The competition between the French suffixes -ment, -ion,
-age and -erie. A semantic analysis
Nominalisations across Languages, Universität Stuttgart
30th November - 2d December 2007
Fabienne Martin
Universität Stuttgart, SFB732/B5
[email protected]
1.
Introduction
• Object: the distribution of four of the suffixes available to create French eventive deverbal nouns (EDNs), namely -ment, -ion, -age and -erie.1
• Hyp. 1: these suffixes have a semantical value. More precisely, they encode certain
aspectual/actional/thematic information, which contributes to explain
i. (strong version) 1) why verbs select different suffixes in the operation of nominalisation (the meaning of the verbal stem and the one of the suffix must match)
and/or
ii. (weaker version) 2) the interpretation of existing DNs, including the semantical
differences of DNs derived from a same verbal stem but with different suffixes
and/or
3) the acceptability of neologisms
• Contra Hyp. 1: Kerleroux (2007):
– French
DN s
are often simply copied from the Latin ones.
– Therefore, if the distribution of the suffixes depends on the semantics of the verbal
roots, it is on the Latin ones.
• Counter-arguments:
– the weak version of Hyp. 1 is not concerned by these counter-arguments
– in some cases at least, the meaning of the Latin verb is close to the one of the
French derived verb
– when more than one DNs were derived from the same verbal stem in the history,
one can assume that the “surviving” one(s) are the ones who optimalise the match
between the semantics of the suffix and the one of the verb (cf. destruction which
“wins over” destruiment)
1I
would like to thank Dennis Spohr for his technical assistance as well as Nicolas Dumay and Melanie
Uth for discussions.
1
– subjects seem to have intuitions on the semantics of EDNs built on pseudo-verbs,
which cannot be explained if the semantic value of these suffixes is empty (= Hyp.
2, cf. Dumay et Martin (2007))).
• Empirical data:
– used EDNs (listed in dictionaries or not). When the DN is present in corpora but
not present in Le Petit Robert or Le Trésor de la Langue française, it is prefixed with
˚
– Invented (and morpho-phonologically well-formed)
and pseudo-verbs, pr. with i
EDN s
derived from real verbs
• Long-term goals :
– explain the competition of the 4 suffixes among existing
– make predictions about the acceptability of invented
EDN s
EDN s
– identify the semantical relations native speakers tend to establish by default between different invented EDNs derived from the same pseudo verb
• Examples of questions submitted to subjects in Dumay et Martin (2007)
– Is the process described by luvuchage simpler or more complex than the process described by luvuchation ? (luvucher being a pseudo-verb)
– Is the process described by luvuchement longer or smaller than the one described by
luvuchage ?
– Imagine that toliner is a verb denoting a certain action that can be finished or not.
If you want to describe an action of this type which is not finished, would you rather
use tolinage or tolination to refer to it ?
– Imagine that the verb drivoncher refers to a certain action. Now, suppose that in
certain circumstances an action of this type is part of a complex ritual and is performed in several different complex steps. How would you call this ritual/ institutional
action ?
– Complete the sentence with a nominalisation formed with age, ment, erie or ion and
formed on the basis of the given verb :
i. It was never-ending, this (grépuler)
ii. It was quite complex, this (bufonter)
iii. ...
• Plan of the talk :
• Indicators of the eventive readings and bad results (no clear distribution between
the distribution of the suffixes and the (a)telicity of the verb)
• -age vs -ment
DN s
• -ment vs -ion
DN s
• -age vs -ion
DN s
• -age vs -erie
DN s
2
2.
Comparing the eventive
EDN s
• DNs are here only compared under their eventive reading (ER). They are not differentiated by the range of readings they are supposed to have as in Lüdtke (1978)), nor
compared under their stative reading (cf. Uth (2007b)) • The "witness" test: it is assumed that 1) the DN can have the ER as soon as it can felicitously be the object of the
verb assister à (’witness’), whose object cannot denote objects, facts or states:
(1)
*J’ai assisté au livre/ *I witnessed the book
(2)
? ?J’ai assisté au fait qu’il était parti/ ? ?I witnessed the fact that he was gone
(3)
? ?J’ai assisté à son état/ ? ?I witnessed his state
and that 2) only the event which has to be witnessed for the sentence to be true is
denoted by the DN. Example:
(4)
J’ai assisté aux soins.
I witnessed the treatment
(only the action of treating y is witnessed)
(5)
J’ai assisté à la guérison.
I witnessed the curing
(only the change of state is witnessed)
Note that the “modifier test” generally points to the same conclusion than the witnesstest (only the event(s) which has/have to be witnessed must satisfy the predicate denoted by the modifier to be in the denotation of the whole NP):
(6)
Des soins rapides
A quick treatment
(7)
Une guérison rapide
A quick curing
2.1.
(only the action of treating y has to be quick)
(only the change of state has to be quick)
No (clear) correlation between the distribution of suffixes and
the (a)telicity of the verb
• >Mourelatos hypothesis:
i. Mourelatos (1978): count nouns (compatible with quantifiers like one) can only
be derived from telic verbs, while atelic verbs yield mass nouns (usable as bare
nouns).
ii. Other things being equal, French -age EDNs are intuitively2 more frequently usable
as mass nouns than -ment or -ion EDNs. (du/de la often acceptable with -age-EDNs
but randomly with -ment and -ion EDNs)3
iii. Prediction: the (a)telicity of the verb may partly determine the choice of the suffix
(given [i.] and [ii.]). This prediction seems also supported by the intuition that
-ion and -ment DNs seem more “telic” then the -age ones.
2I
have not confirmed this intuition on a significant amount of nominalisations yet.
du déchiffrage/ It is du deciphering(636) vs C’est du déchiffrement (0); C’est du gribouillage, it is
du scribbling (930) versus C’est du gribouillement (0).
3 C’est
3
• Inquiry: The (a)telicity of 300 psych-verbs (verbsψ ) was tested. To each of these
verbs were associated
i. the existent
EDN (s)
(eg emballement, ’enthusiasm’ for emballerψ , ’to thrill’)
ii. the availability of a telic and/or atelic reading(s) for the verb (tested with [+SQA]
objects)
iii. the other reading(s) this verb might have (eg emballerψ is linked to the physical
verb emballerφ ’to wrap’)
iv. The available
’wrapping’).
EDN s
for the other readings (eg emballerφ is linked to emballage,
• Results (cf. table 1): the Mourelatos hypothesis is basically falsified (no clear correlation between the (a)telicity of the verb and the choice of the suffixes).4
Telic r. of the verb OK
Atelic r. of the verb OK
No telic r. for the verb
No atelic r. for the verb
-ment (194)
48,2% (95)
70,5% (139)
50,2% (99)
23,8% (47)
-ion (146)
56,8%(83)
71,6% (104)
41% (60)
21,9% (32)
-age (49)
59,1% (29)
77,5% (39)
36,7% (18)
18,3% (9)
erie (16)
31,2% (5)
93,7% (15)
62,5% (10)
6,2% (1)
Table 1: The impact of the (a)telicity of the verbal root on the choice of the suffix
NB : a finer typology of the atelic readings may change the results (no distinction made
between the processive and resultative reading of the VP modified by a durative adverbial)
• However, these results are not so surprising, since quite a few verbs have inverse
aspectual values under two different readings, but nominalise the same way:
(8)
L’éponge a absorbé la flaque en/??pendant dix minutes.(>absorption)
The sponge absorbed the puddle in/for ten minutes.
(9)
Pierre m’a absorbé ??en/pendant 10 minutes. (>absorption)
Pierre absorbed me in/during ten minutes.
The (a)telicity of the verbal stem seems irrelevant for the choice of the suffix in Spanish
too (A. Fabregas, p.c.)
3.
-age versus -ment
• Two previous claims:
1. -age is selected by transitive verbs, and -ment by intransitive ones (Dubois (1962),
Dubois et Dubois-Charlier (1999))
Good predictions for sifflage/sifflement >siffler/ whistle ;
froissage/ froissement>froisser/ crease).
Problems : arrivage (>arriver, arrive), miaulage (>miauler, meow)
4 The
number of DNs containing a certain suffix is put in parenthesis after the suffix. As the same
verb may have different aspectual value on its different readings (eg absorberφ has both values, while
absorberψ only has the atelic one), the DN is counted twice if it nominalises two different readings.
4
2. -age is selected when the subject of the verb denotes an Agent, and -ment in other
cases cf. (10)-(11) (Kelling (2004))
(10) Xag. a gonflé Y/ Xag. inflated Y
→ Le gonflage de X
(11) X¬ag. a gonflé Y/ X¬ag. inflated Y
→ Le gonflement de Y
Problems (noted eg by Heinold (2005)) :
(12) OK Le gonflement des chiffres par certaines sociétés
The inflating of numbers by certain companies
3.1.
Derived from change of state verbs
Claim 1. The event vage denoted by -age EDNs is always longer (or part of a longer
eventive chain, see below) than the event vment denoted by the corresponding -ment
EDN s:
(13) Pierre a assisté au gonflage des ballons
Pierre witnessed the inflating of the balloons
→ Pierre witnessed the causing event.
(14) Pierre a assisté au gonflement des ballons
Pierre witnessed the inflating of the balloons
6→ Pierre witnessed the causing event.
(15) Pierre a assisté au gonflement des ballons par Paul
Pierre witnessed ... by Paul
→ Pierre witnessed the causing event.
→ Even if (13) and (15) have the same truth conditions, they differ compositionally:
the EDN does not perform the same referential job in both cases. In (13), the DN is
responsible for the denotation of the causing event e and the caused event e0 , while in
(15), the DN only denotes the caused event e0 , while the by-phrase itself seems to introduce the causing event e.
• An interesting parallel can be made with the combination of durch-phrases with
causative and non-causative changes of state predicates studied by Solstad (2007):
(16) Ein Polizist wurde durch einen Schuss aus der eigenen Dienstwaffe getötet.
(Solstad (2007))
A policeman was killed by a shot from his own service weapon
' le gonflage du ballon par Paul/the inflating of the balloon by Paul
(17) Ohnesorg starb durch einen gezielten Schuss. (id)
Ohnesorg died through an accurate shot
' le gonflement du ballon par Paul/the inflating of the balloon by Paul
5
• As Solstad argues, even if we have a causative predicate in (16) and an inchoative one
in (17), it seems that the semantic representation assigned in (16) and (17) after composition with durch is similar, in the sense that both sentences include a causing event
e and a specification of this causing event. However, while it is the causative predicate
which is responsible for the introduction of the cause component in (16), it is the durch
phrase which performs this job in (17).5
• Question: which element is responsible of what in (13) and (15)?
Hyp.:
– The verbal base gonfl denotes the change of state e0
– The suffix -age is responsible for the denotation of the causing event e, which
makes the DN gonflage responsible for the denotation of the whole causation. The
par-phrase only specifies the Agent/Performer of e.
– The suffix -ment is semantically less richer than -age in the sense that it does not
refer to any part of the causal chain denoted by (15). Consequently, gonflement
only denotes the change of state e0 . This time, the par-phrase is responsible for the
denotation of the causing event e and specifies the Agent/Performer of this event
e.
• Note that -age seems to specify additionally that the causing event e it introduces is
an action (performed deliberatly or not):
(18) Le décollement des tuiles par le vent/par l’ouvrier.
The unsticking of the tiles by the wind/by the worker.
(19) Le décollage des tuiles #par le vent/OK par l’ouvrier.
The unsticking of the tiles by the wind/by the worker.
• Arrivage (>arriver, ’arrive’) is an interesting counter-example to the hypothesis that
-age introduces a causing event e with (causative/non causative) change of state verbs
(only the change of state is denoted according to the witness/modifier tests):
(20) J’ai assisté à l’arrivage des légumes.
I witnessed the arrival of the vegetables.
(21) Un lent arrivage de légumes.
A slow arrival of vegetables
However, it should be noted that contrary to arrivée, arrivage implies that the change of
state e0 denoted by arriver is caused by an action e:
(22) L’arrivage des légumes/ The arrival/delivery of vegetables.
(23) #L’arrivage des météorites/ The arrival/delivery of meteorites.
5 Solstad
uses the mechanism of unification in order to avoid assuming two different lexical entries of
durch while maintaining strict compositionality. This mechanism can also be applied to account for the
different modes of semantic composition in (13) and (15).
6
• One can try to account of this kind of counter-example in stating that -age DNs denotes
a full causation or a change of state which has to be an « action-caused change of state »
(ie, a change of state which is necessarily caused by an action) :
(24) ∀s, x[Theme(x, s) ∧ Action-caused.Change-of-state(s) → ∃e, yAgent(y, e) ∧ Cause(e, s)]
However, this kind of nominalisations makes the semantic contribution of the -age suffix
obviously less clear.
• Note that the Agent of the action e0 which is ontologically presupposed by the
change of state e denoted by arrivage cannot be expressed by any argument :
(25) *L’arrivage des légumes par les ouvriers.
The arrival of the vegetables by the workers.
• Claim 2. vage must always begin with the action of an Agent-Cause in the sense of
Piñón (2001) (Agent-Cause constraints the causal chain to begin with an Agent and to
lack an Agent anywhere else along the causal chain):
(26) Agent-Cause(e, x, e0 ) = (de f )Agent(x, e) ∧ Cause(e, e0 ) ∧ ∀e00 [Cause(e, e00 ) ∧
(Cause(e00 , e0 ) ∨ e00 = e0 ) → ¬∃y[Agent(e00 , y)]]
In prose, an entity x in an event e agent-causes an event e0 just in case x is the agent
of e, e causes e0 , and any intermediate event e00 in the causal chain between e and e0
(including, as limiting case, e0 itself) lacks an agent.
(27) Marie a plissé la jupe.
Marie pleated the skirt.
(28) Le plissage de la jupe
the pleating of the skirt
(Pure theme)
(29) Marie a plissé les yeux.
Marie squinted her eyes.
(30) #le plissage des yeux
the squinting of the eyes
(The Theme is also a Performer)
• Prediction>Claim 2: -age is very seldomly used for psychological EDNs (the Experiencer of a psychological change of state v’ is always conceived as taking somehow
actively part to v’).
• Apparent counter-example:
(31) ˚époustouflage (205, boggling)
But the Experiencer is then presented as the simple "puppet" of the Causer deprived of
any control on its internal psychological life.
• On the contrary, -ment EDNs always let open the possibility that the Theme of vment
takes actively part (or could have actively taken part) to (a part of) vment (in Piñón
(2001)’s terms, vment has to be conceived as involving a (potentially) non pure change
of state):
7
(32) étonnement (>étonner, astonish), agacement (>agacer, annoy), amusement
(>amuser, amuse), ...
(33) # i photocopiement/#i miniaturisement (OK in contexts where a piece of paper can
somehow take actively part to the photocopying/an entity can take part to its
miniaturization?)
3.2.
Derived from action verbs
• When the EDN denotes an action and not a change of state (cf. miaulement/ miaulage,
’meowing’), -age and -ment cannot be distinguished as previously. Arguably, with these
verbs, the verbal stem and the suffix -age both contribute the same way to the eventive
structure (they both introduce an action e, which can be identified through the mechanism of unification).
• However, -age and -ment
events
EDN s
still differ in this case: -age
EDN s
imply an iteration of
(34) Miaulement : entails 1 ’meow’ or more
(35) Miaulage : entails more than 1 ’meow
(36) secouement/secouage (>secouer, shake) : same contrast
Related claims:
– the Plurality Constraint of Old French -age-Ns (their denotation – groups or kinds
– is necessarily realised by a non-singular entity ; Uth (2007a))
– the iterative value of -age-Ns (Bally (1965))
Prediction : subjects will find (37) most natural than (38) :
(37) Plusieurs miaulements font ensemble un miaulage
Several meow-’ment’ make together a meow-’age’
(38) Plusieurs miaulages font ensemble un miaulement
Several meow-’age’ make together a meow-’ment’
(39) Le chat a poussé un miaulement/#miaulage.
The cat shouted out a meow-ment/a meow-age
4.
4.1.
(U. Heid, p.c.)
-ment versus -ion
From transitive verbs
• Trend 1. -ion EDNs denote the causing event e and the change of state e’, whereas the
corresponding -ment EDNs can denote the change of state only:
(40) J’ai assisté à la dispersion des cendres.
(41) J’ai assisté au dispersement des cendres.
I witnessed the dispersion of the ashes.
(42) Le dénaturement du sucre
The denaturation of the sugar
(the causing event is witnessed)
(the causing event is not nec. witnessed)
(OK the sugar alters by itself)
8
(43) La dénaturation du sucre
The denaturation of the sugar
(#the sugar alters by itself)
(44) Le finissement de l’automne
The ending of the autumn
(45) #La finition de l’automne
The finishing of the autumn
(46) La finition de la table.
The finishing of the table
(47) #Le finissement de la table.
The ending of the table.
• Trend 2. Neologisms in -ment are less frequent in corpora/sounds less natural when
the change of state denoted by the verbal stem is necessarily caused by another event
(is not an “autonomous change of state” as defined in (48)):
(48) ∀x, s[Theme(x, e0 ) ∧ Autonomous-Change-of-State(e0 ) →
¬∃eCause(e, e0 ) ∧ τ(e0 ) < τ(e)]
In prose, for all autonomous change of state e0 having an entity x as its Theme, it cannot
be the case that e0 is caused by an event e such that e begins before e0 . Note that this
definition allows any e0 to be an autonomous change of state as soon as e0 is caused by
a simultaneous event e.
(49) #Alphabétisement (0, >alphabétiser/ alphabetize), #miniaturisement (0,
>miniaturiser/ miniaturize), #tarifiement (0,>tarifier/ fix the price),
#humiliement (2,>humilier/humiliate)
(50) ˚irritement (133), ˚indignement (184)
• 4 out of 4 tested subjects to whom I asked which nouns they would be ready to admit
as appropriate new French nouns among a set composed of indignement, tarifiement,
irritement, poétisement choose irritement and indignement.
(51) Il s’est humilié.
He humiliated himself.
(causative reading only)
(52) Il s’est indigné
(inchoative/causative readings)
a) He got indignant/ b) He made something which made him indignant
• NB: It could be that the creation of -ment DNs like indignement or irritement is motivated by the fact that the concurrent -ion DNs cannot have an eventive reading without
the help of a par-phrase:
(53) #J’ai assisté à l’irritation de Pierre.
I witnessed the annoyance of Pierre
(54) OK J’ai assisté à l’irritation de Pierre par Marie.
I witnessed the provocation of Pierre by Marie
9
• Trend 3. Other things being equal, -ion seems preferred to -ment when the event
e denoted by the EDN is easily conceived as performed in several discontinuous steps
e0 , e00 , e000 ... Arguably, this condition is satisfied as soon as the verb is compatible with a
modifier like en plusieurs étapes (’in several steps’).
(55) J’ai éclaté le ballon #en plusieurs étapes.
I exploded the balloon in several steps.
(56) éclatement/*éclatation.
(57) Il a alphabétisé le pays en plusieurs étapes.
He alphabetised the country in several steps.
(58) *alphabétisement/alphabétisation.
(59) Il m’a étonné/affolé #en plusieurs étapes.
He astonished me/threw me into panic in several steps.
(60) étonnement/*étonnation
(61) affolement/*affolation
(62) Il m’a séduit en plusieurs étapes.
He seduced me in several steps.
(63) *séduisement/séduction.
But they are counter-examples to this claim:
(64) J’ai amorti sa dette en plusieurs étapes.
I amortized his debt in several steps.
(65) amortissement/??i amortition (0)
However, the absence of -ion DN in corpora can be due to the fact that speakers create
less easily neologisms out of verbs finishing in -ir (which are much less frequent than
the verbs finishing in -er). In favour of this hypothesis, note that more one can find
on Internet more than 30 occurrences of amortissation, formed on the basis of the nonstandard verbal stem ˚amortisser, also present in corpora.
4.2.
From intransitive verbs
• Trend 1. -ion EDNs ' - MENT EDNs+ adjuncts (-ion ascribe more properties to the
process than the corresponding -ment) EDNs:
(66) Une renonciation est un renoncement rendu public.
A renunciation is a renouncement made public.
(67) La crufixion est le crucifiement de Jésus-Christ.
The crucifixion is the crucifixion of Jesus-Christ.
• Trend 2. the event denoted by -ment EDNs can easily be conceived as a proper subpart
of an event denoted by the corresponding -ion EDNs, but the reverse is not true:
(68) Soudain, elle a été prise de suffoquements. Cette suffocation a effrayé tout le
monde.
Suddenly, she was starting to suffocate. This suffocation frightened everybody.
10
(69) Soudain, elle a été prise de suffocations. #Ce suffoquement a effrayé tout le
monde.
Suddenly, she was starting to suffocate. This suffocation frightened everybody.
(70) En trois mois il y a eu 37 suffocations d’enfants.
In three months there were 37 suffocations of children.
(71) # En trois mois il y a eu 37 suffoquements d’enfants.
In three months there were 37 suffocations of children.
• Conclusions: the denotation of -ion DNs is richer/more complex than the corresponding -ment DNs in both cases (when derived from transitive or intransitive verbs).
5.
-age versus -ion
• Reminder: DNs are here only compared under their eventive reading. It should be
noted, however, that stative -age DNs seem much rarer than stative -ion DNs. A lot of
-ion DNs seem to be able to acquire an eventive reading only in presence of a par-phrase
(which suggests that they primarily denote a state, which can be coerced in a change of
state when an element of the context denotes a causing event):
(72) #J’ai assisté à la déconcentration de Paul.
I witnessed the loss of concentration of Paul
(73) J’ai assisté à la déconcentration de Paul par les enfants.
Lit.: I witnessed the loss of concentration of Paul by the children.
• Trend 1: when both -age and -ment EDNs can be derived from the same verbal stem, age EDNs ' "imperfective EDNs" (they denote (i) an atelic process or (ii) the internal part
of an telic process, but not the entire telic process) and -ion EDNs ' "perfective EDNs"
(they denote the entire telic process). The difficulty is to come with tests illustrating
this, since the French equivalents of the for-adverbials cannot modify NPs:
(74) *Le repassage des chemises pendant trois heures.
The ironing of the shirts for three hours.
• Here is a possible alternative test:
(75) Le i dénazifiage de l’Allemagne (par X) a abouti à sa dénazification (par X).
The denazifying of Germany (by X) resulted in its denazification (by X).
(76) #La dénazification de l’Allemagne (par X) a abouti à son i dénazifiage (par X).
The denazification of Germany (by X) resulted in its denazifying (by X).
Cf. also codifiage/codification.
• Trend 2: -age EDNs are dispreferred to denote non-physical changes of state:
(77) La fixation/le fixage d’un tableau au mur.
The fastening of a painting on the wall.
(78) La fixation/#le fixage des tarifs.
The setting of the prices.
11
6.
-age versus -erie
6.1.
Group versus sums
• -erie EDNs differ from corresponding -age EDNs in that the former denote a sum of
events (a non-atomic individual) while and the latter denote a group of events (an
atomic individual, cf. Uth (2007a)):
(79) Des cajoleries (#une cajolerie)/ a cuddl-erie
(denotes a sum of events)
(80) Un ˚cajolage (163)/ a cuddl-age
(denotes a group of events)
(81) Des ˚cajolages/’des’cuddl-ages
6.2.
(denotes a group of groups of events)
Iterativity
• With -age EDNs, the pluractionality is realised through iterativity or imperfectivity or
continuativity (Uth (2007a))
• With -erie EDNs, the pluractionality is only realised through iterativity:
(82) Une tuerie (>tuer, kill)/ a massacre
(entails an iteration of killing events)
(83) Le tuage du temps/ The killing of the time
events)
(does not entail an iteration of killing
7.
Conclusions
-erie
complex process
pluract.
iterativity
non termin.
-age
complex process
non-pluract.
iter. ∨ imp. ∨ contin.
non termin.
-ment
simple process
non-pluract.
-ion
complex process
non-pluract.
termin.
termin.
TAB . 2 – Differences between the four kinds of
EDN s
See Table 1.
In sum, it is not true that the competition between the four suffixes at hand can be
explained by the telicity of the related verb. But the different types of EDNs still differ
from each other by some other aspectual and actional features.
Questions still to be answered :
• Why not *pensage, *imaginage while the corresponding psychological verbs penser,
rêver, imaginer (’think’, ’imagine’) have an agentive reading (as already noted by
Vendler (1957), while miauler can nominalise in miaulage ?
• Is it possible to find a unified semantic contribution to the eventive suffixes for any
DN s, independently of the syntactic-semantical class to which pertains the verbal
stem ? If yes, which one ?
• Is the difference used by Fábregas (2007) between Undergoer and Rheme to explain the rivalry of Spanish suffixes relevant for French ?
12
8.
8.1.
Appendix
-age OK, -ment OK, -ion OK
régulage/˚régulement/régulation
cassage/cassement/cassation
finissage/finissement/finition
mâchement/masticage/mastication
élèvement/élevage/élévation
vibrage/˚vibrement/vibration
décentrage/décentrement/décentration
étirage/étirement/˚étiration
finissage/finissement/finition
machage/machement/mastication
cassage/cassement/cassation
épelage/épellement/épellation
démolissage/démolissement/démolition
dispersage/dispersement/dispersion
(dissipage)/dissipement/dissipation
˚stupéfiage/˚stupéfiement/stupéfaction
˚démotivage/˚démotivement/démotivation
˚persécutage/˚persécutement/persécution
˚irritage/irritement/irritation
˚crucifiage/crucifiement/crucifixion
˚dénivellage/dénivellement/dénivellation
˚suçage/sucement/succion
˚transplantage/transplantement/transplantation
8.2.
-ment OK, -ion OK and -age problematic
*pullulage/pullulement/pullulation
isolage/isolement/isolation
désolage/désolement/désolation
préoccupage/(préoccupement)/préoccupation
déportage/déportement/déportation
embarquage/embarquement/embarcation
renonçage/renoncement/renonciation
8.3.
-age OK, -ment OK, -ion problematic
abattement/abattage/*abattation
arrachage/arrachement/*arrachation
arrosage/arrosement/*arrosation
barrage/barrage/*barration
bosselage/bossellement/*bosselation
brunissage/brunissement/*brunissation
cloisonnage/cloisonnement/ ? ?cloisonnation
débouchage/débouchement/*débouchation
déferlage/déferlement/*déferlation
déroulage/déroulement/*déroulation
desserrage/desserrement/*desseration
dégonflation/dégonflement/*dégonflation
détachage/détachement/*détachation
éclaircissage/éclaircissement/*éclaicisation
13
effleurage/effleurement/*effleuration
emballage/emballement/*emballation
embrouillage/embrouillement/ ? ?embrouillation
enlevage/enlèvement/*enlèvation
éreintage/éreintement/*éreintation
frottage/frottement/*frottation
griffonnage/griffonnement/*griffonation
grattage/grattement/*grattation
harponnage/harponnement/*harponnation
martelage/martellement/*martellation
nettoyage/nettoiement/*nettoyation
picotage/picotement/*picotation
papillotage/papillotement/*papillotation
raclage/raclement/*raclation
réchauffage/réchauffement/*réchauffation
recollage/recollement/*recollation
recoupage/recoupement/*recoupation
remuage/remuement/*remuation
renforçage/renforcement/ ? ?renforçation
retournage/retournement/*retournation
sifflage/sifflement/*sifflation
traînage/traînement/*traînation
traçage/tracement/ ?traçation
sifflage/sifflement/*sifflation
chatouillage/chatouillement/*chatouillation
˚haussage/haussement/*haussation
relâchage/relâchement/*relâchation
repliage/repliement/*repliation
˚sanglotage/sanglotement/*sanglotation
˚transférage/transfèrement/*transfération
˚applaudissage/applaudissement/*applaudition
˚attendrissage/attendrissement/*atendrition
rétrécissage/rétrécissement/*rétrécition
˚évanouissage/évanouissement/*évanouition
˚épaississage/épaississement/*épaissition
˚glapissage/glapissement/*glapition
˚enrayage/enrayement/*enrayation
chiffonnage/chiffonnement/*chiffonation
froissage/froissement/*froissation
gonflage/gonflement/*gonflation
esquintage/esquintement/*esquintation
˚affolage/affolement/*affolation
˚enivrage/enivrement/*enivration
˚ensorcellage/ensorcellement/ ?ensorcellation
˚rassurage/rassurement/*rassuration
˚estomaquage/estomaquement/ ? ?estomacation
14
8.4.
-ment OK, -age and -tion problematic
*avançage/avancement/*avançation
commandage/commandement/*commandation
errage/errement/*erration
renversage/renversement/*renversation
retardage/retardement/*retardation
rebondissage/rebondissement/*rebondition
éclatage/éclatement/*éclatation
écartage/écartement/*écartation
? ?aboyage/aboiement/*aboyation
accroissage/accroissement/*accroissation
chatoyage/chatoiement/*chatoition
? ?enchantage/enchantement/*enchantation
? ?amusage/amusement/*amusation
? ?apaisage/apaisement/*apaisation
? ?étonnage/étonnement/*étonnation
8.5.
-age OK, -ion OK, -ment problematic
perforage/ ? ?perforement/perforation
fixage/ ? ?fixement/fixation
numérotage/ ? ?numérotement/numérotation
˚réunissage/ ? ?réuniement/réunion
˚codifiage/*codifiement/codification
˚dénazifiage/ ?dénaziement/dénazification
˚électrifiage/ ? ?électrifiement/électrification
falsifiage/ ? ?falsifiement/falsification
filtrage / ? ?filtrement/filtration
passage/ ? ?passement/passation
˚versifiage/*versifiement/versification
˚carbonisage/*carbonisement/carbonisation
vaporisage/*vaporisement/vaporisation
intimidage/*intimidement/intimidation
8.6.
-ion OK, -age and -ment problematic
?clarifiage/*clarifiement/clarification
? ?personnifiage/ ? ?personnifiement/personnification
? ?réunifiage/ ? ?réunifiement/réunification
?vérifiage/*vérifiement/vérification
tarifiage/*tarifiement/tarification
? ?russifiage/*russifiement/russification
alphabétisage/*alphabétisement/alphabétisation
cancérisage/*cancérisement/cancérisation
caractérisage/*caractérisement/caractérisation
centralisage/*centralisement/centralisation
? ?cicatrisage/*cicatrisement/cicatrisation
? ?crétinisage/*crétinisement/crétinisation
?dépolitisage/*dépolitisement/dépolitisation
?désorganisage/ ?désorganisement/désorganisation
dramatisage/*dramatisement/dramatisation
érotisage/*érotisement/érotisation
improvisage/*improvisement/improvisation
intellectualisage/*intellectualisement/intellectualisation
mémorisage/*mémorisement/mémorisation
15
? ?miniaturisage/*miniaturisement/miniaturisation
? ?modernisage/*modernisement/modernisation
? ?normalisage/*normalisement/normalisation
poétisage/*poétisement/poétisation
sacralisage/*sacralisement/sacralisation
visualisage/*visualisement/visualisation
agressage/*agressement/agression
désappréciage/*désappréciement/désappréciation
résignage/*résignement/résignation
indignage/ ? ?indignement/indignation
tranquillisage/*tranquillisement/tranquillisation
? ?humiliage/*humiliement/humiliation
8.7.
-age ok, -ment and -ion problematic
équilibrage/ ? ?équilibrement/ ? ?équilibration torsage/ ? ?torsement/*torsation
References
Bally, Charles, 1965, Linguistique générale et linguistique française, Berne: Francke.
Dubois, Jean, 1962, Etude sur la dérivation suffixale en français moderne et contemporain, Paris: Larousse.
Dubois, Jean et Dubois-Charlier, Françoise, 1999, La dérivation suffixale en français, Paris: Nathan.
Dumay, Nicolas et Martin, Fabienne, 2007, “Do French Eventive Suffixes Have a Meaning?”, In preparation. University of Bristol & Universität Stuttgart.
Fábregas, Antonio, 2007, “A Syntactic account of Affix Rivalry in Spanish Nominalisations”, Talk presented to the Workshop Nominalisations across Languages, University of Stuttgart, 29 November-1
December 2007.
Heinold, Simone, 2005, “Nominalisierung im heutingen Französisch auf -tion, -ment und -age”, MA Thesis, Universität Stuttgart.
Kelling, Carmen, 2004, “Protorolleneigenschaften von Verbargumenten”, in Rolf Kailuweit et Martin
Hummel (éds.), Semantische Rollen, 341–354, Tübingen: Narr.
Kerleroux, Françoise, 2007, “Des noms indistincs”, in Bernard Fradin (éd.), La raison morphologique.
Hommages à la mémoire de Danielle Corbin, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Lüdtke, Jens, 1978, Prädikative Nominalisierungen mit Suffixen im Katalanischen, Spanischen und Französischen, Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Mourelatos, Alexander, 1978, “Events, Processes, and States”, Linguistics and Philosophy, 2:415–434.
Piñón, Christopher, 2001, “A finer look at the causative-inchoative alternation”, in Rachel Hastings, Brendan Jackson et Zsofia Zvolenszky (éds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 11, Ithaca,
New-York: CLC Publications, Cornell University.
Solstad, Torgrim, 2007, “Lexical Pragmatics and Unification. The Semantics of German causal ’durch’
(’through’)”, Research on Language and Computation.
Uth, Melanie, 2007a, “The Rivalry between the French Nominalization Suffixes -ment and -age from a
Diachronic Perspective”, Talk presented to the Workshop Nominalisations across Languages, University
of Stuttgart, 29 November-1 December 2007.
———, 2007b, “Specification of the causative/anticausative alternation of verbs by means of nominalisation suffixes”, Talk presented to the SFB 732 Meeting, Universität Stuttgart, 17th December 2007.
Vendler, Zeno, 1957, “Verbs and Times”, Philosophical Review, 66:143–160.
16