Logical Connectors

In Grammar, one calls logical connectors morphemes (Adverbe S, coordinating conjuctions or subordination, sometimes even Interjection S), which establish a connection between two statements, even between a statement and a stating. They gather logical connectors and argumentative connectors like “but”, i.e. words which, in addition to their role of junction, insert the statements connecting within an argumentative framework. The study of the connectors thus integrates the prospects for the grammar of text (concerned of the cohesion of the text) and that of the Pragmatique (interested party by the argumentative orientation of the statements and the relation of interlocution).

The absence of connector between two statements is in oneself a form of junction. Among the connectors, one will distinguish:

  • terms with value of temporal succession (" puis" , " alors" , " ensuite" , " enfin"). They can establish a chronological connection in the order of the history, but also to mark the continuity of the account, or relate to the narrative speech. For example, “finally” joined to its temporal value (" with the fin") a énonciative value of interjection in “Lastly, the ship left” ( sentimental education ), and it can take a métadiscursif direction (" enfin" = " for terminer").
  • connectors marking causality : " car" , " because " , " puisque" , " indeed ". The analyzes of O. Ducrot emphasized the pragmatic oppositions between the three first of these connectors. " Puisque" and " car" " , unlike " because " , not link two statements, but two acts of statings. In this counterpart of Jacques the Fatalist , where Jacques known as has his Master: “ And who made the large roller where all is written? A captain, friend of my captain, would have given well a small ecu for the knowledge; he, would not have given a mite, nor me either; because with what that would it be useful to me? would I avoid for that the hole of It where I must go myself to break the neck? ” (Denis Diderot, Jacques the Fatalist , 1796, in Novels , ED. Garnier, 1962, p. 503), the rhetoric question introduced by “because” comes to justify the preceding assertion (“he would not have given a mite, nor me either”), after the pause of the Point-virgule, and forms part of an argumentation in favor of the meaning of the Déterminisme. With " car" and " puisque" , it is the causal link which is presupposed allowed of the interlocutor, and is withdrawn from the discussion, and is withdrawn from the discussion. The offensive characteristic of “since” holds so that it has a polyphonic dimension which does not exist with “because”: the point of view presented by “since” can be allotted to a enonciator distinct from the speaker. Thus, after having evoked then congédié various possible romantic of his account (“you will believe that”), the narrator of Jacques the Fatalist begins again: “ It is quite obvious that I do not make a novel, since I neglect what a novelist would not fail to employ. That which would take what I write for the truth, would be perhaps less in the error that which would take it for a fable ” ( ibid , p. 505). The proposal introduced by “since” the denial justifies which precedes (“It is quite obvious that I do not make a novel”) by an argument presented as an obviousness taken again to a enonciator who merges with the recipient-reader. The play on the fiction consists in producing like an admitted argument, an assertion relating to what the narrator said that he would not write, but that he nevertheless evoked by preterition, some lines higher (“ You will believe that this small army will fall on Jacques and his Master, that there will be a bloody action, blows of stick given, drawn blows of gun; and it would hold only with me that all that did not arrive; but good-bye the truth of the history, good-bye the account of the loves of Jacques ”, ibid ). “Because”, on the other hand, the explanation of a known presupposed fact poses, and in the sequence of the argumentation, it is the explanation which can be the subject of the debate. Jacques answers his Master, who asks him to rise:
  • “ Jacques: Why?
  • the Master: To leave from here as fast as possible.
  • Jacques: Why?
  • the Master: Because we are there badly.
  • Jacques: Who it knows, and if we will be better elsewhere? ” (ibid p. 501-502).
Counterpart of Jacques (“Who it knows, and if we will be better elsewhere? ”) of course connects the statement of its Master (and not on the stating) and it refutes an explanation which is posed like a stake of the discussion. Of three connectors of cause, only “because” can thus answer a question carrying about the cause; and this, even if one refuses to reveal it: “Why did you do that? - Because”.
  • connectors marking the consequence : " ainsi" (which can also introduce an example), " donc" , " this is why ".
  • connectors of opposition : " mais" , " cependant" , " toutefois" , " nevertheless ".
  • Those marking the addition: " et" , " of plus" , " moreover " , moreover. “Besides” is an argumentative connector. According to O. Ducrot ( words of the speech ), “Moreover” introduced into a reasoning an additional argument, going in the direction of the first, but presented like subsidiary: so it makes it possible to accredit the preceding arguments, and is not subjected itself to discussion. Thus, the great digressions proustiennes are often opened by “Besides”, which connects the example to the expression of a general law, or the example with another expression of the same law, like the law of the “family features”, exemplifiée then by “Thus”.

Related subjects

External bonds

  • logical connectors (interactive exercises) on the Magister site. Attention, in these exercises, the correction is identified with the original text, which treats like errors, even if they produce correct texts, the other connectors or organizations of texts.

Random links:List Prime Ministers of Alberta | 7th stage of the Tour de France 2005 | Tyrosinase | DaN Florek | Ezoke | Friture_et_Laurie