• Mylène BLASCO-DULBECCO, Paul CAPPEAU & Marie SAVELLI (Clermont-Ferrand / Poitiers / Grenoble)
    Preuves à l'appui : les relations entre les données et l'analyse
    (Proven relationships between data and analysis)
    1999, Vol. IV-2, pp. 31-40

    More often than not, oral data differ from written data both from a frequential and distributional point of view. They lead to a sharpening of the description as they supply us with construction characteristics or contexts that do not exist in writing.Dislocations and the form 'il y a', known to be lavishly used in the oral language, provide us with often predictable examples regarding their distributional characteristics as well as their function in textual dynamics.Although 'certains' as a subject is not much used in spoken language, its offers a variety of distribution facts which are also clearly divided and actually related to the kind of observed corpus.The following article therefore aims at presenting us with three case studies that are representative of the relationship between data and analysis.


  • Berthille PALLAUD & Marie SAVELLI (Aix-en-Provence / Grenoble)
    L’oral enfantin : comment l’évaluer ?
    (Methods for evaluating speech production in children)
    2001, Vol. VI-1, pp. 121-135

    One of the main problems in establishing linguistic dysfunctioning resides in the definition of the 'comparison group'. The numerous studies today in the domain of oral proficiency, have shown that comparing oral with written language production can seriously bias the outcome. As for children's speech, the evaluation is sometimes even more seriously biased by what may be called 'adultocentrism', which allows to conclude too hastily and/or erroneously for language dysfunctioning. In this article we want to show what can be considered as common errors in oral language proficiency of children, and what might be indicative of more specific problems.