Skip to main content

Some Insights on a Typology of French Interactional Prefabricated Formulas in Spoken Corpora

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Computational and Corpus-Based Phraseology (EUROPHRAS 2022)

Abstract

This study deals with interactional prefabricated formulas (IPFs) in French, these usual formulas used in spoken or written interactions, such as how shall I put it ?; you bet !; see you later; you’re welcome; nice to see you; that’s fine. These expressions, often called “routine formulae” have not been much listed and studied, unlike other types of expressions, although they are very common. We propose a broad typology of these formulas from meta-enunciative IPFs (on va dire ‘let’s say’) to direct interactional expressions (c’est bon ‘it’s OK’) or ritual formulas (bonne journée ‘have a nice day’). An annotation scheme has been developed to account for the different aspects of these elements including main types, semantic labels, clause types and lemmatization. A first annotation of the main types carried out on diverse extracts of oral corpora shows a contrasted distribution according to the genres. This prompts us to recall that spoken corpora do not constitute a uniform genre with respect to these phraseological phenomena.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Corpus is introduced in Sect. 3.2.

  2. 2.

    https://www.ortolang.fr/market/corpora/cefc-orfeo (accessed 05/20/2022).

  3. 3.

    We use an incremental procedure by enriching the IPF lists integrated gradually into NooJ.

  4. 4.

    “Mood” refering here to historical grammatical conception, in opposition with semantic conception linked with “modality” that expresses the spearker’s attitude regarding his statement (Gosselin et al. 2010, Nuyts et al. 2016).

  5. 5.

    Remember that polar questions in spoken French generally have the same syntactic structure as the declarative clauses. Only the prosody distinguishes them.

References

Corpus

  • CLAPI: http://clapi.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/. Accessed 01 June 2022

  • CFPP: http://cfpp2000.univ-paris3.fr/. Accessed 01 June 2022

  • Abeillé, A., Clément, L., Liégeois, L.: Un corpus arboré pour le français: le French Treebank. TAL 60(2), 19–43 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  • Apothéloz, D.: La rection dite ”faible”: grammaticalisation ou différentiel de grammaticité ?. Verbum, La grammaticalisation en français. 25(3), 241–262. Presses Universitaires de France, Nancy (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, D., Culpeper, J., Matthew D.: Pragmatic annotation. In: Kytö, M., Lüdeling, A. (eds.) Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, pp. 613–642. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bally, C.: Traité de stylistique française. Klincksieck, Paris (1921)

    Google Scholar 

  • Benzitoun, C., Debaisieux, J. M.: Orféo: un corpus et une plateforme pour l’étude du français contemporain. Langages. 219(3), 160p. (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bidaud, F.: Structures figées de la conversation. Analyse contrastive français-italien. Peter Lang, Bern/Berlin (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanche-benveniste, C., Willems, D.: Un nouveau regard sur les verbes faibles. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 102, 217–254 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanco, X., Mejri, S.: Les pragmatèmes. Champion, Paris (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  • Corpas Pastor, G.: Manual de fraseología española. Gredos, Madrid (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  • Coulmas, F.: On the sociolinguistic relevance of routine formulae. J. Pragmat. 3(3–4), 239–266 (1979)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coulmas, F.: Conversational Routine: Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech, vol. 96. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowie, A.P. (ed.): Phraseology. Theory, Analysis, and Applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  • Cresti, E., Massimo, M., Tucci, I.: Annotation de l’entretien d’Anita Musso selon la Théorie de la langue en acte. Lang. Fr. 170(2), 95–110 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croft, W., Cruse, A.: Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Deulofeu, J., et Valli, A.: « Lexique et classement en parties du discours dans ORFÉO ». Langages. 219(3), 53–68 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  • Eshkol-Taravella, I., Grabar, N.: Taxinomie dans les reformulations du point de vue de la linguistique de corpus. Syntaxe et Sémantique 1(18), 149–184 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fillmore, Ch.: Frame Semantics Meets Construction Grammar. In Bernal, E., DeCesaris, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the XIII EURALEX International Congress, 49–69. Institut Universitari de Lingüística Aplicada, Barcelone (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fónagy, I.: Situation et signification. John Benjamins Publishing, Amsterdam (1982)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gharbi, N.: Analyse sémantico-pragmatique et discursive: les formules expressives de la conversation. Université Grenoble Alpes-Université de Sfax, Thèse de doctorat (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosselin, L.: Les modalités en français: la validation des représentations. Rodopi, Netherlands/New York (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahane, S., Gerdes, K.: Annotation syntaxique du français parlé: Les choix d’ORFÉO. Langages 219(3), 69–86 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C., Traverso, V. (eds): Les interactions en site commercial: invariants et variation. ENS éditions, Lyon (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffer, M.: Le figement des «actes de langage stéréotypés» en français et en allemand ». Pratiques: théories, pratique, pédagogie, 159–160, 42–54 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffer, M.: Les “actes de langage stéréotypés”: essai de synthèse critique. Cah. Lexicol. 1(114), 149–171 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  • Krzyżanowska, A., Grossmann, F., Kwapisz-Osadnik, K.: Les formules expressives de la conversation Analyse contrastive: français-polonais-italien. Episteme, Lublin (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G.: Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago University Press, Chicago (1987)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • López-Simó, M.: Fórmulas de la conversación. Propuesta de definición y clasificación con vistas a su traducción español-francés, francés-español. Thèse de doctorat, Université d’Alicante (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  • Lüger, H.: Pragmatische Phraseme: Routineforme. In: Burger, H. (eds) Phraseologie: ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung, pp. 444–459. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  • Martins-Baltar, M.: Énoncés de motif usuels: figures de phrase et procès en déraison. Cahiers du français contemporain 2, 87–118 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mel’čuk, I.: Clichés, an understudied subclass of phrasemes. Yearbook of Phraseology. 6(1), 55–86 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  • Nasr, A., Dary, F., Bechet, F., Fabre, B.: Annotation syntaxique automatique de la partie orale du ORFÉO. Langages 219(3), 87–102 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuyts, J., Van der Auwera, J. (eds.): The Oxford Handbook of Modality and Mood. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pausé, MS., Tutin, A., Kraif, O., Coavoux, M.: Extraction de Phrases Préfabriquées des Interactions à partir d’un corpus arboré du français parlé: une étude exploratoire. In: Neveu, F., Prévost, S., Steuckardt, A., Bergounioux, G., Hamma, B. (eds.) 8e Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française (CMLF) 2022. SHS Web of Conferences, 138, Orléans (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrin, L.: Modalisateurs, connecteurs, et autres formules énonciatives. Arts et Savoirs, 2 (2012). http://journals.openedition.org/aes/500. Accessed 14 April 2022

  • Ronan, P.: Categorizing expressive speech acts in the pragmatically annotated SPICE Ireland corpus. ICAME J. 39, 25–45 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silberztein, M.: Formalizing Natural Languages: the NooJ Approach. Max Silberztein. Wiley Editions, Hoboken (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tutin, A.: Phrases préfabriquées des interactions: quelques observations sur le corpus CLAPI. Cah. Lexicol. 114, 63–91 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisser, M.: The DART annotation scheme: form, appliability & application. Stud. Neophilol. 91(2), 131–153 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuluaga, A.: Introducción al estudio de las expresiones fijas. Peter Lang, Berne (1980)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Agnès Tutin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Pausé, MS., Tutin, A. (2022). Some Insights on a Typology of French Interactional Prefabricated Formulas in Spoken Corpora. In: Corpas Pastor, G., Mitkov, R. (eds) Computational and Corpus-Based Phraseology. EUROPHRAS 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13528. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15925-1_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15925-1_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-15924-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-15925-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics