French Syntax Research Articles

Appropriation du français dans le sud du Cameroun

Carole de Féral : « Appropriation du français dans le sud du Cameroun » French in the Southern provinces of French-speaking Cameroon is an object of « appropriation ». As a result one should expect to find structural changes. However these are less numerous if one compares the spoken varieties of French in Cameroon not to Standard French but to everyday metropolitan spoken French. A particularly original form of appropriation manifests itself in a vernacular variety used among students and called camfranglais because of the presence of English and Pidgin English lexical items within a French syntax.

Comparative Constructions in Spanish and French Syntax

Comparative Constructions in Spanish and French Syntax

Comparative Constructions in Spanish and French Syntax

Comparative Constructions in Spanish and French Syntax

Comparative Constructions in Spanish and French Syntax

A description of the syntax of the comparative constructions of Spanish and French, which attempts to show that the differences in syntactic realizations can be accounted for by general constraints on the expressions of comparison.

Susan Price, Comparative Constructions in Spanish and French Syntax. London and New York: Routledge, 1990251 pp.

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

The Dynamics of Linguistic Systems and the Acquisition of French as a Second Language

It has been observed that learners of French as a second language at different stages of the acquisition process tend to use forms and rules that are comparable to those of French-based creoles or pid-ginized French. The more advanced learners employ rules and forms akin to dialectal variants of French or to French as spoken in isolated areas such as Old Mines, Missouri. The learners produce non-standard forms considered unacceptable by the purist tradition of French grammarians. It has been noted that the observed similarities between interlanguage, regional dialects, etc., occur in given “sensitive” zones of French morphology and syntax such as the use of verbs and auxiliaries, morphology and placement of clitic pronouns, over-generalization of given prepositions, those very areas which are problematic in the acquisition of French as L1. Since the 17th century, these have been the object of a strict codification by purist grammarians who disregard actual usage in various dialects. It is hypothesized that such similarities between the interlanguage forms at various stages of development, French regional dialects, and areas of conflict over the elaboration of norms in standard French can be partly accounted for if one considers the dynamics of the target language. To explain the functioning of this process, we posit a “system” comprising the learner-speaker, the specific linguistic system itself (including pressure to conform to the norm), and the interactions with native speakers. Through self-regulation, this system devises solutions which perforce pertain to that common area which in any language is at the crossroads of variation, language change, and acquisition. This hypothetical zone (called français zéro by Chaudenson, 1984) is the point of convergence of the self-regulating processes which are responsible for the formal and functional similarities between French-based interlanguages, language change, norm conflicts in the standardization of French, and the creolization process.

La déclinaison bicasuelle de l'ancien français By Lene Schøsler (review)

BOOK NOTICES 209 rectly Usted as 'dental', 12), the history of Latin (with numerous examples from inscriptions), and comparative linguistics, in addition to the topics already mentioned. It should therefore fulfill its practical goal: '... möglichst einfach in die Problematik der lateinischen Sprachwissenschaft einzuführen' (5). [John T. Jensen, University of Ottawa.] La déclinaison bicasuelle de l'ancien français. By Lene Sch0sler. (Études romanes de l'Université d'Odense, 19.) Odense, Denmark: University Press, 1984. Pp. 321. Kr. 120.00. The problem to be explained by S is the disappearance of the two-case declension system of Old French, a feature generally viewed as a direct descendant of the more complex Latin system. It persisted into the 14th century, when it disappeared completely for nouns and determiners (though it remains in the pronoun system of Modern French). S's analysis is based on the syntactic theories of L. Tesnière; thus it gives primary status to the verb in any sentence, with the nouns marked as actants (primary = subject , second = direct object etc.) The book is divided into nine chapters, preceded by an introduction and foUowed by an extensive bibliography, an index, and the printout of an analysis of the Charroi de Nîmes, an epic text used as a case study in the body ofCh. 2. The introduction defines the approach as purely syntactic, and discusses several problems arising from the textual nature of the data (both literary works and charters). In Ch. 1, the analysis is established: S isolates the various factors, both contextual and syntactic (impinging on univalent and plurivalent verbs), which would serve to differentiate the subject from the object of a sentence in a relatively free wordorder language. Ch. 2 continues the discussion in the context of the analysis of a single manuscript version ofa text. Ch. 3 returns to a large number of texts, studied one by one to examine the importance ofcase-marking in the syntax of Old French. Chs. 4-6 deal with certain syntactic features (the use ofdeclinable pronouns and word order) which have sometimes been ascribed a causal relationship to the case system and to its disappearance . S studies extensive data, both textby -text and chronologically, and demonstrates that no causal connection exists. Ch. 7 also has a negative goal: S demonstrates that other syntactic phenomena, cited in the literature as causing the disappearance of the case system, were present from the earliest attestations of Old French—whatever the degree of correctness of case use—and therefore must be eUminated from the study. Ch. 8 takes a dialectal and diachronic view of OF case; S establishes a definite movement from west to east in the disappearance of case-markings, as weU as some very interesting observations about the nature of Uterary and non-literary language across regions. In Ch. 9, S presents her own theory of case: a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for its disappearance is the fact that it is not ofprimary importance in distinguishing subject from object , and a catalyst to its demise is the disappearance of final s. She sees the crux of the problem in a hierarchy of grammatical categories in which case, because of its relative non-importance, is lost in order to maintain distinctions of number in the language at a time when the s is disappearing and thus causing communicative ambiguities in both these categories . The book was written as a dissertation, and reads as such. It is convincingly argued, and will certainly add to the literature on OF diachronic syntax. But reading through it means working through huge amounts ofdata which might have been better summarized when the dissertation was published as a book. S has not translated any Old French (or any Latin or German), which may make it difficult for non-specialist researchers . She also assumes a good knowledge of OF grammar, and does not present the case-markings themselves until Ch. 9. I would have liked to see some of S's sentences analysed at greater length to demonstrate some ofher more abstract points, and thus to make the case phenomena more explicit. As for S's quite convincing analysis, two questions might be raised: First...

The Evolution of French Syntax: A Comparative Approach

The Evolution of French Syntax: A Comparative Approach

The drift of french syntax

Recent speculation about the drift of French syntax is evaluated against data from a socially diverse corpus of modern French. While the data do not support the theory that French is becoming a VSO language, they do suggest that French is developing a ‘topic prominent’ sentence type.

Grammatičeskoe var'irovanie v moldavskom jazyke: Nekotorye aspekty. [Grammatical variation in the Moldavian language: Selected aspects.] By M. A. Gabinsku (review)

BOOK NOTICES 239 even if directed to an actual auditor or a group of auditors, may be intended for two different addressees, defined as 'patients of illocutionary acts' (38). Thus, L'ordre sera maintenu coûte que coûte, uttered by a politician, is concurrently a promise addressed to 'good' citizens and a threat to 'bad' citizens (39). Quotations, or any kind of reportive or quotative expression (à ce que dit X, il paraît que), have two 'énonciateurs; defined as 'agents of illocutionary acts'. This explains the difference between car 'for', and puisque 'since', as in Sortons, car il fait beau 'Let's go out, for the weather is fine' vs. Eh bien sortons, puisqu' (*car) ilfait beau 'OK, let's go out, since [you say] the weather is fine.' Here puisque is used whenever the 'énonciateur' (here making a concession to the addressee by Eh bien) is different from the quoted speaker. Although D does not claim to deal with French syntax or with discourse strategy, he more than occasionally offers syntactic information , stating such rules as: ? general feature of morphemes used as connectors between two discrete acts ofenunciation is that they generate structures to which neither negation, nor interrogation , nor embedding can apply' (209). He has also produced a work which is essential for everyone interested in 'argumentation in language '—and, because of the rare intelligence of the analyses, for every linguist who is not exclusively 'l'homme des phrases' (18) or does not think the study of speech performance or of texts to be an inaccessible dream. [Jacques M. Julien, University of Texas, Austin.] Grammaticeskoe var'irovanie ? moldavskom jazyke: Nekotorye aspekty . [Grammatical variation in the Moldavian language: Selected aspects.] By M. A. Gabinsku. (Akademija Nauk Moldavskoj SSR, Institutjazyka i literatury.) Kisïnëv:§tüníá, 1980. Pp. 222. Rb. 2.10. This is, paradoxically, a depressing book, though one written by a versatile and sophisticated author. The first paradox, to be sure, is not of G's making: The language spoken in the Moldavian Autonomous Republic (ethnic splinter groups apart)—which, stretching from the Prut to the Dnestr rivers, forms part of the USSR—has traditionally been known as the Bessarabian subdialect of the Moldavian dialect of Daco-Rumanian (or of Rumanian for short), a language which before 1850 was sometimes called Wal(l)acho-Moldavian (e.g. in the title of Ja. Ginkulov's grammatical treatise [St. Petersburg , 1840], to which G often refers). At present, a major part of Moldavia—around the cities ofIasi, GaIaJi, and Bacäu—remains inside Rumania and looks to Bucharest for guidance, continuing to use Latin script. But the newly landlocked KiSinëv area, for which G acts as spokesman, has adopted a Neo-Cyrillic alphabet based on Russian (before 1860, Rumanians used a Paleo-Cyrillic alphabet rooted in Church Slavonic). All this tends to make the label 'Moldavian ' as equivocal as 'Macedonian' has been for ages; the situation is far more complex than in the case of Serbian vs. Croat. In any event, for advanced scholarship and science Russian has become the standard language in the KiSinëv territory, as it was of course on most levels under the Czars. A second paradox, for which G (a seasoned Balkanologist) cannot be blamed either, is the fact that—obviously for local political reasons —the Russian equivalent of the word 'Rumanian ', which in Moscow-sponsored publications seems perfectly admissible, is never used in this book except in scattered footnote references to older foreign studies and, sporadically , in the appended bibliography. This is not an isolated instance of a novel category of taboo; the tendency has been pointed out before , in a dispassionate (or, rather, compassionate ) tone, by an impartial and highly competent observer, Scandinavia's ranking Dacologist Alf Lombard, in his generally favorable review of an etymological dictionary project—for which G, incidentally, has been coresponsible . In stumbling over 'trans-Danubian varieties of Daco-Romance' and similar paraphrases , one learns to read between the lines. A third paradox, however—namely, the bizarre structure of the entire book—must, I suspect , be squarely laid at G's door. The title page informs the reader, in small print, that the text has been...

A Functional Approach to Subject Inversion

It has been argued by Kayne and Pollock (1978a-b) that, in French, full NP subject inversion (henceforth SI) can be reduced to a stylistic rule of the form Move NP, the application of which would be triggered by WH. To be descriptively accurate, a general analysis of SI would have to take into account on the one hand that not all WH-words are compatible with SI (e.g. *pourquoi part Jean?) as noted for instance by Cornulier (1974) and on the other that SI does occur in the absence of WH (e.g. in sentences with list interpretation, live coverage of sports events). These apparent exceptions can all be explained when we take into account a number of pragmatic factors such as focusing and discourse context. Taking these factors into account provides a basis for ex-plaing why some uses of SI are conditioned by style or register while others are not, and why consequently French syntax has to include at least two distinct rules of subject inversion.

French Syntax: The Transformational Cycle

Carried out within the framework of the theory of generative grammar originated with Noam Chomsky in the 1950s, this book should be of particular interest to those either active in or conversant with the field of generative grammar and also to those just beginning the study of generative grammar. Those readers interested in French syntax, but outside the domain of generative grammar, should find profitable Kayne's detailed discussion of various grammatical phenomena and should find stimulating the claim that the theory of generative grammar can provide revealing solutions to traditionally unsolved or unnoticed problems.

Computer‐Aided Instruction in French Syntax

Computer‐Aided Instruction in French Syntax

Computer-Aided Instruction in French Syntax

Computer-Aided Instruction in French Syntax

Hume's Impressions

It is a pleasure to read Hume, and to watch him explore recalcitrant problems with agility of mind and grace of style. Ironically these twin abilities have worked against each other from the beginning, in the first place because in the matter of writing Hume was an innovator — nobody before him had so successfully albeit unwittingly adapted French syntax to the writing of English-and-Scottish - and in the second place because on the grace of his style subtleties of thought flow past his readers, who then accuse him of obscurity. So abstruse were his writings to his contemporaries that he failed to achieve the literary recognition for which he craved; and even today, long after the elegance of his style has been received, it is said by Passmore that Hume in contrast to Berkeley ‘was a philosophical puppy-dog, picking up and worrying one problem after another, always leaving his teeth-marks in it, but casting it aside when it threatened to become wearisome.’ Similarly Selby-Bigge says in his introduction to the Enquiries:His pages, especially those of the Treatise, are so full of matter, he says so many things in so many different ways and different connexions, and with so much indifference to what he has said before, that it is very hard to say positively that he taught, or did not teach, this or that particular doctrine. He applies the same principles to such a great variety of subjects that it is not surprising that many verbal, and some real inconsistencies can be found in his statements. He is ambitious rather than shy of saying the same thing in different ways, and at the same time he is often slovenly and indifferent about his words and formulae. This makes it easy to find all philosophies in Hume, or, by setting up one statement against another, none at all.

Hume's Impressions

It is a pleasure to read Hume, and to watch him explore recalcitrant problems with agility of mind and grace of style. Ironically these twin abilities have worked against each other from the beginning, in the first place because in the matter of writing Hume was an innovator — nobody before him had so successfully albeit unwittingly adapted French syntax to the writing of English-and-Scottish - and in the second place because on the grace of his style subtleties of thought flow past his readers, who then accuse him of obscurity. So abstruse were his writings to his contemporaries that he failed to achieve the literary recognition for which he craved; and even today, long after the elegance of his style has been received, it is said by Passmore that Hume in contrast to Berkeley ‘was a philosophical puppy-dog, picking up and worrying one problem after another, always leaving his teeth-marks in it, but casting it aside when it threatened to become wearisome.’ Similarly Selby-Bigge says in his introduction to the Enquiries:His pages, especially those of the Treatise, are so full of matter, he says so many things in so many different ways and different connexions, and with so much indifference to what he has said before, that it is very hard to say positively that he taught, or did not teach, this or that particular doctrine. He applies the same principles to such a great variety of subjects that it is not surprising that many verbal, and some real inconsistencies can be found in his statements. He is ambitious rather than shy of saying the same thing in different ways, and at the same time he is often slovenly and indifferent about his words and formulae. This makes it easy to find all philosophies in Hume, or, by setting up one statement against another, none at all.

French Syntax List.

French Syntax List.

French Syntax List.

French Syntax List.

Faire, Laisser, Voir and Entendre With a Dependent Infinitive

THE subject of this title represents one of the most complicated, illogical, and incoherent matters in the whole realm of French syntax, particularly in the case of faire. The difficulty is not so much in the use of faire itself or in the infinitive dependent upon it, as in the proper use and choice of the objects of both verbs. Confused in early times by a failure to distinguish between the active and passive infinitives, the construction has been made more so by the rules governing combinations of pronouns and by questions of ambiguity with the preposition d. It seems strange that such an important matter--for this construction is one of the commonest in the language--has apparently not received any comprehensive and systematic explanation. Most grammars, even those claiming to be advanced or complete, give it only a fragmentary treatment; some contain contradictions or actual mis-statements, and I have yet to see any that lay down the principles governing certain important distinctions. Since faire is subject to stricter rules than the other verbs in our title, it will be discussed first.

Notes on French Syntax

Notes on French Syntax