L’identification des arguments et la hiérarchisation des marges : critères formels et critères conceptuels

Michele Prandi

doi:10.31261/NEO.2021.33.11

Publié: 2021-11-10

Vol. 33 (2021)

L’identification des arguments et la hiérarchisation des marges : critères formels et critères conceptuels

Michele Prandi

Rubrique: Articles

https://doi.org/10.31261/NEO.2021.33.11

Résumé

The distinction between arguments and margins within a simple nuclear sentence is sharp at conceptual level in that it is grounded in explicit relevance criteria: arguments are saturated referential noun phrases that are essential for the integrity of the process; different layers of margins enrich different kinds of processes according to different consistency requirements. If one observes the syntactic structure of linguistic expressions, on the other hand, the same distinction seems to shade into a sort of continuum owing to two orders of factors. First, there is a cleavage between the model sentence, whose main function should be the expression of the process, and the utterances actually documented in texts and corpora, whose structure is shaped by the incommensurate function to adapt the structure of the process to the communicative dynamism of a text. Moreover, within the model sentence itself, the coding regime of arguments and the coding regime of margins shadow into one another: some margins are coded, like arguments, through formal grammatical relations, while some arguments are coded, like margins, directly as conceptual relations through a set of forms of expression motivated by their conceptual content.
In spite of these obstacles, the conceptual distinction between arguments and margins and the hierarchy of margins can be identified at the level of model sentence thanks to adequate and differentiated criteria. These criteria are formal where the difference of coding regime draws a sharp formal distinction between arguments and margins, and conceptual and textual where the structure of the forms of expression neutralises the distinction. Conceptual and textual criteria also make the identification of a clear hierarchy of margins possible.

Mots-clés :

Arguments , inner margins , outer margins , formal criteria , conceptual and textual criteria , control , closeness , coding regime

Télécharger les fichiers

PDF

Règles de citation

Prandi, M. (2021). L’identification des arguments et la hiérarchisation des marges : critères formels et critères conceptuels. Neophilologica, 33, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.31261/NEO.2021.33.11

Cité par / Partager

Références

Blinkenberg, A. (1960). Le problème de la transitivité en français moderne : essai syntacto-sémantique. København, I Kommission hos Munksgaard.
Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. A. (1971 [1965]). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge (Massachusetts), MIT Press [Traduction française : Aspects de la théorie syntaxique (J.-Cl. Milner, Trad.). Paris, Seuil].
Google Scholar

Dowty, D. (2000). The dual analysis of adjuncts / complements in categorial grammar. ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 17, 1—26. Réimpr. in E. Lang, I. Maienbom & C. Fabricius-Hansen (Eds.), Modifying Adjuncts (p. 33—66). Berlin — New York, De Gruyter Mouton.
Google Scholar

Feuillet, J. (Éd.). (1998). Actance et Valence dans les Langues de l’Europe. Berlin, De Gruyter Mouton.
Google Scholar

Firbas, J. (1964). On defining the theme in functional sentence analysis. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague, I, 267—80.
Google Scholar

Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago — London, University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar

Gross, G. (2012). Manuel d’analyse linguistique. Villeneuve-d’Ascq, Presses universitaires du Septentrion.
Google Scholar

Gross, G., & Prandi, M. (2004). La finalité : fondements conceptuels et genèse linguistique. Bruxelles, De Boeck / Duculot.
Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). Linguistic Structure and Linguistic Function. In J. Lyons (Ed.), New Horizons in Linguistics (p. 140—165). Harmondsworth, Penguin Books.
Google Scholar

Hanks, P. (2013). Lexical Analysis. Cambridge (Massachusetts), MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Hilpert, M. (2014). Construction Grammar and its Application to English. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.
Google Scholar

König, E., & Haspelmath, M. (1998). Les constructions à possesseur externe dans les langues de l’Europe. In J. Feuillet (Éd.), Actance et Valence dans les Langues de l’Europe (p. 525—606). Berlin, De Gruyter Mouton.
Google Scholar

Lazard, G. (1998). Définition des actants dans les langues européennes. In J. Feuillet (Éd.), Actance et Valence dans les Langues de l’Europe (p. 111—146). Berlin, De Gruyter Mouton.
Google Scholar

Longacre, R. E. (2006 [1985]). Sentences as Combinations of Clauses. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description (2nd ed., Vol. II : Complex Constructions, p. 235—286). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Mereu, L. (2017). La struttura argomentale in un approccio ‘usage-based’. Studi e saggi linguistici, 55(2), 36—65.
Google Scholar

Mereu, L. (2020). La semantica della frase. Roma, Carocci.
Google Scholar

Mereu, L., & Piunno, V. (2019). The Argument Structure of Verbs of Hitting and Breaking in Italian. Lingue e linguaggio, 18(1), 143—176.
Google Scholar

Orlandi, A., & Fasciolo, M. (2021). Corpus Pattern Analysis et Classes d’objets : différences théoriques et retombées pratiques de deux approches à la description du lexique. Synergies Italie, 17, 91—105.
Google Scholar

Palmer, F. R. (1994). Grammatical Roles and Relations. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

Perek, F. (2015). Argument Structure in Usage-Based Construction Grammar. Amsterdam — Philadelphia, John Benjamins.
Google Scholar

Prandi, M. (1987). Sémantique du contresens. Paris, Éditions de Minuit.
Google Scholar

Prandi, M. (2004). The Building Blocks of Meaning. Ideas for a Philosophical Grammar. Amsterdam — Philadelphia, John Benjamins.
Google Scholar

Prandi, M. (2019). Phrase et énoncé : de l’ordre symbolique à l’ordre indexical. In F. Neveu (Éd.), Proposition, phrase, énoncé. Linguistique et philosophie (p. 131—154). Londres, Iste Editions.
Google Scholar

Prandi, M. (2020). Roles and grammatical relations in synchrony and diachrony: the case of the indirect object. In C. Fedriani & M. Napoli (Eds.), The Diachrony of Ditransitives (p. 19—58). Berlin, De Gruyter Mouton.
Google Scholar

Pustejowsky, J. (1995). The generative Lexicon. Cambridge (Massachusetts), MIT Press.
Google Scholar

Pustejovsky, J. (2000). Lexical shadowing and Argument Closure. In Y. Ravin & C. Leacock (Eds.), Polysemy. Theoretical and Computational Approaches (p. 68—90). Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Riegel, M., Pellat, J.-Ch., & Rioul, R. (1994). Grammaire méthodique du français. Paris, Presses universitaires de France.
Google Scholar

Steinitz, R. (1969). Adverbial-Syntax. Berlin, Akademie Verlag.
Google Scholar

Strik-Lievers, F. (2012). Sembra ma non è. Studio semantico-lessicale sui verbi con complemento predicativo. Firenze, Accademia della Crusca.
Google Scholar

Tesnière, L. (1965 [1959]). Éléments de syntaxe structurale (2e éd.). Paris, Klincksieck.
Google Scholar

Vergnaud, J.-R., & Zubizarreta, M.-L. (1992). The definite determiner and the inalienable construction in French and English. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 595—652.
Google Scholar

Vol. 33 (2021)
Publié: 2021-12-31

ISSN: 0208-5550

eISSN: 2353-088X

10.31261/NEO

Éditeur

Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego | University of Silesia Press

Envoyer le texte

L’identification des arguments et la hiérarchisation des marges : critères formels et critères conceptuels

Résumé

Mots-clés :

Michele Prandi

Informations