L’identification des arguments et la hiérarchisation des marges : critères formels et critères conceptuels

The distinction between arguments and margins within a simple nuclear sentence is sharp at conceptual level in that it is grounded in explicit relevance criteria: arguments are saturated referential noun phrases that are essential for the integrity of the process; different layers of margins enrich different kinds of processes according to different consistency requirements. If one observes the syntactic structure of linguistic expressions, on the other hand, the same distinction seems to shade into a sort of continuum owing to two orders of factors. First, there is a cleavage between the model sentence, whose main function should be the expression of the process, and the utterances actually documented in texts and corpora, whose structure is shaped by the incommensurate function to adapt the structure of the process to the communicative dynamism of a text. Moreover, within the model sentence itself, the coding regime of arguments and the coding regime of margins shadow into one another: some margins are coded, like arguments, through formal grammatical relations, while some arguments are coded, like margins, directly as conceptual relations through a set of forms of expression motivated by their conceptual content.In spite of these obstacles, the conceptual distinction between arguments and margins and the hierarchy of margins can be identified at the level of model sentence thanks to adequate and differentiated criteria. These criteria are formal where the difference of coding regime draws a sharp formal distinction between arguments and margins, and conceptual and textual where the structure of the forms of expression neutralises the distinction. Conceptual and textual criteria also make the identification of a clear hierarchy of margins possible.