Chapter published in:
The Expression of Tense, Aspect, Modality and Evidentiality in Albert Camus’s L'Étranger and Its Translations / L'Étranger de Camus et ses traductions : questions de temps, d'aspect, de modalité et d'évidentialité (TAME): An empirical study / Etude empirique
Edited by Eric Corre, Danh Thành Do-Hurinville and Huy Linh Dao
[Lingvisticæ Investigationes Supplementa 35] 2020
► pp. 326–351

Verbless sentences in L’Étranger

A French – Russian – English contrastive study

| Université de Paris, CLILLAC-ARP UR 3967
| Université de Paris, CLILLAC-ARP UR 3967
What is aspectual meaning without a verb? Focusing on sentences in which the typical marker of aspectual meaning – the verb constellation – is absent, we use translations to explore the aspectual meaning pragmatically implicated by verbless sentences. Retrieved automatically, they were analyzed from a monolingual, parallel-text and third-language perspective. Semantic annotation for situation and viewpoint aspect showed that while states are an important correlate, verbless sentences are also found in contexts that call for the use of dynamic situations. English verbless sentences tend to implicate the French present simple and require an indexical relation to the situation of utterance. In spite of its high frequency in the novel, the French passé composé is excluded from the conversational implicature of Russian and English verbless sentences.
Keywords: verbless sentences, aspect, translation corpora, quantitative contrastive analysis
Published online: 11 August 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/lis.35.17bon
References

References

Altshuler, D.
(2013) There is no neutral aspect. In T. Snider (Ed.), Proceedings of the 23rd Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference (SALT), May 3–5 2013, Santa Cruz, California, 40–62.Google Scholar
Baker, M.
(1993) Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. In M. Baker, G. Francis, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and Technology (pp. 233–250). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1996) Corpus-based translation studies: The challenges that lie ahead. In H. Somers (Ed.), Terminology, LSP & Translation (pp. 175–186). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Balvet, A., Barque, L., Condette, M.-H., Haas, P., Marín, R., & Merlo, A.
(2011) Nomage: An electronic lexicon of French deverbal nouns based on a semantically annotated corpus. In B. Sagot (Ed.), Proceedings of WoLeR 2011 at ESSLLI, International Workshop on Lexical Resources, August 1–5, 2011, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 8–15.Google Scholar
Biber, D.
(1993) Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 8(4), 243–257. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bondarenko, A.
(2019) A corpus-based contrastive study of verbless sentences: Quantitative and qualitative perspectives. Studia Neophilologica 91(2): Corpus-based approaches to discourse phenomena, 175–198. doi CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bondarenko, A., & Celle, A.
(2018) Traduire l’absence : Les questions à prédicat zéro dans un corpus parallèle russe et anglais. Des Mots aux Actes 7: Sémantique, sémiotique et traductologie, 341–364. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Camus, A.
(1942) L'Étranger. Paris: Librairie Gallimard.Google Scholar
(1946) The Stranger (S. Gilbert, Trans.). New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. (Original work published 1942)Google Scholar
(1966) Незнакомец (Г. Адамович [G. Adamovič], Trans.). Paris: Editions Victor Paris. (Original work published 1942)Google Scholar
(1968) Посторонний (Н. Галь [N. Gal'], Trans.). Москва: Радуга [Moskva: Raduga]. (Original work published 1942)Google Scholar
(1988) The Stranger (M. Ward, Trans.). New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. (Original work published 1942)Google Scholar
Celle, A.
(1997) Etude contrastive du futur français et de ses réalisations en anglais. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Comrie, B.
(1976) Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Corre, E.
(2009) De l’aspect sémantique à la structure de l’événement: Les verbes anglais et russes. Paris: Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle.Google Scholar
Desclés, J.-P.
(1980) Construction formelle de la catégorie grammaticale de l’aspect. In J. David, & R. Martin (Eds.), La notion d’aspect (pp. 195–229). Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Dowty D.R.
(1979) Word meaning and Montague Grammar: The semantics of verbs and times in Generative Semantics and in Montague's PTQ. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fleury, S., & Zimina, M.
(2014) Trameur: A framework for annotated text corpora exploration. In L. Tounsi, R. Rak (Eds.), Proceedings of COLING 2014 the 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, August 23–29, 2014, Dublin, Ireland, 57–61.Google Scholar
Gawronska, B.
(1992) Aspect – a problem for MT. In Ch. Boitet (Ed.), Proceedings of COLING 1992 the 14th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Applications, August 23–28, 1992, Nantes, France, 652–657.Google Scholar
Guillemin-Flescher, J.
(2003) Théoriser la traduction. Revue française de linguistique appliquée, 8(2), 7–18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huyghe, R.
(2011) (A)Telicity and the mass-count distinction: The case of French activity nominalizations. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes, 40, 101–126. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kopotev, M.
(2007a) What a difference a verb makes! Russian and Finnish verbless sentences. In M. Nenonen, & S. Niemi (Eds.), Collocations and Idioms 1: Papers from the First Nordic Conference on Syntactic Freezes, Joensuu, May 19, 177–192.Google Scholar
(2007b) Where Russian syntactic zeros start: Approaching Finnish? Slavica Helsingiensia, 32, 116–137.Google Scholar
Leech, G.
(2007) New resources or just better old ones? The holy grail of representativeness. In M. Hundt, N. Nesselhauf, & C. Biewer (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics and the Web (pp. 133–149). Amsterdam: Rodopi. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lefeuvre, F., & Nicolas, D.
(2004) La phrase nominale existentielle et la distinction aspectuelle télique/atélique. Revue de Sémantique et Pragmatique, 14(14), 101–119.Google Scholar
Loock, R.
(2016) La traductologie de corpus. Lille: Presses Universitaires du Septentrion. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maslov, J.
(1984) Očerki po aspektologii [Essays on aspect]. Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Leningradskogo Universiteta.Google Scholar
McShane, M.
(2000) Verbal ellipsis in Russian, Polish and Czech. The Slavic and East European Journal, 44(2), 195–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nádvorníková, O.
(2017) Pièges méthodologiques des corpus parallèles et comment les éviter. Corela Online HS–21, 1–28. Retrieved from hcorela​.revues​.org​/4810
Olohan, M.
(2002) Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Interaction and reaction. Linguistica Antverpiensia, 1, 419–429.Google Scholar
Rakhilina, E.
(1999) Aspectual classification of nouns: a case study of Russian. In A. Werner, & L. Kulikov (Eds.), Tense-aspect, Transitivity and Causativity: Essays in Honour of Vladimir Nedjalkov (pp. 341–350). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C.
(1997) The parameter of aspect (2nd ed.). Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Soames, S.
(2008) Drawing the line between meaning and implicature – and relating both to assertion. NOÛS, 42(3), 440–465. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, B.
(1977) Tense and continuity. Linguistics & Philosophy, 1, 199–220.Google Scholar
Toury, G.
(1985) A rationale for descriptive translation studies. In T. Hermans (Ed.), The manipulation of literature: Studies in literary translation (pp. 16–41). London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Vendler, Z.
(1957) Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review, 66(2), 143–160. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Verkuyl, H.
(1972) On the compositional nature of the aspects. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, D.
(2011) Bezglagol’nye konstrukcii russkoj razgovornoj reči: Ix tipologija i status v lingvisticeskom opisanii [Verbless constructions in Russian speech: Their typology and status in linguistic descriptions]. In I. M. Boguslavskij, L. L. Iomdin, & L. P. Krysin (Eds.), Slovo i jazyk: Sbornik statej k vos’midesjatiletiju Ju. D. Apresjana (pp. 139–155). Moskva: Jazyki slavjanskix kul’tur.Google Scholar
Zanettin, F.
(2011) Translation and corpus design. Synaps, 26, 14–23.Google Scholar
(2013) Corpus methods for descriptive translation studies. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 95, 20–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) Corpora in translation. In J. House (Ed.), Translation: A Multidisciplinary Approach (pp. 178–199). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar