COMUNICARE INTERCULTURALĂ ȘI LITERATURĂ COMMUNICATION INTERCULTURELLE ET LI TTÉRATURE NR. 1 (9) Ianuari e-februarie -martie Editura Europlus 2010… [624518]

MINISTERUL EDUCAȚIEI ȘI CERCETĂRII
UNIVERSITATEA „DUNĂREA DE JOS” GALAȚI
FACULTATEA DE LITERE

CENTRUL DE CERCETARE

COMUNICARE INTERCULTURALĂ ȘI LITERATURĂ

COMMUNICATION INTERCULTURELLE ET LI TTÉRATURE
NR. 1 (9)
Ianuari e-februarie -martie

Editura Europlus

2010

CUPRINS

Literatură și interculturalitate 7

Amraoui Abdelaziz – Lire visuellement Mohammed Dib 9
Rajaa Al -Tamimi Subhi – Le dialogue des cultures -ou- la quête de l’Autre : Michel Butor 17
Carmen Andrei – Traduction et littérature : tâches éthiques du traducteur en médiateur (inter)culturel 25
Simona Antofi – Formules romantiques roumaines dans des textes programmatiques 33
Iuliana Barna – Virgil Tănase – À la recherche du temps perdu 38
Abderrahman Beggar – Nomadanse et figure de l’immigré chez Hédi Bouraoui 41
Mohamed Benitto – Gender and intergroup contact: the case of Arab woman 49
Ruxanda Bontilă – Errata to life or on autobiography 59
Hichem Cherrad – Malek Bennabi, le précurseur du dialogue interculturel dans le monde musulman 66
Gabriela Iuliana Colipcă – Migration and romanian identity in Angus Macqueen’s The Last Peasants.
Temptation (2003) 74
Ana-Elena Costandache – Le destin de la fable roumaine au XIXe siècle: allégorie, satire ou parodie ? 81
Andreea -Roxana Constantinescu – Cross -dressing, Sexuality, Identity. Sexual Representation and
Body Politics in Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night 87
Alina Crihană – Représentations du sacré dans le roman kafkaïen: notes pour une lecture religiologique 96
Matei Damian – The African Muslims, as shown by an Economist correspondent 101
Claude Dedomon – Le travail de l’espace ou penser le monde autrement dans Bref séjour chez les
vivants de Marie Darrieussecq 104
Fred Dervin – Quand la littérature sert de manuel de communication interculturelle: le cas de Ni d’Ève
ni d’Adam d’Amélie Nothomb 111
Mirela Drăgoi – La configuration du personnage dans La Petite Fadette de George Sand 121
Virginie Dure y – L’influence littéraire franco -germanique et britannique dans les longs -métrages
Disney 127
Jacques Fux – Les plagiaires par anticipation et les précurseurs de Kafka : Perec, Borges et l’Oulipo 134
Bettina Ghio – « Ecrire » le paysage argentin selon Roger Caillois 144
Mohsen Hamli – Salman Rushdie: Heretic or Rebel? 153
Mohsen Hamli – The Satanic Verses: The Rhetoric and the Dream 164
Mike Olivier Kouakou – Poisson d’or : déconstruction généalogique et construction identitaire 182
Gabriela Virginia Lupea – Substitution in The Importance of Being Earnest 189
Petru Iamandi – Slipstream – “this brave new genre” 200
Nicoleta Ifrim – The Literary Text and Its Fractal Structures : Towards a New Reading Ideology 205
Nicolae Ioana – Phenomena Preceding the Literature Ideology -Oriented Textbooks (1944 -1948)
209
Isabela Merilă – The Whole and Holes of the Human Heart 215
Doini ța Milea – La poésie comme insurrection – Pablo Neruda 223
Daniela Mirea – Quelques considérations concernant la métaphysique des noms dans la prose de
Mircea Eliade et de Michel Tournier 228
Ioana Mohor -Ivan – Conflicting Irelands: the first productions of the Irish Literary Theatre 238
Benghenissa Nacer eddine – Approche interculturelle de la sexualisation des rapports « Orient vs
Occident » dans le roman arabe de voyage 244
Michaela Praisler – Film and the Romanian as Other. A Case Study 251
Ioana -Maria Puțan – Le thème de l’exil dans deux romans francophones : La disparition de la langue
française d’Assia Djebar et Le ventre de l’Atlantique de Fatou Diome 256
Katherine Rondou – Exemple de création hagiographique dans le théâtre dannunzien : origines de
saint e Alétis, "personnage secondaire" de La Pisanelle 266
Steluța Stan – Once more on Own -Tail-Chasing Literature 271

Daniela Șorcaru – Defending Romanian Identity and Specificity through Hip -Hop: Message to Europe 277
Elie Yazbek – Alain Tasso, poète de l’improbable 284

Interferențe și conexiuni lingvistice 293

Ionel Apostolatu – An Attempt to Classify Linguistic Analogy: Fundamental Types and Defining
Traits. Applicative to Romanian 295
Nadia Benelazmia – Stéréotype et processus de catégorisation dans le dictionnaire arabe 305
Oana Cenac – Adverbs and Adverbials. General Aspects 320
Mihaela Cîrnu – Die kulturelle Bedeutung der Farben in der Werbung 324
Gabriela Dima – Some Remarks Concerning the Textual Organization of ESP Corpora 328
Elmustapha Lemghari – Du choc culturel à l’acculturation : quelques barrières linguistiques en
contexte interculturel 333
Toufik Majdi – Politique de communication interne adoptée par les dirigeants des PME marocaines 344
Mariana Neagu – On Meanin gs of ‘Construction’. Past and Recent Approaches 354
Gina Necula – Strategies Used to Avoid Discrimination through Language between Law and Common
Practice 361
Floriana Popescu – Interculturality and Lexicology: Romanian Medical Eponyms. A Case Study 365
Daniela Țuchel – Redefining Cultural Obedience 375
Angelica Vâlcu – Un point de vue théorique sur les paralittératures 381

Didactică 387

Simona Alecu Marin – The Determinant Factors of Success in the Management of the School
Organization 389

Recenzii 395

Simona Antofi – Fijación, desautomatización y traducción. Figement, défigement et traduction, Salah
Mejri et Pedro Mogorron Huerta (dir.) 397

Résumés / Abstracts 400

Adverbs and Adverbials. General Aspects

Asist. univ. drd. Oana Cenac
Universitatea “Dun ărea de Jos” din Galați

Résumé: Le terme qui définit cette classe d’unit és lexico -grammaticales situe au premier plan une particularité
syntaxique définitoire: l’adverbe est un déterminant du verbe. La perspe ctive syntaxique ne peut pas, quand même,
fixer l’identité spécifique de cette classe. De fait, du point de vue de la position syntaxique, d’une part, l’adverbe
entre également dans des syntagmes verbaux et nominaux, d’autre part, il peut réaliser un synta gme autonome, sous
l’aspect syntaxique, par lui -même. Le but de ce travail tient à la mise en évidence de certains aspects, plus où moins
controversés, repérables dans de diverses situations d’occurence de l’adverbe.

Key-words: adverb, adverbial phrase , adverbial clause

Introduction
The term “ adverb ” comes down from antiqu ity. It is the English cognate to the adverbium of the
Roman grammarians, who themselves translated the Greek epirrhē ma. The term transparently
suggests that an adverb is a word that is placed with the verb or, in semantic terms, modifies the
verb. Though it is now realized that the link between verb and adverb is not as close as suggested,
the term remains in general usage and has even led to new terminology, such as the noun
”adverbial”, which is generally used to denote both simple adverbs as well as phrases and clauses
that have the same function as adverbs.

1. Adverbs
The familiarity of the term “adverb” is deceptive, for the class of adverbs does not have a
homogeneous membership and sometimes words seem to be assigned to the class of adverbs for
no better reason than that they do not fit any other class. This does not mean that there are no
criteria, but only that they s eem more problematic than for other categories. Consider the case of
carefully in John had carefully opened the door. Here carefully can be argued to have the
following four properties:
a. it is invariable;
b. it modifies the verb;
c. it is optional and
d. it occurs in a position that is reserved for adverbs.
Each of these properties is strongly associated with adverbiality and is candidate for being
criterial. Yet each property is problematic.
Adverb as an invariable : It is correct that carefully is inv ariable, in the sense that i ts shape does
not vary depending on case, number, and gender, the dimension that are typically releva nt for
nouns and adjectives, nor for person, voice, tense or aspect, the typically verbal dimensions.
At this point, we should take into consideration several issues:
First, from ancient times up to at least Hjelmslev (1935), grammarians have proposed that what is
usually called an adverb is not really a separate word at all, but rather a case form, an “adverbial
case” of another word. Thus carefully would be analyzed as the adverbial case form of the
adjective careful , or Latin articulati m “piecemeal” would be the adverbial case of the noun
articulus “member”. The majority view, however is to condemn the “inflectional” theory of
adverbs as being highly ad hoc, at least for Standard Average European. It is true that many
adverbs are morphologically related to words of other categories, but many are not thus related
(e.g., English soon or latin clam “secretly”). S econd, for the adver bs that have this relation, it

may not be the result of any productive adverb formation process (e.g. only, yesterday, perhaps )
and third , for the adverbs that are the result of a productive adverbialization process (eg.
eurocratically ), this process is be st taken to be derivational rather than inflectional. (see Pinkster
1972:63 -70).
The second problem is that, even though invariability may be a necessary feature of the adverb, it
may be not sufficient. The English adjective careful is not less invariable than the adverb
carefully.
Adverbs modifies a verb : In the case of John had carefully opened the door , the idea that an
adverb modifies a verb has some plausibility, and carefully does seem to specify the manner of
the event of opening that John was involv ed in. However, precisely because it is not just any
event of opening that was careful, but rather the specific one of opening the door, one may feel
that what is in the scope of the adverb is not merely the verb opened but the entire verb phrase
opened th e door .
When John sang his area beautifully, John was not beautiful, but it remains the case that what
was beautiful was not merely a singing but John’s singing of his aria. To conclude, even with
simple manner adverbs there are reasons to think that the a dverb does not merely modify a verb,
but rather a verb phrase or an entire clause.
In He will meet me here .
He will certainly meet me .
and
Briefly, he will meet me .
the adverbs again modify an entire clause rather than merely i ts verb, but these examples also
indicate that it is not sufficient to identify the scope of an adverb in syntactic terms (“clause”
versus “verb”), but that one needs semantics as well. Here in He will meet me here says
something about He will meet me . Briefly once again concerns an entire clause, but this time it is
the illocutionary act associated with it. What is brief is neither the meeting nor the speaker’s
belief, but the speaker’s assertion. One could say that briefly , certainly and here have the same
syntactic scopes, but a different semantic scope (speech act versus propositional attitude versus
state of affairs). (see Dik, et al. 1990). Variation exists both with respect to semantic and
syntactic scope. Therefore, in
The Meeting here was never a success .
here has same type of semantic scope as in
He will meet me .
but they differ in syntactic scope.
Even in Even John was there also combines with a noun phrase. So it has same type of syntactic
scope as here in the meeting here , but it h as a different type of semantic scope: even modifies an
ordinary first -order entity. Different still are very in I saw him very briefly and in the meeting was
very brief . In the former, very has another adverb in its syntactic scope and, in the latter, an
adjective. In The nail went right through the wall, finally, right seems to combine with a
prepositional phrase.
The general conclusion is that the suggestion carried by terminology that the adverb modifies the
verb, that it is the “adjective” of the verb, is not correct. Perhaps it should not be ruled out that an
adverb exclusively modifies a verb. This analysis is plausible for the function of over in the
phrasal verb hand over as in The policeman handed over the evidence .
An Adverb is Optional : If one deletes the adverbs in John had carefully opened the door or in
Very briefly, he will certainly meet me here the re sulting sentences remain grammatical. So all of
these adverbs are optional. But it does not follow that all adverbs are optional. On the one hand,

in John lived here , the adverb here is obligatory: the predicate live, when meaning “reside”, can
be said to be subcategorized for co -occurrence with a place adverbial. Similarly, intransitive wash
as in My shirt washes easily needs a manner adverbial, and presentative there in There is a man is
obligatory too. On the other hand, a predicate such as to be dead cannot co -occur with a place
adverbial at all (* John was dead here ). Cases like these make it impossible to use optionally as a
criterion for adverbiality. Thus one finds linguists claiming that here in John lived here is a
locative “object” or “argument” rather than an adverb or that presentative there should be
divorced from its adverbial origin and merely called a dummy subject.
Position : A language may reserve a certain position for adverbials. The English ‘middle f ield’-
the area between the finite and nonfinite verb is such a position. The adverb carefully need not go
into the middle field ( John opened the door carefully ) and one may remark that in general the
position of adverbs is rather flexible. At the same tim e, it remains true that the English middle
field only hosts adverbials. The possibility of occurring in the middle field can thus be taken to be
a sufficient condition for adverbiality. It is not, however, a necessary condition. Upstairs and too
are both a dverbs, yet they cannot occur in the middle field (*John had upstairs / too opened the
door ).
Depending on the language, the typical adverb may well be invariable (except for the derivational
expression of grad ability), modify most other categories, be opt ional, and obey certain word
order restrictions. There is a large cross -theoretical consensus about when some word is an
adverb. Most importantly, there is a strong German tradition, exemplified in linguists such as
Konig (1990) and Abraham (1990), and inf luential in continental linguistics as a whole that
advocates a peculiar division of labor between the terms ‘adverb’ and ‘particle’, such that, e.g.,
neither even in Even John was there nor just in He just won’t listen are adverbs, but rather
particles. O ne may also point to recurrent claims, inspired by Jespersen (1924), to the effect that
before as in I saw him before is a preposition rather than an adverb. What is behind the latter
claims is the hypot hesis that prepositions can be transitive as well as intransitive.
Universality of adverb : Little is known about the universality of the adverb and of its uses (see
Hengeveld 1992:47 -72). In English, a construction such as The soup tastes terrible has no need
for an adverb; terrible is an unmistakable adject ive, and it cannot be replaced by an adverb (* The
soup tastes terribly .).

2. Adverbial Phrases and Clauses
Adverbials that are not adverbs are either adverbial phrases or clauses. In I saw him very briefly ,
very briefly is an adverbial phrase with an adverbial head. There are also adverbial noun phrases,
such as the whole day in I talked to him the whole day , ordinary prepositional phrases, such as in
the city in I meet him in the city, and discontinuous prepositional ph rases, such as which city…in
in Which city did you meet him in ? Phenomena intermediate betwe en adverb and adverbial are
the „pronominal adverb” and the ”prepositional pronoun” . Just a s ordinary pronouns are
standard ly taken to be words that function like n oun phrases, so pronominal adverbs and
prepositional pronouns are words that function like prepositional phrases. In Germanic linguistics
the term „pronominal adverb” refers to a complex lexem consisting of a locative adverb followed
by a postposition, for example the English wherewith or hereby . If one paraphrases a Germanic
pronominal adverb with a phrase, the postposition becomes a preposition and the locative adverb
often changes into a demonstartive pronoun. Thus wherewith becomes with that and hereby
becomes by (means of) this .
The adverbial clause is a subtype of the subordinate clause. It may contain a finite verb and then
the type of adverbial relatio n is often expressed by a subordinated word or phrase.

Eg. He was happy because / in that he could l eave his car at home . Especially for the expression
of time, place and manner, the subordinating phrase may have the shape of a noun phrase and
then the adverbial clause may be analyzed as a relative clause. Thus, English allows the moment
we arrived next to when we arrived . (see Thompson and Longacre 1985:178 -185).
Nonfinite adverbial clauses contain either an infinitive ( He took the car in order to avoid the
train stike ), a participle ( Knowing about the train strike, he took the car ), a special adverbial form
if the verb, sometimes called “adverbial participle” or “converb” (see Haspelmath and König
1995), or a nonverbal predicate such as an adjective or a prepositional phrase ( Their father dead /
in the hospital, the children left ). The exact semantic rel ation between the main clause and the
adverbial one is often unexpressed and left to be inferred from the context. Their father dead , for
example, could be merely temporal but also causal.
Some adverbials are intermediate between a phrase and a clause. An adverbial gerund, as in He
succeeded with his continuously asking the right question has both phrasal and clausal
characteristics. A similar structural intermediate ness is found in particip ial and nonverbal
constructions as in With John driving, we won‘t have any fun and With their father dead / in the
hospital, the children left.
Much as these is no universality in the uses of adverbs, so there is none with respect to the uses of
adverbial phrases and clauses either. For example, English can express purpose with both a finite
and an infinitival subordinate clause: John came in order to take the knife / so that he could take
the knife.
Adverbial Notions : The various notions that are typicall y expressed by adverbs and adverbials,
time, place, manner, condition, cause etc, may be classified in various ways. Thus time, place and
manner have been considered (see Th ompson and Longacre 1985:177 ) more elementary than the
other dimensions, for only t ime, place and manner can typically be expressed by
monomorphemic, nonaphoric adverbs (e.g. here, now and fast). Adverbials may also be classified
in terms of their syntactic and semantic scope. Propositional attitudes, for example, ca n be
modified by adve rbials that further specify the attitude (e.g. He will hopefully return ), its source
(e.g. Accordind to John, Mary has already left ) or the evidence (e.g. Giving the absence at the
office, she must be sick ), but not by any place, time, purpose or instrumen t adverbial. Adverbial
notions are also connected through general semantic relations such as hyponymy, converseness
and blending. Thus point of time, duration and frequency are hyponyms of temporal setting,
purpose is easily thought of as a special case of causation and some conditions are also anterior
circumstances.
e.g. When you turn on the radio, you will hear music .
Concession as in John left although Mary was there too seems a kind of converse of an after
clause. Concessive condition, finally, as expr essed by an even if clause is a blend of
conditionality ( if) and concessivity ( even). The above examples also illustrate that semantic
relations may or may not be lexically transperant. Thus while the lexemes although and because
do not betray any converse relation, the lexical make -up of even if is an indication of the blending
and the fact that when is ambiguous between a purely temporal and a conditional reading is
indicative of a relation between time and condition.

Bibliography

Abraham, W., (ed .), Discourse Particles, Benjamin Amsterdam, 1990.
Dik, S., Hengelveld, K., Vester, E., The hierarchical structure of the clause and the typology of adverbial satellites, in
Nuyts, J., Bolkestein, A., M., (eds.), Layers and Levels of Representation in Lang uage Theory: A functional View ,
Benjamin Amsterdam, 1990.
Haspelmath, M., König, E., (eds.), Converbs in Crosslinguistic Perspective. Structure and Meaning of Adverbial
Verb Forms, Adverbial Participle, Gerunds , Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, 1995.
Hengelved , K., Non-verbal predication. Theory, Typology, Diachrony , Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, 1992.
Hjelmslev, L., La catégorie des cas , Universitetsforlaget, Aarhusa, 1935.
Jespersen, The Philosophy of Grammar , Allen and Unwin, London, 1924
König, E., The Meaning of Focus Particles: A Comparative Perspective , Routledge, London, 1990
Pinkster, H., On Latin Adverbs , North -Holland, Amsterdam, 1972.
Thompson, s., Longacre, R., Adverbial Clauses in Shopen T (ed.) Language Typology and Syntactic Description ,
vol. II: Complex Constructions , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.