Alternatives et décisions lexicales dans l'emploi des expressions démonstratives

Reichler-Béguelin, Marie-José

doi:10.3406/prati.1995.1736

Cited by 20 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Learner texts have been studied by linguists and researchers in the teaching of French for about fifty years (Charolles 1978(Charolles , 1988Beguelin, 1988;Apotheloz, 1995;Masseron, 1981). These analyses, conducted within the tradition of the "grammar of errors" (Frei, 1929), aim to "seek the regularities underlying language errors" (Béguelin, 1988) and the "anomalies" indicative of the cognitive processes involved in oral and written production (Béguelin, 1992), in order to identify the production mechanisms involved in the encoding of written text (Béguelin, 1995). Deviations from the norm are thus interpreted not as errors but as traces of the writing process Schneuwly, 1988) and the gradual construction of writing skills.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Writing and Reconstructing Identity Through Professional Transitions

Jacques¹

2017

Research on Writing: Multiple Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The International Exchanges on the Study of Writing Series publishes booklength manuscripts that address worldwide perspectives on writing, writers, teaching with writing, and scholarly writing practices, specifically those that draw on scholarship across national and disciplinary borders to challenge parochial understandings of all of the above. The series aims to examine writing activities in 21st-century contexts, particularly how they are informed by globalization, national identity, social networking, and increased cross-cultural communication and awareness. As such, the series strives to investigate how both the local and the international inform writing research and the facilitation of writing development. This recently announced series is now accepting proposals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Writing and Reconstructing Identity Through Professional Transitions

Jacques¹

2017

Research on Writing: Multiple Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus it is profitable for him/her to take the most advantage of non-verbal information. It can be pragmatically important for him/her to take advantage of the referencial operations to achieve other discursive operations (see, on this topic, Apothéloz, 1995;Maes and Noordman, 1995;Reichler-Béguelin, 1995).…”

Section: Interaction Between Production and Reception In Referential mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interpretations and functions of demonstrative NPs in indirect anaphora

Apothéloz

Reichler-Béguelin²

1999

Journal of Pragmatics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An anaphor is said to be associative when it refers to a referent (i) which has not been explicitly mentioned in the prior context, and (ii) which can nevertheless be identified on the basis of information provided by this context. Numerous linguists consider that associative anaphora can only be introduced by definite NPs and claim that demonstrative NPs cannot take on the role of associative anaphora. In this paper, we defend the idea that demonstrative NPs are not incompatible with associative anaphora and are in fact current in French. We examine the various explanations and interpretations provided by the authors who claim that demonstrative NPs cannot take on the role of associative anaphora (polyphony effect, memory deixis, empathy, etc.). We show that, in numerous cases, these interpretations are not satisfactory. On the contrary, it is possible to describe non-coreferential demonstrative NPs by applying a dynamic model for the production and reception of discourse reference. It is based on the idea that interactors may have diverging strategic interests, a different representation of the universe of discourse, and that the selection of referring expressions may be a reflection of these diverging interests. It can also be shown that demonstrative associative NPs have various discursive and communicative functions or effects, such as avoiding a generic interpretation, signalling a problematic presupposition, signalling that the identification of the intended referent will be somewhat difficult, etc. A distinction is proposed between positive and negative function. Finally, we contend that an investigation of anaphoric phenomena should be conducted along three lines of description, to avoid oversimplification .

show abstract

“…The domain of the French and Dutch demonstrative determiner is a well‐studied topic in descriptive and cognitive linguistics (Kleiber 1983; Corblin 1987; Kirsner 1993; Apothéloz 1995; Reichler‐Béguelin 1995; Maes 1996; De Mulder 1997; Charolles 2002; Leeman 2004, among many others), but has only rarely been the subject of study in Applied Linguistics (Van Peteghem and Willems 1983; Devos, De Muynck and Van Herreweghe 1991; Van Langendonck, Lauwers, Lamiroy, Melis and Van Belle 2005). Moreover, most French (Vlugter, Sleeman and Verheugd 1996; Raes, De Clercq and Leroy 2000; D'haene and De Rammelaere 2007) and Dutch (Vannes 1989; Rosen, Hans and Kinnard 1991; Vandevyvere 1999) L2 grammars for Dutch and French learners respectively mainly focus on the demonstrative pronoun rather than on its determiner equivalent and give only a limited overview of the demonstrative determiner forms and their basic uses, that is, expressing textual and situational reference, since these uses are generally similar in both languages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Integrated Contrastive Model evaluated: The French and Dutch demonstrative determiner in L1 and L2

Vanderbauwhede

2012

Int J App Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we evaluate the effectiveness of Granger's Integrated Contrastive Model for describing real language use and predicting correct and incorrect L2 productions with a detailed corpus‐based study of the structural and semantic similarities and divergences between the French and Dutch demonstrative determiner systems in L1 and their precise impact on written L2 productions. This study allows us to formulate six objective recommendations for developing pedagogical grammars and thus illustrates to what extent the combination of L1 and L2 corpora analysis should become an obligatory practical step rather than a theoretical one between primary forged linguistic analyses and the elaboration of well‐balanced and representative didactic material. Dans cet article, nous évaluons l'efficacité de l'Integrated Contrastive Model de Granger pour décrire la langue réelle et pour prédire les productions L2 correctes et erronées par le biais d'une étude de corpus détaillée des ressemblances et divergences structurelles et sémantiques entre les systèmes du déterminant démonstratif en français et en néerlandais en L1 et leur impact précis sur les productions écrites en L2. Cette étude permet de formuler six recommandations objectives pour le développement de grammaires pédagogiques et illustre, par conséquent, dans quelle mesure la combinaison d'analyses de corpus L1 et L2 devrait devenir une étape pratique obligatoire plutôt qu'une étape théorique entre les premières analyses linguistiques et l'élaboration de matériaux didactiques représentatifs.

show abstract

Alternatives et décisions lexicales dans l'emploi des expressions démonstratives

Cited by 20 publications

References 8 publications

Writing and Reconstructing Identity Through Professional Transitions

Writing and Reconstructing Identity Through Professional Transitions

Interpretations and functions of demonstrative NPs in indirect anaphora

The Integrated Contrastive Model evaluated: The French and Dutch demonstrative determiner in L1 and L2

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About