Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T23:47:23.372Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introduction to the special issue: ‘Negation and Clitics in French: Interaction and Variation’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 November 2013

ELISABETH STARK ,
CHARLOTTE MEISNER  and
HARALD VÖLKER
ELISABETH STARK*
Affiliation:
University of Zurich
CHARLOTTE MEISNER
Affiliation:
University of Zurich
HARALD VÖLKER
Affiliation:
University of Zurich
*
Address for correspondence: Romanisches Seminar, Zürichbergstrasse 8, CH-8032, Zürich, Switzerland e-mail: estark@rom.uzh.ch
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This introduction presents very briefly some of the main issues currently discussed around negation particles and clitics in contemporary French and taken up by the six contributions it assembles, namely language change (grammaticalisation of clitics into agreement markers, completion of the Jespersen Cycle) vs. stable variation, and external (sociolinguistic) or internal (phonotactic, prosodic, or syntactic) factors triggering variation in both cases; the hypothesis of a potential diglossia in French opposing two grammars with considerable syntactic differences. Five out of six contributions focus on modern standard and non-standard varieties of French, with a formal theoretical background, while one shows a more philological-descriptive approach and is dedicated to Old French manuscripts.

Type
Introduction
Information
Journal of French Language Studies , Volume 24 , Issue 1: Negation and Clitics in French: Interaction and variation , March 2014 , pp. 1 - 7
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Armstrong, N. (2001). Social and Stylistic Variation in Spoken French. A Comparative Approach. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, N. (2002). Variable deletion of French ne. A cross-stylistic perspective. Language Sciences, 24: 153–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, N. and Smith, A. (2002). The influence of linguistic and social factors on the recent decline of French ne. Journal of French Language Studies, 12: 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashby, W. J. (1976). The loss of the negative morpheme ne in Parisian French. Lingua, 39: 119–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashby, W. J. (1981). The loss of the negative particle ne in French: a syntactic change in progress. Language, 57: 674–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashby, W. J. (2001). Un nouveau regard sur la chute du ne en français parlé tourangeau. S'agit-il d'un changement en cours? Journal of French Language Studies, 11: 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auger, J. (1994). Pronominal clitics in Québec colloquial French: a morphological analysis. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania; accessible online under: http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1174&context=ircs_reportsGoogle Scholar
Biberauer, T. and Roberts, I. (2011). Negative words and related expressions. A new perspective on some familiar puzzles. In: Larrivée, P. and Ingham, R. P. (eds), The Evolution of Negation. Beyond the Jespersen Cycle. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, pp. 23–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coveney, A. (2002). Variability in Spoken French. A Sociolinguistic Study of Interrogation and Negation, 2nd ed. Bristol UK, Portland USA: Elm Bank.Google Scholar
Coveney, A. (2010). Vouroiement and tutoiement: sociolinguistic reflections. Journal of French Language Studies, 20.2: 127–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culbertson, J. (2010). Convergent evidence for categorical change in French: from subject clitic to agreement marker. Language, 86: 85–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culbertson, J. and Legendre, G. (2008). Qu'en est-il des clitiques sujet en français oral contemporain? In: Durand, J., Habert, B. and Laks, B. (eds), Actes du 1er Congrès Mondial de Linguistique française. Paris: EDP Sciences, pp. 2651–2662.Google Scholar
Déprez, V. (2003). Concordance négative, syntaxe des mots-N et variation dialectale. Cahiers de Linguistique Francaise, 25: 97–118.Google Scholar
Dufter, A. and Stark, E. (2007): La linguistique variationnelle et les changements linguistiques ‘mal compris’. Le cas de la ‘disparition’ du ne de négation. In: Marchello-Nizia, C. and Combettes, B. (eds), Etudes sur le changement linguistique en français. Nancy: Presses Universitaires de Nancy, pp. 115–128.Google Scholar
Fuß, E. (2005). The Rise of Agreement. A Formal Approach to the Syntax and Grammaticalization of Verbal Inflection. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gadet, F. (2003). La signification sociale de la variation. Romanistisches Jahrbuch, 54: 98–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, L. (1996). The Syntax of Negation, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Halle, M. and Marantz, A. (1994). Some key features of Distributed Morphology. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics: Papers on Phonology and Morphology, 21: 275–288.Google Scholar
Heap, D. (2000). La variation grammaticale en géolinguistique. Les pronoms sujet en roman central. Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1917). Negation in English and Other Languages. Copenhagen: Høst.Google Scholar
Lehmann, C. (1985). Grammaticalization: Synchronic variation and diachronic change. Lingua e Stile, 20: 303–318.Google Scholar
Kaiser, G. A. (2008). Zur Grammatikalisierung der französischen Personalpronomina. In: Stark, E., Schmidt-Riese, R. and Stoll, E. (eds), Romanische Syntax im Wandel. Tübingen: Narr, pp. 305–326.Google Scholar
Massot, B. (2010). Le patron diglossique de la variation grammaticale en français. Langue Francaise, 168: 87–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massot, B. and Rowlett, P. (eds) (2013). L'hypothèse d'une diglossie en France. Special issue, Journal of French Language Studies, 23.1.Google Scholar
Meisner, C. (2010). A corpus analysis of intra- and extralinguistic factors triggering ne-deletion in phonic French. In: Neveu, F.et al. (eds), Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française – CMLF 2010. Paris: Institut de Linguistique Française, pp. 1943–1962.Google Scholar
Ménard, P. (1994). Syntaxe de l'ancien français, 4th ed. Bordeaux: Bière.Google Scholar
Miller, P. H. and Monachesi, P. (2003). Les pronoms clitiques dans les langues romanes. In: Godard, D. (ed.), Les langues romanes: problèmes de la phrase simple. Paris: CNRS, pp. 67–123.Google Scholar
Miller, P. H. and Sag, I. A. (1997). French clitic movement without clitics or movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 15: 573–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palasis, K. (2013). The case for diglossia: Describing the emergence of two grammars in the early acquisition of metropolitan French. Journal of French Language Studies, 23: 17–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollock, J.-Y. (1989). Verb movement, universal grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry, 20: 365–424.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1997). The fine structure of the left periphery. In: Haegeman, L (ed.), Elements of Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 281–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberge, Y. (1990). The Syntactic Recoverability of Null Arguments. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, I. (2007). Diachronic Syntax. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rowlett, P. (1998). Sentential Negation in French. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shlonsky, U. (2004). Enclisis and proclisis. In: Rizzi, L. (ed.), The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 329–353.Google Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A., Williams, L. and McCourt, C. (2011). A corpus-driven study of second-person pronoun variation in L2 French synchronous computer-mediated communication. Intercultural Pragmatics, 8 (1): 67–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Völker, H. (2009). La linguistique variationnelle et la perspective intralinguistique. Revue de Linguistique Romane, 73: 27–76.Google Scholar
Williams, L. and van Compernolle, R. A. (2009). On versus tu and vous: Pronouns with indefinite reference in synchronous electronic French discourse. Language Sciences, 31: 409–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zanuttini, R. (1997). Negation and Clausal Structure: A Comparative Study of Romance Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeijlstra, H. (2004). Sentential negation and negative concord. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Zribi-Hertz, A. (1994). The syntax of nominative clitics in standard and advanced French. In: Cinque, G.et al. (eds), Paths towards Universal Grammar. Studies in Honor of Richard S. Kayne. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, pp. 453–472.Google Scholar
Zribi-Hertz, A. (2011). Pour un modèle diglossique de description du français: quelques implications théoriques, didactiques et méthodologiques. Journal of French Language Studies, 21: 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar