Re: [typo] césures en anglais

[Sebastien Mengin <sebastien@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Le 13 oct 2006 à 04:56, Blue Cox a écrit:
> Bonjour,
> 
> Pour une fois que je peux peut-être vous aider, j'en profite.

Oui !
 
> J'ai posé la question à un ami Anglais, traducteur (et ex prof de comm de
> surcroît). Je vous copie ci-dessous sa réponse en espérant qu'elle puisse
> vous être utile.

Et comment... merci beaucoup.
(remerciements égalements aux autres colistiers pour leurs
contributions. Me voilà équipé. :-) )

Cordialement,
SM
 
> Cordialement
> 
> 
> Sophie
> www.bluecox.net
> 
> 
> En effet, ce n'est pas évident de trouver des renseignements en français sur
> les césures en anglais !
> 
> Le CMS http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/home.html est disponible en
> essais gratuit / sur abonnement, il est la bible de style pour l'anglais
> américain. Mais c'est en anglais...
>  
> Une recherche Wikipédia en français donne des règles à la fois surprenant
> par rapport ce qu'on m'a toujours appris sur le français, mais qui en effet
> se rapprochent des règles en anglais.
>  
> Voici un extrait de ce qui dit Oxford, pour l'angalis britannique :
> 
> hyphens
>  
> A. Hyphens are used to connect words that are more closely linked to each
> other than to the surrounding syntax. Unfortunately their use is not
> consistent. Some pairs or groups of words are written as a single word (e.g.
> motorway, railwayman), others, despite their equally close bond, as separate
> words (e.g. motor cycle, pay phone); very similar pairs may be found with a
> hyphen (e.g. motor-cyclist, pay-bed). There are no hard and fast rules that
> will predict in every case whether a group of words should be written as
> one, with a hyphen, or separately. Useful lists can be found in Hart's
> Rules, pp. 76-81; numerous individual items are entered in ODWE.
>  
>  
>  
> 1. Groups consisting of attributive noun + noun are probably the most
> unpredictable. It is the nature of English syntax to produce limitless
> numbers of groups of this kind. Such a group generally remains written as
> separate words until it is recognized as a lexical item with a special
> meaning, when it may receive a hyphen. Eventually it may be written as one
> word, but this usually happens when the two nouns are monosyllabic and there
> is no clash between the final letter of the first and the first letter of
> the second.
>  
> This generalization is, however, a very weak guide to what happens in
> practice. Compare, for example, coal tar, coal-face, coalfield; oil well,
> oil-painting, oilfield; blood cell, blood-pressure, bloodstream.
>  
>  
>  
> 2. Nouns derived from phrasal verbs, consisting of verb + adverb, are
> slightly more predictable. They are never written as two words, frequently
> hyphened, and sometimes written as one, e.g. fall-out, play-off, set-back,
> turn-out; feedback, layout, runoff, turnover. Phrases consisting of
> agent-noun in -er + adverb are usually hyphened, e.g. picker-up, runner-up;
> those consisting of gerund in -ing + adverb are usually left as two words,
> e.g. Your coming back so soon surprised me, unless they have become a unit
> with a special meaning, e.g. Gave him a going-over.
>  
>  
>  
> 3. Various collocations which are not hyphened when they play their normal
> part in the sentence are given hyphens when they are transferred to
> attributive position before a noun, e.g.
>  
> (a) adjective + noun: a common-sense argument (but This is common sense), an
> open-air restaurant (but eating in the open air).
>  
> (b) preposition + noun: an out-of-date aircraft (but This is out of date),
> an in-depth interview (but interviewing him in depth).
>  
> (c) participle + adverb: The longed-for departure and Tugged-at leaves and
> whirling branches (Iris Murdoch) (but the departure greatly longed for;
> leaves tugged at by the wind).
>  
> (d) other syntactic groups used attributively, e.g. A tremendous
> wrapping-up-and-throwing-away gesture (J. B. Priestley); An
> all-but-unbearable mixture (Lynne Reid Banks).
>  
>  
>  
> 4. Collocations of adverb + adjective (or participle) are usually written as
> two words when attributive as well as when predicative, e.g. a less
> interesting topic, an amazingly good performance, but may very occasionally
> take a hyphen to avoid misunderstanding, e.g. Sir Edgar, who had heard one
> or two more-sophisticated rumours (Angus Wilson) (this does not mean ?one or
> two additional sophisticated rumours¹).
>  
> See also *well.
>  
>  
>  
> 5. When two words that form a close collocation but are not normally joined
> by a hyphen enter into combination with another word that requires a hyphen,
> it may be necessary to join them with a hyphen as well in order to avoid an
> awkward or even absurd result, e.g. natural gas needs no hyphen in natural
> gas pipeline, but natural-gas-producer may be preferred to the ambiguous
> natural gas-producer; crushed ice + -making looks odd in crushed ice-making
> machine, and so crushed-ice-making machine may be preferred. Occasionally a
> real distinction in meaning may be indicated, e.g. The non-German-speakers
> at the conference used interpreters versus The non-German speakers at the
> conference were all Austrians.
>  
> * * * * *
>  
> En règle général, il suffit de savoir que l'anglais se base sur les syllabes
> du mot SELON LEUR forme, et pas selon leur prononciation.
>  
> On cherche donc toujours l'etymologie du mot, pour en connaître le racine
> (lexème) ; dans la mesure du possible, il faut garder ça intact, en ne
> mettant des césures qu'entre le racine et les affixes, que ceux-ci soit des
> préfixes / suffixes, ou des terminaisons de conujugaison etc.
>  
> Dans le cas d'un verbe qui finit en [2 consonnes]-ing, par exemple, il faut
> savoir si c'est bien le racine se termine en consonne double ou non. Par ex.
> fill > fill-ing mais begin > begin-ning
> 
> ...et ainsi de suite !
> 
> Bon courage, je suis là en cas de difficulté !
> 
> 
> Le 13/10/06 15:32, « Sébastien Mengin » <sebastien@xxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> 
> > Bonjour,
> > 
> > Je me fais dire que, «en anglais, il n'y a pas de césures» (sic).
> > 
> > Où puis-je trouver une référence simple et efficace en la matière ?
> >  
> > Ça me paraît tellement aberrant qu'à part répondre «mais si !» je suis
> > coi.
> > 
> > Merci de votre aide,
> > 
> > Cordialement,
> > -- 
> > Sébastien
> > 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Sébastien