Le redoublement des sujets en picard

Journal of French Language Studies

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 381-404

  Auger, Julie ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248693415     PISSN: 09592695     EISSN: 14740079     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0959269503001200     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Anagnostopoulou, E. (1997). Clitic left dislocation and contrastive left dislocation. In: E. Anagnostopoulou, H. van Riemsdijk and F. Zwarts (eds), Materials on Left Dislocation. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 151–192.
2. Ashby, W. J. (1988). The syntax, pragmatics, and sociolinguistics of left- and right-dislocations in French. Lingua 75: 203–229.
3. Ashby, W. J. (1994). An acoustic profile of right-dislocations in French. Journal of French Language Studies 4(2): 127–145.
4. Auger, J. (1995). Les clitiques pronominaux en français parlé informel: une approche morphologique. Revue québécoise de linguistique 24(1): 21–60.
5. Auger, J. (2000). Phonology, variation, and prosodic structure: Word-final epenthesis in Vimeu Picard. In: J. M. Fontana et al. (eds), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE). Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra, pp. 14–24.
6. Auger, J. (2001). Phonological Variation and Optimality Theory: Evidence from word-initial vowel epenthesis in Picard. Language Variation and Change 13(3): 253–303.
7. Auger, J. (2003a). Les pronoms clitiques sujets en picard: une analyse au confluent de la phonologie, de la morphologie et de la syntaxe. Journal of French Language Studies 13(1): 1–22.
8. Auger, J. (2003b). Picard parlé, picard écrit: comment s'influencent-ils l'un l'autre?. In: J. Landrecies and A. Petit (eds), Le Picard d'hier et d'aujourd'hui, numéro spécial de Bien dire bien Aprandre, 20. Centre d'Études Médiévales et Dialectales: Lille 3, pp. 17–32.
9. Bauche, H. (1920/1950). Le Langage populaire. Paris: Payot.
10. Berrendonner, A. and Reichler-Béguelin, M.-J. (1997). Left dislocation in French: varieties, norm and usage. In: J. Cheshire and D. Stein (eds), Taming the Vernacular; From Dialect to Written Standard Language. London: Longman, pp. 200–217.
11. Brandi, L. and Cordin, P. (1989). Two Italian dialects and the null subject parameter. In: O. Jaeggli and K. Safir (eds), The Null Subject Parameter. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 111–142.
12. Bresnan, J. and Mchombo, S. A. (1987). Topic, pronoun, and agreement in Chichewa. Language 63(4): 741–782.
13. Campion, E. (1984). Left Dislocation in Montréal French. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
14. Cinque, G. (1990). Types of A'-dependencies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Cochet, E. (1933). Le Patois de Gondecourt (Nord). Paris: Droz.
16. Collins, C. and Branigan, P. (1997). Quotative inversion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15(1): 1–41.
17. Dauby, J. (1979). Le Livre du ‘Rouchi’ parler picard de Valenciennes. Amiens: Musée de Picardie.
18. Debrie, R. (1974). Étude linguistique du patois de l'Amiénois. Amiens: Archives départementales de la Somme.
19. Delais-Roussarie, É. (2000). Vers une nouvelle approche de la structure prosodique. Langue française 126: 92–112.
20. Deshaies, D., Guilbault, C. et Paradis, C. (1993). Prosodie et dislocation à gauche par anaphore en français québécois spontané. In: A. Crochetière, J.-Cl. Boulanger, and C. Ouellon (eds), Actes du XVe Congrès international des linguistes, vol. II. Québec: Presses de l'Université Laval, pp. 31–34.
21. Duranti, A. and E. Ochs. (1979). Left-dislocations in Italian conversation. In: T. Givón (ed), Syntax and Semantics, t. 12. New York: Academic Press, pp. 377–416.
22. Edmont, E. (1897/1980). Lexique Saint-Polois. Genève: Slatkine Reprints.
23. Ferdinand, A. (1996). The Development of Functional Categories; The Acquisition of the Subject in French. The Hague: Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.
24. Fradin, B. (1990). Approche des constructions à détachement, inventaire. Revue romane 25(11): 3–34.
25. Friedemann, M.-A. (1997). Inversion stylistique et position de base du sujet. Revue canadienne de linguistique 42(4): 379–413.
26. Gadet, F. (1989). Le Français ordinaire. Paris: Armand Colin.
27. Goodall, G. (2002). On preverbal subjects in Spanish. In: T. Satterfield, C. Tortora et D. Cresti (eds), Current Issues in Romance Languages Selected Papers from the 29th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Ann Arbor, 8–11 April 1999. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 95–109.
28. Guiraud, P. (1965). Le Français populaire. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
29. Hale, K. (1983). Walrpiri and the grammar of non-configurational languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1(1): 5–47.
30. Hrkal, E. (1910). Grammaire historique du patois picard de Démuin. Revue de philologie française et de littérature 24: 118–140, 175–204, 241–277.
31. Inkelas, S. and Zec, D. (1995). Syntax-phonology interface. In: J. A. Goldsmith (ed), Handbook of Phonological Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell, pp. 535–549.
32. Kanerva, J. M. (1990). Focusing on phonological phrases in ChicheÎa. In: S. Inkelas and D. Zec (eds), The Phonology-Syntax Connection. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 145–161.
33. Kayne, R. S. and Pollock, J.-Y. (2001). New thoughts on stylistic inversion. In: A. C. J. Hulk and J.-Y. Pollock (eds), Subject Inversion in Romance and the Theory of Universal Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 107–162.
34. Labelle, M. and Valois, D. (1996). The status of post-verbal subjects in French child language. Probus 8(1): 53–80.
35. Lambrecht, K. (1981). Topic, Antitopic and Verb Agreement in Non-Standard French. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
36. Lambrecht, K. (1986). Topic, Focus, and the Grammar of Spoken French. Thèse de doctorat, University of California, Berkeley.
37. Ledieu, A. (1909). Petite Grammaire du patois picard. Paris: H. Welter.
38. Nadasdi, T. (2000). Variation grammaticale et langue minoritaire. Munich: Lincom Europa.
39. Nespor, M. and Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
40. Poletto, C. (2000). The Higher Functional Field; Evidence from Northern Italian Dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
41. Prince, E. F. (1997). On the functions of left-dislocation in English discourse. In: A. Kamio (éd.), Directions in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 117–143.
42. Rizzi, L. (1986). On the status of subject clitics in: Romance. In O. Jaeggli and C. Silva-Corvalán. (eds), Studies in Romance Linguistics. Dordrecht: Foris, pp. 391–419.
43. Roberge, Y. (1990). The Syntactic Recoverability of Null Arguments. Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.
44. Saccon, G. (1993). Post-Verbal Subjects; A Study Based on Italian and its Dialects. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.
45. Selkirk, E. O. (1984). Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
46. Vasseur, G. (1996). Grammaire des parlers picards du Vimeu (Somme). Abbeville: F. Paillart.
47. Wunderli, P. (1987). L'Intonation des séquences extraposées en français. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
48. Zribi-Hertz, A. (1994). La syntaxe des clitiques nominatifs en français standard et en français avancé. Travaux de linguistique et de philologie XXXII: 131–147.