Rowlett, PA

English

University of Salford Institutional Repository

Journal of French Language StudiesFrancard, M. (1990) Le francais parle des corpus oraux. Travaux de linguistique 21:53-<53-Green, J. & Ayres-Bennett, W. (1990) Variation and Change in French: EssaysPresented to Rebecca Posner on the Occasion of her Sixtieth Birthday. Londres:Routledge.Hausmann, F. J. (1979) Wie alt ist das gesprochene Franzosisch? RomanischeForschungen 91: 431-444.Hausman, F. J. (ed.) (1983) Die franzosische Sprache von Heute. Darmstadt:Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Holtus, G. & Radtke, E. (1986) Sprachlicher Substandard. Tubingen: Niemeyer.Holtus, G. & Radtke, E. (1990) Sprachlicher Substandard: Standard, Substandard undVarietatenlinguistik. Tubingen: Niemeyer.Holtus, G., Metzeltin, M. & Schmitt, C. (eds.) (1990) Lexikon der RomanistischenLinguistik, Tome v. Tubingen: Niemeyer.Lodge, R. A. (1993) French, from Dialect to Standard. Londres et New York:Routledge.Miiller, B. (1985) Le Francois d'aujourd'hui. Paris: Klincksieck.OfTord, M. (1990) Varieties of Contemporary French. Londres: Macmillan.Radtke, E. (1990) Gesprochenes Franzosisch und Sprachgeschichte: zur Rekonstruktionder Gesprdchkonstitution. Tubingen: Niemeyer.Sanders, Carol (ed.) (1993) French Today: Language in its Social Context. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.Stimm, H. (ed.) (1980) Zur Geschichte des gesprochenen Franzosisch und zurSprachtenkung im Gegenwartsfranzosischen. Wiesbaden: Steiner.Jacques DurandDepartment of Modern LanguagesUniversity of Salford(Received 17 October 1995)Lazard, Gilbert, L'Actance. (Linguistique Nouvelle.) Paris: Presses Universitaires deFrance, 1994, xi + 265 pp. 2 13 045775 4» 0292-4226In this atheoretical typological study of the morphosyntactic realisation of argumentstructure, Lazard defines 'actance' as 'les faits relatifs aux relations grammaticales quis'etablissent entre le predicat [verbal] et les termes nominaux qui en dependent' (p. ix).As for a translation of the term 'actance', the author uses 'actancy' in the titles of recentwork in English, e.g., Lazard (1990, 1995).Chapter 1, 'Les instruments de l'actance' (1-23), contains an overview of the variousmeans by which languages indicate the relationship between a verb and its arguments,e.g., by overt or non-overt markers on the verb (agreement) and/or on the argument(affixes, adpositions), word order (somewhere between totally free and totally fixed,rarely at either extreme) or coalescence/incorporation (e.g., prendre feulmaintenir) inwhich latter case the noun loses its status as an argument. The important point made isthat languages are rarely (if ever?) restricted to a single means.Chapter 2, 'Structures d'actance' (24-63), addresses the important (yet not entirelyunproblematic) typological contrast between accusative and ergative (and mixed (anddual)) systems, a distinction whose relevance is not restricted to those languages withovert accusative/ergative morphology. Of course, the distinction is familiar and the256Reviewsinformed reader will probably be able to follow Lazard's presentation of the range ofcross-linguistic variation. The beginner in contrast may well be confused by theunnecessarily complicated notation system. The following is from p. 28:(6') X,,YaV, (011 a = accusatif)(7') z.,v,(8') Y.A'j.Xh (ou b = instrumental)(9') Z..V,The recapitulation (pp. 34-35) only serves to compound the confusion.Chapter 3, 'Les actants' (64-128), the longest of the six chapters, discusses argumenthierarchies, whereby the term argument is to be understood as thematic role (Gruber1965; Fillmore 1968). Here, Lazard distinguishes between an 'onomasiological'approach — by which he characterises most work done in this area and whichinvestigates how given processes, etc., are represented grammatically — and his own'semasiological' approach which starts from the grammatical relations and attempts toderive a set of presumably universal semantic relations.In chapter 4, 'Les classes de verbes' (129—169), Lazard introduces a verb taxonomy interms of valency, which is more or less determined by meaning. While monadic(unergative and unaccusative) and diadic (transitive) verbs seem to be universallyattested, other classes of verb are not. In chapter 5, 'Variations d'actance' (170-220), hediscusses ways in which the valency of verbs can be affected by, for example, theproperties of the argument(s), tense, aspect and polarity as well as pragmatic andstrictly syntactic factors. In the same way though that verbal morphology is not aperfect isomorphism of valency, neither in the domain of valency alternation is there aone-to-one correlation between cause and effect.In the final chapter, 6 'Correlations' (221—265), Lazard considers universals withinthe context of a possible theory of transitivity. For example, if the presence or absenceof overt marking is determined by the [ ± HUMAN] or [ ± DEFINITE] features of theargument, then it is always the [ + HUMAN] and [ + DEFINITE] argument which will beovertly marked rather than the [ — HUMAN] or [ — DEFINITE] one.The overriding quality of this book for me is the wealth of data reviewed - theindex contains references to over 130 languages — and this is doubtless an ideal startingpoint for anyone needing basic information about morphosyntactic variation. As such,this is probably as much a textbook as a presentation of original research.It is, of course, not without its shortcomings. Most are fairly trivial and some havebeen alluded to already. On a final note, though, example (14) on p. 31 is supposed tobe identical to example (3) on p. 26 but isn't. The abbreviations PTCP and PTC are usedon pp. 33 (2o)-(22) and 46 (36)—(37) (to mean the same thing?) but are not given in thelist of abbreviations. On p. 33 (20), the -ko suffix in Hindi is glossed asOBL(ique)-ACc(usatif) but referred to in the text as 'une marque d'accusatif/datif. TheGerman and English quotations on pp. 38-39 and 56 are not translated into French.The meaning of the second tree diagram on p. 101 is unclear (S = subject, V = verb,O = object):257Journal of French Language StudiesREFERENCESFillmore, C. (1968) The case for case. In: E. Bach & R. T. Harms (eds.) Universals inLinguistic Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 1—88.Gruber, J. S. (1965) Studies in lexical relations. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Lazard, G. (1990) Researches on actancy. Actances 6: 3—58.Lazard, G. (1995) Typological research on actancy: the Paris RIVALC group. In: M.Shibatani & T. Bynon (eds.) Approaches to Typology. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress, pp. 167-213.Paul RowlettEuropean Studies Research InstituteUniversity ofSalford(Received 26 April 1996)Magri, Veronique, Le Discours sur I'autre: a travers quatre recks de voyage en Orient.(Travaux de linguistique quantitative, 55.) Paris: Honore Champion, 1995, 426 pp.2 85203 411 5This volume approaches the classic problem of the relationship between the languageof a text and a reader's construction of meaning with the intention of describing 'defructueuses rencontres entre les systemes formels de production, de reception du dis-cours et le systeme linguistique de l'alterite' (4). It does so in a way that raises someinteresting questions of method. The author chooses a corpus of four works belong-ing to the Institut National de la Langue Francaise FRANTEXT data base, wherethey have been categorised into a 'sous-ensemble generique intitule "recit de voyage"'(2). They are Lamartine's Souvenirs, Impressions, Pensees et Paysages pendant un voyageen Orient ou Notes d'un voyageur, Du Camp's Le Nil, Egypte et Nubie, and Fromentin'stwo volumes, Un Ete dans le Sahara and Voyage en Egypte. Distributions of lexical andsyntactical items are measured by means of a statistical instrument provided byCharles Muller, i'ecart reduit . . . il est positif si l'auteur privilegie le terme concerne'(60, 61). From time to time, the information yielded by the data base is completed bymanual procedures, notably by observations of co-texts. In this study, the quantitativematerial, presented in tables or graphs, is very clearly a means, and its implications areconsidered in the light of a solid linguistic and literary culture.V. Magri analyses the language of each of these texts with reference to the notionsthat she considers to be constitutive of any discourse: 'qu'est-ce qui est dit?, commentest-ce dit?, dans quel but?' (5). For her, the 'qu'est-ce qui est dit' is constructed — 'lesimages d'Orient telles qu'elles sont developpees dans notre corpus' (58) — by specifici-ties of vocabulary and syntax, and by sequences of description, Tacte oblige du recitde voyage . . . caracteristique du genre' (129). The vision of the Orient that emerges atthis level is stereotypical and prejudiced, founded on an 'incomprehension de l'Autre'(204).Now description was made possible by an earlier process of'maitrise' (206) of theotherness of the Orient. This involved four strategies. The first is measurement of'lesecarts a la norme que constitue la culture des voyageurs' (207) of a world whose differ-ences provoke a choice of evaluative and axiological adjectives. The second is 'la tra-duction . . . acclimater l'etrangete a son discours pour l'y inserer' (259). Figures of258

Review of Gilbert Lazard (1994) L’actance. (Linguistique nouvelle. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.)

linguistique quantitative, 55.) Paris: Honore Champion,

Magri, Veronique, Le Discours sur I'autre: a travers quatre recks de voyage en Orient.

Researches on actancy.

Studies in lexical relations.

The case for case.

Typological research on actancy: the Paris RIVALC

https://salford-repository.worktribe.com/file/1455448/1/JFLS_download_containing_review_of_Lazard_1994.pdf

Review of Gilbert Lazard (1994) L’actance. (Linguistique nouvelle. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Salford Institutional Repository