1887
Volume 42, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0378-4169
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9927
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Résumé

Nous proposons dans cet article une analyse multifactorielle et contrastive de la notion de saillance, telle qu’elle s’applique aux entités du discours et détermine l’interprétation référentielle d’une anaphore. En observant les phénomènes de saillance en français et en chinois, notre but est de montrer que la saillance est influencée par une multitude de facteurs, de manière plus ou moins comparable dans les deux langues. Nous classons ces facteurs selon leur nature syntaxique, sémantique, textuelle ou pragmatique. Notre approche contrastive permet d’illustrer que, si plusieurs divergences – qui sont souvent corrélées avec les différences typologiques des deux langues – s’observent au niveau syntaxique, de nombreux facteurs de saillance dérivent plutôt de principes cognitifs généraux.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/li.00034.hou
2020-03-16
2020-08-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ariel, M.
    1990Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bilger, M., Buscail, L. & Mignon, F.
    (Eds.) 2017Langue française mise en relief. Aspects grammaticaux et discursifs. Perpignan: Presses Universitaires de Perpignan.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Boisseau, M. & Hamm, A.
    (Eds.) 2015Saillance. La saillance en langue et en discours. Besançon: Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chafe, W.
    1976 Givenness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics and Points of View. InC. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and Topic, 25–55. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Chambers, C. G. & Smyth, R.
    1998 Structural Parallelism and Discourse Coherence: A Test of Centering Theory. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 593–608. 10.1006/jmla.1998.2575
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1998.2575 [Google Scholar]
  6. Charolles, M.
    2002La référence et les expressions référentielles en français. Paris: Ophrys.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Chiarcos, C., Claus, B. & Grabski, M.
    (Eds.) 2011Salience. Multidisciplinary Perspectives on its Function in Discourse. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110241020
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110241020 [Google Scholar]
  8. Clark, H. H. & Sengul, C. J.
    1979 In Search of Referents for Nouns and Pronouns. Memory & Cognition, 7, 35–41. 10.3758/BF03196932
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196932 [Google Scholar]
  9. Col, G.
    2012 Focalisation, saillance et instruction de construction du sens. InP. Cappeau & S. Hanote (dir.) , Focalisation(s), 84–101. Rennes : Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Comrie, B.
    1989Language universals and linguistic typology: syntax and morphology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Cowles, W. & Dawidzuik, L.
    2016 Ambiguity Avoidance in Noun-Phrase Anaphora: The Repeated Name Advantage. InM. Fossard & M.-J. Béguelin (Eds.), Nouvelles perspectives sur l’anaphore. Points de vue linguistique, psycholinguistique et acquisitionnel, 213-230. Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Croft, W.
    2002Typology and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511840579
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840579 [Google Scholar]
  13. 2010 Relativity, Linguistic Variation and Language Universals. CogniTextesVolume4. 10.4000/cognitextes.303
    https://doi.org/10.4000/cognitextes.303 [Google Scholar]
  14. Fillmore, C. J.
    1968 The Case for Case. InE. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory, 1–88. New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fossard, M.
    1999 Traitement anaphorique et structure du discours. Etude psycho-linguistique des effets du focus de discours sur la spécificité de deux marqueurs référentiels: le pronom anaphorique “il” et le nom propre répété. In Cognito, 15, 33–40.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Fukumura, K. & Gompel, R. P. G. van
    2011 The Effect of Animacy on the Choice of Referring Expression. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 1472–1504. 10.1080/01690965.2010.506444
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.506444 [Google Scholar]
  17. Garvey, C. & Caramazza, A.
    1974 Implicit Causality in Verbs. Linguistic Inquiry, 5, 459–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Gelormini-Lezama, C. & Almor, A.
    2011 Repeated Names, Overt Pronouns, and Null Pronouns in Spanish. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 437–454. 10.1080/01690965.2010.495234
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.495234 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gernsbacher, M. A.
    1989 Mechanisms That Improve Referential Access. Cognition, 32, 99–156. 10.1016/0010‑0277(89)90001‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(89)90001-2 [Google Scholar]
  20. Gernsbacher, Morton Ann & Hargreaves, D. J.
    1988 Accessing Sentence Participants: The Advantage of First Mention. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 699–717. 10.1016/0749‑596X(88)90016‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90016-2 [Google Scholar]
  21. Givón, T.
    1983Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-Language Study. 3. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/tsl.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R. & Foster, K. L.
    2000 Language Comprehension and Probe-List Memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 766–75. 10.1037/0278‑7393.26.3.766
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.3.766 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gordon, P. C. & Chan, D.
    1995 Pronouns, Passives, and Discourse Coherence. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 216. 10.1006/jmla.1995.1010
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1995.1010 [Google Scholar]
  24. Gordon, P. C., Grosz, B. J. & Gilliom, L. A.
    1993 Pronouns, Names, and the Centering of Attention in Discourse. Cognitive Science, 17, 311–47. 10.1207/s15516709cog1703_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1703_1 [Google Scholar]
  25. Gordon, P. C. & Hendrick, R.
    1998 The Representation and Processing of Coreference in Discourse. Cognitive Science, 22, 389–424. 10.1207/s15516709cog2204_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2204_1 [Google Scholar]
  26. Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., Ledoux, K. & Yang, C. L.
    1999 Processing of Reference and the Structure of Language: An Analysis of Complex Noun Phrases. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 353–79. 10.1080/016909699386266
    https://doi.org/10.1080/016909699386266 [Google Scholar]
  27. Gordon, P. C. & Scearce, K. A.
    1995 Pronominalization and Discourse Coherence, Discourse Structure and Pronoun Interpretation. Memory & Cognition, 23, 313–23. 10.3758/BF03197233
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197233 [Google Scholar]
  28. Greene, S. B., McKoon, G. & Ratcliff, R.
    1992 Pronoun Resolution and Discourse Models. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 266–83. 10.1037/0278‑7393.18.2.266
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.18.2.266 [Google Scholar]
  29. Grober, E. H., Beardsley, W. & Caramazza, A.
    1978 Parallel Function Strategy in Pronoun Assignment. Cognition, 6, 117–33. 10.1016/0010‑0277(78)90018‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(78)90018-5 [Google Scholar]
  30. Grosz, B. J., Weinstein, S. & Joshi, A. K.
    1995 Centering: A Framework for Modeling the Local Coherence of Discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21, 203–225.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Gundel, J. K.
    1988 Universals of Topic-Comment Structure. InM. Hammond (Eds.), Studies in Syntactic Typology, 209–239. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/tsl.17.16gun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.17.16gun [Google Scholar]
  32. Halliday, M. A. K.
    2004An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London : Hodder Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Haude, K. et Montaut, A.
    (Eds.) 2012La saillance. Faits de Langues39.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Her, O.-S.
    1991 Topic as a Grammatical Function in Chinese. Lingua, 84, 1–23. 10.1016/0024‑3841(91)90011‑S
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(91)90011-S [Google Scholar]
  35. Hoek, K. V.
    2007 Pronominal Anaphora. InD. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. 890-915, Oxford: Oxford university press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Hu, Q.
    2008 A Corpus-Based Study on Zero Anaphora Resolution in Chinese Discourse. PhD Thesis, City University of Hong Kong.
  37. Huang, C.-T.J.
    1982Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar. PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Huang, C.-T. J.
    1987 Existential Sentences in Chinese and (in) Definiteness. The Representation of (in) Definiteness, 226–253. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Huang, S.
    1992 Getting to Know Referring Expressions: Anaphor and Accessibility in Mandarin Chinese. InProceedings of ROCLING V, 27–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Hudson, S. D. & Tanenhaus, M. K.
    1997 Assigning Antecedents to Ambiguous Pronouns: The Role of the Center of Attention as the Default Assignment. InM. Walker (Eds.), Centering Theory in Discourse, 199–226. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Iida, M.
    1998 Discourse Coherence and Shifting Centers in Japanese Texts. InM. Walker (Eds.), Centering Theory in Discourse, 161–180. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Inkova, O.
    (Ed.) 2011Saillance. Aspects linguistiques et communicatifs de la mise en évidence dans un texte. Besançon: Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Kail, M.
    1979 Coréférence et thématisation. L’Année psychologique, 79, 411–27. 10.3406/psy.1979.28277
    https://doi.org/10.3406/psy.1979.28277 [Google Scholar]
  44. Kameyama, M.
    1986 A Property-Sharing Constraint in Centering. InProceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, 200–206. 10.3115/981131.981159
    https://doi.org/10.3115/981131.981159 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lambrecht, K.
    1994Information structure and sentence form: topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620607
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620607 [Google Scholar]
  46. 2000 Prédication seconde et structure informationnelle : la relative de perception comme construction présentative. Langue française, 127, 49–66. 10.3406/lfr.2000.998
    https://doi.org/10.3406/lfr.2000.998 [Google Scholar]
  47. Lambrecht, K. & Lemoine, K.
    1996 Vers une grammaire des compléments zéro en français parlé. InJ. Chuquet & M. Fryd (Eds.), Absence de Marques et Représentation de l’absence, 1, 279–309. Rennes : Presses universitaires de Rennes.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Landragin, F.
    2004 Saillance physique et saillance cognitive. Corela. Cognition, Représentation, Langage, 2–2. 10.4000/corela.603
    https://doi.org/10.4000/corela.603 [Google Scholar]
  49. Langacker, R. W.
    1991Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume 2, descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Lappin, S. & Leass, H. J.
    1994 An Algorithm for Pronominal Anaphora Resolution. Computational Linguistics, 20, 535–561.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Li, C. N. & Thompson, S. A.
    1976 Subject and Topic: A New Typology of Language. InC. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic, 457-489. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Lima, L. & Bianco, M.
    1999 Le problème des références dans la compréhension des textes à l’école primaire : le cas de “il” et de “lui”. Revue française de pédagogie, 126, 83–95. 10.3406/rfp.1999.1096
    https://doi.org/10.3406/rfp.1999.1096 [Google Scholar]
  53. Lyons, J.
    1980Sémantique linguistique. Paris: Librairie Larousse.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Matthews, A. & Chodorow, M. S.
    1988 Pronoun Resolution in Two-Clause Sentences: Effects of Ambiguity, Antecedent Location, and Depth of Embedding. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 245–260. 10.1016/0749‑596X(88)90053‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90053-8 [Google Scholar]
  55. Mélanie-Becquet, F. & Prevost, S.
    2014 Eléments initiaux : combinaisons et schémas préférentiels dans un corpus d’articles scientifiques. Corpus, 1329–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Neveu, F.
    2011Dictionnaire des sciences du langage. Paris : A. Colin.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Pattabhiraman, T.
    1992Aspects of Salience in Natural Language Generation. PhD Thesis, Simon Fraser University.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Pottier, B.
    1992Sémantique générale. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Prat-Sala, M. & Branigan, H. P.
    2000 Discourse Constraints on Syntactic Processing in Language Production: A Cross-Linguistic Study in English and Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 168–82. 10.1006/jmla.1999.2668
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2668 [Google Scholar]
  60. Prevost, S.
    1998 La notion de Thème : flou terminologique et conceptuel. Cahiers de praxématique, 30, 13–35.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Rose, R.
    2005The Relative Contribution of Syntactic and Semantic Prominence to the Salience of Discourse Entities. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Northwestern University.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Sanford, A. J. & Garrod, S. C.
    1981Understanding Written Language: Explorations of Comprehension Beyond the Sentence. Chichester : John Wiley and sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Schmid, H.-J.
    2010 Entrenchment, Salience, and Basic Levels. InD. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, 117-138. Oxford: Oxford university press.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Schnedecker, C.
    2011 La notion de saillance: problèmes définitoires et avatars. InO. Inkova (2011), 23–43.
  65. Shi, D.
    2000 Topic and Topic-Comment Constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language, 76, 383–408. 10.1353/lan.2000.0070
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2000.0070 [Google Scholar]
  66. Sidner, C. L.
    1979Towards a Computational Theory of Definite Anaphora Comprehension in English Discourse. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Stevenson, R. J., Crawley, R. A. & Kleinman, D.
    1994 Thematic Roles, Focus and the Representation of Events. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 519–48. 10.1080/01690969408402130
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969408402130 [Google Scholar]
  68. Talmy, L.
    2000Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol.2. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Tsao, F.
    1987 A Topic-Comment Approach to the Ba Construction. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 15, 1–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Turan, U.
    1998 Ranking Forward-Looking Centers in Turkish: Universal and Language-Specific Properties. InM. Walker (Eds.), Centering Theory in Discourse, 139–160. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Yang, C. L., Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R. & Hue, C. W.
    2003 Constraining the Comprehension of Pronominal Expressions in Chinese. Cognition, 86, 283–315. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(02)00182‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00182-8 [Google Scholar]
  72. Yang, C. L., Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R. & Wu, J. T.
    1999 Comprehension of Referring Expressions in Chinese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 715–43. 10.1080/016909699386248
    https://doi.org/10.1080/016909699386248 [Google Scholar]
  73. Yang, C. L., Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., Wu, J. T. & Chou, T. L.
    2001 The Processing of Coreference for Reduced Expressions in Discourse Integration. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 21–35. 10.1023/A:1005252123299
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005252123299 [Google Scholar]
  74. 陈 (Chen), 平 (Ping)
    1987 汉语零形回指的话语分析 (Analyse Discursive de l’anaphore Zéro En Chinois). 中国语文 (Zhongguo Yuwen) 5: r378.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. 陈 (Chen), 永明 (Yongming) and 崔 (Cui), 耀 (Yao)
    1994 句子先提述的参与者在可提取性上的优势现象 (The Advantage of Accessibility of First-Mentioned Participants in Chinese Sentences). 心理学报 (Acta Psychologica Sinica), no.02: 113–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. 陈 (Chen), 林 (Lin)
    2007 基于特征提取和机器学习的现代汉语人称指示代词消解研究 (Research on Pronominal Anaphora Resolution Based on Feature Extraction and Machine Learning). 硕士 (Master Thesis), 清华大学 (Qinghua University).
  77. 侯 (Hou), 敏 (Min) and 孙 (Sun), 建军 (Jianjun)
    2005 汉语中的零形回指及其在汉英机器翻译中的处理对策 (Zero Anaphora in Chinese and How to Process It in Chinese-English MT). 中文信息学报 (Journal of Chinese Information Processing) 19: 15–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  78. 孙 (Sun), 雯 (Wen)
    2014 现代汉语零形回指加工的ERP研究 (An ERP Study on Processing Zero Anaphor in Modern Chinese). 硕士 (Master Thesis), 江苏师范大学 (Jiangsu Normal University).
    [Google Scholar]
  79. 蒋 (Jiang), 平 (Ping)
    2004 零形回指的句法和语篇特征研究 (Syntactic and discourse features of zero anaphora: with specific reference to its resolution in Chinese). 博士 (PhD Thesis), 上海外国语大学 (Shanghai International Studies University).
  80. 2017 汉语零形回指先行语的句法可及性等级序列 (Accessibility Hierarchy of Antecedents in Chinese Zero Anaphora). 南昌大学学报(人文社会科学版) (Journal of Nanchang University), no.03: 135–40.
    [Google Scholar]
  81. 缪 (Mou), 小春 (Xiaochun) and 宋 (Song), 正国 (Zhengguo)
    1995 动词语义和句子语法对代词加工的影响 (The influence of verb meaning and sentence grammar on pronoun processing). 心理科学 (Psychological Science).
    [Google Scholar]
  82. 屈 (Qu), 承熹 (Chengxi)
    2006汉语篇章语法 (A Discourse Grammar of Mandarin Chinese). 北京语言大学出版社 (Beijing Language and Culture University Press).
    [Google Scholar]
  83. 王 (Wang), 德亮 (Deliang)
    2004 汉语零形回指解析——基于向心理论的研究 (Zero Anaphora Resolution in Chinese: A Study Based on Centering Theory). 现代外语 (Modern Foreign Languages), no.04: 350–359+436.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. 王 (Wang), 力 (Li)
    1947 中国现代语法 (La Grammaire Chinoise Moderne).
    [Google Scholar]
  85. 王 (Wang), 倩 (Qian)
    2014 汉语零形回指的认知机制研究 (A Study of the Cognitive Mechanism of Chinese Zero Anaphora). 博士 (PhD Thesis), 浙江大学 (Zhejiang University).
  86. 许 (Xu), 余龙 (Yulong)
    2000 英汉指称词语表达的可及性 (Refering expressions and their accessibility in Chinese and English). 外语教学与研究 (Foreign Language Teaching and Research), no.05: 321–328+399.
    [Google Scholar]
  87. 2007 话题引入与语篇回指——一项基于民间故事语料的英汉对比研究 (Topic Introduction and Discourse Anaphora in Chinese and English:A Corpus-based Contrastive Study). 外语教学 (Foreign Language Education), no.06: 1–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  88. 张 (Zhang), 伯江 (Bojiang)
    2007 施事和受事的语义语用特征及其在句式中的实现 (Agent and Patient: Their Semantic and Pragmatic Status and Their Roles in Chinese Grammatical Constructions). 博士 (PhD Thesis), 复旦大学 (Fudan University).
  89. 朱 (Zhu), 勘宇 (Kanyu)
    2002 汉语零形回指的句法驱动力 (The Syntactic Motivation of Zero Anaphora in Mandarin Chinese). 汉语学习 (Chinese Language Learning), no.04: 73–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Cao Kou
    , Wā xiàqù jiùshì měiguó 2011, et sa traduction en français parBrigitte Duzan et Zhang Xiaoqiu : Continue à creuser, au bout c’est l’Amérique 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Guy de Maupassant
    , Boule de suif (1880, version utilisée téléchargée sur Wikisource), et sa traduction en chinois parWang Yang : Yáng zhī qiú 1993.
    [Google Scholar]
  92. , Histoire d’une fille de ferme (1891, version utilisée téléchargée sur Wikisource).
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Liu Cixin
    , Dàishàng tā de yǎnjīng 2004, et sa traduction en français parGwennaël Gaffric : Avec ses yeux 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Liu Zhenyun
    , Shǒujī (extrait 2003), et sa traduction en français parHervé Denès, avec la collaboration deJia Chunjuan : Le téléphone portable (extrait 2017).
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Romain Rolland
    , L’aube (Jean-Christophe) (extrait 1904, version utilisée téléchargée sur Wikisource).
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Zhou Meisen
    , Zhōngguó zhìzào (extrait 1998), et sa traduction en français parMathilde Mathe : Made in China (extrait 2016).
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/li.00034.hou
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/li.00034.hou
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error