2001
DOI: 10.4000/praxematique.241
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contraintes syntaxiques et discursives des emplois de quant à et en ce qui concerne en français parlé

Abstract: Topicalisation et partitionContraintes syntaxiques et discursives des emplois de quant à et en ce qui concerne en français parlé Syntactic and discursive constraints on the uses of quant à and en ce qui concerne in spoken French

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Whereas some TMs have been well described, such as quant à (Fløttum, 1999, 2003; Debaisieux, 2001; Choi-Jonin, 2003; Anscombre, 2006; Lagae, 2003, 2007c, 2011b, see also Prévost, 2003b, 2008, 2010 for a diachronic account), en fait de (Lagae, 2007a,b,c; Lagae, 2011b), à propos de (Porhiel, 2001; Péroz, 2003; Prévost, 2008; Lagae, 2011a), côté (Le Querler, 2001; Noailly, 2006), question (Le Querler, 2003, Noailly, 2006) and en ce qui concerne (Debaisieux, 2001; Fløttum, 2003; Anscombre, 2006), this is not the case for the TMs which are at issue here. Pour ce qui est de and au niveau (de) are only mentioned in comparison with other TMs (see Anscombre, 2006 and Porhiel, 2004a,b on pour ce qui est de , and Flament-Boistrancourt, 2002 and Delahaie and Flament-Boistrancourt, 2013 on ( au) niveau (de) ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Whereas some TMs have been well described, such as quant à (Fløttum, 1999, 2003; Debaisieux, 2001; Choi-Jonin, 2003; Anscombre, 2006; Lagae, 2003, 2007c, 2011b, see also Prévost, 2003b, 2008, 2010 for a diachronic account), en fait de (Lagae, 2007a,b,c; Lagae, 2011b), à propos de (Porhiel, 2001; Péroz, 2003; Prévost, 2008; Lagae, 2011a), côté (Le Querler, 2001; Noailly, 2006), question (Le Querler, 2003, Noailly, 2006) and en ce qui concerne (Debaisieux, 2001; Fløttum, 2003; Anscombre, 2006), this is not the case for the TMs which are at issue here. Pour ce qui est de and au niveau (de) are only mentioned in comparison with other TMs (see Anscombre, 2006 and Porhiel, 2004a,b on pour ce qui est de , and Flament-Boistrancourt, 2002 and Delahaie and Flament-Boistrancourt, 2013 on ( au) niveau (de) ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, most previous analyses are based exclusively on formal written language. As far as we know, only Debaisieux (2001), Flament-Boistrancourt (2002) and Delahaie and Flament-Boistrancourt (2013) study TMs in spoken French.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%