Marqueurs de discours - Université Paris

Marqueurs de discours Steven Schaefer Université Paris-‐Sorbonne L5ANM620 Les marqueurs de discours parenthéAques : Reduced Parenthe-cal clauses (Urmson) •  Hétérogènes – un grand nombre de structures possibles •  Rôle secondaire par rapport aux proposiAons lexicales •  Possibilité d’occurrence dans plusieurs posiAons par rapport aux proposiAons principales ProblémaAque •  Ces expressions sont consAtuAves en parAe de la cohérence du discours •  Elles sont omniprésentes dans le discours spontané contemporain •  Il est important de cerner leur rôle et foncAon en discours – plusieurs axes d’approche incluent la linguisAque sémanAco-‐syntaxique, la prosodie, avec une prise en compte du contexte (pragmaAque et énonciaAf) PosiAon (simpliﬁeé) dans l’énoncé •  INITALE •  I think, I know, I believe (syntacAc matrix) – subordinate proposiAon •  MEDIANE •  ParentheAcal Adjunct -‐ I think, I know, I believe (« displaced matrix » ) – within or between proposiAon(s) •  FINALE •  main proposiAon -‐ I think, I know, I believe (juxtaposed supplementary comment clause) Tony Blair, good a\ernoon! Er, I enjoyed the book, er I mean that sincerely. It’s quite refreshing I think. It’s unlike… other poliAcal memoirs. Déplacement de phrase matrice avec des « prédicats subjecAfs » •  I believe that there is a God. ['I assert the belief that there is a God’ or 'There may be a God.'] •  There is a God, I believe. ['There may be a God.’ ] •  You know that it belongs to me. ['You know that'] •  It belongs to me, you know. ['I want you to know that’ (to remind you of that)] DeﬁniAon of types in Quirk (1985) •  (i) as the comment clause interpolated into a main clause: There were no other applicants, I believe, for that job. •  (ii) as an adverbial ﬁnite clause (introduced by as): I'm working the night shiC, as you know. •  (iii) like a nominal relaAve clause: What was more upseFng, we lost all our luggage. •  Comment clauses (i) are either content disjuncts that express the speakers’ comments on the content of the main clause, or style disjuncts that convey the speakers' views on the way they are speaking Quirk’s Type 1 Comment clauses •  Type (i) comment clauses, which are the most important, generally contain a transiAve verb or adjecAve which elsewhere requires a nominal that-‐clause as object. We can therefore see a direct correspondence between sentences containing such clauses and sentences containing indirect statements: [l] There were no other applicants, I believe, for that job. [2] I believe that there were no other applicants for that job. •  To convert a sentence with a that-‐clause such as [2] into a sentence such as [l], we have to reverse the relaAonship of subordinaAon between the two clauses, making the that-‐clause into the matrix clause, at the same Ame omikng the subordinator that, and making the matrix clause into the comment clause. Because of this reversal of syntacAc roles. the two sentences [l] and [2] are not exact paraphrases; but the relaAonship between them illuminates the funcAon of the comment clause. Furthermore, the verb in the comment clause may have only one of the meanings possible for the verb in the matrix clause. Verbs like believe and think may have a more deﬁniAve meaning or may merely hedge (express a tentaAve meaning); but only the hedging meaning is present in comment clauses. ConsidéraAons Extra-‐syntacAques •  Since the "that" of an object that-‐clause is normally deletable, only the intonaAon (reﬂected by comma separaAon) disAnguishes an iniAal comment clause from an iniAal matrix clause: •  You know, you're wrong. [you know is a comment clause] •  You know (that) you're wrong. [you know is a matrix clause] •  Comment clauses resemble main clauses in that they contain at least a subject and a verb and are not introduced by a subordinator. •  However, they are not independent clauses, since they are defecAve syntacAcally: the verb or adjecAve lacks its normally obligatory complementaAon. Exemples pris dans le Santa Barbara Corpus • 
GrammaAcizaAon of EvidenAal ParentheAcals – Thompson and Mulac (1988) (1) I think that we’re deﬁnitely moving towards being more technological. (2) I think exercise is really beneﬁcial, to anybody. (3) …it’s just your point of view you know what you like to do in your spare Ame I think. Problème de méthode: Quand on mélange plusieurs énoncés avec I think dans des posiAons diﬀérentes, il est diﬃcile d’en Arer des conclusions. Cline of grammaAcalisaAon •  ProposiAonal -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐ Formulaic In Dehé and Wichmann (2010) Prosodic separaAon and prominence go along with semanAc transparency: expression of speaker aktude (genuine uncertainty, doubt, etc. Prosodic integraAon and deaccentuaAon go along with semanAc bleaching: comment clauses are used for discoursal, interacAonal and interpersonal purposes (politeness, miAgaAon) Comment clauses mark phases of disﬂuency and hesitaAon: they reﬂect mental planning and word-‐
searching phases or are used as ﬂoor-‐
holding devices; they co-‐occur with other disﬂuency markers SemanAc FuncAons (Quirk) • 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Type (i) comment clauses that are stereotyped may have various semanAc funcAons : (a) They hedge, ie they express the speaker's tenta-veness over the ‘Truth Value’ of the matrix clause. Commonly, the subject is I and the verb is in the simple present, but the subject may be an indeﬁnite one or they or (usually with a passive verb) it and the verb may (for example) have a modal auxiliary or be in the present perfecAve. Here are some examples: I believe, I guess, I think, I expect, I feel, I hear, I presume, I assume, I understand, Isuppose, I consider, Isuspect, I'm told, I have read, I have heard, I have heard tell, I can see, I may assume, I daresay, I venture to say, one hears, they tell me, they allege, they say, it is said, it is reported, it is claimed, it is rumoured, it has been claimed, it seems, it appears L’ambiguïté perçue de la forme écrite Le verbe « understand » donne deux interprétaAons clairement disAnctes – Pourquoi? Hypothèse 1) selon la posiAon du verbe, et 2) selon le sens contextuel ou situaAonnel du verbe Ou 3) selon l’accentuaAon du verbe dans la lecture de ces phrases A: Why did that have to be a big announcement? (about the publicaAon of the memoirs) Couldn’t you have done it quietly? B: I think, w-‐ we came to the conclusion it was never going to remain quiet… and therefore you might as well just be open about it…you know, and.. I did it for the reasons I stated. -‐ Tony Blair Interview, Radio 4, 2010 Certainty (b) Ces verbes exprime la cerAtude / incerAtude du locuteur (construisent un point de vue par rapport à leur validaAon). Très souvent, le sujet est « I » et •  le verbe est à la forme simple présent. Par exemple: •  I know, I claim, I see, I remember, I agree, I admit, I'm sure, I'm convinced; I have no doubt; it's true, it transpires; there's no doubt; I must say, I must admit, I must tell you, I have to say Verbes de CogniAon •  Avec les verbes de cogniAon, know or believe, il est impossible de faire une asserAon. Selon Emile Benveniste, cela correspond à une désasser-on (in English, 'miAgated asserAon' – cf. Urmson 1952) Re-‐cadrer le problème •  The problem posed by language structures involving the speaker’s point of view (and not simply his “aktude”) in relaAon to his use of metadiscursive forms was certainly in the air early in the twenAeth century, though perhaps only in anecdotal form. It was only much later that an examinaAon of the nature of comment clauses was carried out in the form of an arAcle originally published by Emile Benveniste ([1966]1971: 228): •  “Now a number of verbs do not have this permanence of meaning in the changing of persons (as with I suﬀer, you suﬀer, he suﬀers -‐ SS), such as those verbs with which we denote disposiAons or mental operaAons. In saying I suﬀer, I describe my present condiAon. […] Can I consider I believe to be a descripAon of myself of the same sort of I feel? Am I describing myself believing when I say I believe (that…)? Surely not. The operaAon of thought is not at all the object of the u~erance; I believe (that…) is equivalent to a miAgated asserAon.”
Comparer remarques de Quirk avec Benveniste pp.228-‐229 •  PLUSIEURS (i) phrases DU TYPE 1 sont stereotypiques, eg: verbes de cogniAon, croyance, savoir I believe, you know. En dehors de ce groupe pourtant, des phrases peuvent être plus ou moins facilement construites, ce qui permet des variaAons de sujet, temps, et aspect, ainsi que l’addiAon de proposiAons adverbiales (adjuncts). EmoAonal aktude •  (c) They express the speaker's emoAonal aktude towards the content of •  the matrix clause. Again, usually the subject is Iand the verb is in the simple •  present. Some are followed by a to-‐inﬁniAve verb of speaking. Here are some •  examples: ' •  I'm glad to say, I'm happy to say, I'm pleased to say, I'm delighted to say, I'm •  happy to tell you; I hope, I wish, Ifear, Iregret, I'm afraid; I regret to say, I'm •  sorry to say; it pains me to tell you, it grieves me to say Claim hearer’s a~enAon • 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
(d) They are used to claim the hearer's a~enAon. Some also call for the hearer's agreement. At the same Ame, they express the speaker's informality and warmth toward the hearer. The subject is usually you or the implied you of the imperaAve. Here are some examples: you know, you see, you realize; you can see, you may know, you may have heard, you must admit; mind you, mark you; it may interest you to know NegaAve quesAons generally call for the hearer's agreement, eg: wouldn't you say?, don't you think?, don't you agree?, can't you see?, don't you know? They are a~ached to declaraAve sentences: It's ethically wrong, wouldn't you say? PosiAve quesAons generally call for the hearer's a~enAon. They are a~ached to interrogaAve sentences: What's she doing, do you think? Is the heaAng on, do you suppose? •  Comment clauses and intonaAonal domains I Think/ you know in onset posiAon (Head) or (Pre-‐head) is integrated into IU with following syllables, i.e. Main ProposiAon; I Think in Separate IU preceding Main ProposiAon. I Think/ you know in median posiAon,is integrated into IU with surrounding syllables – or I Think/ you know in Separate IU (linking parts of Main Prop). I Think/ you know in ﬁnal posiAon following Main Prop but integrated into preceding syllables i.e. post-‐nuclear; – or ﬁnal I Think/ you know forming Separate IU Prosody •  RPC in onset posiAon (Head) integrated into following syllables of the Main ProposiAon •  RPC can be in a Separate IntonaAon Group, preceding, following or interpolated into surrounding syllables of the main proposiAon Example of radical alterity • -‐Have you spoken to him since he became PM ? • -‐No, I mean there’s no par-cular reason why we – would [..] •  -‐Well, `I think there’s a reason why you 7would (Richard Bacon and Tony Blair, BBC Interview) A: Have you spoken to him since he became Prime Minister? Has he called you? B: Erm….no. A: No? You’ve not spoken at all? B: No; I mean there’s no parAcular reason why we, we would, but I mean I… A: Well I think there’s a reason why you would But I, you know, I wanted it to be homemade, you know… something special SBC 0004