Les débutants parlent-ils à l`infinitif? : Influence de l

LUND UNIVERSITY
PO Box 117
221 00 Lund
[phone]
Les débutants parlent-ils à l'infinitif? : Influence de l'input sur la production des verbes
par des apprenants adultes du français
Thomas, Anita
Published: 2009-01-01
Link to publication
Citation for published version (APA):
Thomas, A. (2009). Les débutants parlent-ils à l'infinitif? : Influence de l'input sur la production des verbes par
des apprenants adultes du français
General rights
Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors
and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the
legal requirements associated with these rights.
• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private
study or research.
• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain
• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?

R01 !/ .+)*!/ ! (1* 
D?J7 0>EC7I
#A%$$# "$#
FH$ 
#%"  "%$ # &"#
" #  "$# %$# % "@#
/FHWA E9> B?JJ;H7JKH9;DJHKC
"H7DIA7

THOMAS, ANITA, Les débutants parlent-ils à l'infinitif? Influence de l'input sur la production des
verbes par des apprenants adultes du français (Do beginners speak in the infinitive? Influence of input
on verb production by adult learners of French), Études Romanes de Lund, 87, Lund 2009. 255 pages.
Written in French. Monograph
This dissertation deals with the characteristic variation found in adult French L2 oral production. In
their production of regular verbs, beginners use a short form, like parle, and a long form, like parlE,in
contexts of both the present (je parl/*je parlE) and the infinitive (je veux parlE/*je veux parl). This
sometimes results in target-like uses and sometimes not.
The question addressed in the thesis is if there is any systematicity in learners’ use of the verb
forms. In attempting to account for the variation, some previous studies have pointed at specific
linguistic factors while others have suggested that the observed variation can be more or less arbitrary.
One kind of systematicity has been found in earlier studies focusing on the development of past tense
morphology. These studies showed that production of the forms could be predicted from the
prototypical lexical aspect of the verbs. Based on French L2 studies of this kind, I present a first
hypothesis stating that, also when referring to non-past contexts, i.e. present and infinitive contexts,
learners use the short form with static verbs and the long form with dynamic verbs.
I further propose a second, contrasting hypothesis, namely that learners are influenced by the
frequency of surface forms in the input. This hypothesis emerges from a usage-based perspective
(Bybee, 2008) where input frequency is a key factor (Ellis, 2002).
A first investigation of 16 regular verbs in different input sources (for example, corpora of spoken
French and teacher talk) is conducted in order to obtain specific data for the second hypothesis.
Firstly, this examination shows that the distribution of verb forms in the input is uneven: some verbs
occur more often in the short form and others more often in the long form. A gradual scale can thus be
established for how frequent each of the studied verbs is in the short and the long form respectively.
Secondly, I found that lexical aspect and frequency are closely related. The verbs more frequent in the
short form turned out to be static verbs while the verbs more frequent in the long form turned out to be
dynamic verbs.
The analysis of the same verbs in learner data from a corpus of oral production shows tendencies in
favour of the influence of input frequency. This investigation is completed by using experimental data
for 12 regular verbs from a free production task, an elicited imitation task and a (serial) recall task.
The results of the imitation task, where the verbs are presented in sentences, showed a possible
influence of input frequency from the beginning stages. An influence of lexical aspect could only be
detected in the production by learners having passed the beginning stages. The recall task, where the
verbs are presented in series of five at a time, reveals a weaker correlation with input frequency and no
significant differences between the verbs with respect to the lexical aspect.
In conclusion, the data show that lexical aspect and input frequency are closely related in input as
well as in learner data and the results speak in favour of input frequency for the verbs where the two
hypotheses can be distinguished.
Språk- och litteraturcentrum
Lunds universitet
Box 201
SE-221 00 LUND, Suède
© Anita Thomas
ISSN 0347-0822
ISBN 978-91-978017-2-0
Imprimé en Suède
Media-Tryck
Lund 2009

TABLE DES MATIÈRES
Index des figures et tableaux ..............................................................................7
Abréviations et conventions de transcription ......................................................8
Remerciements...................................................................................................9
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................11
PARTIE THEORIQUE............................................................................15
2. LES VERBES REGULIERS EN –ER EN FRANÇAIS............................17
3. VARIATION DES FORMES ET FINITUDE ..........................................21
3.1. Approche fonctionnelle : la variété de base................................................21
3.2. Stades de développement en français LE/L2..............................................22
3.3. Perspective de la grammaire générative : formes et syntaxe.......................24
3.4. Synthèse et discussion ...............................................................................28
4. VARIATION DES FORMES ET ASPECT LEXICAL ...........................33
4.1. Présentation de l’aspect lexical ..................................................................33
4.2. Influence de l’aspect lexical en français LE/L2..........................................38
4.2.1. Présentation de l’hypothèse de l’aspect ...............................................39
4.2.2. Études à partir de l’hypothèse de l’aspect et français LE/L2................41
4.2.3. Aspect lexical dans le corpus ESF – approche fonctionnelle ...............47
4.3. Résumé et discussion.................................................................................50
5. CADRE THEORIQUE : PERSPECTIVE BASEE SUR L’USAGE DE
LA LANGUE (USAGE-BASED)....................................................................53
5.1. Principaux concepts de la perspective basée sur l’usage de la langue.........53
5.1.1. Expérience de la langue.......................................................................53
5.1.2. Constructions.......................................................................................54
5.1.3. Fréquence............................................................................................54
5.1.4. Input et usage de la langue...................................................................57
5.2. Autres facteurs en jeu ................................................................................58
5.2.1. Attention .............................................................................................58
5.2.2. Saillance..............................................................................................60
5.2.3. Intake ..................................................................................................61
5.3. Résumé et discussion.................................................................................61
6. HYPOTHESES...........................................................................................63
7. PRINCIPAUX CHOIX METHODOLOGIQUES ....................................65
7.1. Provenance des données empiriques ..........................................................65
7.1.1. Données d’input ..................................................................................65

7.1.2. Données d’apprenant/es.......................................................................66
7.1.3. Données expérimentales......................................................................68
7.2. Choix des verbes........................................................................................69
7.2.1. Présentation des verbes choisis............................................................69
7.2.2. Classement des verbes selon leur aspect lexical...................................70
7.3. Traitement des données .............................................................................74
7.3.1. Formes verbales et contextes...............................................................74
7.3.2. Codage des formes ..............................................................................75
7.3.3. Format des données (logiciels) ............................................................75
7.3.4. Méthodes statistiques...........................................................................76
PARTIE DONNEES DE CORPUS .......................................................79
8. DONNEES D’INPUT .................................................................................81
8.1. Choix méthodologiques .............................................................................81
8.1.1. Sources de données d’input .................................................................81
8.1.2. Choix des verbes .................................................................................88
8.1.3. Compilation des formes.......................................................................88
8.2. Analyse empirique des données d’input.....................................................89
8.2.1. Verbes réguliers en –er dans l’input ....................................................89
8.2.2. Verbes irréguliers dans l’input oral......................................................97
8.3. Résumé et prédictions..............................................................................101
9. DONNEES D’APPRENANT/ES DE CORPUS ......................................105
9.1. Choix méthodologiques ...........................................................................105
9.1.1. Présentation des apprenant/es ............................................................105
9.1.2. Choix des verbes ...............................................................................105
9.1.3. Calcul des occurrences ......................................................................106
9.2. Résultats des apprenant/es de corpus .......................................................107
9.2.1. Verbes réguliers en –er......................................................................107
9.2.2. Verbes irréguliers ..............................................................................115
9.3. Résumé et discussion...............................................................................120
PARTIE EXPERIMENTALE..............................................................123
10. PRESENTATION DE LA PARTIE EXPERIMENTALE...................125
10.1. Introduction ...........................................................................................125
10.2. Déroulement de l’expérience .................................................................125
10.3. Sélection des verbes pour la partie expérimentale..................................127
10.4. Présentation des règles éthiques suivies.................................................128
10.5. Présentation des participant/es ...............................................................129