Overview

Most of the questions investigated in this chapter concern the use of determiners. In 5.2, we look at the classification of nouns according to different semantic and syntactic properties, particularly those which are relevant to the use of determiners.

In 5.3, the determiners themselves are focused upon, their function within the NP and the semantic and syntactic properties of different types of determiner. This discussion is guided by two basic questions: whether the determiner is an obligatory component of the NP and whether an NP can contain more than one determiner. Both of these questions require us to define the class of determiners, as opposed to other items (e.g. adjectives) which can precede the noun. This discussion leads us in 5.3.6-5.3.8 to the structural properties of NPs like beaucoup de pommes and beaucoup de ces pommes and similar cases where quantity is expressed by a noun (un kilo de pommes, une bande de voyous).

Some of the issues raised in 5.3 are taken up in greater detail in 5.4, where various constructions in which a part of the NP is introduced by de, are examined, and more particularly the indefinite use of du, de la and des and the use of de in negative sentences. The approach to these constructions is based on the premise that the function of de is to assign a Case feature to some element within the NP.

In 5.5, we investigate the syntactic and semantic properties of tout and tous and other expressions which have a similar function.

Overview

Prepositions are often thought of as grammatical particles which introduce NPs, indicating an indirect object or modifier relation, rather than as fully fledged lexical items on a par with nouns, verbs or adjectives. This issue is addressed in 8.2, with an investigation of the syntactic functions and structural properties of prepositions in comparison with other lexical categories and items of a more grammatical nature. In 8.3, we shall pursue the idea that prepositions (like verbs, adjectives and nouns) can take complements other than NPs, or no complement at all, thus subsuming many items traditionally classified as ‘subordinating conjunctions’ or adverbs within the category of prepositions. Here, as elsewhere, the important question is not whether one term is more appropriate than another – the issue is raised principally as a way of looking at similarities and differences which cut across the traditional classification of the parts of speech. In 8.4, the syntactic properties of so called ‘complex prepositions’ are discussed.

One area of meaning in which prepositions play an important role is the expression of spatial relations. In 8.5, there is an investigation of some significant differences between French and English concerning the ways in which prepositions can combine with verbs of movement to indicate the place to or from which an entity moves.

There are many difficulties surrounding the use of particular prepositions. In 8.6, this chapter is concluded by a look at a few cases (principally involving en and avec) which are amenable to systematic analysis.

Overview

In this chapter we will look at pronouns which, informally speaking, act as substitutes for NPs and other phrases in cases where a full description or use of a proper noun would be unnecessary or inappropriate. Other types of pronoun which have more specialised functions will be discussed in other chapters: negative pronouns in chapter 7, interrogative and relative pronouns in chapter 10.

A dominant theme of this chapter is that the Clitic-placement process outlined in 1.5.1 serves not only to account for constructions in which pronouns are attached to the verb but also to explain the conditions in which disjunctive pronouns (i.e. pronouns which are not attached to the verb) can be used.

In 6.2 and 6.3, this hypothesis is investigated in relation to structural conditions on the Clitic-placement rule, while 6.4 focuses on the semantic properties of different types of pronouns. In 6.5 and 6.6, we study in greater detail the properties of the so-called lsquo;adverbial’ clitics y and en, looking at questions such as the difference between y and Dative clitics as substitutes for expressions introduced by ä, the choice between en and possessive determiners as substitutes for phrases introduced by de within NPs and the various uses of en to replace indefinite NPs.

In 6.7, the structural relations between pronouns and their antecedents are studied, and the ways in which these relations determine the form of pronouns (e.g. reflexive vs non-reflexive forms), focusing particularly on differences between French and English.

This book is an introduction to the study of French grammar intended principally for advanced students (e.g. at university level) and teachers of French. It is particularly appropriate as a textbook for courses which combine the study of French with linguistics, though no prior knowledge of linguistics is assumed. Its main objectives are as follows:

Overview

The discussion in this chapter relies heavily on the concept of Case introduced in 1.5.6 and developed in subsequent chapters.

In 9.2, this concept is exploited as a means of accounting for the absence of an overt subject in most types of infinitival clauses and for some systematic differences between English and French. A distinction is drawn between constructions in which the subject of the infinitive is empty in the underlying structure and is interpreted in relation to some participant in the main clause and constructions in which the subject of an infinitive is moved into the main subject position to acquire Case.

In 9.3, there is an examination of the syntactic strategies for expressing the subject in constructions with faire, laisser and verbs of perception, whose properties are strikingly different from their English counterparts and which often pose problems for learners of French. This discussion continues in 9.4 with a detailed analysis of the apparently complicated behaviour of clitic pronouns in these constructions.

9.5.1 summarises generalisations proposed in earlier chapters concerning the distribution of infinitives with de and a and ‘bare’ infinitives. Finally, in 9.5.2, there is a review of some similarities and differences between infinitives and gerunds (verb-forms in -ant).

Overview

Inversion is the traditional term for the process of reversing the normal order of the subject and the verb. QU- movement (sometimes called ‘Wh-movement’ even in discussions of French) is the term which will be used here for movement of expressions such as qui, quand, oú, combien, etc., to the beginning of the sentence in questions and other constructions. Although these two processes are independent of each other, in the sense that one can occur without the other, there are many constructions whose properties can be elucidated in terms of interaction between these processes. For this reason it makes sense to discuss them together.

The main thrust of the discussion in 10.2 is that there are two fundamentally different types of Inversion in French which are distinguished in terms of their structural properties and the types of sentence in which they occur. In 10.3, a closer look is taken at the structural properties of these two types of Inversion and the conditions under which they are used or avoided.

In 10.4, we will look in greater detail at the operation of Inversion and Q-Umovement in questions of various types, paying particular attention to the conditions which govern the use of the interrogative pronouns qui, que and quoi and the syntactic properties of other QU- items (notably quel, pourquoi and combien) which behave in rather different ways from their English counterparts.

Overview

The verb can be considered the key element in the sentence in the sense that it provides the link between all the other major constituents of the sentence. Consequently, the form and interpretation of a given sentence depends to a very large extent on the properties of the verbs which it contains.

2.2 begins with a classification of verbs according to semantic notions such as ‘state’, ‘process’, ‘action’, etc. In 2.3 and 2.4 verbs are investigated according to the types of complements they can take, applying the system of lexical representation introduced in 1.2.4 to explore the ways in which theta-roles are expressed in terms of grammatical relations.

The verbs âtre and avoir are atypical in that they do not describe particular types of states or events, but rather provide a syntactic link be ween the subject and the complement which together express the basic semantic content of the sentence. The properties of these verbs are discussed in 2.5–2.6 along with other complement constructions which express relations of a similar type without recourse to a verb.

Auxiliary verbs have a rather similar status, supplementing the information conveyed by the main verb. In 2.7 we concentrate on the syntactic properties of verbs which are traditionally classified as auxiliaries (their semantic contribution, particularly as it relates to the concept of time, is analysed m chapter 4). In 2.8 we consider the related questions of the choice of auxiliary (avoir vs etre) in compound tenses and agreement of the past-participle.

Overview

The three main topics discussed in this chapter are related in the following ways. Adjectives and adverbs have similar functions – while adjectives are used to modify nouns, adverbs act as modifiers of other categories (principally verbs). The link with negation is provided by items like pas and jamais which behave like other adverbs in many respects, but which share other properties with non-adverbial items like personne, rien and aucun.

In 7.2 a semantic classification of adjectives is presented, and then applied in 7.3 to various problems concerning the position of adjectives: e.g. before or after the noun, order of adjectives, etc. In 7.4, we look at some adjectival constructions involving complements and the degree modifiers trop and assez*

The discussion of adverbs in 7.5 develops the ‘Verb-raising’ hypothesis outlined in 1.4.3, as a means of accounting for the various positions which different types of adverbs can occupy, highlighting differences between French and English and also drawing attention to syntactic similarities between adverbs and adjectives.

This approach is extended in 7.6 to the study of negation, particularly in 7.6.1–7.6.5 where we investigate the syntactic properties of pas and other negative adverbs (jamais,plus, etc.). In 7.6.6–7.6.8 our attention turns to negative pronouns and determiners (personne, rien, aucun, etc.), focusing particularly on the semantic and syntactic relations between these items and the particle we. The remaining sections (7.6.9–7.6.13) deal with other constructions involving the use of ne and non.