Sur la grammaire des consonnes latentes

Abstract

Liaison in French is commonly described as involving a "latent" consonant whose realization or suppression is determined by contextual factors. This is an oversimplified view of the phenomenon, but liaison consonants (when pronounced) do have distinctive properties that call for a special treatment. Furthermore, the same notion of latent consonant appears to be relevant for morphological derivation. In this paper we offer a new formalization that captures the special status of latent consonants, by representing them as an "appendix" to the phonological "body" of a linguistic sign. We present an analysis of liaison that makes use of phonological representations of this type (while remaining general enough to accommodate cases where liaison does not involve a latent consonant). We explain in detail how the phonology is constructed in phrasal combinations, incorporating syntactic and lexical constraints, giving rise to the observed inventory of obligatory, optional, and impossible liaison contexts. We also show that the phonological appendix can be used to account for the realization of latent consonants in morphological derivation (even when these consonants do not participate in the liaison alternation).

Variable and invariable liaison in a corpus of spoken French

“…To be sure, this account may only explain the fact that liaison is variable with free clitics, but invariable with internal clitics; why free clitics of the same category may vary greatly in their liaison rates remains to be explained. As to the representation of the liaison consonant, the results of the present study are fully compatible with the assumption that it is lexically stored as an appendix to the invariant morphological shape of the lexeme, as proposed by Bonami et al (2005). As argued by Eychenne (2011), following previous research (Bonami et al, 2005;Steriade, 1999), a constraint requiring invariance in the shape of morphemes militates against realization of the appendix; yet, if higher ranked constraints on syllabification require an onset, the liaison consonant will be realized.…”

“…Under the straightforward assumption that the liaison consonant pertains to what is termed the target word in this study, four options have been proposed: the liaison consonant may be lexically present, but truncated where unrealized (Schane, 1968;Selkirk, 1974); it may be lexically absent, but inserted where realized (Klausenburger, 1974(Klausenburger, , 1978Tranel, 1981); it may be lexically represented as a floating consonant, remaining unrealized unless anchored to an empty onset position of the following word (Booij, 1983;Clements & Keyser, 1983;Hyman, 1985); see Tranel (1995) for a discussion of different implementations; or the target word may be lexically represented in two shapes, one with and one without liaison consonant (Gaatone, 1978;Tranel, 1990;Perlmutter, 1998;Steriade, 1999;Plénat, 2008). Finally, a recent proposal which we will build on below assumes that the liaison consonant is lexically represented, but that its status with respect to the lexeme is that of an appendix, that is, it is not part of the invariant morphological shape of the lexeme (Bonami, Boyé, & Tseng, 2005;Eychenne, 2011). Liaison with [z] and [t], where these two consonants are exponents of morphological features like 'plural' or '3rd person', has sometimes been analyzed as an instance of realization or non-realization of a morphemic marker (Morin & Kaye, 1982;Morin, 1986).…”

La liaison 'obligatoire' avec et sans enchaînement

“…Comme on l'a dit plus haut, plusieurs auteurs ont voulu voir dans cette situation un argument plaidant en faveur de l'idée d'un statut particulier des consonnes de liaison qui s'enchaînent en toute circonstance, que ce soit un statut de consonnes « flottantes » sans ancrage propre (Tranel , 1998, un statut de préfixe du substantif (Morin 2003), ou un statut d'« appendice » (Bonami, Boyé et Tseng 2005). Schématiquement, une forme de liaison du masculin singulier s'achèverait soit par une telle consonne, soit, comme la forme du féminin, par une consonne ordinaire.…”

Le Thème L de l'adjectif et du nom

“…Plus précisément, la présente contribution s'insère dans un ensemble de travaux sur les paradigmes flexionnel et dérivationnel de l'adjectif en français (cf. Bonami & Boyé 2003b, Bonami, Boyé & Tseng 2005, Boyé & Plénat à paraître, Roché en préparation, Plénat ce volume, et déjà Morin 1993. Elle se conforme aussi à l'effort de renouvellement des données qui caractérise un certain nombre de recherches récentes (cf.…”