Cover not available
Part of
Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 15: Selected papers from 'Going Romance' 30, Frankfurt
Edited by Ingo Feldhausen, Martin Elsig, Imme Kuchenbrandt and Mareike Neuhaus
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 15] 2019
► pp. 93–112

Chapter 5
Point of view on causal clauses

The case of French parce que and puisque

| Harvard University

This paper uses the case study of French clauses introduced by parce que ‘because’ and puisque ‘since’ to argue that causal clauses are intrinsically perspectival: the causal relation that they express is established by a causal judge. Perspectival effects in causal clauses indicate that the referential possibilities of this judge depend on the structural level of attachment of causal clauses, which can modify Verb Phrases, Evidential Phrases or Speech Act Phrases. This supports the hypothesis that the causal judge is syntactically represented as a silent argument of the causal subordinator that must be bound within its clause. The presence of this judge argument explains why logophoric elements can appear in causal clauses.

Keywords: syntax-semantics, adjunct clause, causal clause, logophoricity, perspective, evidentiality, speech act, French
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Three types of causal clauses
    • 2.1Distinguishing between eventive and evidential causal clauses
    • 2.2Distinguishing between evidential and speech act causal clauses
  • 3.Perspectival effects in causal clauses
    • 3.1Perspective in parce que-clauses
    • 3.2Perspective in puisque-clauses
    • 3.3Analysis
  • 4.Causal clauses in attitude contexts
    • 4.1Embedded parce que-clauses
    • 4.2Embedded puisque-clauses
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 9 October 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.15.05cha
References
Anand, Pranav
2006 De De Se. Ph.D. Dissertation: MIT.Google Scholar
Anand, Pranav, and Valentine Hacquard
2013 “Epistemics and Attitudes”. Semantics and Pragmatics 6 (8): 1–59.Google Scholar
Antomo, Mailin
2009 “Interpreting Embedded Verb Second. Causal modifiers in German”. Proceedings of ConSOLE XVII: 27–51.Google Scholar
Charnavel, Isabelle
2017 “Exempt Anaphors and Logophoricity in French”. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 12. Selected papers from the 45th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Campinas, Brazil, ed. by Ruth E. V. Lopes, Juanito Ornelas de Avelar, and Sonia M. L. Cyrino, 15–28. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
2018 Perspectives in Causal Clauses. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory: 1–36.Google Scholar
to appear. “French Causal puisque-clauses in the light of (not)-at-issueness.” In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory – Selected papers from the 47th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL47), Newark, Delaware. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Charnavel, Isabelle, and Dominique Sportiche
2016 “Anaphor Binding – What French Inanimate Anaphors Show.” Linguistic Inquiry 47 (1): 35–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo
1999 Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Clements, George N.
1975 “The Logophoric Pronoun in Ewe: Its Role in Discourse”. Journal of West African Languages 10: 141–177.Google Scholar
Culy, Christopher
1994 “Aspects of Logophoric Marking”. Linguistics 32: 1055–1094. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dubinsky, Stanley, and Robert Hamilton
1998 “Epithets as Antilogophoric Pronouns”. Linguistic Inquiry 29 (4): 685–693. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald
1983 “ Puisque: essai de description polyphonique”. Revue romane 24: 166–185.Google Scholar
Faller, Martina
2002 Semantics and Pragmatics of Evidentials in Cuzco Quecha. Ph.D. Dissertation: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Groupe Lambda-1
1975 “ Car, parce que, puisque ”. Revue Romane 10: 248–280.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
2003 “Conditional Clauses: External and Internal Syntax”. Mind and Language 18 (4): 317–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane, and Virginia Hill
2013 “The Syntacticization of Discourse”. In Syntax and its Limits, ed. by Raffaella R. Folli, Christina Sevdali, and Robert Truswell, 370–390. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, C.-T. James, and C.-S. Luther Liu
2001 “Logophoricity, Attitudes, and Ziji at the Interface”. Long-Distance Reflexives 33: 141–195.Google Scholar
Johnston, Michael James Robert
1994 The Syntax and Semantics of Adverbial Adjuncts. Ph.D. Dissertation: University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Koopman, Hilda, and Dominique Sportiche
1989 “Pronouns, Logical Variables and Logophoricity in Abe”. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 555–589.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred
2014 “Embedding Illocutionary Acts”. In Recursion: Complexity in Cognition, ed. by Tom Roeper, and Margaret Speas, 59–87. Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Lewis, David K.
1973 “Causation”. Journal of Philosophy 70: 556–567. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murray, Sarah E.
2010 Evidentiality and the Structure of Speech acts. PhD Dissertation: Rutgers University-Graduate School-New Brunswick.Google Scholar
Oshima, David Y.
2007 “Motion Deixis, Indexicality, and Presupposition”. In Proceedings of SALT 16: 172–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rutherford, William
1970 “Some Observations concerning Subordinate Clauses in English”. Language 46: 97–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruwet, Nicolas
1990 “ En et y: deux clitiques pronominaux antilogophoriques”. Langages 97: 51–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sæbø, Kjell Johan
1991 “Causal and Purposive Clauses”. In Semantik –Semantics. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung – An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, ed. by Armin von Stechow, and Dieter Wunderlich, 623–631. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sells, Peter
1987 “Aspects of Logophoricity”. Linguistic Inquiry 18: 445–79.Google Scholar
Sheffler, Tatjana
2008 Semantic operators in different dimensions. PhD Dissertation: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Speas, Margaret, and Carol L. Tenny
2003 “Configurational Properties of Point of View Roles”. In Asymmetry in Grammar. Volume 1: Syntax and Semantics, ed. by Anna Maria Di Sciullo, 315–344. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Speas, Margaret
2004 “Evidentiality, Logophoricity and the Syntactic Representation of Pragmatic Features”. Lingua 114: 255–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stephenson, Tamina
2007 “Judge Dependence, Epistemic Modals, and Predicates of Personal Taste”. Linguistics and Philosophy 30: 487–525. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur
1976 “Reflexives and Subjunctives in Icelandic”. Sixth Annual Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistics Society: 225–239.Google Scholar