Eva-Maria Geigl
email: eva-maria.geigl@ijm.fr

Thierry Grange

Ancient DNA: the quest for the best

Keywords: Ancient DNA, DNA preservation, taphonomy, bone

It is the dream of all researchers working with ancient DNA to identify prior to DNA extraction from bone the specimens or specific zones within them that contain the most and highest proportion of endogenous DNA. Since it impacts the sacrifice of precious ancient specimens and the financial support needed for the analyses, the question is of high importance to the scientific field of paleogenomics. The "Holy Grail" of paleogenomics was reached when Cristina Gamba and collaborators discovered that it was in the petrosal part of the temporal bone, the densest part of the mammalian skeleton, where DNA is exceptionally well preserved. As a consequence, osteological collections experienced a rush from paleogenomicists to "harvest" these precious bone parts. In this issue of Molecular Ecology Resources, Alberti and colleagues (2018) describe the discovery of another promising source of relatively well preserved endogenous DNA, the outermost layer of cortical bone, that they had identified through computed tomography (CT scans). These bones being larger and more abundant than petrous bones, this discovery increases markedly the source material for high quality paleogenomic studies and releases the pressure on osteological collections.

Paleogenomics, or the analysis of DNA preserved in biological material from the past, mainly bones, contributes greatly to the study of the recent evolutionary history of humans, human and animal migrations, domestication processes, past population dynamics, and the impact of climate change on past biodiversity, to name just a few. The primary source of these studies, however, is limited in number. Moreover, paleogenomic analyses being costly, and the failure rate due to insufficient DNA preservation high, researchers in the field were seeking for the "Holy Grail" since the initial proposition of differential DNA preservation in molecular preservation niches [START_REF] Geigl | On the circumstances surrounding the preservation of very old DNA[END_REF]. Empirical considerations and observations motivated ancient DNA researchers to privilege the most compact bones for their studies. [START_REF] Gamba | Genome flux and stasis in a five millennium transect of European prehistory[END_REF] pushed this logic to its ultimate limit and discovered that the most compact bone of the mammalian skeleton, the petrosal part of the temporal bone, is by far the best source of endogenous DNA from ancient bones. Since then, our scientific community could verify the truth and robustness of this observation that has transformed the field of paleogenomics to a point that a joke dates studies before 2014 to BP (before petrous).

In the present study, Alberti et al. (2018) used CT scans to identify the most compact parts of bones. This allowed them to refine the identification of the zones within the petrosal to be the most compact and favorable for DNA preservation. Most importantly, however, they identified a part of ancient bones rich in DNA that so far has not only been neglected by paleogeneticists but has even been removed and discarded to minimize contamination: the outermost layer of cortical bone. Here, endogenous DNA is shown to be often (significantly in about half of the cases) much better preserved and less diluted in environmental DNA than in trabecular bone (Fig. 1). Even though it does not reach the DNA preservation levels of the petrosal, cortical bone is so much more abundant in the fossil record and in osteological collections that this observation solves a growing problem in the field: the access to fossil material in which DNA is well preserved.

To contextualize the problem of DNA preservation and the slow speed of progress of the field, it is necessary to take into account the great variability of DNA preservation in ancient bones which is responsible for differences in the efficiency of DNA extraction and the ratio of endogenous to environmental DNA. The variability in DNA preservation is such that even petrosal bones can sometimes contain only traces of endogenous DNA ( [START_REF] Pinhasi | Optimal Ancient DNA Yields from the Inner Ear Part of the Human Petrous Bone[END_REF]; Fig. 1, our unpublished observations). Therefore, to be useful, quantitative studies must include many samples of various origins, periods and taphonomic contexts, but such studies are rare (e.g., [START_REF] Pruvost | Freshly excavated fossil bones are best for amplification of ancient DNA[END_REF][START_REF] Pruvost | DNA diagenesis and palaeogenetic analysis: critical assessment and methodological progress[END_REF]).

How does the compactness of bone favor DNA preservation? To understand this phenomenon, one has to consider all the biological and physicochemical parameters acting during bone diagenesis. Postmortem DNA degradation is shaped by two distinct phases that determine the outcome. The first decay phase corresponds to the enzymatic degradation of most of the organic material involving autolysis and putrefaction. This phase of early diagenesis is most influential on the quantity and size of the DNA molecules that will persist and is probably responsible for the absence of a correlation between the age of the sample and the average size of preserved DNA molecules [START_REF] Sawyer | Temporal patterns of nucleotide misincorporations and DNA fragmentation in ancient DNA[END_REF][START_REF] Kistler | A new model for ancient DNA decay based on paleogenomic meta-analysis[END_REF]. This first phase is likely to be subject to a great deal of variability but is a black box since one cannot reconstruct it ex-post. During the second decay phase, non-enzymatic chemical degradation seems to correlate with the thermal age of the samples, and in particular the deamination of cytosines at the ends of the DNA molecules [START_REF] Sawyer | Temporal patterns of nucleotide misincorporations and DNA fragmentation in ancient DNA[END_REF][START_REF] Kistler | A new model for ancient DNA decay based on paleogenomic meta-analysis[END_REF]. The third factor that determines the success of paleogenomic approaches is the variable degree with which environmental DNA penetrates into the bone during burial. This environmental DNA dilutes the endogenous DNA and can render shotgun sequencing very costly.

The best bones for the paleogenomic approach are those that contain on one hand sufficient endogenous DNA and on the other hand low amounts of environmental DNA. Several parameters are prone to produce variability with respect to these two properties of ancient bones. First, the initial DNA degradation is susceptible to vary according to the degree of accessibility of the interior of the bone to putrefying microorganisms. The more the bone is vascularized and porous, the easier it is for microorganisms to penetrate into it. The bone parts that contained in vivo the highest amounts of dead osteocytes, i.e., bone cells that are embedded in the mineral matrix that they produce, that can escape phagocytosis by osteoclasts during bone remodeling, are the ones with the highest likelihood of containing preserved DNA. This is the case for the petrosal that undergoes very little remodeling after childhood [START_REF] Sørensen | Spatial organization of bone modelling and remodelling in the otic capsule[END_REF], which may be one of the reasons explaining its high endogenous DNA content. Other in vivo calcification processes, such as those transforming dental plaques in calculi, lead to excellent DNA preservation, too [START_REF] Warinner | A new era in palaeomicrobiology: prospects for ancient dental calculus as a long-term record of the human oral microbiome[END_REF]. Second, long term degradation is mainly ruled by physicochemical factors (temperature, hygrometry, pH, etc.) that act upon the bone during the entire period spanning the moment of death of the organism to the moment of excavation of the skeletal part. These factors influence the kinetics of the decay reactions and are probably responsible for the large variability between burial sites with the result that even ancient petrous bones can lack any endogenous DNA. With the exception of the thermal age [START_REF] Smith | Neanderthal DNA. Not just old but old and cold?[END_REF]) and empirical observations (e.g., [START_REF] Pruvost | Freshly excavated fossil bones are best for amplification of ancient DNA[END_REF][START_REF] Pruvost | DNA diagenesis and palaeogenetic analysis: critical assessment and methodological progress[END_REF])), we do not have clues allowing us to identify the archeological or paleontological sites that are favorable for DNA preservation. Finally, the, compactness of bones may also favor exclusion of environmental DNA.

The outermost layer of long bones is a new potential source for paleogenomic results that calls for great attention with respect to its exposure to contamination with DNA from excavators and other researchers manipulating the bone prior to the paleogenomic analysis. If this contamination can be minimized through particular precautions during the excavation, the approach developed by the group of M. Meyer based on the treatment with bleach of the bone powder should be taken into consideration (Korlevic, et al. 2015). This approach is susceptible to degrade preferentially exogenous and recent environmental DNA that is not associated intimately with the mineral matrix of the bone, despite variability in the loss of exogenous but also endogenous DNA. The combination of the approaches proposed by Alberti et al. ( 2018) and [START_REF] Korlević | Reducing microbial and human contamination in DNA extractions from ancient bones and teeth[END_REF] could allow the recovery of paleogenomic information in cases where petrous bones are not available for analysis. Such a procedure could crack the secret of many more ancient bones.

Figure1: CT scans of a petrous and a long bone showing typical locations of the areas that were sampled for paleogenomic analyses by Alberti et al (2018). The boxplots represent the distribution of the percentage of endogenous DNA in the various sample types reported in Table 1 of

  Figure1: CT scans of a petrous and a long bone showing typical locations of the areas that were sampled for paleogenomic analyses byAlberti et al (2018). The boxplots represent the distribution of the percentage of endogenous DNA in the various sample types reported in Table1ofAlberti et al. (2018) enriched with the data from petrous bone of[START_REF] Pinhasi | Optimal Ancient DNA Yields from the Inner Ear Part of the Human Petrous Bone[END_REF], using the A and C areas as surrogates of the trabecular and otic capsule regions, respectively. The numbers indicate the number of samples analyzed.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Both EMG and TG conceived and wrote the manuscript.


Agnès Celle

Laure Lansari

On the mirative meaning of aller + infinitive compared with its equivalents in English

Introduction 1

In the linguistic literature devoted to aller + infinitive in French, a specific meaning has been identified and labelled "allure extraordinaire" by Damourette and Pichon (1936: 429), which we translate using the term "mirative meaning". The following example illustrates this meaning:2

(1) Il a désigné dans le désordre nos confrères Bastide, Cormier, Besson, Mitchea et votre serviteur. On se demande où il est allé chercher cela et s'il ne nous soupçonne pas d'écrire sur des feuilles de vigne. (Frantext, Blondin Antoine, Ma vie entre les lignes, 1982: 450) (1') […]. We wonder where he picked up that idea […] Aller does not have its spatial meaning in (1) since no motion is involved. Nor does it refer to a future event. According to Damourette and Pichon, aller is used to signal that the event referred to does not correspond to the speaker's expectations ("dans ce tour le verbe aller confère au verbe dont l'infinitif le suit un caractère dérangeant par rapport à l'ordre attendu des choses" (ibid.)). The speaker expresses surprise at what the character did and explicitly disapproves of this event. We argue that this meaning may be subsumed under the semantic category defined in linguistic typology as mirativity -a category encoding "information […] new or unexpected to the speaker" [START_REF] Delancey | The mirative and evidentiality[END_REF], "unexpected perception" [START_REF] Lazard | On the grammaticalization of evidentiality[END_REF] or "surprising facts" [START_REF] Guentchéva | Introduction[END_REF].

Mirativity is seen either as a category of its own (see DeLancey) or as a subcategory of evidentiality (see Guentchéva, Lazard). For Guentchéva and Lazard, evidentiality deals with the marking of three related meaningshearsay, inference and surprise. In some languages, evidentiality is grammaticalised into a full-fledged linguistic system, but, as pointed out by many authors, there is no such grammaticalised evidential system in French and English: in these two languages, evidentialityand henceforth mirativity -exists only as a "covert semantic category" [START_REF] Delancey | The mirative and evidentiality[END_REF]. In other words, mirative meaning is expressed in an unsystematic way by linguistic items whose overt function is not that of encoding mirativity.

DeLancey claims that intonation is one of these devices, and we argue that verbal constructions involving aller and go might be another. We contend more precisely that, in the case of aller and go, surprise or unexpectedness is very often associated with a negative evaluative judgement. We also aim to show that mirativity intersects with the lexical aspect of an event. In French, aller + infinitive introduces a comment on the initial boundary. In English, a range of aspectual shades of meaning are conveyed by different go-constructions. We focus on go V-ing and on the binomial phrase go and V.

Mirative aller

Judgement on past and current states or events

Mirativity usually has to do with past and current events or states (see for instance Guentchéva's analysis of the French "passé composé"). In (1), the speaker first states what happened in a neutral way, then comments on the past event, marking it as both surprising/unexpected and undesirable. Unexpectedness is inherently epistemic, an unexpected event being typically thought to be unlikely. In addition, unexpectedness impinges on the speaker's appraisal. 3 The speaker looks back on an event that is considered unlikely in 3 Rocq-Migette (2009: 228-229) points out that the adjectives surprised and surprising express epistemic modality when followed by an if-clause. Although these predicates primarily convey attitudinal modality, she explains that their epistemic reading is due to the nature of surprise: "The concept to which surprise refers belongs to the category of emotions and feelings; but contrary to happiness or sadness which are purely emotive, surprise is created by something which is external to the speaker. I am surprised cannot be used without a situational or textual context giving the source of the feeling.[…] With ifclauses and presupposition expressing 'contrary to expectation', the status of the event, as assessed by the speaker, comes to the foreground. The prediction feature becomes central in the information which is imparted". She also notes retrospect, as on se demande shows. Mirative aller is indeed frequently associated with epistemic elements:

(2) Que le motif du crime ne soit pas le vol, il est -au sens exact des mots -« payé pour le savoir ». Mais pourquoi aller imaginer ce dédoublement de l'assassin? (Frantext, Robbe-Grillet Alain, Les Gommes, 1952: 225) (2') […]. But why would he make up a second murderer?

Besides this epistemic component, mirative aller very often involves a negative evaluative judgement whereby the event is regarded as undesirable/abnormal. Although [START_REF] Bres | Allez donc sortir des sentiers battus! La production de l'effet de sens extraordinaire par aller et venir[END_REF] claim that mirative aller may express either a negative deontic evaluation or an epistemic judgment, we contend that the epistemic component is present in all instances of mirative aller. Indeed, surprise is inherently epistemic since it marks a discrepancy between what is expected and what is, or might be, the case. More often than not, this discrepancy is considered undesirable by the speaker. Bres & Labeau only give few instances where the speaker's surprise does not overlap with negative evaluation. Here is one of them:

(3) Je vais te raconter quelque chose qui va te faire rire je sais pas comment je suis allée penser au papet et à cette fois je sais pas si tu t'en rappelles The event is thereby presented as resisting any rational explanation. Negative evaluation is most striking in the following example:

(4) Oui, une voiture toute neuve. Et ce connard est allé m'emboutir une aile ! (quoted by Larreya, 2005: 351).

(4') Yes, it was a brand new car. And that silly bugger ran into a wing! that the presence of adjectives such as likely or unlikely in the contextual environment corroborates the epistemic interpretation.

In other instances, the starting point of the speaker's comment is not a past event but the current state of affairs -the addressee's illness in the following example:

( When faced with the news that will probably ruin his/her plans, the speaker first expresses surprise (c'est pas vrai) and then tries to infer what has caused the current state of affairs, using aller in the "passé composé". As is often the case in languages that have evidential systems (see [START_REF] Delancey | The mirative and evidentiality[END_REF], inference and mirativity appear here to be entangled. Unexpected events naturally lead speakers to try to find a plausible cause for them.

When the event or state commented on is actualised at the time of utterance, mirative aller is used as a "constative" (see [START_REF] Larreya | Sur les emplois de la périphrase aller + infinitif in[END_REF]. A comment is made about an actualised event, that is to say about an event denoted by a proposition which may be either true or false (i.e. either he is ill or not). In retrospect, the speaker indicates that the actualisation was unlikely and s/he points out its annoying consequences in the speech situation. This operation of reasoning is called abduction by Peirce (1998: 287). Peirce stresses that surprise triggers abduction: "A peculiar state of facts [is suggested] that will 'explain' the surprising phenomenon; and a law already known is recognized as applicable to the suggested hypothesis, so that the phenomenon, under that assumption, would not be surprising, but quite likely, or even would be a necessary result. This synthesis suggesting a new conception or hypothesis is the Abduction." Interestingly, Peirce also points out that the conclusion is not asserted, but "drawn in the interrogative mood"

Judgement on anticipated events

Mirative aller is not only compatible with the "passé composé", but may be used with a variety of tenses and moods (see examples below). In this respect, it differs greatly from temporal aller + infinitive, which can only be used in the present tense and the "imparfait". Mirative aller actually seems to have retained the morphosyntactic characteristics of the motion verb, which is unconstrained in terms of tense and mood, in contrast to the auxiliary used to refer to the future. We follow Larreya (2005: 354), who claims that the morphosyntactic similarity between mirative aller and spatial aller is evidence that the mirative meaning has directly developed from the motion verb, not from the future meaning.

This temporal flexibility explains the manifold uses of mirative aller. The construction may express the speaker's disapproval of past, current, as well as anticipated events:

(6) Je connaissais l'histoire, mais de seconde voix. In ( 6), the reporting speaker never made up weird imaginings, but the reported speaker had reasonable evidence to believe s/he was probably about to. Similarly, in example (7), the addressee has not claimed he wants to stay in the firm because he likes it there, but the speaker seems to have reason to believe that he will make such a claim. In both ( 6) and ( 7), the state of affairs is somehow anticipated and immediately rejected by means of the negative marker because its actualisation would run counter to what the speaker considers normal and desirable behaviour.

Larreya labels these uses "non-constative". Pragmatically speaking, "non-constative" utterances differ from constative ones. They usually involve a negation4 because the speaker does not want the event to become reality. His/her "argumentative strategy" [START_REF] Schrott | La modalisation d'une forme temporelle: le futur périphrastique et l'allure extraordinaire[END_REF] is to contemplate the actualisation only to reject it. 5 The utterance with aller then serves as an implicit warning to the addressee when an intersubjective relation is at stake, as is the case in example (7) above or in the following instances: The speaker's anticipation of a state of affairs s/he deems abnormal works as a powerful incentive for the addressee to change his/her attitude. This "nonconstative" use may thus be labelled "vetative", meaning being implied by the negation.

In examples ( 8) and ( 9), it might be difficult to categorise aller + infinitive precisely. It is not clear whether the verbal construction functions as a future marker or as a mirative marker. There might even be some degree of overlap between these two semantic categories. We contend that no real prediction is made, insofar as these utterances are defined by a lack of assertiveness, as reflected by their intonation. Indeed, they are not assertive statements but waver between interrogation and exclamation. The speaker does not really predict the future actualisation of the event. We claim, moreover, that there is some kind of overlap between inference and mirativity, inference serving to reject the future actualisation of the event. 6 In our sample, the inference is based on situational evidence. In example (8), Ferrer's threatening words progressively lead Delahaye to infer that Ferrer might kill him; although he finds it hard to believe. In (9), the speaker has been watching the man and has the feeling he will soon be teaching her how to do her job. 7 6 In an attempt to explain different shades of mirative 'extensions', Aikhenvald (2004: 198) argues "one may be surprised at an ongoing process, or at an inference made on the basis of some visible evidence".

7

The gloss with will be-ing proposed here highlights interesting common points between mirative aller and the mirative meaning of will be-ing analysed in Celle & Smith (2010: 255). With will be-ing, the strategy is different; the speaker does make a prediction aiming "at warning the hearer against the negative and inevitable consequences of his/her behaviour, should no change occur". The speaker's anticipation of a new state of affairs gives way to a true order "not to" when aller appears in the imperative:

(10) Abba Cronios reprit pour s'adresser à Macaire le ton railleur qu'il affectionnait:

-Tu as réussi à garder le silence. As [START_REF] Bourdin | On two distinct uses of go as a conjoined marker of evaluative modality[END_REF] points out, an aspectual flavour may be perceived here. "Ne va pas t'imaginer" and "va pas croire" roughly correspond to "don't even start thinking". 8 If no negation is involved, the imperative refers to an event whose actualization is pragmatically impossible. There is a sarcastic overtone associated with this use of aller + infinitive: The speaker asks the addressee to do something even though s/he perfectly knows it is undoable. The meaning is still mirative since it would be 8

The same process is at play in some utterances with the subjunctive: Et qu'on n'aille pas dire que ces billets nouveaux sont inoffensifs (Frantext, Mendès-France Pierre, Oeuvres complètes. 1. S'engager. 1922-1943., 1984: 69) / I won't let anyone tell me that these new notes are harmless! surprising if the addressee actually did manage to do what is required of him/her.

A comparison with two go-constructions in English

While the motion verb go has been thoroughly studied in its use as a future periphrasis (be going to + infinitive), other constructions involving the nonmotional meaning of go are less documented. However, go is used in several idiomatic constructions to refer to change of state rather than motion (go mad, go missing). In these constructions, go requires do-support in negative and emphatic utterances, as well as in questions, and therefore is not an auxiliary. Clark (1974: 317) argues that go indicates "departure from a normal state", carrying evaluative connotations. 9 Along the same line of thought, Bourdin (2003: 115) demonstrates that go functions as a marker of "aspect and modality conjoined" in the go V-ing construction. Our contention is that the binomial phrase go and V is also a conjoined marker of aspect and evaluative modality in some of its uses. We focus here on go V-ing and go and V as markers of evaluative modality, and argue that these two constructions may be regarded as counterparts of mirative aller. However, the aller-construction and the two go-constructions under scrutiny differ in terms of aspect, which explains why the French construction and the English ones are not necessarily translational equivalents.

Go V-ing

Mirative go occurs in contexts where there is no implication of motion. We distinguish between two types of mirative go: go V-ing may either refer to an absence following the end of a state of affairs viewed as normal, or to an attitude or activity that should be refrained from. The first use typically involves the verb miss or the motion verb go as complements of go:

(13) But we covered everything you know, steam engines and diesel engines and oh crushers and construction work and development and pneumatic 9 [START_REF] Paulin | Etude sémantico-syntaxique d'unités polylexémiques dont le noyau est go: la construction du sens par le co-texte[END_REF] The construction indicates that the referent of the grammatical subject underwent a change of state, being first present and then absent. The presence of the things referred to in ( 13) and the presence of the jeep in ( 14) are viewed as normal states, while their absence departs from the normal state of affairs. In this constative use, the speaker is faced not with a new event, but rather with the end of a state of affairs.

The other use of mirative go marks the speaker's disapproval 10 of an attitude or an activity which may be either witnessed or feared. In any case, this activity is evaluated negatively:

(15) The markets are in complete disorder, yet they remain unable to solve the situation themselves, and so go looking for a public sector bailout. Risk management, the buzz word of the financial markets since the collapse of Barings Bank in 1995, is clearly an oxymoron. (The Guardian, Friday 19 September 2008) (16) It is could be called a movement [sic], then it is one which is concerned with feelings rather than rights. It is about men reconciling their feelings towards their fathers and learning how to show emotion. But if the best way to do this is by romping around a campfire and sniffing each other's bottoms is open to question. "A lot of guys go thinking they're going to buy 10

In this, we follow Spears (1982: 866). Spears contrasts the 'go of disapproval' with the 'come of indignation', which is used as a semi-auxiliary in Black English. The comparison between the itive and ventive markers would go beyond the purpose of this paper. However, it is noteworthy that both English (see Spears) and French (see [START_REF] Bres | Allez donc sortir des sentiers battus! La production de l'effet de sens extraordinaire par aller et venir[END_REF] have mirative ventive markers, at least in some of their dialectal variants. Our hypothesis is that the mirative meaning is based on the deictic orientation of these verbs, the event being presented as either departing from the speaker's norm or intruding upon his/her sphere. Indeed, in French venir tends to occur in contexts where the event is seen as impinging on the speaker's world, as in ne venez pas me faire une chute sur le parquet, vous l'abîmeriez (private conversation: don't you fall on the floor, you'd damage it).

sensitivity," says Richard Bradley, who produced a BBC Forty Minutes documentary about a Wildman weekend shown earlier this year. (BNC) (17)This woman kept following him, and leaving gifts for him. When she finally confronted him at the stage door, he begged her not to go buying all these gifts. Some time after that he read in the paper that she'd shoplifted all the stuff so he worried he had a lot of stolen goods on his hands. (Fleming, Burnt Piano)

The motional interpretation of go is not possible in any of these examples.

Clearly, go takes on an evaluative function and expresses continuative aspect: in these three examples, go might be paraphrased by keep or keep on. Go signals that the referent of the grammatical subject is already involved in a process in reaction to some disorder as in ( 15) or as part of some social trend as in ( 16). In ( 17), the woman buying gifts corresponds to the current state of affairs and the reported speaker wishes to put an end to it. As noted by Spears (1982: 866), evaluative go cannot occur in the progressive:

(15') *The markets are going looking for a public sector bailout. (16') *A lot of guys are going thinking they're going to buy sensitivity. in contrast to motional go: 11 (18) How d' you think you're going to feel, Joey, when we come face to face with a herd of elephant or a tawny tiger out there? " " I thought we weren't out to shoot elephants or tigers, " replied Joseph absently. " We're not going looking for them, genius --but they don't know that, do they? If they come looking for us with tusk and fang you'd better be ready with that Winchester peashooter of yours. " (BNC) This is a distinguishing feature of evaluative go and may help disambiguate between the motional and mirative meanings. At the same time, the event that is evaluated runs counter to the speaker's norm and expectations. In ( 15), the course of events is viewed as erratic, given the disorder of the markets. In ( 16), the speaker clearly considers the guys to have a simplistic approach to sensitivity. In ( 17), as in most of the examples of the sample, the go V-ing construction occurs in a 11 (15') and (16') would imply that the referents of the grammatical subject intentionally look for… or think…, which is incompatible with the inanimate (and thus non-agentive) subject in (15') and with the cognitive state in (16').

negative context where the speaker explicitly objects to the process that has been going on.

Mirative go occurs mainly in negative and non-assertive contexts. Typically, the speaker attempts to prevent the course of events from deviating from what s/he assumes to be the natural course of things: The event referred to by the complement of go is evaluated negatively and the speaker wants to avoid or stop its actualisation. Mirative go takes verbs of activity and verbs of cognition as its complements. Even if the verb refers to an uncontrollable state of affairs (what someone thinks, the way someone looks), it is presented as an activity for which the referent of the grammatical subject can be held responsible. In this way, this state of affairs may be criticized by the speaker in an interpersonal exchange.

The binomial phrase: Go and V

The binomial phrase is also an exponent of mirativity in some of its uses. As in the go V-ing construction, go may retain its spatial meaning in some cases: Go up there clearly indicates that a motion is involved. Consequently, two separate events are coordinated in go and invite: the fact of going somewhere and the fact of inviting someone. However, the structure can also be used to indicate that the event referred to by the conjoined verb is foolish and/or unexpected (see the overview of dictionaries in [START_REF] Collin | GO et l'injonction: le cas de GO AND V, CORELA, Cognition, Représentation[END_REF]. There is only one event at stake and go does not denote motion:

(23) 'I thought she could walk home with some of her friends, and let herself in.

Then Example ( 23) highlights the contrast between the speaker's expectations (I thought she could...) and the event that actually took place. The event was unlikely to happen, and its actualisation is seen as deeply annoying (see the adjective silly). In example ( 24), the speaker expresses his incredulity (I can't figure out) and his anger at what they did. In ( 25), the speaker's surprise at the millionaires' whims is clearly stated. Like mirative aller and go V-ing, the binomial phrase thus seems to convey the speaker's epistemic judgement (unexpectedness) and his/her negative evaluation of an event.

In the previous examples, the binomial phrase refers to an actualised event but the construction can also have vetative uses whereby the speaker anticipates an abnormal kind of behaviour in an attempt to avoid its actualisation:

(26) There's your coffee. Now don't go and spill it all over the photos! (BNC)

Both in constative and vetative uses, the binomial phrase is incompatible with verbs denoting a cognitive state. We argue that such a constraint derives from the aspectual properties of the construction, which focuses on the endpoint of the process and on its resultant state (the coffee might be spilled, the key is lost in (23), the house is built in (25), etc.)

From a typological viewpoint, Bybee, Perkins & Pagliuca (1994: 57-60) mention the existence of languages (e.g. Tucano) where itive markers are used as markers of "completive aspect". Completive aspect is defined by three elements: "1. The object of the action is totally affected, consumed, or destroyed by the action […]. 2. The action involves a plural subject of intransitive verbs or object of transitive verbs. […]. 3. The action is reported with some emphasis or surprise value". Although no such aspect exists in English, the authors suggest that there might be a completive component in go and V, "which is usually used in the past to emphasize the deliberateness and finality of an action". We contend that the "finality" of the action may be ascribed to the coordination structure itself. As [START_REF] Collin | GO et l'injonction: le cas de GO AND V, CORELA, Cognition, Représentation[END_REF] argues, go works as the starting point of the process and consequently the second verb is construed as the final step of that process. As a whole, the construction perfectivises a situation. As for the "deliberateness" of the action, we propose to re-examine it in terms of responsibility: even when the binomial phrase does not appear in the past, emphasis is laid on the agent's responsibility, whether the event is actualised or feared.

Concluding remarks: three types of mirativity intermingled with lexical aspect

We have distinguished between three types of mirative meaning, all of them being entangled with lexical aspect. Mirative aller and go function as modal modifiers, in contrast to the temporal periphrases aller + infinitive and be going to.

a. In the construction with go missing, surprise emerges from the interruption of a state of affairs considered normal. Only the English go Ving construction may express this meaning. b. Surprise may result from the speaker witnessing a fact that runs counter to his or her norm. This constative use is common to the three constructions aller + infinitive, go V-ing and the binomial phrase go and V. c. A dissonant event may be anticipated in an attempt to prevent it from happening. There is a strong interpersonal quality associated with this vetative use, which is typically found in imperative and/or negative utterances. All the constructions under scrutiny may convey this mirative meaning.

The characteristic feature of constative and vetative mirativity when the grammatical subject is animate is that the speaker does not really comment on a state of affairs but on the origin of that state, that is to say on the referent of the grammatical subject. Moreover, this referent is held responsible for the anticipated or new state of affairs. What is seen as surprising or abnormal is the fact that a subject, more often than not the addressee, did what eventually led (or might lead, in vetative uses) to the event referred to. This explains why these mirative meanings often imply an animate and agentive grammatical subject. 12 Even if the referent of the subject cannot be held responsible for the state of affairs, the speaker will pretend s/he is: In example (4), the addressee is implicitly held responsible for his current illness, whereas no such ascription of responsibility is implied in où tu as attrapé ça? Despite these common characteristics, there is one striking aspectual dissimilarity between mirative aller and the English constructions. Mirative aller is a modal modifier, which can only encode the initial boundary of a process. It provides no information about the endpoint. Therefore, its complement verb is compatible with any kind of eventuality. By contrast, the binomial phrase and go V-ing are two aspectual variants of mirative go. The complements taken by go V-ing tend to be verbs of activity and verbs of cognition whereas the binomial phrase is incompatible with verbs denoting cognitive states. The similarity between aller and go may be illustrated by the following translational equivalents:

(25) He remembered Nigger Island as a boy. ... sort of rock covered with gullsstood about a mile from the coast. It had got its name from its resemblance to a man's head-a man with negroid lips. Funny idea to go and build a house on it! Awful in bad weather! But millionaires were full of whims! (A. This pair of translational equivalents shows that both go-constructions may render the meaning of mirative aller. But the choice between the two goconstructions is not made at random. It is governed by the Aktionsart of the complement verb. In the examples of our sample, the go V-ing construction does not take an event implying an endpoint as a complement, 13 in contrast to the go and V construction. Vice versa, the go and V construction does not appear with verbs of activity, in contrast to the go V-ing construction. The following constructed utterances would have a meaning significantly different from that of the original ones:

(25') Funny idea to go building a house on it. (21') You mustn't go and castigate yourself for crimes you didn't commit.

(25') would sound strange if said about a house that has been built, but would be perfectly felicitous in a comment on a process that has actually started. (21') would be construed as a genuine obligation not to carry out a prospective event, whereas deontic modality in ( 21) is pragmatically interpreted as a rebukethe speaker blaming the grammatical subject for his self-castigation. ( 21) could be glossed as follows: "I see you are castigating yourself, but you shouldn't." This aspectual distinction cannot be made in French with aller + infinitive.

( 12 )

 12 Va savoir ! / Allez travailler avec tout ce vacarme ! / Va comprendre, Charles ! (quoted by Forest 1999: 61) (12') Go figure! / Just try and work with all that noise! / Go figure, Charles!

(

  22) I'll tell you something, why don't you go and invite Carole and Brian? That's what she said. Well I would, I should go up there and have a word with Carole and Brian cos they sit on their own all Christmas virtually! (BNC)

  (8) On vous croit mort, fit-il valoir, vous n'avez plus d'existence légale, c'est ce que vous vouliez, non ? Donc, qu'est-ce que je risquerais à vous supprimer ? Tuer un mort n'est pas un crime, supposa-t-il […]. Allons, dit Delahaye, vous n'allez pas faire ça. Non, reconnut Ferrer, je ne crois pas. (Echenoz, Je m'en vais) (8) […]. Come one, Delahaye said, you're not going to do that. […] (9) L'homme explique, discute, argumente encore et Michèle Bernard-Requin

explose: « Vous n'allez tout de même pas m'apprendre le code ? » lance-t-elle… (Télérama, June 2004) (9') […]. 'You're not teaching me the highway code, are you?' […]

  Ne va pas t'imaginer qu'il y a de quoi être fier. Dis-toi plutôt que tu n'es pas digne de parler. (Frantext, Weyergans François, Macaire le Copte, 1981: 55). (10') […]. You managed to remain silent. Don't go thinking you can be proud of it. […]

(11)-T'en as violé combien, toi, des Cambodgiennes? -Oh, va pas croire... j'ai jamais violé une femme. J'en ai payé avec ma solde, mais ça n'empêchait pas les sentiments. (Frantext, Boudard Alphonse, Les Enfants de choeur, 1982: 152) (11') -How many Cambodian women did you rape?

-Oh, don't get it wrong… I never raped a woman.

[…]

  claims as well that go-constructions expressing a change of state are used by the speaker to mark a discrepancy between his/her expectations and what is the case. gear, compressors and oh any damn thing that went going. We made everything ourselves more or less. (BNC) (14) It's my jeep, OK? My driver. I'm not allowed to report the loss by radio, I've got to do it in person. It's a hell of a journey but that's the law. The Lodwar police really like helping citizens in distress. My jeep went missing? Tough shit. (Le Carré, Constant Gardener)

  (19) "See, I don't want Mrs Hollidaye to go thinking you're riff-raff. I don't want her to go getting any wrong ideas about what's become of me." (BNC) (20) They want someone who looks as if he's been shot at, wounded, and spent the day crawling through minefields to deliver the dispatches. So don't go looking too neat. On the other hand, don't go looking too battered. (BNC) (21) You were always good to her, Justin, you know you were. You mustn't go castigating yourself for crimes you didn't commit. A lot of people do that when they lose someone, and they're not being fair on themselves. (Le Carré, Constant Gardener).

  the silly girl goes and loses her key'. (Coe, The House of Sleep) (24) Goddamn niggers, Lord. What I have to put up with! Sonuvabitch, I can't figure out what in hell for they went and put niggers in my squad for. (Brown Corpus) (25) He remembered Nigger Island as a boy. ... sort of rock covered with gullsstood about a mile from the coast. It had got its name from its resemblance to a man's head -a man with negroid lips. Funny idea to go and build a house on it! Awful in bad weather! But millionaires were full of whims! (Christie, Ten Little Niggers)

  See, I don't want Mrs Hollidaye to go thinking you're riff-raff. I don't want her to go getting any wrong ideas about what's become of me." (BNC)

	(4) C'est pas vrai…. T'es malade -où t'es allé attraper ça ? (quoted by Larreya
	2005: 354)
	(19) "

  Christie, Ten Little Niggers, 1939) L'île du Nègre. II se rappelait y avoir été dans son enfance. Une sorte de rocher nauséabond hanté par les mouettes, à quinze cents mètres environ de la côte. Cette île devait son nom à sa ressemblance à une tête d'homme...[START_REF] Bres | Allez donc sortir des sentiers battus! La production de l'effet de sens extraordinaire par aller et venir[END_REF] show that mirative aller is compatible with inanimate subjects (see one of the instances they quote: L'hiver est dur, cette année, et jamais on n'a vu cette épaisseur de glace au ruisseau; et jamais on n'a senti ce froid, si fort qu'il est allé geler le vent au fond du ciel, hence undermining Larreya's claim that this use necessarily implies an animate and agentive grammatical subject. We may nonetheless counter that the cold is being personified here. aux lèvres négroïdes. Drôle d'idée d'aller bâtir une maison là-dessus! C'est horrible de vivre dans un îlot quand souffle la tempête. Mais les millionnaires sont tellement capricieux! (21) 'You were always good to her, Justin, you know you were. You mustn't go castigating yourself for crimes you didn't commit. (Le Carré, Constant Gardener) Vous avez toujours été bon envers elle, Justin, vous le savez bien. N'allez pas vous reprocher des fautes que vous n'avez pas commises.

12

Bres &

The translations are ours. They are to be taken as glosses.

See[START_REF] Flydal | Aller et venir suivis de l'infinitif comme expressions de rapports temporels[END_REF]

57). 5The scope of the negation is crucial to disambiguate between futurity and mirativity (see[START_REF] Giancarli | Le Futur Périphrastique modal français d'« allure extraordinaire » (assertif, et interrogatif, impératif) et ses traductions en anglais[END_REF][START_REF] Larreya | Sur les emplois de la périphrase aller + infinitif in[END_REF][START_REF] Schrott | La modalisation d'une forme temporelle: le futur périphrastique et l'allure extraordinaire[END_REF]. In the mirative meaning, the negation bears on the proposition as a whole. In the case of future aller, it bears on the link between subject and predicate within the proposition.


Agnès Celle

Laure Lansari

Surprise et exclamation en anglais

INTRODUCTION

Cet article examine la relation entre surprise et exclamation en prenant pour objet les exclamatives directes de l'anglais. Les énoncés déclaratifs et exclamatifs ont en commun l'expression d'une proposition présentée comme vraie. On explique en général la différence entre ces deux types d'énoncés par le positionnement du locuteur par rapport à cette proposition, les déclaratives étant simplement informatives, tandis que les exclamatives sont expressives et indissociables d'une réaction émotionnelle (cf. Sadock & Zwicky 1985 : 162). Dans un article sur les constructions exclamatives, [START_REF] Michaelis | Exclamative Constructions[END_REF]Michaelis ( : 1039Michaelis ( -1040) ) précise la nature de la réaction émotionnelle associée à l'exclamation. Elle affirme en effet que les exclamations expriment la surprise. Toutefois, elle souligne que dans son modèle, la surprise n'est pas une simple réaction à un stimulus. La surprise implique un « jugement de non-canonicité ». Ce concept, emprunté à Fillmore, [START_REF] Charles | Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions[END_REF], est défini en ces termes par [START_REF] Michaelis | Exclamative Constructions[END_REF]Michaelis ( : 1039) ) : "A noncanonical situation is one whose absence a speaker would have predicted, based on a prior assumption or set of assumptions, e.g., a stereotype, a set of behavioral norms, or a model of the physical world." Pour Michaelis, exclamation et surprise vont de pair. Cette affirmation constitue le point de départ de cet article. Si nous suivons Michaelis dans sa définition de la surprise en termes de jugement de non-canonicité, nous voudrions montrer qu'il n'y a pas pour autant de correspondance bi-univoque entre exclamation et surprise. D'une part, la surprise n'est pas exprimée par un seul type d'énoncés mais par un ensemble de marqueurs et de structures, lesquels ne se limitent pas à des paramètres verbaux ; les réactions faciales et corporelles sont aussi des moyens d'expression de la surprise. D'autre part, il est nécessaire de distinguer deux types de surprise. Certes, la surprise peut correspondre à une réaction émotionnelle spontanée, impliquant un jugement de non-canonicité. Mais, comme l'ont suggéré des travaux récents en communication multimodale, montrer de la surprise en interaction peut aussi constituer une réaction socialement appropriée qui sert à stimuler l'échange verbal. L'analyse de nos données va dans le même sens. Nos données sont tirées de la série américaine In Treatment, qui fait intervenir un psychothérapeute et ses patients engagés dans des sessions de dialogue hebdomadaires, et du Corpus of American Soap Operas, constitué de dialogues de séries américaines. Nous avons utilisé ce corpus comme corpus de référence. Nous avons laissé de côté les exclamatives indirectes, traitées dans l'article d'Anne Jugnet (ce volume), pour nous concentrer sur les exclamatives directes. Nous prendrons en compte aussi bien les exclamatives « strictes » en what et how, dans lesquelles la surprise est liée à un jugement scalaire, c'est-à-dire un jugement qui implique le degré, que les exclamations de phrase (verbales ou averbales). Dans la première partie de cet article, nous examinerons les liens entre surprise et exclamation sur le plan théorique, en prenant appui sur la littérature. Dans la seconde partie, nous analyserons nos données et montrerons la diversité des liens entre exclamation et surprise en interaction. Nous montrerons que la surprise s'inscrit dans une relation sociale, ce qui interdit d'établir une équivalence systématique entre expression et expressivité.

Exclamation et surprise 2.1. Recoupement avec la mirativité

La mirativité a été définie par DeLancey (1997) comme une catégorie sémantique indépendante de l'évidentialité, dont le rôle consiste à marquer l'information nouvelle ou surprenante pour le locuteur, quelle que soit la nature de la source de cette information1 . La mirativité n'est pas marquée dans la morphosyntaxe de l 'anglais, et DeLancey (1997 ;49) Dans ces énoncés, c'est la cause de la surprise de B qui apparaît dans l'exclamation, et non l'événement surprenant. L'exclamation est ici une vérité qui ne peut être contestée. Enoncer cette vérité permet au locuteur de ne pas répondre à la question qui lui est posée. Même si (7) est elliptique en ce qui concerne le positionnement du locuteur vis-à-vis du discours de l'autre, on infère facilement que B trouve la question de A tellement surprenante et inappropriée qu'elle apparaît inconcevable. En ( 6), l'exclamation indique que B rejette la question posée par A. L'exclamation de phrase n'exprime pas ici une information nouvelle, même si elle exprime bien la surprise : ce qui est surprenant, c'est qu'un participant ignore un élément considéré comme évident et pose une question jugée non pertinente. Une théorie en termes de non-canonicité semble ainsi plus adaptée pour rendre compte de ces cas de figure, qui sont laissés de côté dans les approches miratives de la surprise.

Constructions

Dans le courant de la linguistique cognitive, plusieurs constructions ont été identifiées comme moyen d'expression de l'incongru. On doit les WXDY ("What's X doing Y") à Kay et Fillmore (1999), qui les définissent en ces termes: "In the WXDY construction we have an overall scene (frame) in which a judgment of incongruity is attributed by a judge (prag) to some state of affairs". Fillmore, Kay et O 'Connor (1988: 511) définissent également les "Incredulity Response Constructions", qui prennent la forme d'une reprise incrédule comme dans l'exemple suivant :

(8) Speaker A: I hear that John may wear a tuxedo to the ball… Speaker B: Him wear a tuxedo? He doesn't even own a clean shirt (Lambrecht 1990 : 216).

Ce genre d'exemple illustre la proximité entre exclamation et interrogation lorsque l'interrogation ne sollicite pas une information, prenant une fonction rhétorique ou échoïque. Lambrecht affirme que la reprise opérée par l'interrogation ne peut être analysée correctement que dans une perspective constructionniste, en examinant la proposition précédente, et la proposition suivante -dans laquelle le locuteur exprime son jugement. Him wear a tuxedo forme un « topic » complexe, alors que ce qui suit constitue un commentaire sur ce topique et plus précisément un rejet de la validité de ce topique. Ces constructions sont absentes de nos données, mais nous avons trouvé une construction qui rappelle les « Incredulous Response Constructions » :

(9) He's not here and it's my fault! It's my fault because I am here. (In Treatment) (10) I was late and you're kicking me out of therapy? (In Treatment) (11) You tried to kill yourself, Sophie, and you don't want to tell the most important person in your world? (In Treatment) Cette construction est formée de deux propositions conjointes, la seconde étant soit une exclamation, soit une question. La différence entre les deux est d'ailleurs ténue. On notera que l'inversion sujet-auxiliaire est impossible dans la seconde partie.

Comme les constructions du type "him wear a tuxedo », cette construction implique une structure topique -commentaire. Le topique fait référence à un fait qui va à l'encontre d'une norme. Dans le commentaire, on observe un changement de perspective : référence est faite à la réaction de l'interlocuteur. Sur le plan formel, and suggère que le lien entre les deux propositions est logique. Mais la question ou l'exclamation dans la seconde proposition indique que la validité du point de vue de l'autre quant à l'enchaînement logique entre les deux propositions est à rejeter. Ainsi, l'enchaînement qui apparaît logique pour l'autre est considéré comme absurde par le locuteur. Dans ce type de constructions, la surprise concerne donc un enchaînement de propositions, et l'exclamation ou l'interrogation qui apparaît en position coordonnée vise à déconstruire un lien qui est contraire à l'attente du locuteur.

L'EXCLAMATION DANS L'INTERACTION

L'examen de séquences dialoguées attestées contenant des exclamations -constructions exclamatives ou exclamations de phrase -montre que le jugement de non-canonicité qui caractérise la surprise peut s'intégrer à divers scénarios selon le positionnement du locuteur. Trois cas différents se dégagent de nos données :

- Dans nos données, nous n'avons effectivement pas relevé de remise en cause de l'assertion qu'implique l'exclamative lorsque celle-ci correspond à une véritable réaction émotionnelle. Ainsi, dans l'exemple (16), il serait difficile d'imaginer comme réaction à l'exclamative what a weasely way out! la négation it's not a weasely way out! :

show surprise in response to the surprisable." / « Il revient à l'autre de montrer de la surprise en réaction à ce qui est susceptible d'être surprenant » (ibid. : 232, notre traduction).

Ces auteurs ajoutent que ce type de réaction ne relève pas du mensonge : le second participant ne feint pas consciemment une émotion qu'il ne ressent pas, mais se conforme de façon inconsciente à des attentes sociales : "This is not to say that the emotion is disingenuous but rather that in this case, surprise is a sequentially and situationally appropriate response, not simply to the event, but to the ways in which the event is rendered visible and the obligations that arise and rest therein." (ibid. : 216) / « Il ne s'agit pas de dire que l'émotion est mensongère, mais plutôt que dans ce cas la surprise constitue une réponse appropriée dans la séquence et dans la situation, pas seulement à l'événement mais à la façon dont l'événement est rendu visible, et aux obligations qui en découlent » (notre traduction). Nous souscrivons pleinement à cette analyse, qui nous semble applicable aux exclamations que nous étudions : le locuteur ne feint pas sciemment d'être surpris alors qu'il ne le serait pas, mais a intégré une routine sociale à laquelle il se conforme.

Ce second type de surprise est caractérisé par une dimension que Heath, vom Lehn, Cleverly & Luff (2012) qualifient de « proactive » : le locuteur anticipe sur les attentes de l'autre. La dimension proactive de la surprise mise en évidence ici a largement été ignorée dans la littérature. Dans leur définition de l'exclamation comme expression de la surprise (par opposition à assertion de la surprise), Rett & Murray (2013) se fondent uniquement sur des critères formels, critères examinés dans notre première partie. Elles n'envisagent donc pas le cas de figure où l'expression de la surprise peut s'intégrer à une routine sociale sans être aussi clairement « orientée vers le sujet » qu'ils le suggèrent. Notre approche discursive et pragmatique révèle que l'exclamation peut aussi être dirigée vers l'autre. Il faut préciser en outre que cette dimension proactive de la surprise est également susceptible de se manifester en rapport à l'exclamation dans des situations moins conventionnelles : Mateo: I was so sure. We were so sure. Arlene: Yeah. Well, there's no such thing in this life as a sure thing except for me blowing it. (CASO) La locutrice, Arlene, n'est pas surprise au moment où elle parle: c'est au contraire elle qui annonce un élément potentiellement surprenant pour les autres mais dont elle a déjà connaissance (voir I got the results on my own dans le contexte-avant). L'interlocuteur Mateo est bien surpris, lui. Dans sa réaction, il insiste d'ailleurs sur l'écart entre sa certitude passée et la réalité (voir I was so sure. We were so sure). Rett (2011, 416;2008, 603), dans la lignée de Potts ( 2005), postule qu'on a alors affaire à des marqueurs expressifs associés à un acte de langage mensonger (« insincere speech act ») : le locuteur mentirait en feignant la surprise. Nous ne souscrivons pas à cette analyse en termes de mensonge : plutôt que de mensonge, il s'agit pour nous de mise en scène dans le cadre d'un positionnement intersubjectif particulier. L'analyse proposée par Rett est liée au fait qu'elle assimile expressivité et réaction émotionnelle : s'il n'y a pas véritable surprise, alors l'exclamative est la trace d'un mensonge, d'une feinte consciente. Notre hypothèse, au contraire, est que ces exclamations relèvent bien de l'expressivité mais d'un autre type d'expressivité : l'expressivité « éthique » définie par Legallois & François (2012, 210-211), par contraste avec l'expressivité pathétique et l'expressivité mimésique évoquées plus haut. C'est bien l'expressivité éthique qui nous semble apte à rendre compte des énoncés ironiques : dans l'expressivité éthique, il y a « promotion de soi » comme l'expriment Legallois & François, au sens où le locuteur met en scène ou dramatise son discours, ce qui lui permet dans nos énoncés de maîtriser le rapport interlocutif. En (20), le locuteur utilise ainsi l'exclamative pour se distancier du réel, trop douloureux à affronter, mais également pour mettre en scène son annonce des mauvais résultats médicaux vis-à-vis de l'autre. Là encore, la surprise est proactive : il y a anticipation de la surprise de l'autre, qui se trouve ainsi court-circuitée. What a surprise! signifie : I know you will be surprised but you shouldn't. L'autre ne peut donc plus véritablement exprimer sa propre surprise (voir plus bas § 4). Observons un autre exemple: L'expressivité éthique est encore plus évidente ici : l'exclamative what a coincidence est suivie d'une question rhétorique enchâssée (voir who dropped by to say hi this afternoon?) dans le cadre d'une mise en scène du récit. Par le biais de cette mise en scène, l'interlocuteur ne peut manquer de voir qu'il n'y a justement pas coïncidence. On peut gloser par : don't tell me it is a coincidence, then. L'interlocuteur est sommé de réagir, comme le suggère la vraie question qui clôt la réplique du locuteur. Les emplois ironiques qui, d'après nos données, se retrouvent essentiellement dans des unités figées comme what a surprise, what a coincidence3 , sont finalement liés à un positionnement intersubjectif particulier : c'est précisément lorsque le locuteur pense que l'autre sera surpris ou affirmera qu'il s'agit d'une coïncidence que l'exclamative apparaît pour court-circuiter par avance la surprise et l'affirmation de coïncidence. L'exclamative est alors utilisée par le locuteur pour s'assurer la maîtrise du rapport interlocutif.

Réaction de l'interlocuteur

Dans cette dernière partie, nous souhaitons corréler exclamation du locuteur et réaction de l'interlocuteur, dans le but d'identifier les spécificités de chacun des trois types de surprise que nous avons définis, mais aussi de comparer exclamation et interrogation dans l'expression de la surprise. Dans un travail sur les interrogatives modalisées en would prononcées en réaction à un élément surprenant (Celle & Lansari, à paraître), nous avons montré que la surprise peut mener à l'argumentation : face à un élément jugé déviant, le locuteur peut mener un raisonnement abductif pour remonter à la cause de la source de surprise. Voici un exemple représentatif : Cette séquence montre clairement qu'après la réaction purement émotionnelle manifestée par what?, le locuteur tente de comprendre ce qui a pu motiver le comportement jugé déviant dont il est question. Ce type de réaction conduit l'interlocuteur à proposer une justification causale, de nature argumentative donc, avec ou sans because. Dans le cas de l'exclamation, nous postulons au contraire que l'interlocuteur ne discute pas de la nature ou de la cause de surprise. Les exclamatives ne sont pas argumentatives en soi.

Nos données suggèrent qu'en réponse aux exclamatives véritablement émotionnelles, l'interlocuteur:

-Soit n'exprime pas de réaction particulière, notamment lorsque la valence est positive.

(12) Marian: Oh, wonderful ! Wonderful.

Isabella: I'm so happy.

L'exclamative Oh, wonderful ! wonderful!, qui résulte d'une attente sociale, est forcément consensuelle.

-Soit sa réaction met en avant le caractère irrationnel de l'exclamative, vue comme un déferlement difficile à maîtriser -que la valence soit positive ou négative, comme l'illustrent les exemples (11) et ( 12

  ) : (13) Erica: Of course! Wow! What a --what a surprise! My goodness! Give me a hug! Lily: I don't do that! I don't do that suggère ainsi que du point de vue de Lily, Erica réagit de façon excessive à leur rencontre.

  souligne son caractère optionnel dans cette langue. Lorsqu'elle est marquée, elle pourrait passer par l'intonation.Ainsi, DeLancey (2001 :9) estime qu'il existe une intonation mirative en anglais : « The mirative contour is an exaggerated version of the declarative intonation, with the tonic rise considerably higher." DeLancey ne fait pas de rapprochement avec l'exclamation. D'ailleurs, dans les traductions anglaises des exemples qu'il donne, la présence d'un point d'exclamation est loin d'être systématique. Dans les cas où l'énoncé miratif exprime un compliment, le point d'exclamation est présent dans la traduction, comme dans cet exemple traduit du turc qu'il reprend deSlobin et Aksu (1983), où le miratif est marqué par la particule -mıș :My God ! énoncé par B exprime la surprise à propos de l'assertion énoncée par A. La surprise est ici causée non par un événement extralinguistique mais par un « événement de discours », c'est-àdire une information contraire à l'attente du locuteur B. Rett & Murray (2013) limitent les exclamations de phrase aux cas où il y a information nouvelle, comme en (5). Cependant, certaines exclamations de phrase constituent des reprises d'une information déjà connue des participants au discours, notamment lorsque cette information semble ignorée par l'interlocuteur alors qu'elle est censée être une connaissance partagée :

	assertion d'un énoncé à valeur mirative. Rett (2011), Rett et Murray (2013) et Peterson (à paraître)
	qualifient explicitement cette intonation d'exclamative. Elle apparaît dans (3) (b), qui se distingue
	de l'intonation assertive de (3) (a) :
		(3) a. John arrived on time.
		b. (Wow,) John arrived on time! (Rett et Murray 2013, 455)
	Pour Rett et Murray (2013, 467) (3) (b) constitue une "construction mirative", dont la
	caractéristique est d'associer l'assertion et l'expression de la surprise du locuteur :
	(6) "[…] the illocutionary content of the speech act is to assert that p and to express that p was not A: Did you have the father that you needed? previously in the speaker's expectation set". B: I'm a therapist! What do you think? (In Treatment)
	Rett et Murray (2013, 455) dégagent quatre critères déterminant l'expression de la surprise par opposition son assertion : (7) A: Is he attracted to you -Reeves?
	(1)	kiz-iniz 1. L'expression de la surprise ne peut être niée : # No, you are not surprised). Seul le contenu çok iyi piyano çal-iyor-muș
		peut être nié : No, John didn't arrive on time.
		daughter-your 2. On ne peut pas l'enchâsser sous une négation ou un discours rapporté : John didn't arrive on very good piano play-PRES-MIR
		time! ne peut pas exprimer que le locuteur n'est pas surpris par la ponctualité de John.
		Mary said John arrived on time! exprime forcément la surprise du locuteur face au fait que
		Marie ait dit que John était arrivé à l'heure, et non face à la ponctualité de John.
		3. L'expression de la surprise est toujours orientée vers le locuteur. L'intonation est celle de
		l'exclamation, et non de l'interrogation.
		4. L'exclamation est contrainte par la « restriction de récence » c'est-à-dire que l'élément
	(2)	Mary e-wé' surprenant vient juste d'être porté à la connaissance du locuteur. ghálayeyĩda lō
	Mary its-hide La distinction que font Rett & Murray entre expression et assertion -suivant en cela Potts (2005) work.IMPF -est fondamentale. L'assertion simple, comme dans I am surprised/je suis surpris(e), peut être remise
	en cause dans l'interaction verbale. A l'inverse, l'expression de la surprise est indexicale et
		exclamation peut
	être fait dans certains cas, la mirativité ne se laisse pas réduire pour autant à l'exclamation. En (1),
	où le point d'exclamation suggère une intonation mirative, la qualité de la performance musicale
	dépasse l'attente du locuteur, tandis qu'en (2), le locuteur exprime un simple constat d'imprévu
	(« first-hand knowledge of unanticipated information ») selon DeLancey (1997 : 39). Dans ce
	dernier cas, il n'y a pas nécessairement une intonation mirative en anglais. La mirativité telle que
	la décrit DeLancey est donc une catégorie sémantique qui va au-delà de l'exclamation, même si
	elle peut l'inclure.
	Revenons à présent au cas qui nous intéresse, à savoir le rapprochement entre mirativité et
	exclamation. En anglais l'intonation est l'un des critères permettant de distinguer une simple

"Your daughter plays the piano very well!'

(DeLancey 1997: 38)

Dans d'autres cas, en revanche, il n'y a pas de point d'exclamation, comme dans cet exemple où la particule lō en hare marque le miratif : 'Mary is working on hides.'

(DeLancey 1997: 39)

A supposer que la présence d'un point d'exclamation soit un indice de l'intonation mirative dont l'existence est postulée par DeLancey, on observe que cette intonation n'est pas systématique dans la traduction anglaise. Cela tend à montrer que si le rapprochement avec l'inaccessible à l'interlocuteur, qui ne peut remettre en cause que le contenu : (

4

) A: What happened? B: You fainted! A: What? (In Treatment) "No, I didn't faint, I just felt sick" pourrait se trouver dans la suite du dialogue, mais pas No, you are not surprised". What marque clairement une question sur le contenu, sur l'événement lui-même, pas sur l'état émotionnel de B. Dans cet énoncé, la surprise est liée à l'émergence d'un événement incontrôlable, inattendu. L'exclamation de phrase you fainted ! associe expression de la surprise et assertion que p. Mais dans le discours assertion et expression ne sont pas nécessairement coprésentes. Ainsi, les interjections, qui apparaissent très souvent en co-occurrence avec les exclamatives dans nos données, peuvent exprimer de la surprise, tout en étant disjointes d'un contenu propositionnel : (5) A: Walter tried to kill himself. B: My God! Paul, why didn't you tell me this? When did this happen? (In Treatment) B: Why wouldn't he be? A: And what about you? B: Doctor, I'm a married woman! (In Treatment)

  Le jugement épistémique peut être associé à une réaction de surprise spontanée : l'exclamation est alors très proche d'une interjection et témoigne d'une réaction non contrôlée.-Dans d'autres cas, l'exclamation s'apparente à une réaction plus conventionnelle, par laquelle le locuteur prétend être surpris par souci des conventions sociales. -Enfin, l'exclamation peut être utilisée de façon ironique. Ce cas de figure est mentionné dans la littérature (cf. Potts 2005, Rett 2008, 2011) et analysé comme acte de langage mensonger. Nous verrons qu'une autre analyse permet de rendre compte des emplois ironiques de l'exclamation. Les exclamatives sont susceptibles d'exprimer une forte réaction émotionnelle de la part de l'énonciateur -réaction qui peut être associée à une valence positive, comme dans les exemples (12) et (13), ou négative, comme dans l'exemple (14). Cette double possibilité est liée au fait que la surprise n'est pas en soi porteuse d'une valence particulière, contrairement à la peur ou à la colère (voir notamment Ortony et al. 1999, 32) : (12) Marian: Still no word? Stuart: Oh. Oh, I couldn't find a parking place. Did I miss everything? Marian: Well, we don't know, Darling, but Isabella thought she heard a baby crying. François (2012). A la lecture des travaux fondateurs de Bally, Guillaume et Bühler, ces auteurs se prononcent en faveur d'une « remise en cause de la définition commune de l'expressivité en termes d'émotivité » (ibid. : 208). Ils affirment que l'expressivité inclut l'émotivité mais ne s'y réduit pas. Ils établissent ainsi trois types d'expressivité : expressivité émotionnelle qu'ils nomment expressivité « pathétique » ; expressivité mimésique qui vise à représenter ou « présentifier » un objet (dans le cas des onomatopées, par exemple) ; expressivité éthique, liée à la « présentation de soi ». C'est d'expressivité émotionnelle qu'il est question ici, expressivité qui se manifeste notamment par la présence d'interjections (oh, wow, my God), de répétitions (wonderful, wonderful), soit plus largement de phénomènes de disfluence dans le discours. Ce type d'exclamatives est orienté vers le locuteur et non vers l'interlocuteur : il s'apparente à un débordement irrépressible de la part de ce dernier. La disfluence syntaxique en (12) et (14) montre clairement qu'il n'y a pas de stratégie de contrôle, ni d'intention de choquer l'interlocuteur ou de lui plaire. Il faut d'ailleurs noter que ce débordement est considéré comme irrationnel par l'interlocuteur (voir you can't think about this rationally en (14)). Comme nous l'avons rappelé en première partie, Rett (2011) postule que, dans ce type d'exemples où la surprise s'exprime par une construction exclamative, le jugement de noncanonicité est orienté vers le locuteur et ne peut être nié :

	Isabella: I did.
	Rosa: Mom, it's a maternity ward.
	Isabella: I know, but it came out of that room. It did.
	Joe: Everybody? Congratulations. It's a boy ! And mother --and mother and son are both doing fine.
	Marian: Oh, wonderful! Wonderful.!
	Isabella: I'm so happy. (CASO)
	(13) Erica: Oh.
	Lily: You're Erica.
	Erica: Oh, yes. Lily! I am! How wonderful to see you!
	Lily: It is?
	par une
	situation -la rencontre avec la dénommée Lily en (13). L'exclamation fait alors partie d'une à l'exclamative complète, qui est enchâssable :
	réaction spontanée, non-contrôlée et relève de l'un des deux modes de communication définis
	par Caffi & Janney (1994) (qu'ils reprennent de Marty (1908)) : la communication (13'') It's amazing what a surprise it was.
	« émotionnelle », par opposition à la communication « émotive ». La communication
	émotionnelle s'apparente à « un type de débordement émotionnel, spontané, non-intentionnel, (14'') It's amazing what a weasely way out it was.
	dans le discours » (notre traduction) ("a type of spontaneous, unintentional leakage or bursting
	out of emotion in speech", Caffi & Janney 1994 : 328). Par contraste, la communication dite
	« émotive » "n'entretient pas de relation automatique ou nécessaire avec les véritables affects
	internes au locuteur. Elle est liée à une posture de celui-ci, elle est intrinsèquement stratégique,
	persuasive, interactionnelle et orientée vers l'autre » (notre traduction : it "has no automatic or
	necessary relation to "real" inner affective states. Rather, it is related to self-presentation and it is

3. 1. Exclamatives et réaction émotionnelle

Erica: Of course! Wow! What a --what a surprise! My goodness! Give me a hug! Lily: I don't do that! Erica: Oh, that's just for strangers. This is me! It's Erica! Well, my goodness, we really have to catch up. Ahem. How long have you been home? Do you like it here? I mean, your father must be so happy. How is your father? Oh, come on, Lily, we can't catch up like this. (CASO) (14) Greenlee: You what? Trey: I know, I know. Greenlee: She could go free? She could be out on the streets? Don't you care that she might sell drugs, kill other people? Trey: Of course I know Mrs. Cortlandt has done you a lot of harm and you do, but that's not my responsibility. You have to think about it from a legal standpoint. The D.A.' s case is falling apart. The physical evidence has been compromised, there are statutes of limitations -Greenlee: But that's your --ugh, my God, what a weasely way out! Trey: Think about it calmly. Greenlee: You're using the flag and the constitution to free a murderer. That's despicable. Trey: You're wrong, Greenlee. Greenlee: Or if you really are a civil rights geek, then you're a fool and Vanessa's using you. Trey: I know Mrs. Cortlandt has done you a lot of harm and you can't think about this rationally -Greenlee: No, I can't. I can't. But guess what -(CASO) Dans ces trois séquences, le locuteur est véritablement surpris par un discours antérieurl'annonce d'une naissance en (12), l'annonce de la libération d'un meurtrier en (14) -ou inherently strategic, persuasive, interactional and other-directed by its very nature". (ibid.)). Nous verrons par la suite que certaines exclamatives relèvent de ce second mode de communication. Comme le montrent les exemples (12) à (14), la communication émotionnelle est caractérisée par une forte expressivité. Notre acception de ce terme est fondée sur les travaux de Legallois & (15) A. (My,) What delicious desserts John bakes! (wh-exclamative) / (Boy,) Does John bake delicious desserts! (inversion exclamative) / (My,) The delicious desserts John bakes! (nominal exclamative) B. ?No (he doesn't), these are store-bought. John's actually a terrible cook. Les trois constructions exclamatives de l'exemple (15) A, qui correspondent dans la terminologie de Rett (2011) respectivement à une exclamative en wh-, une exclamative inversée, et une exclamative nominale, ne peuvent pas faire l'objet d'une réfutation par B. L'assertion qui soustend ces exclamatives ne peut pas être niée par l'autre 2 , ce qui montre qu'elles sont intrinsèquement orientées vers le locuteur et comparables en cela aux déictiques. Il a été observé par ailleurs que ces exclamatives ne peuvent être enchâssées lorsqu'elles sont incomplètes. En reprenant le test de Ginzburg (2011 : 272), on peut contraster l'exclamative incomplète, non enchâssable : (13') *It's amazing what a surprise. (14') *It's amazing what a weasely way out.

  Dans cet échange entre un thérapeute, Paul, et sa patiente, Sophie, la patiente sent que le thérapeute attend de sa part une réaction de surprise, liée à la relecture qu'il fait de son enfance. Le terme « exposed » choisi par le thérapeute, et repris par la patiente, est en effet utilisé pour que la patiente voie à quel point le comportement de son père était pervers et l'aider à comprendre le mal qu'il lui a fait. Pour répondre aux attentes du thérapeute, elle simule donc la surpriseréaction attendue par le thérapeute. Le thérapeute n'est finalement pas dupe et sait qu'elle se moque de lui (voir laughs). Your son needs your help if he's going to see his first birthday, and I'll be damned if I let you soak your liver in booze just because you can't take the heat! You know, you can't even wait for the test result? Arlene: I can wait. I already know. Mateo: What do you mean you know? What --I -Arlene: I couldn't wait for the doctor to take her own sweet time, so I got the results on my own.

	Mateo: And?
	Arlene: The liver's a bust. What a surprise, huh?
	(19) Sophie: His studio was at home. So there were a lot of models walkingaround naked. It wasn't a
	big deal. We were cool.
	Paul: So this was normal for you, to be exposed to adults being naked, yeah?
	Sophie: "Exposed". Ooh, nudity. How scary. Breasts -terrifying!
	(Laughs)
	Paul: So were you ever naked around the house?
	Sophie: Of course not. (In Treatment)
	3.3 Emplois ironiques
	Nos données confirment que les exclamatives peuvent aussi être utilisées de façon ironique, fait
	qui a déjà été noté dans la littérature (voir Rett 2008, 2011 ; Potts 2005) :

(20) Mateo:

  You think spending time with Carly is gonna help things with Hope? Hope and Ciara should not be living at my house, Bo. They should be living here with you. Wait a second. No, no, that's not what I'm talking about. Out of the past, out of the blue, Carly shows up. And what a coincidence. Guess who dropped by to say hi this afternoon? Vivian. What the hell is going on? (CASO)

	Bo: What?
	Philip: Carly being here?
	Bo: She's a friend.

(21) Philip: Philip:

  (22) Gaby: Oh, let's face it, Susan. You're kind of a loose cannon. Yeah, I mean, 15 minutes after we made a pact to keep this secret, you were begging us to tell Mike. Susan: Oh, yeah? Well, guess what? I didn't tell Mike. Carlos did. So who's your loose cannon now? Gaby: What? Why would Carlos do that? Susan: Oh, I don't know. Maybe because unlike you, he has a conscience. Gaby: Oh, don't push it, Susan! (Desperate Housewives)

La mirativité pose problème en tant que catégorie sémantique. L'objet de cet article étant l'articulation de la surprise et de l'exclamation, nous n'avons pas la place de revenir sur la définition de la mirativité, qui a fait l'objet de critiques fondées de la part de Lazard (2009) et Zeisler (à paraître).

A l'inverse, les exclamations de phrase, qui ont un schéma déclaratif, autorisent, au même titre que les assertions, une contestation de leur contenu : A: (Wow,) John bakes delicious desserts! B: No (he doesn't), these are store-bought. John's actually a terrible cook.(Rett 2011 : 414)

Legallois & François (2012 : 216) notent d'ailleurs que les « unités phraséologiques […] sont très souvent expressives ».