Cover not available
Part of
Romance Perspectives on Construction Grammar
Edited by Hans C. Boas and Francisco Gonzálvez-García
[Constructional Approaches to Language 15] 2014
► pp. 79–111

Chapter 3. From lexicalization to constructional generalizations

On complex prepositions in French

ORCID logo | Ghent University
This article deals with French constructions such as sous l’emprise de (‘under the influence of’), which have been called locutions prépositives (complex prepositions) in the French linguistic tradition. Putting the issue of lexicalization aside, I establish regular complex form-meaning patterns (i.e. constructions) within a family of formally related complex prepositions introduced by sous (‘under’). I show that the construction as a whole (which is part of a network of more or less schematic constructions) exhibits formal and semantic properties that cannot be ascribed to its constituent parts. The analysis is confirmed by showing that there are coercion effects exerted by the construction on the central noun.
Published online: 28 August 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.15.03lau
References (39)
References
Aarts, B. (2007). Syntactic gradience. The nature of grammatical indeterminacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Adler, S. (2001/2). Les locutions prépositives: Questions de méthodologie et de definition [Complex prepositions: Issues related to methodology and definition]. Travaux de Linguistique, 42–43, 157–170. DOI logo
Boas, H.C. (2003). A constructional approach to resultatives. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Boone, A. (1987). Les constructions ‘Il est linguiste’ / c’est un linguiste’ [The constructions ‘He is linguist’ / ‘That is a linguist’]. Langue française, 75, 94–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dubois, J., & Dubois-Charlier, F. (2004). Locutions en français [Fixed expressions in French]. Aix-en-Provence: by the authors.Google Scholar
Fagard, B., & de Mulder, W. (2007). La formation des prépositions complexes: Grammaticalisation ou lexicalisation? [The formation of complex prepositions: Grammaticalization or lexicalization?]. Langue Française, 156, 9–29.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C., & Kay, P. (1993). Construction Grammar course book. Manuscript, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M.-C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone . Language, 64, 501–538. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flaux, N., & Van de Velde, D. (2000). Les noms en français: Esquisse de classement [Nouns in French: A classificatory sketch]. Gap/Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Franckel, J.-J., & Paillard, D. (2007). Grammaire des prépositions[The grammar of prepositions]. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Fried, M., & Östmann, J.-O. (2004). Construction Grammar: A thumbnail sketch. In M. Fried, & J.-O. Östman (Eds.), Construction Grammar in a cross-language perspective (pp. 11–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gaatone, D. (1976). Locutions prépositives et groupes prépositionnels [Complex prepositions and prepositional phrases]. Linguistics, 167, 15–33.Google Scholar
Girard-Gillet, G. (2008). ‘Sous’ et les parties du corps en anglais [‘Under’ and body parts in English]. L’Information Grammaticale, 117, 35–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. (2006). Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gonzálvez-García, F. (2007). ‘Saved by the reflexive’: Evidence from coercion via reflexives in verbless complement clauses in English and Spanish. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 5, 193–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2011). Metaphor and metonymy do not render coercion superfluous: Evidence from the subjective-transitive construction. Linguistics, 49(6), 1305–1358. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gross, G. (1996). Les expressions figées en français. Noms composés et autres locutions [Fixed expressions in French. Compound nouns and other fixed expressions]. Gap and Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
. (2006). Sur le statut des locutions prépositives [On the status of complex prepositions]. Modèles linguistiques, 27(2), 35–50.Google Scholar
Gross, M. (1986). Grammaire transformationnelle du français. 3. Syntaxe de l’adverbe [Transformational grammar in French: 3. The syntax of adverbs]. Paris: Asstril.Google Scholar
Langacker, R.W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lauwers, P. (2008). The nominalization of adjectives in French: from morphological conversion to categorial mismatch. Folia Linguistica, 42(1), 135–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2010). Comment dissocier des locutions prépositives quasi synonymiques? Essai d’analyse collostructionnelle [How can we distinguish between near synonymic complex prepositions? A collostructional analysis]. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 55(1), 55–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lauwers, P., & Willems, D. (2011). Coercion: Definition and challenges, current approaches, and new trends. Linguistics, 49(6), 1219–1235. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leeman, D. (Ed.). (2007). Modèles linguistiques 55. De la préposition à la locution prépositive [Special issue: From prepositions to fixed complex prepositions]. Toulon: Éditions des Dauphins.Google Scholar
. (Ed.). (2008). L’Information grammaticale 117. Locutions du français, traduction et traduction automatique [Special issue: Fixed expressions in French, translation and automatic translation]. Paris: Peeters.Google Scholar
Marque-Pucheu, C. (2001). Les locutions prépositives: Du spatial au non spatial [Complex prepositions: from spatial to non-spatial]. Langue française, 129, 35–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mejri, S. (1997). Le figement lexical: Descriptions linguistiques et structuration sémantique [Lexical fossilization: linguistic descriptions and semantic structuring]. Tunisie: Publications de la Faculté de lettres de la Manouba.Google Scholar
Melis, L. (2001/2). La préposition est-elle toujours la tête d’un groupe prépositionnel? [Are prepositions always the head of a prepositional phrase?]. Travaux de Linguistique, 42–43,11–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2003). La préposition en français [Prepositions in French]. Gap/Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Merle, J.-M. (2008). Prépositions et aspect [Prepositions and aspect]. L’information grammaticale, 117, 52–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, L. (2003). Word meaning, sentence meaning, and syntactic meaning. In H. Cuyckens, R. Dirven, & J. Taylor (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to lexical semantics (pp. 163–209). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pustejovsky, J., & Bouillon, P. (1995). Aspectual coercion and logical polysemy. Journal of Semantics, 12(2), 133–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Riegel, M. (1985). L’adjectif attribut. Paris: P.U.F.Google Scholar
Svenonius, P., & Roy, I. (2009). Complex prepositions. In J. François, E. Gilbert, C. Guimier, & M. Krause (Eds.), Autour de la préposition (pp. 105–116). Caen: Presses Universitaires de Caen.Google Scholar
Van de Velde, D. (2000). Quelques variétés de pluriels de noms abstraits: référence (pro-) nominale plurielle: Aspects linguistiques et psycholinguistiques [Some varieties of plural abstract nouns: plural (pro-)nominal reference: Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects]. Verbum, 12, 379–395.Google Scholar
. (2006). Les adjectifs de groupe [‘Group’ adjectives]. Travaux de Linguistique, 53, 135–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Langendonck, W., Lauwers, P., Lamiroy, B., Melis, L., & Van Belle, W. (2005). De nominale constituent [The nominal constituent]. In Nederlandse Grammatica voor Franstaligen [Dutch Grammar for speakers of French], Working papers, K. U. Leuven, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Willems, D. (2000). La ‘coercition’ revisitée: Le cas des structures trivalentes en français [Coercion revisited: The case of trivalent verbal structures in French]. In M. Coene, W. De Mulder, P. Dendale, & Y. D’Hulst (Eds.), Traiani augusti vestigia pressa sequamur. Studia lingvistica in honorem Lilianae Tasmowski (pp. 233–242). Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Lauwers, Peter, F. Neveu, S. Prévost, A. Montébran, A. Steuckardt, G. Bergounioux, G. Merminod & G. Philippe
2024. La productivité syntaxique à l’aune de la sémantique distributionnelle. SHS Web of Conferences 191 ► pp. 00003 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.