Cover not available
Part of
In Search of Basic Units of Spoken Language: A corpus-driven approach
Edited by Shlomo Izre'el, Heliana Mello, Alessandro Panunzi and Tommaso Raso
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 94] 2020
► pp. 127–154

Chapter 4
Syntactic and prosodic segmentation in spoken French

| Université Paris 3 Sorbonne Nouvelle LaTTiCe UMR 8094
| Université Paris 7 Denis Diderot UFRL, LLF UMR 7110
This chapter presents first of all the analytical framework adopted for the syntactical study of spoken French productions. In line with the work of the pronominal approach, the framework postulates that three components are involved in the constitution of utterances. Two syntactical components, micro- and macrosyntax, and a prosodic component interact independently in the constitution of units. The second part of the chapter presents the application of this framework to the analysis of a conversation excerpt and an excerpt from a monologue.
Keywords: macrosyntax, microsyntax, prosodic component, pronominal approach, spoken French
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Linguistic framework
    • 2.1From text units to discourse units
    • 2.2The syntactic subcomponent
      • 2.2.1Combination of microsyntactic units
      • 2.2.2Combination of macrosyntactic units
    • 2.3Prosodic component
    • 2.4The interface rules between the formal components
  • 3.Descriptive issues
    • 3.1Simple utterances: Nuclei
    • 3.2Compound utterances: Nucleus + Satellite
    • 3.3Configurations as extended discourse patterns: Grouping
    • 3.4Ungrouping: Epexegesis
    • 3.5Some remarkable configurations in monologue
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 June 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.94.04deb
References (32)
References
Bally, C. (1950). Linguistique française et linguistique générale. Bern: A. Francke.Google Scholar
Berrendonner, A. (2003). Éléments pour une macro-syntaxe: Actions communicatives, types de clauses, structures périodiques. In A. Scarano (Ed.), Macro-syntaxe et pragmatique: l’Analyse linguistique de l’oral (pp. 93–110). Roma: Bulzoni.Google Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C. (1993). Répétitions de lexique et glissement vers la gauche. Recherches sur le Français Parlé, 12, 9–34.Google Scholar
(2010). Approches de la langue parlée en Français. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C. & Martin, P. (2010). Le français. Usages de la langue parlée. Leuven/Paris: Peeters.Google Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C., Bilger, M., Rouget, C., Van den Eynde, K., Mertens, P. (1990). Le français parlé: Études grammaticales. Paris: Editions du CNRS.Google Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C., & Jeanjean, C. (1987). Le français parlé: Transcription et édition. Paris: Didier Érudition.Google Scholar
Combettes, B. (1993). Pour une grammaire textuelle. Louvain: De Boeck-Duculot.Google Scholar
Cresti, E., & Moneglia, M. (2010). Informational patterning theory and the corpus based description of spoken language. In M. Moneglia & A. Panunzi (Eds.), Bootstrapping information from corpora in a cross linguistic perspective (pp. 13–45). Florence: Firenze University Press.Google Scholar
Culicover, P., & Jackendoff, R. (2005). Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culioli, A. (1983). Pourquoi le français parlé est-il si peu étudié?. Recherches sur le Français Parlé, 5, 291–300.Google Scholar
Debaisieux, J.-M. (2016). Toward a global approach to discourse uses of conjunctions in spoken French. In Language Sciences 58. Special Issue. Adverbial Patterns in Interaction. Dagmar Barth-Weingarten and Oliver Ehmer (ed), 79–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Debaisieux, J-M. (Ed.). (2013). Analyses linguistiques sur corpus: Subordination et insubordination en français. Paris: Hermès-Lavoisier.Google Scholar
Debaisieux, J-M., & Deulofeu, J. (2001). Grammatically unacceptable utterances are communicatively accepted by native speakers, why are they? Disfluency in Spontaneous Speech (DiSS ’01), 69–72.Google Scholar
Debaisieux, J-M., & Martin, P. (2010). Les parenthèses: Étude macrosyntaxique et prosodique sur corpus. In M-J. Béguelin, M. Avanzi, & G. Corminboeuf (Eds.), La parataxe: Vol. 2. Structures, marquages et exploitation discursive (pp. 307–339). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Debaisieux, J-M., Deulofeu, J., & Martin, P. (2019). Apparent insubordination as discourse patterns in French. In K. Beijering, G. Kaltenböck, & M. S. Sansiñena (Eds.), Insubordination: New perspectives (pp. 234–257). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deulofeu, J. (2003). L’approche macrosyntaxique en syntaxe: Un nouveau modèle de rasoir d’Occam contre les notions inutiles. Scolia, 16, 47–62.Google Scholar
(2008). Peripheral constituents as generalized hanging topics. In R. Kawajima, G. Philippe, & T. Sowley (Eds.), Phantom sentences: Essays in linguistics and literature presented to Ann Banfield (pp. 227–257). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
(2013). L’approche macrosyntaxique: Sources et controversies. In J.-M. Debaisieux (Ed.), Analyses linguistique sur corpus: Subordination et insubordination en Français (pp. 427–498). Paris: Hermès-Lavoisier.Google Scholar
Groupe de Fribourg. (2013). Grammaire de la période. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. (1989). Spoken and written language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, P. (2009). L’intonation du français. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
(2014). Spontaneous speech corpus data validates prosodic constraints. In N. Campbell, D. Gibbon, & D. Hirst (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th conference on speech prosody (pp. 525–529). Dublin: Science Foundation Ireland.Google Scholar
(2015). The structure of spoken language: Intonation in romance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Intonation, structure prosodique et ondes cérébrales. London: ISTE.Google Scholar
Martins-Baltar, M. (1977). De l’énoncé à l’énonciation: Une approche des fonctions intonatives. Paris: CREDIF.Google Scholar
Mithun, M. (2005). On the assumption of the sentences as the basic unit of syntactic structures. In Z. Frayzingier, A. Hodges, & D. S. Rood (Eds.), Linguistic diversity and language theory (pp. 169–183). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). The extension of dependency beyond the sentence. Language, 84(1), 69–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moneglia, M., & Raso, T. (2014). Notes on Language into Act Theory (L-AcT). In T. Raso & H. Mello (Eds.), Spoken Corpora and Linguistic Studies (pp. 468–495). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Partee, B. (1995). Lexical semantics and compositionality. In L. R. Gleitman, M. Liberman, & D. N. Osherson (Eds.), Language: Vol. 1. An invitation to cognitive science (pp. 311–360). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rossi, M. (1971). Le seuil de glissando ou seuil de perception des variations tonales pour la parole. Phonetica, 23, 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verstraete, J-C. (2007). Rethinking the coordinate-subordinate dichotomy: Interpersonal grammar and the analysis of adverbial clauses in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
audio

Example 16

Example 18

Example 19

Example 20

Example 21

Example 22

Example 23

Example 25

Example 26

Example 27

Example 28

Example 29

Example 30

Example 31

Example 32

Example 33

Example 34

Example 35

Example 36

Example 37

Example 38

Example 39

Example 40

Example 41 Fig 1

Example 41 fig 2

Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Bossaglia, Giulia, Heliana Mello & Tommaso Raso
2020. Chapter 7. Illocution as a unit of reference for spontaneous speech. In In Search of Basic Units of Spoken Language [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 94], ► pp. 221 ff. DOI logo
Izre'el, Shlomo
2020. Chapter 2. The basic unit of spoken language and the interfaces between prosody, discourse and syntax. In In Search of Basic Units of Spoken Language [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 94], ► pp. 77 ff. DOI logo
Kibrik, Andrej A., Nikolay A. Korotaev & Vera I. Podlesskaya
2020. Chapter 1. Russian spoken discourse. In In Search of Basic Units of Spoken Language [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 94], ► pp. 35 ff. DOI logo
Panunzi, Alessandro, Lorenzo Gregori & Bruno Rocha
2020. Chapter 8. Comparing annotations for the prosodic segmentation of spontaneous speech. In In Search of Basic Units of Spoken Language [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 94], ► pp. 403 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.