Signata (Mar 2017)
Syntaxe et paradigme(s) : outre les relations de dépendance, les relations d’équivalence
Abstract
This article intends to examine, in the theoretical framework of functional linguistics, syntactic ‘equivalence’ relationships, as opposed to the far more described syntactic dependency relationships, in the light of paradigmatic piles as defined in the Aix micro and macrosyntactic approach. These two sorts of relationships (‘equivalence’ and piling) can be considered as paradigmatic as they are established between units which are able to replace each other, though, at the same time, they (necessarily) also occupy the syntagmatic axis. Coordination, which can be seen as belonging to these two sorts of relationships, is first discussed, with a special attention to interpropositional coordination, as the existence of ‘equivalence’ relationships beyond the sentence can be questioned. Apposition, which is not analysed as being part of ‘equivalence’ and piling relationships as unanimously as coordination, is then addressed. These conflicting views may be due to the syntactic status of apposition which, rather than a relationship, comes to a function. The notion of syntactic ‘relay’, instead, can be proposed as a sort of ‘equivalence’ relationships, thus constituting a syntactic counterpart of the semantic notion of reformulation. Finally, the notion of ‘functional resumption’ is presented as a sort of ‘equivalence’ relationships but not of piling relationships, and it is shown that this particular notion allows a strictly syntactic (vs macrosyntactic) treatment of detachment of noun phrases resumed by pronouns in the main clause. This comparison between ‘equivalence’ relationships and some piling relationships puts forward the immanent aspect of these notions, which both refer to paradigmatic phenomena but are to be replaced within their respective theoretical frameworks (functional linguistics vs Aix micro and macrosyntactic approach) and maximal units (sentence based on a syntactic criterion vs government unit or ‘grouping’ of government units).The author puts forward the following words: ‘equivalence’ relationships, piling relationships/paradigmatic piles, coordination, apposition, detachment/dislocation.
Keywords
