Cover not available

Squib published In: Lingvisticæ Investigationes
Vol. 41:1 (2018) ► pp.129–151

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required
General section

Les clivées en voici / voilà

Une analyse de corpus

 | KU Leuven
 | KU Leuven
 | KU Leuven

Article language: French

Published online: 27 August 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/li.00016.kar
Résumé
Cet article est consacré à trois types de clivées en voici/voilà (type 1 : voilà le chat qui arrive, type 2 : le voilà qui arrive, type 3 : voilà deux semaines que j’attends). Nous analysons (i) l’alternance entre voici et voilà, (ii) la distribution des trois types dans deux corpus, (iii) l’alternance entre le premier et le deuxième type, et (iv) leurs fonctions discursives. Nous montrons entre autres que voici n’apparaît que dans 20% des cas et que l’alternance entre les deux premiers types s’explique par des principes généraux concernant l’accessibilité des référents. De plus, les trois types fonctionnent comme des marqueurs de saillance et le troisième type peut également créer un cadre temporel pour le contexte postérieur.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • 1.Travaux antérieurs
  • 2.Analyse de corpus
    • 2.1Méthodologie
    • 2.2Résultats quantitatifs généraux
    • 2.3L’alternance entre voilà SN qui et le voilà qui
    • 2.4Fonctions discursives
      • 2.4.1Voilà SN qui
      • 2.4.2Le voilà qui
      • 2.4.3Voilà SN temporel que
  • Conclusion
  • Remarques
  • Œuvres citées
References (47)
Œuvres citées
Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bergen, B. K. & Plauché, M. C. (2001). Voilà voilà: Extensions of deictic constructions in French. Conceptual and Discourse Factors in Linguistic Structure, 45–61.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). The convergent evolution of radial constructions: French and English deictics and existentials. Cognitive Linguistics, 16(1), 1–42. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bruxelles, S. & Traverso, V. (2006). Usages de la particule “voilà”. In M. Drescher & B. Frank-Job (eds.), Les marqueurs discursifs dans les langues romanes (pp. 71–92). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2001). Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dassi, M. (2003). De la morphosyntaxe à la sémantique des présentatifs en français contemporain : Une aperception fondée sur la prose romanesque de Mongo Beti. München: LINCOM.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Cesare, A. -M. (2011). L’italien ecco et les français voici, voilà: Regards croisés sur leurs emplois dans les textes écrits. Langages, 1841, 51–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delahaie, J. (2009). “Voilà le facteur ou voici le facteur ?” Etude syntaxique et sémantique de voilà . Cahiers de Lexicologie, 2(95), 43–58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dufter, A. (2006). Zwischen Kompositionalität und Konventionalisierung: Satzspaltung mit c’est im Französischen der Gegenwart. Romanistisches Jahrbuch, 571, 31–59.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Clefting and Discourse organization: Comparing Germanic and Romance. In A. Dufter & D. Jacob (eds.), Focus and Background in Romance languages (pp. 83–121). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, N. (1997). The Dynamics of Focus Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Information structure. The syntax-discourse interface. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giry-Schneider, J. (1988). L’interprétation événementielle des phrases en il y a . Lingvisticæ Investigationes, 12(1), 85–100. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón, T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In T. Givón (ed.), Topic contituity in discourse (pp. 1–42). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2003). Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(5), 219–224. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gundel, J. K. (1974). The role of topic and comment in linguistic theory. PhD dissertation. Austin: University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacob, D. (2015). Anaphorische Spaltsätze im Französischen: Grammatik – Text – Rhetorik. In S. Adam, D. Jacob & M. Schecker (eds.), Informationsstrukturen in Kontrast: Strukturen, Kompositionen und Strategien (pp. 101–122). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Julia, M. -A. (2013). Les présentatifs français voici, voilà et latins ecco, em, en: Essai d’étude comparative. Congrès International de Linguistique et de Philologie Romanes, 271, Nancy.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karssenberg, L. (2016a). French il y a clefts, existential sentences and the focus-marking hypothesis. Journal of French Language Studies, 27(3), 405-430. .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016b). Il n’y a que Superman qui porte le slip par-dessus le pantalon : Les clivées en il n’y a que x qui . In 5e Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française Vol. 271. Les Ulis: EDP Sciences. [URL].
(2017). Ya les oiseaux qui chantent. A corpus analysis of French il y a clefts. PhD dissertation. KU Leuven.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karssenberg, L. & Lahousse, K. (à venir). The information structure of French il y a clefts & c’est clefts: A corpus-based analysis. Linguistics.
König, E. (2012). Le rôle des déictiques de manière dans le cadre d’une typologie de la déixis. Bulletin de la Societe de Linguistique de Paris, 107(1), 11–42.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuno, S. (1975). Conditions for verb phrase deletion. Foundations of Language, 13(2), 161–175.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K. (1986). Pragmatically motivated syntax. Presentational cleft constructions in spoken French. In 22nd Conference of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Papers from the parasession on Pragmatics and Grammatical Theory (pp. 115–126). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1988). Presentational cleft constructions in spoken French. In J. Haiman & S. A. Thompson (eds.), Clause combining in grammar and discourse (pp. 135–179). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1994). Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). Prédication seconde et structure informationnelle : La relative de perception comme construction présentative. Langue française, 127(1), 49–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics, 39(3), 463–516. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Topic, focus and secondary predication. The French presentational relative construction. In C. Beyssade, R. Bok-Bennema, F. Drijkoningen & P. Monachesi (eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2000 (pp. 171–212). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Léard, J. -M. (1992). Les gallicismes. Étude syntaxique et sémantique. Paris/Leuven: Duculot.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morin, Y. C. (1985). On the two French subjectless verbs voici and voilà . Language, 61(4), 777–820. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Müller-Hauser, M. -L. (1943). La mise en relief d’une idée en français moderne. Geneva & Erlenbach-Zürich: Librairie E. Droz & Eugen Rentsch Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oppermann-Marsaux, E. (2006). Les origines du présentatif voici/voilà et son évolution jusqu’à la fin du XVIe siècle. Langue française, 149(1), 77–91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Porhiel, S. (2012). The presentative voici/voilà – Towards a pragmatic definition. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(4), 435–452. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prince, E. F. (1978). A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language, 54(4), 883–906. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rabatel, A. (2001). Valeurs énonciative et représentative des “présentatifs” c’est, il y a, voici/voilà: Effet point de vue et argumentativité indirecte du récit. Revue de Sémantique et Pragmatique, 91, 111–144.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. (1982). Pragmatics and Linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica, 271, 53–94.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rialland, A., Rebuschi, G. & Doetjes, J. (2002). What is focused in C’est XP qui/que cleft sentences in French? In B. Bel & I. Marlien (eds.), Speech Prosody (pp. 595–598). Aix-en-Provence: ISCA Archive.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rothenberg, M. (1979). Les propositions relatives prédicatives et attributives : Problème de linguistique française. Bulletin de la Société de linguistique de Paris, 741, 351–395.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schiller, A. (1992). Die Présentatifs im heutigen Französisch. Eine funktionale Studie ihrer Vielfahlt. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strawson, P. F. (1964). Identifying reference and truth-values. Theoria, 301, 86–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomsin, K. (2010). Les présentatifs voici et voilà . KU Leuven BA thesis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verlinde, S. & Selva, T. (2001). Nomenclature de dictionnaire et analyse de corpus. Cahiers de Lexicologie, 79(2), 113–139.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wandruszka, M. (1969). Sprachen. Vergleichbar und unvergleichbar. München: Piper Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wehr, B. (1984). Diskursstrategien im Romanischen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Gaeta, Livio
2023. Pure existentials vs. pure presentationals. In Existential Constructions across Languages [Human Cognitive Processing, 76], ► pp. 102 ff. DOI logo
Karssenberg, Lena, Karen Lahousse, Béatrice Lamiroy, Stefania Marzo & Ana Drobnjakovic
2018. Non-prototypical clefts. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 32 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 2025. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue