Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-06-01T16:18:27.283Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cette mesure est-elle vraiment clé? A constructional approach to categorial gradience1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2014

KRISTEL VAN GOETHEM
KRISTEL VAN GOETHEM*
Affiliation:
F.R.S.-FNRS and Université catholique de Louvain
*
Address for correspondence: Université catholique de LouvainInstitut Langage et Communication, Pôle Linguistique Place Blaise Pascal 1, box L3.03.33 1348 Louvain-la-NeuveBelgium e-mail: kristel.vangoethem@uclouvain.be
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article investigates the recently developed adjectival properties of the French noun clé ‘key’, as attested in for instance un poste très clé ‘a really key position’ and Cette mesure est-elle vraiment clé? ‘Is this measure really key?’. The main purpose of this study is triple: it consists in analysing (i) which adjectival uses can be found in modern French, (ii) to what extent they are accepted by native speakers (from different geographical varieties) of French, and (iii) how they can be accounted for within the framework of Construction Grammar and Construction Morphology. It will be hypothesised that French clé is subject to categorial gradience as a consequence of an ongoing constructionalisation process.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of French Language Studies , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , March 2015 , pp. 115 - 142
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

Acknowledgements This study has benefited from the financial support of the Belgian F.R.S.-FNRS foundation. The surveys presented in Section 3.3 have been made possible thanks to the collaboration of Philippe Hiligsmann (Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium), Dany Amiot (Université Lille 3, France) and Wim Remysen (Université Sherbrooke, Quebec). I would like to thank them very cordially for submitting the acceptability tests to their students. Special thanks also go to Anne Lore Leloup (Université catholique de Louvain) for her assistance with the statistical tests. Finally, the article has greatly benefited from the valuable comments and suggestions of the anonymous reviewers and the discussions with Dany Amiot and Hendrik De Smet.

References

REFERENCES

Aarts, B. (2007). Syntactic Gradience. The Nature of Grammatical Indeterminacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Amiot, D. and Van Goethem, K. (2012). A constructional account of French –clé ‘key’ and Dutch sleutel- ‘key’ as in mot-clé/ sleutelwoord ‘key word’. Morphology, 22: 347–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergs, A. and Diewald, G. (eds). (2008). Constructions and Language Change. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Booij, G. (2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2001). Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W. and Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denison, D. (2001). Gradience and linguistic change. In: Brinton, L. J. (ed.), Historical Linguistics 1999. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 119–144.Google Scholar
De Smet, H. (2012). The course of actualization. Language, 88.3: 601–633.Google Scholar
Fradin, B. (2009). IE, Romance: French. In: Lieber, R. and Štekauer, P. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Compounding. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 417–435.Google Scholar
Goes, J. (1999). L'adjectif. Entre nom et verbe (Champs linguistiques). Paris / Bruxelles: Duculot.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. (2006). Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. (2009). The nature of generalization in language. Cognitive Linguistics, 20: 93–127.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Th. and Trousdale, G. (eds). (2013). The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. J. (1991). On some principles of grammaticalization. In: Traugott, E. C. and Heine, B. (eds), Approaches to Grammaticalization. Volume I: Focus on Theoretical and Methodological Issues. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 17–35.Google Scholar
Hudson, R. (2007). Language Networks: The New Word Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hüning, M. and Booij, G. (2013). From compounding to derivation. The rise of derivational affixes through ‘constructionalization’. Manuscript, Sept. 2013. 21 pp.Google Scholar
Lauwers, P. (forthcoming). Copular constructions and adjectival uses of bare nouns in French: a case of syntactic recategorization?. Word, 58.2.Google Scholar
Lehmann, A. and Martin-Berthet, F. (2008). Introduction à la lexicologie. Sémantique et morphologie, 3rd edn. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
Mathieu-Colas, M. (1994). Les mots à trait d'union. Paris: Didier Erudition.Google Scholar
Noailly, M. (1990). Le substantif épithète. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Norde, M. (2009). Degrammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Norde, M. and Van Goethem, K. (2013). Emancipatie van affixen en affixoïden: degrammaticalisatie of lexicalisatie?. Manuscript, Sept. 2013, 47 pp.Google Scholar
Scalise, S. and Bisetto, A. (2009). The classification of compounds. In: Lieber, R. and Štekauer, P. (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Compounding. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 34–53.Google Scholar
Traugott, E.C. and Trousdale, G. (2010). Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization. How do they intersect? In: Traugott, E.C. and Trousdale, G. (eds), Gradience, Gradualness and Grammaticalization. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 19–44.Google Scholar
Traugott, E. C. and Trousdale, G. (forthcoming). Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Trousdale, G. and Norde, M. 2013. Degrammaticalization and constructionalization: two case studies. Language Sciences, 36: 32–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Goethem, K. and Amiot, D. 2012. Debonding of French [N+limite]N compounds: a diachronic-constructional account. Paper presented at the Morphology Day, Leiden, Sept. 2012.Google Scholar
Van Goethem, K. and De Smet, H. (forthcoming). How nouns turn into adjectives. The emergence of new adjectives in French, English and Dutch through debonding processes. Languages in Contrast.Google Scholar
Van Goethem, K. (2012). Le statut des séquences ‘N+N à N2 productif’: le cas de N-clé. Lingvisticae Investigationes, 35.1: 76–93.Google Scholar

DATA SOURCES

Frantext: http://atilf.atilf.fr/frantext.htmGoogle Scholar
GlossaNet: http://glossa.fltr.ucl.ac.be/Google Scholar
Google news archives: http://news.google.comGoogle Scholar
WebCorp: http://www.webcorp.org.uk/Google Scholar