Affiliation:
1. University of Wuppertal , Romance Languages and Literatures , Gaußstr. 20 , 42119 Wuppertal , Germany
2. University of Zurich , Institute of Romance Studies , Zürichbergstr. 8 , 8032 Zürich , Switzerland
Abstract
Abstract
The liaison consonant [z] in French noun phrases has traditionally been assumed to function as a plural marker. The realization of “plural [z]” in N(oun)-A(djective)-combinations is becoming, however, very rare in naturalistic data – except for contexts which allow a proper-name reading. On the one hand, one might think that we are dealing with a recent phenomenon, the beginning of a potential linguistic change in French in the sense of exaptation, reuse of former morphophonological material such as plural markers to signal proper-namehood in the sense of ‘frozen morphology’. If this turns out correct, we expect the productivity of the new synchronic function to increase: New NA-combinations which function as proper names should be realized systematically with liaison, and proper name-marking via liaison should also become possible with other liaison consonants. On the other hand, we may be dealing with a (completed) diachronic process, in that only those NA-combinations which allowed liaison at the relevant point in time may have a liaison consonant in their univerbalized form. That is, new NA-combinations, even though they are used as proper names, do not display a liaison consonant, because liaison is no longer possible. The purpose of this paper was to investigate, based on empirical studies, whether liaison productively marks NA-combinations which function as proper names and distinguishes them from NA-combinations that count as common nouns, or whether we are dealing with a completed diachronic process. In view of the poor productivity observed, we argue that we are dealing with cases of univerbation.
Reference42 articles.
1. Ackermann, Tanja. 2018. Grammatik der Namen im Wandel. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
2. Ågren, John. 1973. Études sur quelques liaisons facultatives dans le français de conversation radiophonique: Fréquence et facteurs. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
3. Ashby, William J. 1981. French liaison as a sociolinguistic phenomenon. In William W. Cressey & Donna Jo Napoli (eds.), Linguistic symposium on Romance languages, 46–57. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
4. Bosredon, Bernard. 2011. Dénominations monoréférentielles, figement et signalétique. In Jean-Claude Anscombre & Salah Mejri (eds.), Le figement linguistique: la parole entravée, 155–169. Paris: Champion.
5. Bybee, Joan. 2001. Frequency effects on French liaison. In Joan Bybee & Paul Hopper (eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, 337–359. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.