Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T20:26:37.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Contrastive Focus, French N-words and Variation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Marie-Thérèse Vinet
Marie-Thérèse Vinet*
Affiliation:
Université de Sherbrooke
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of this article is to argue that the similarities and differences in the interpretation of n-words (personne, rien, etc.) in two closely related dialects of French can be explained by considerations linked to lexical properties as well as to properties of contrastive stress in Universal Grammar. The minor lexical differences in the two systems are related to the fact that only in Standard French is a single negation reading ruled out when an adverbial negative marker bearing [+neg, −T, −Asp] features, i.e., pas, appears in the scope of an unstressed n-word. A general principle is proposed to account for the fact that a contrastively focused n-word always blocks the local relation which seems necessary for a negative concord reading. It is observed that the presence of an intervening quantifier between the negative quantifier and the n-word always induces a Double Negation reading.

Résumé

Résumé

Le but de cet article est de montrer que les similarités et les différences observées quant à l’interprétation des mots-n (personne, rien, etc.) dans deux dialectes étroitement reliés du français peuvent s’expliquer par des propriétés lexicales et des propriétés liées à l’accentuation contrastive en Grammaire Universelle. Les différences lexicales dans les deux systèmes se résument au fait que seul le français standard rejette la lecture avec négation unique lorsqu’un marqueur de négation adverbial portant les traits [+neg, −T, −Asp], c’est-à-dire pas, apparaît dans le champ d’un mot-n non accentué. Un principe général est proposé pour rendre compte du fait qu’un mot-n avec une accentuation contrastive bloque toujours la relation locale qui semble nécessaire pour obtenir une lecture négative concordante. On peut observer que l’interposition d’un quantifieur, entre le quantifieur négatif et le mot-n, entraîne toujours une interprétation avec double négation.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 43 , Special Issue 01 1: Grammaire et variation , March 1998 , pp. 121 - 141
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acquaviva, Paolo. 1995. Operator composition and the derivation of negative concord. Gen GenP 3: 72–104. Université de Genève.Google Scholar
Azoulay-Vicente, Avigail. 1987. Les tours comportant l’expression de + Adjectif . Geneva: Droz.Google Scholar
Bauche, Henri. 1929. Le langage populaire. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1977. On wh-movement. In Formai syntax, ed. Culicover, Peter, Wasow, Tom, and Akmajian, Adrian, 69–132. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1990. Types of A′-dependencies. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1993. A null theory of phrase and compound stress. Linguistic Inquiry 24:239–297.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1998. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Daoust-Blais, Denise. 1975. L’influence de la négation sur certains indéfinis en français québécois. Doctoral dissertation, Université de Montréal.Google Scholar
Déprez, Viviane. 1995. The roots of negative concord in French and French-based creóles. Ms., Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Déprez, Viviane. 1997. Two types of negative concord. Probus 23:103–143.Google Scholar
Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Di Sciullo, Anne-Marie, and Tremblay, Mireille. 1996. Configurations et interprétation: Les morphèmes de négation. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes 25:27–52.Google Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, Nomi. 1998. The dynamics of focus structure, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gadet, Françoise. 1992. Le français populaire. Que sais-je? Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Guy, Salomé, and Vinet, Marie-Thérèse. 1996. Les propriétés des mots-N en français québécois. Paper read at ACFAS Conference, McGill University.Google Scholar
Haase, Albert. 1975. Syntaxe française du XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Delagrave.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 1995. The syntax of negation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane, and Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1991. Negative heads and the Neg criterion. The Linguistic Review 8:233–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heim, Irene. 1982. The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Graduate Linguistics Student Association. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Hirschbühler, Paul, and Labelle, Marie. 1993. Le statut de (ne) pas en français contemporain. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes 22:31–58.Google Scholar
Horn, Larry. 1989. A natural history of negation. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Hulk, Aafke. 1996. L’autre DE: une tête quantificationnelle ? Langue française 109:44–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulk, Aafke, and Verheugd, Els. 1994. Accord et opérateurs nuls dans les projections adjectivales. Revue québécoise de linguistique 23:17–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1917. Negation in English and other languages. Copenhagen: A.F. Høst.Google Scholar
Kadmon, Nerit, and Landman, Fred 1993. Any. Linguistics and Philosophy 16:353–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1998. Overt vs. covert movement. Ms., New York University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Negative attraction and negative concord in English grammar. Language 48:773–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ladusaw, William. 1992. Expressing negation. In Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 40: Proceedings of the Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory, ed. Barker, Chris and Dowty, David, 237–259. Ohio State University, Columbus.Google Scholar
Laka, Itzar. 1990. Negation in syntax: On the nature of functional categories and projections. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Law, Paul. 1993. On the analysis of negative polarity items in Haitian. In Proceedings of the 1993 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, ed. Dyck, Carrie, 413–427. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Lemieux, Monique. 1982. La négation dans la théorie du liage et du gouvernement. Revue québécoise de linguistique 12:169–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemieux, Monique. 1985. Pas rien. In Les tendances dynamiques du français parlé à Montréal, ed. Cedergren, Henrietta and Lemieux, Monique, 91–140. Montréal: Gouvernement du Québec.Google Scholar
Martin, Robert. 1966. Le mot Rien et ses concurrents en français (du XlVe siècle à l’époque contemporaine). Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
May, Robert. 1985. Logical form, its structure and derivation, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
May, Robert. 1989. Interpreting logical form. Linguistics and Philosophy 12:398–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milsark, Garry. 1974. Existential sentences in English. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Milsark, Garry. 1977. Toward an explanation of certain peculiarities of the existential construction in English. Linguistic Analysis 3:1–31.Google Scholar
Moreau, Marie-Louise. 1976. C’EST: Études de syntaxe transformationnelle. Mons: Editions Universitaires de Mons.Google Scholar
Moritz, Luc, and Valois, Daniel. 1994. Pied Piping and Specifier Head Agreement. Linguistic Inquiry 25:667–707.Google Scholar
Muller, Claude. 1984. L’association négative. Langue française 62:59–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muller, Claude. 1991. La négation en français. Genève: Droz.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, William. 1926. Dictionnaire historique du parler neuchâtelois et suisse romand. Neuchâtel: Éditions Victor Attinger.Google Scholar
Piñar, Pilar. 1995. Quantifier/negation construal and negative concord. In The Proceedings of the Thirteenth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. Aranovich, Raúl, Byrne, William, Preuss, Suzanne, and Senturia, Martha, 483–498. CSLI, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20:365–424.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 1997. Quantifier scope: How labor is divided between QR and choice functions. Linguistics and Philosophy 20:335–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1982. Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1996. Residual verb second and the w/i-criterion. In Parameters and functional heads: Essays in comparative syntax, ed. Belletti, Adriana and Rizzi, Luigi, 63–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rochemont, Michael. 1998. Phonological focus and structural focus. In The limits of syntax, ed. Culicover, Peter and McNally, Sally, 337–363. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stechow, Arnim von. 1991. Current issues in the theory of focus. In Semantik/Semantics: An international handbook of contemporary research, ed. von Stechow, Arnim and Wunderlich, Dan, 804–825. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Valois, Daniel. 1997. Négation, interrogation et accord spécificateur-tête. Revue québécoise de linguistique 25(2):99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vinet, Marie-Thérèse. 1996a. On certain adverbs of quantification in Quebec French. Probus 8:1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vinet, Marie-Thérèse. 1996b. Adverbes de quantification, négation et phénomènes d’accentuation. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes 25:133–144.Google Scholar
Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1991. Syntactic properties of sentential negation: A comparative study of Romance languages. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1997. Negation and clausal structure: A comparative study of Romance languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zubizarreta, Maria-Luisa. 1994. On some prosodically governed syntactic operations. In Paths towards universal grammar: Studies in honor of Richard Kayne, ed. Cinque, Guglielmo, Koster, Jan, Pollock, Jean-Yves, Rizzi, Luigi, and Zanuttini, Raffaella, 473–485. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar