‘Tu m’embrasses encore, et c’est mon pied dans les pompons !’ Comment construit-on le sens ?
This study concerns French constructions producing a hypothetical interpretation composed of two juxtaposed or and-connected assertions such as You say one more word (and) I’m leaving. The introductory assertion expresses a fact that is at odds with elements of the situation of utterance. Indeed, it...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Presses universitaires de Caen
2017-10-01
|
| Series: | Discours |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://journals.openedition.org/discours/4173 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832581861641027584 |
|---|---|
| author | Gilles Corminboeuf |
| author_facet | Gilles Corminboeuf |
| author_sort | Gilles Corminboeuf |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This study concerns French constructions producing a hypothetical interpretation composed of two juxtaposed or and-connected assertions such as You say one more word (and) I’m leaving. The introductory assertion expresses a fact that is at odds with elements of the situation of utterance. Indeed, it is quite obvious that the addressee is not talking in the situation of utterance: You say one more word can’t be a statement, and if it were it would be of poor informative content. I suggest an analysis of these constructions on the interface between syntax and pragmatics. These binary constructions present a mismatch between a formal structure (an assertion) and some pragmatic requirements usually linked to it (commitment, for example). These assertions – expressed under a “validation key” – increment the common ground with two items of information: (i) the validity of a state of affairs O; (ii) the allocation of a modal commentary to this fact, for example . I try to understand how this modal commentary is inferred. In my view, this inference is produced by two information sources in competition: a linguistic one – the state of affairs O is asserted – and an extralinguistic one – the experimental truth refutes the validity of O. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-a534b163e1234e57bb815224fe1f6e34 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1963-1723 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2017-10-01 |
| publisher | Presses universitaires de Caen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Discours |
| spelling | doaj-art-a534b163e1234e57bb815224fe1f6e342025-01-30T09:52:54ZengPresses universitaires de CaenDiscours1963-17232017-10-01310.4000/discours.4173‘Tu m’embrasses encore, et c’est mon pied dans les pompons !’ Comment construit-on le sens ?Gilles CorminboeufThis study concerns French constructions producing a hypothetical interpretation composed of two juxtaposed or and-connected assertions such as You say one more word (and) I’m leaving. The introductory assertion expresses a fact that is at odds with elements of the situation of utterance. Indeed, it is quite obvious that the addressee is not talking in the situation of utterance: You say one more word can’t be a statement, and if it were it would be of poor informative content. I suggest an analysis of these constructions on the interface between syntax and pragmatics. These binary constructions present a mismatch between a formal structure (an assertion) and some pragmatic requirements usually linked to it (commitment, for example). These assertions – expressed under a “validation key” – increment the common ground with two items of information: (i) the validity of a state of affairs O; (ii) the allocation of a modal commentary to this fact, for example . I try to understand how this modal commentary is inferred. In my view, this inference is produced by two information sources in competition: a linguistic one – the state of affairs O is asserted – and an extralinguistic one – the experimental truth refutes the validity of O.https://journals.openedition.org/discours/4173modalitymacro-syntaxconditionalsparataxissubordinationinference |
| spellingShingle | Gilles Corminboeuf ‘Tu m’embrasses encore, et c’est mon pied dans les pompons !’ Comment construit-on le sens ? Discours modality macro-syntax conditionals parataxis subordination inference |
| title | ‘Tu m’embrasses encore, et c’est mon pied dans les pompons !’ Comment construit-on le sens ? |
| title_full | ‘Tu m’embrasses encore, et c’est mon pied dans les pompons !’ Comment construit-on le sens ? |
| title_fullStr | ‘Tu m’embrasses encore, et c’est mon pied dans les pompons !’ Comment construit-on le sens ? |
| title_full_unstemmed | ‘Tu m’embrasses encore, et c’est mon pied dans les pompons !’ Comment construit-on le sens ? |
| title_short | ‘Tu m’embrasses encore, et c’est mon pied dans les pompons !’ Comment construit-on le sens ? |
| title_sort | tu m embrasses encore et c est mon pied dans les pompons comment construit on le sens |
| topic | modality macro-syntax conditionals parataxis subordination inference |
| url | https://journals.openedition.org/discours/4173 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT gillescorminboeuf tumembrassesencoreetcestmonpieddanslespomponscommentconstruitonlesens |