%0 Journal Article
%T Focalisation averbale vs focalisation verbale en fran ais parl¨¦
%A Noalig Tanguy
%J Discours : Revue de Linguistique, Psycholinguistique et Informatique
%D 2010
%I Universit¨¦ Paris Sorbonne-Paris IV
%R 10.4000/discours.7726
%X Cet article se propose de rapprocher deux types de structures couramment employ¨¦es en fran ais parl¨¦ et qui pr¨¦sentent toutes deux la particularit¨¦ d¡¯¨ºtre ¨¦nonc¨¦es en deux temps. L¡¯une est cependant construite autour d¡¯un verbe, tandis que la seconde est structur¨¦e ¨¤ partir d¡¯un constituant averbal : [a] ¨¤ la caisse ils se p¨¨sent (Sabio, 1995 : 114) [b] tr¨¨s bien ta vie (CTFP : 32) Nous montrerons que ces deux types d¡¯exemples suivent tout d¡¯abord un m¨ºme sch¨¦ma prosodique. Les constructions [a] et [b] sont prononc¨¦es en deux groupes intonatifs. Le premier est porteur d¡¯une intonation modale qui le rend autonome tandis que le second est prononc¨¦ comme un appendice. Ensuite, nos deux r¨¦alisations pr¨¦sentent les m¨ºmes rendements communicatifs. Elles r¨¦sultent d¡¯une m¨ºme op¨¦ration de focalisation, op¨¦ration visant ¨¤ placer en t¨ºte de phrase un argument ¨¤ vocation rh¨¦matique. Nous proposerons alors une m¨ºme interpr¨¦tation de ces constructions ¨¤ analyser en termes de   noyau ¨C suffixe  . Enfin, nous verrons que ces deux exemples peuvent ¨ºtre analys¨¦s comme des variantes contextuelles d¡¯un m¨ºme proc¨¦d¨¦ contraintes par le type de verbe et la nature du sujet qui sous-tendent la construction. The aim of this paper is to compare two types of (syntactic) structures which are frequently used in spoken French. While they are both uttered in two parts, one structure contains a verb and the other is based on a verbless element:[a] ¨¤ la caisse ils se p¨¨sent [Sabio, 1995 : 114] = at the checkout, they are weighed[b] tr¨¨s bien ta vie [CTFP : 32] = very pleasant, your lifeWe will show that such examples follow the same prosodic pattern. Construction [a] and [b] are uttered with a pause which splits them into two intonation groups. The first conveys a modal intonation which makes it autonomous while the second sounds like an appendix or extension. Furthermore, the same pragmatic effect is obtained by both structures, as they result from the same focalisation process, entailing the fronting of a rhematic element.We will hence suggest an identical interpretation for such structures, as they can be analysed as a 'nucleus' + a 'suffix'. We will finally show that these two examples can be analysed as contextual variants for the same process, and that these variants are the result of a constraint created both by the type of verb and by the syntactic type of the subject which underlie the construction.
%K syntax
%K oral
%K predicate
%K verbless
%K sentence
%K focusing
%K syntaxe
%K oral
%K pr¨¦dicat
%K averbal
%K phrase
%K focalisation
%U http://discours.revues.org/7726