1887
Volume 18, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2211-6834
  • E-ISSN: 2211-6842
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This contribution presents two syntactically annotated corpora of Old French, (MCVF) and the (SRCMF). The focus is on how the underlying syntactic theory (constituency vs. dependency) influences the grammar model and how this choice is reflected in the syntactic annotations of the corpora. The comparison relates to the most relevant general properties of the corpora as well as to two phenomena, null subjects and cleft constructions. Null subjects highlight possible conflicts between syntactic annotation models and syntactic theory, and the information-structural properties of cleft constructions pose a particular problem for the interpretation and annotation of historical corpora. Both phenomena are major instances of diachronic variation in French. The study is relevant for corpus users working on diachronic syntax, as well for corpus builders wishing to design a grammar model for annotation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lv.00005.ste
2018-07-13
2019-09-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Blumenthal, Peter
    1980La syntaxe du message. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bosco, Cristina
    2004A grammatical relation system for treebank annotation. Turino, Italy: Università degli Studi di Turino dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bouchard, Jacynthe , Fernande Dupuis & Monique Dufresne
    2007 Un processus de focalisation en ancien français: le développement des clivées. In Milica Radišić (ed.), Actes du Congrès annuel de l’Association canadienne de linguistique (ACL) 2007, Association Canadienne de Linguistique. homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~cla-acl/actes2007/​Bouchard_Dupuis_Dufresne.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Buridant, Claude
    2000Grammaire nouvelle de l’ancien français. Paris: Sedes.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Collins, Peter
    1991Cleft and pseudo-cleft constructions in English. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203202463
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203202463 [Google Scholar]
  6. Combettes, Bernard
    1999 Thématisation et topicalisation: leur rôle respectif dans l’évolution du français. In Claude Guimier (ed.), La thématisation dans les langues. Actes du colloque de Caen, 9–11 octobre 1997, 231–245. Paris: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Dees, Anthonij
    1987Atlas des formes linguistiques des textes littéraires de l’ancien français. Avec le concours de M. Dekker, O. Huber et K. van Reenen-Stein. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 212. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dufter, Andreas
    2008 On explaining the rise of c’est-clefts in French. In Ulrich Detges & Richard Waltereit (eds.), The Paradox of Grammatical Change, 31–56. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.293.03duf
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.293.03duf [Google Scholar]
  9. Erteschik-Shir, Nomi
    2007Information structure: the syntax-discourse interface. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Guillot, Céline , Christiane Marchello-Nizia & Alexeij Lavrentiev
    2007 La Base de Français Médiéval (BFM): états et perspectives. In Pierre Kunstmann & Achim Stein (eds.), Le Nouveau Corpus d’Amsterdam. Actes de l’atelier de Lauterbad, 23–26 février 2006. Stuttgart: Steiner.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Gärtner, Markus , Gregor Thiele , Wolfgang Seeker , Anders Björkelund & Jonas Kuhn
    2013 ICARUS – An Extensible Graphical Search Tool for Dependency Treebanks. InProceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics 2013, www.ims.uni-stuttgart.de/forschung/ressourcen/werkzeuge/icarus.html.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Jochimsen, Paul
    1907Beiträge zur Geschichte der deiktischen Hervorhebung eines einzelnen Satzteiles, bezw. eines Satzes mittelst c’est (…) que (qui). Kiel, Germany: Universität Kiel.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Krifka, Manfred
    2007 Basic Notions of Information Structure. In Caroline Féry , Gisbert Fanselow & Manfred Krifka (eds.), The Notions of Information Structure, 13–55. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Kroch, Anthony & Ann Taylor
    2000 The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English (PPCME2). Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, second edition, release 4 (www.ling.upenn.edu/ppche/ppche-release-2016/PPCME2-RELEASE-4).
  15. Kroch, Anthony , Beatrice Santorini & Ariel Diertani
    2010The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Modern British English (PPCMBE). Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, first edition, (www.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/).
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 2016The Penn Parsed Corpus of Modern British English (PPCMBE2). Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, second edition, release 1 (www.ling.upenn.edu/ppche/ppche-release-2016/PPCMBE2-RELEASE-1).
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Kunstmann, Pierre & Achim Stein
    2007 Le Nouveau Corpus d’Amsterdam. In Pierre Kunstmann & Achim Stein (eds.), Le Nouveau Corpus d’Amsterdam. Actes de l’atelier de Lauterbad, 23–26 février 2006, 9–27. Stuttgart: Steiner.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Lambrecht, Knud
    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]
  19. 2001 A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics39. 463–516.10.1515/ling.2001.021
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2001.021 [Google Scholar]
  20. Lerch, Eugen
    1934Historische französische Syntax. Leipzig: Reisland.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Lezius, Wolfgang
    2002Ein Suchwerkzeug für syntaktisch annotierte Textkorpora (German)University of Stuttgart Arbeitspapiere des Instituts für Maschinelle Sprachverarbeitung (AIMS), vol.8, no.4. Stuttgart: Institut für Maschinelle Sprachverarbeitung (IMS).
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Löfstedt, Bengt
    1966 Die Konstruktion ‘c’est lui qui l’a fait’ im Lateinischen. Indogermanische Forschungen71. 253–277.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Marchello-Nizia, Christiane
    1999Le français en diachronie: douze siècles d’évolution. Paris: Ophrys.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2009 Histoire interne du français: morphosyntaxe et syntaxe. In Gerhard Ernst , Martin-Dietrich Gleßgen , Christian Schmitt & Wolfgang Schweickard (eds.), Romanische Sprachgeschichte. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Geschichte der romanischen Sprachen und ihrer Erforschung, Teilband 3: Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft, 2926–2947. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Marcus, Mitchell P. , Beatrice Santorini & Mary Ann Marcinkiewicz
    1993 Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics19. 313–330. Reprinted in Susan Armstrong , ed. 1994, Using large corpora. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 273–290.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Martineau, France
    2008 Un corpus pour l’analyse de la variation et du changement linguistique. Corpus7. corpus.revues.org/index1508.html.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. (ed.) 2009Le corpus MCVF. Modéliser le changement: les voies du français. Ottawa: Université d’Ottawa. www.voies.uottawa.ca/corpus_pg_fr.html.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Martineau, France , Constanta Diaconescu & Paul Hirschbühler
    2007 Le corpus ‘Voies du français’: de l’élaboration à l’annotation. In Pierre Kunstmann & Achim Stein (eds.), Le Nouveau Corpus d’Amsterdam. Actes de l’atelier de Lauterbad, 23–26 février 2006, 121–142. Stuttgart: Steiner.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Mazziotta, Nicolas
    2010 Building the ‘Syntactic Reference Corpus of Medieval French’ using NotaBene RDF Annotation Tool. InProceedings of the 4th Linguistic Annotation Workshop (LAW IV), www.aclweb.org/anthology/W/W10/W10-1820.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Mazziotta, Nicolas , Beatrice Bischof , Julie Glikman & Thomas Rainsford
    2012 ‘Ce’ sujet dans les ‘constructions impersonnelles’ du roman de Tristan de Béroul. L’information grammaticale132. 48–52.10.3406/igram.2012.4188
    https://doi.org/10.3406/igram.2012.4188 [Google Scholar]
  31. Mel’čuk, Igor A.
    1988Dependency syntax: Theory and practice. New York: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Polguère, Alain & Igor Mel’čuk
    (eds.) 2009Dependency in linguistic description. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.111
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.111 [Google Scholar]
  33. Prévost, Sophie & Achim Stein
    (eds.) 2013Syntactic reference corpus of Medieval French (SRCMF). Lyon & Stuttgart: ENS de Lyon; Lattice & Paris; Universität Stuttgart. srcmf.org.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Prince, Ellen
    1978 A comparison of wh-clefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language54. 883–906.10.2307/413238
    https://doi.org/10.2307/413238 [Google Scholar]
  35. 1981 Toward a taxonomy of given/new information. In Peter Cole (ed.), Radical pragmatics, 223–254. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 1992 The ZPG letter: Subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In William Mann & Sandra Thompson (eds.), Discourse description: diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text, 295–325. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.16.12pri
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.16.12pri [Google Scholar]
  37. Reinhart, Tanya
    1981 Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica27. 53–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Rinke, Esther & Jürgen Meisel
    2009 Subject-inversion in Old French: Syntax and information structure. In Georg Kaiser & Eva-Maria Remberger (eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop ‘Null subjects, expletives, and locatives in Romance’, Arbeitspapiere Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft 123, 93–130. Konstanz: Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft. nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz: 352-opus-78604.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Roberts, Craige
    1998 Focus, the flow of information, and universal grammar. In Peter W. Culicover & Louise McNally (eds.), The limits of syntax, 109–160. San Diego: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Rooth, Mats
    1985Association with focus. Amherst, MA: UMass dissertation.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Rouquier, Magali
    2007 Les constructions clivées en ancien français et en moyen français. Romania125(1–2). 167–212.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Stein, Achim & Sophie Prévost
    2013 Syntactic annotation of medieval texts: the Syntactic Reference Corpus of Medieval French (SRCMF). In Paul Bennett , Martin Durrell , Silke Scheible & Richard Whitt (eds.), New Methods in Historical Corpora, 275–282. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Stein, Achim et al.
    (eds.) 2006Nouveau Corpus d’Amsterdam. Corpus informatique de textes littéraires d’ancien français (ca 1150–1350), établi par Anthonij Dees (Amsterdam 1987), remanié par Achim Stein, Pierre Kunstmann et Martin-D. Gleßgen. Stuttgart: Institut für Linguistik/Romanistik. www.uni-stuttgart.de/lingrom/stein/corpus/.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Tesnière, Lucien
    1965Éléments de syntaxe structural, 2nde édition. Paris: Klincksieck.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Waters, Edwin G. R.
    (ed.) 1974The Anglo-Norman Voyage of St. Brendan by Benedeit. A poem of the early twelfth century. Genève: Slatkine Reprints.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Wehr, Barbara
    2005 Focusing strategies in Old French and Old Irish. In Janne Skaffari , Matti Peikola , Ruth Carroll , Risto Hiltunen & Brita Wårvik (eds.), Opening windows on texts and discourses of the past, 354–379. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.134.28weh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.134.28weh [Google Scholar]
  47. 2012 Phrase clivée et phrase à copule identificationnelle en ancien français. In Barbara Wehr & Frédéric Nicolosi (eds.), Pragmatique historique et syntaxe, 289–318. Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lv.00005.ste
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/lv.00005.ste
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): cleft constructions , constituency , dependency , grammar model , Old French and syntactic annotation
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