrowing. In addition, we know more about the factors that make this likely. Speed and volume of translation from English are particularly important and it is possible to dismiss impressionistic comments such as Guiraudߣs (1965: 122) claim that a journalist translates “sans connaître la langue étrangère, voire souvent la sienne”. Finally, we have strong evidence to counter previous claims about which constructions would be affected by contact and what the linguistic effects of this contact would be. Future studies should be able to start with comparative linguistic analysis rather than lists of constructions previously linked to contact.