All parties deplore the decline of the French language, and some pose as defenders. But how do their leaders (mis)treat the language of Molière? To see more clearly, The duty subjected the gab of the leaders’ debate to the watchful eye of specialists in French and speech.
To ensure a fair comparison, the texts of the oratorical contest and the press briefings that followed were analyzed by a French language expert — the linguist and author of Multidictionary of the French languageMarie-Éva de Villers — and by software measuring the level of language and the lexical and syntactic complexity of texts.
As much to say it outright, the exercise remains without scientific pretension. However, it sheds light on how well candidates speak French in this specific context. Certainly, as Mme de Villers that the software used immediately gave the five counts a pass mark. The IT tools also conclude that “simple” French is used when transposed to writing, one granting the chefs a level of language equivalent to a public with a primary education.
The opinion of a linguist
Thanks to a qualitative evaluation grid based on 10 criteria — introduction, elocution, sentence structure, vocabulary, powerful images, effectiveness of the subject, sense of repartee, relevance of objections, respect of the register and conclusion — , Marie-Éva de Villers observed notable differences between the candidates. In his eyes, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon thus comes first, with a cumulative score of 90%, while Éric Duhaime is at the back of the pack with 76%.
If the Conservative leader gets 9 out of 10 for his assured delivery and 8 out of 10 for his tit for tat responses, Mme de Villers rejects it for its repeated use of Anglicisms (“ break », « poked »“ talk about two sides of the stuffy “) and the relevance of its objections to the attacks of its adversaries (sending dismissed civil servants to schools, she gives as an example). Because handling the verb and the metaphor well is not the only guarantee of mastery of oral French, insists the linguist: the ability to reply, the coherence of the subject and the effectiveness of the argument also count.
Despite certain faulty connections (“J’t’en politique”), Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois excels in the choice of shocking formulas (“take out the Halloween decorations”) and obtains second place in the list with a score of 86%. Dominique Anglade follows with 80%, because despite the excellence of her diction and her well-constructed sentences, the leader of the PLQ speaks sometimes imprecisely and devoid of powerful images (7 out of 10), believes the linguist.
Although he is not very comfortable in these oratorical contests, François Legault ranks third thanks to the formulas and well-felt replies (“wonderland”, “magic of Quebec solidaire”, “Duhaime, an agitator ») that he retains to sting his opponents, believes Mme of Villers. “Despite sometimes faulty phrases — ‘what do you say’, ‘the resources we need’ — Mr. Legault’s familiar style resonates with the public to whom [son message] is destined,” she says.
Software analysis
As for the software, they scrutinized the post-debate press briefings in terms of the complexity of the sentences and words used.
A word of caution, however: such IT tools “do not measure the quality of French nor [celle] of the argument. They calculate the readability of a written text. However, here, they analyzed spoken French, the form of which is often simpler than the written word”, also points out Jean-François Dumas, of the firm Influence Communication, which uses Scolarius in particular to gauge the comprehensibility of a text.
This software reveals that the chefs use on average a low level of complex language, intended for an audience who has completed primary school education (between 50 and 90 points on its readability scale), with an average score of 85. most newspaper articles are around 120; academic texts can exceed the 200 mark.
The tool also reveals that PQ player Paul St-Pierre Plamondon takes the lead with 90 points. He is followed by solidarity leader Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois (88), curator Éric Duhaime (82), caquiste François Legault (81) and liberal Dominique Anglade (78).
The recurring use of adverbs and complex words weighs heavily in the balance of Scolarius, explains Jean-François Dumas. “This robot cannot measure whether the speech was boring like the rain or whether the words were wrong. I am not surprised that the candidates have sought to remain as accessible as possible, ”he notes, moreover. “There are no good or bad levels, but language levels adapted to different audiences. »
Interesting fact: the software also reveals that journalists adapt their level of language according to the chief to whom they are addressing. When asked questions to the PQ and solidarity leaders, their collective score reached 77; it drops to 65 when they question the CAQ or Liberal leaders, then plunges to 54 against the Conservative leader.
Politician familiarity
Professor at the University of Ottawa, public debate specialist Bertrand Labasse believes that the French used by the leaders during the last debate was all in all “simple, calibrated” – a conclusion to which his linguistic analysis tool is also upstart—as well as quite “beige and unstyled.”
“You can’t say they slaughtered the language. But the language of politicians is getting closer and closer to that of our hairdresser. In short, colloquial spoken language. There is also a mutation towards the ethos of the person for fear of being perceived as elitists”, thinks Mr. Labasse, as when Mr. Legault calls himself a “little guy from Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue” or that Dominique Anglade presents herself as a “mother of three children”.
A shift in political communication also observed by Antonine Yaccarini, former political adviser and director at the communications firm TACT. “It is clear that authenticity has become a central theme in politics, both in image and in discourse, and this is reflected in the level of language. »