Cover not available
Article published In:
Languages in Contrast
Vol. 21:1 (2021) ► pp.82–111

Temperaments, tempers, and temporality

Constructions reveal how speakers of French and English conceptualize human properties

ORCID logo | Université de Lille , France
| Université Polytechnique Hauts-de-France , France
| Université de Lille , France
This study focuses on French and English abstract nouns denoting properties that can be ascribed to humans, such as beauty, carefulness and anger. Previous research showed that some but not all of these nouns are licensed in both locative existentials (e.g., There’s an intense anger in Isabella) and possessive existentials (e.g., Isabella has an intense anger). What remains unclear is how these and other patterns correlate among themselves depending on how easily they host such nouns. We here use speaker ratings of these nouns in different constructional environments. A principal component analysis suggests that the main dimension underlying native speakers’ ratings of these abstract nouns in six different patterns is temporal limitability. This gradable distinction, strongly correlated with the locative existential, holds for both the French and English data and outweighs any French-English contrastive differences in how acceptable human property nouns are considered to be in the patterns studied.
Keywords: human property noun, conceptual autonomy, temporal limitability, existential construction, English/French
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Existentials and other constructions, a cline of HPNs, and predictions
    • 2.1Two existential constructions
    • 2.2HPNs in locative and possessive existentials
    • 2.3Four other constructions
      • 2.3.1Genitive of quality
      • 2.3.2Go into a state of…
      • 2.3.3Pluralization
      • 2.3.4… didn’t last long
    • 2.4Constructional convergence, classificatory validity and cross-linguistic convergence: Predictions
  • 3.Materials and methods
    • 3.1Test items
    • 3.2Data gathering
    • 3.3Statistical processing
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Results for French
      • 4.1.1Correlations among constructions
      • 4.1.2Classes of HPNs
    • 4.2Results for English
      • 4.2.1Correlations among constructions
      • 4.2.2Classes of HPNs
    • 4.3French and English results taken together
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 May 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.19006.cap
References (42)
References
Anscombre, J.-C. 1992. Quand on Fait du Sentiment ; Réflexions (presque) Spontanées sur la Nature des Noms Psychologiques. In De la Musique à la Linguistique. Hommage à Nicolas Ruwet, L. Tasmowski and A. Zribi-Hertz (eds), 139–153. Ghent: Communication et Cognition.Google Scholar
1995. Morphologie et Représentation Événementielle : Le Cas des Noms de Sentiment et d’Attitude. Langue française 1051, 40–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996. Noms de Sentiment, Noms d’Attitude et Noms Abstraits. In Les noms abstraits. Histoire et theories, N. Flaux, M. Galtigny and D. Samain (eds), 257–273. Lille: Presses Universitaires du Septentrion.Google Scholar
Balibar-Mrabti, A. 1995. Une Étude de la Combinatoire des Noms de Sentiment dans une Grammaire Locale. Langue Française 1051: 88–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barcelona, A. 2001. On the Systematic Contrastive Analysis of Conceptual Metaphors: Case Studies and Proposed Methodology. In Applied Cognitive Linguistics II: Language Pedagogy, M. Pütz, S. Niemeier and R. Dirven (eds), 117–146. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beauseroy, D. 2009. Syntaxe et Sémantique des Noms Abstraits Statifs : Des Propriétés Verbales ou Adjectivales aux Propriétés Nominales. PhD Thesis, Université de Nancy II.Google Scholar
Boas, H. C. 2010. Comparing Constructions across Languages. In Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar, H. C. Boas (ed), 1–20. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cappelle, B. and F. Tayalati. 2015. Autonomous Entities and the Choice between There and Possessive Existentials. Spring Colloquium of the Graduate Student Association, 28 March 2015, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Cappelle, B., V. Mostrov and F. Tayalati. 2019. Dépendance et Autonomie des Noms Dénotant des Propriétés Humaines : Étude Contrastive Français/Anglais. In Comparatio delectat III. Akten der VIII. Internationalen Arbeitstagung zum romanisch-deutschen und innerromanischen Sprachvergleich, Innsbruck, 29 August – 1 September 2016, E. Lavric, C. Konecny, C. Konzett-Firth, W. Pöckl, M. Messner and E. Jacinto García (eds), 271–295. Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Flaux, N. and D. Van de Velde. 2000. Les Noms en Français : Esquisse de Classement. Paris: Orphys.Google Scholar
Freeze, Ray. 1992. Existentials and other Locatives. Language 68(3): 553–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gast, V. and F. Haas. 2011. On the Distribution of Subject Properties in Formulaic Presentationals of Germanic and Romance: A Diachronic-Typological Approach. In Impersonal Constructions: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, A. Malchukov and ‎A. Siewierska (ed), 127–166. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Husserl, E. 1972 (1913). Recherches Logiques. Tome 21. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Kassambara, A. and F. Mundt. 2017. Factoextra: Extract and Visualize the Results of Multivariate Data Analyses. Available at [URL] [last accessed 19 February 2018].
Kövecses, Z. 2002. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krzyżanowska, A. 2006. Analyse Sémantique de Certains Noms d’Émotion. Lublin Studies in Modern Languages and Literature 29/301: 24–37.Google Scholar
2011. Aspects Lexicaux et Sémantiques de la Description des Noms d’Affect en Français et en Polonais. Lublin: Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lauwers, P. and T. Vermote. 2014. La Flexibilité de l’Opposition Massif/Comptable en Français et en Néerlandais: Une Étude Contrastive. Syntaxe et sémantique 151: 139–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lê, S., J. Josse and F. Husson. 2008. FactoMineR: An R Package for Multivariate Analysis. Journal of Statistical Software 25(1): 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leeman, D. 1987. À ma Grande Surprise! Revue Québécoise de Linguistique 1/21: 415–434.Google Scholar
1991. Hurler de Rage, Rayonner de Bonheur, Remarques sur une Construction en de . Langue Française 911: 80–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995. Pourquoi peut-on Dire ‘Max est en colère’ mais non ‘Max est en peur’? Hypothèses sur la Construction être en N . Langue Française 1051: 55–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mathieu, Y. 1995. Verbes Psychologiques et Interprétation Sémantique. Langue Française 1051: 98–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999. Les Prédicats de Sentiment. Langages 1361: 41–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mostrov, V. 2010. Étude Sémantique et Syntaxique des Compléments Adnominaux en à et en de Dénotant des Parties. PhD Thesis, Université de Lille 3.Google Scholar
Oxford Dictionaries. n.d. temperament. Available at [URL] [last accessed 21 February 2019].
Paykin, K., F. Tayalati and D. Van de Velde. 2015. Les Noms d’Évaluation de Comportement. Travaux de Linguistique 71(2): 43–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paykin, K. and D. Van de Velde. 2015. Possession, Localisation et Existence en Russe et en Français, International colloquium “Existential Predication in Natural Languages: Values, Operations, Structures, Modalities”, 10–11 April 2015, Paris, Inalco.Google Scholar
Pearson, K. 1901. On Lines and Planes of Closest Fit to Systems of Points in Space. Philosophical Magazine 2(11): 559–572.Google Scholar
Takeuchi, S. 2015. Possessive have, Existential have, and Related Phenomena: Binding Relations Represented in Conceptual Structure. PhD Thesis, University of Tsukuba.Google Scholar
Tutin, A. and F. Grossmann. 2002. Collocations Régulières et Irrégulières : Esquisse de Typologie du Phénomène Collocatif. Revue Française de Linguistique Appliquée 7(1), 7–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tutin, A., I. Novakova, F. Grossmann and C. Cavalla. 2006. Esquisse de Typologie des Noms d’Affect à partir de leurs Propriétés Combinatoires. Langue française 1501: 32–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van de Velde, D. 1995. Le Spectre Nominal. Des Noms de Matières aux Noms d’Abstractions. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
1998a. Alice Noyée dans ses Larmes. Verbum 20(4): 395–403.Google Scholar
1998b. Cet Obscur Objet du Désir. L’Objet des Verbes de Sentiment. Travaux de Linguistique 351: 67–78.Google Scholar
1999a. Adjectifs d’États, Adjectifs de Qualités. In Fonctions Syntaxiques et Rôles Sémantiques, D. Amiot, W. De Mulder, N. Flaux and M. Tenchéa (eds), 151–160. Arras: Artois Presses Universitaires.Google Scholar
1999b. La Multiplication des Sentiments. Travaux de Linguistique 381: 63–87.Google Scholar
2003. Existence et Localisation. Ms. University of Lille.Google Scholar
Vermote, T. 2014a. L’Opposition Massif-Comptable : Flexibilité et Modélisation. Études de Corpus, Enquêtes d’Acceptabilité et Expérience d’Amorçage en Français et en Néerlandais. PhD Thesis, Universiteit Gent.Google Scholar
2014b. L’Opposition Massif-Comptable au Niveau Lexical et Supra-Lexical. In Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française (CMLF 2014), F. Neveu, P. Blumenthal, L. Hriba, J. Meinschaefer et S. Prévost (eds), vol. 81, 3225–3238. Freie Universität Berlin. Available at [URL] [last accessed 14 October 2019].
Vermote, T., P. Lauwers and L. De Cuypere. 2017. Transcending the Lexical vs. Grammatical Divide regarding the Mass/Count Distinction. Evidence from Corpus Studies and Acceptability Surveys in French and Dutch. Language Sciences 621: 37–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar