| Titre | Le circonstant est-il un terme facultatif de la phrase russe ? [Is the Circumstantial Phrase a Facultative Element in a Russian Sentence?] | |
|---|---|---|
| Auteur | Christine Bracquenier | |
 |
Revue | Revue des Etudes Slaves |
| Numéro | Vol. 82, no 2, 2011 | |
| Rubrique / Thématique | Articles |
|
| Page | 295-309 | |
| Résumé anglais |
Is the Circumstantial Phrase a Facultative Element in a Russian Sentence ?
Since the grammatical circumstance concept has been introduced, it has been considered as a facultative part of the sentence. In fact, it is frequently so if to do a strictly syntactic analysis, but when information and discourse coherence are concerned, the speaker nearly always has to express the circumstances if he wants the addressee to understand properly what the matter is. In this article we consider the cases when a circumstance expression is necessary on the syntactic level, too. The circumstantial phrase can be the Rheme of the utterance, and if the expression of place, time or reason is deleted, there is no utterance at all. But when the addressee already knows the circumstances, we wonder why the speaker considers it necessary to repeat the already known information. However, he does it when he thinks that the addressee might forget about these circumstances, when he wants to define a time and space framework in which the utterance will be correct ; when the sentence is built on a binary opposition, a circumstance expression is compulsory on the syntactic level. So, we can say the circumstantial phrase is not as facultative as it is usually said. And it may be compulsory in some situations. Source : Éditeur (via Persée) |
|
| Article en ligne | https://www.persee.fr/doc/slave_0080-2557_2011_num_82_2_8095 |
