Cover not available
Part of
Studies at the Grammar-Discourse Interface: Discourse markers and discourse-related grammatical phenomena
Edited by Alexander Haselow and Sylvie Hancil
[Studies in Language Companion Series 219] 2021
► pp. 127–156

Chapter 5
The meaning and functions of French je pense (que)

A constructionalist and interactional account

| The University of Manchester
| The University of Manchester
This paper examines the meanings of the French construction je pense (que) (‘I think (that)’, henceforth JP), as well as its uses in social interaction. We propose an account of JP as a micro-construction with two basic elements of coded meaning, either one of which may be pragmatically foregrounded in a given context of use. As a direct result of its constructional meaning, which we argue is situated at the context level rather than at the content level of discourse, the expression frequently functions as a pragmatic marker in conversation. We show that uses of JP may fulfil both interpersonal, face-related functions and discourse-organizational ones. Our analysis has implications for the way JP and similar expressions in French and other languages are categorized and how their pragmatic functions may be seen to have developed. It also raises interesting questions with regard to the psycholinguistic processing of such constructions.
Keywords: pragmatic markers, epistemic verbs, parentheticals, Construction Grammar, Interactional Linguistics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous studies
  • 3.Presentation of the data
  • 4.The meaning(s) of je pense (que)
    • 4.1 Je pense (que) as a micro-construction
    • 4.2Constructional meaning of je pense (que)
    • 4.3Fine-tuning the analysis of je pense (que): Comparison with je crois / trouve (que)
      • 4.3.1 Je pense (que) vs je crois (que)
      • 4.3.2 Je pense (que) vs je trouve (que)
  • 5.Interactional functions of je pense (que)
    • 5.1 Je pense (que) as a face-saving device
      • 5.1.1 Je pense (que) as a redressive action for the speaker’s face
      • 5.1.2 Je pense (que) as a redressive action for the hearer’s face
    • 5.2Discourse-organizational functions
      • 5.2.1Indicating a transition in the speaker’s turn-in-progress
      • 5.2.2Projecting a preferred answer: Je pense (que) in question-answer formats
  • 6.Correlations between the position and the function of je pense (que)
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 3 June 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.219.05ang
References (42)
References
Andersen, Hanne Leth. 2007. Marqueurs discursifs propositionnels. Langue française 154(2): 13–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Angot, Juliette. In progress. Je pense, je crois and je trouve in French Conversation. PhD dissertation, University of Manchester.
Apothéloz, Denis. 2003. La rection dite ‘faible’: Grammaticalisation ou différentiel de grammaticalité ? Verbum 25(3): 241–262.Google Scholar
Avanzi, Mathieu & Glikman, Julia (eds). 2009. Entre rection et incidence: Des constructions verbales atypiques ? Études sur je crois, je pense et autres parenthétiques. Linx 61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beeching, Kate. 2016. Pragmatic Markers in British English. Meaning in Social Interaction. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, Claire. 1989. Constructions verbales ‘en incise’ et rection faible des verbes. Recherches sur le français parlé 9: 53–73.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope & Levinson, Stephen C. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caffi, Claudia. 1999. On mitigation. Journal of Pragmatics 31: 881–909. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cosnier, Jacques & Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 1987. Décrire la conversation. Lyon: Presses Universitaires de Lyon.Google Scholar
Dendale, Patrick & Van Bogaert, Julie. 2007. A semantic description of French lexical evidential markers and the classification of evidentials. Rivista di Linguistica 19(1): 65–89.Google Scholar
Gazdar, Gerald. 1979. Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gosselin, Laurent. 2018. French expressions of personal opinion: je crois / pense / trouve / estime / considère que p . In Epistemic Modalities and Evidentiality in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Zlatka Guentchéva (ed.), 179–195. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, Herbert Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts, Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan (eds), 41–58. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard. 1998. The Function of Discourse Particles. A Study with Special Reference to Spoken Standard French [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 53], Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Particles at the Semantics / Pragmatics Interface: Synchronic and Diachronic Issues. A Study With Special Reference to the French Phasal Adverbs. Oxford/Leiden: Elsevier/Brill.Google Scholar
. 2020. The role of (historical) pragmatics in the use of response particles: The case of French. Functions of Language 27(3): 307–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haselow, Alexander. 2016. A processual view on grammar: Macrogrammar and the final field in spoken syntax. Language Sciences 54: 77–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Kuteva, Tania, Kaltenböck, Gunther & Long, Haiping. 2015. On some correlations between grammar and brain lateralization. Oxford Handbooks Online. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd, Kaltenböck, Gunther, Kuteva, Tania & Long, Haiping. Forthcoming. The Rise of Discourse Markers. Cambridge: CUP.
Hilpert, Martin. 2014. Construction Grammar and Its Application to English. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
Hoffman, Thomas & Trousdale, Graeme (eds). 2013. The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hooper, Joan B. 1975. On assertive predicates. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 4, John P. Kimball (ed.), 91–124. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 1984. On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next positioned matters. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds), 191–222. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
. 2004. Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 125], Gene H. Lerner (ed.), 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise. 2003. Epistemic Stance in English Conversation: A Description of its Interactional Functions, with a Focus on I think [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 115]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William & Waletzky, Joshua. 1967. Narrative Analysis. In Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts, June Helm (ed.), 12–44. Seattle WA: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000. Presumptive Meanings. The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Boston MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Anna & Sorjonen, Marja-Leena. 2013. Affiliation in conversation. In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds), 350–369. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Mandelbaum, Jenny. 2013. Storytelling in conversation. In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds), 492–507. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Mullan, Kerry. 2010. Expressing Opinions in French and Australian English Discourse [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 200]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, Simona. 2016. More than an epistemic hedge: French je sais pas ‘I don’t know’ as a resource for the sequential organization of turns and actions. Journal of Pragmatics 106: 148–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita & Heritage, John. (2013). Preference. In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds), 210–228. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Schegloff, Emmanuel A. & Jefferson, Gail. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50(4): 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emmanuel A. & Sacks, Harvey. 1973. Opening up closings. Semiotica 8: 289–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Stefan. 2007. Reduced Parenthetical Clauses as Mitigators. A Corpus Study of French, Italian and Spanish [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 27]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, Stefan, Glikman, Julia & Avanzi, Mathieu. 2015. Parenthetical Verbs. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2008. Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41(1): 31–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Mulac, Anthony. 1991. The discourse conditions for the use of the complementizer that in conversational English. Journal of Pragmatics 15: 237–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2008. The grammaticalization of NP of NP patterns. In Constructions and Language Change, Alexander Bergs & Gabriele Diewald (eds), 23–45. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Van Bogaert, Julie. 2011. I think and other complement-taking mental predicates: A case of and for constructional grammaticalization. Linguistics 49(2): 295–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar