This article deals with English causal subordinate clauses introduced by since or as. Both these markers may convey different meanings according to contextual variations, and can express temporal relations, from which their causal value is derived. The semantic closeness between as and since whenever they express a causal relation makes it necessary to harvest a large number of attested examples in order to compare and contrast them. The recourse to large on-line corpora such as the British National Corpus gives rise (...) to specific practical difficulties, however, especially as far as as is concerned; because of the high frequency of the subordinators in question, one is confronted to thousands of examples, few of which turn out to have a clear causal value in the case of as, hence the recourse to other means in order to make up a large enough corpus of examples.The concept of presupposition is examined, as it has often been argued that causal since subordinates, unlike as subordinates, introduce a presupposed content. But when confronted to a large number of examples, this criterion falls short of accounting for the subtle differences between the two conjunctions. A more theoretical approach is required; thanks to the tools provided by A. Culioli’s Theory of Enunciative and Predicative Operations, it becomes possible to formalise the hypothesis that a since causal relationship is presented as unproblematic and is addressee-oriented, whereas an as causal relationship is felt as unproblematic, and is speaker-oriented.This difference can be felt in the fact that it seems to be easier to find examples of causal as clauses in the press, while the causal use of since is more widespread in general, and does not seem to be specific to a genre in particular. In order to put this impression to the test, I have resorted to the multi-lingual parallel corpus Intercorp. (shrink)

Le livre de F. Doro-Mégy (ci-après FDM) se fonde sur ses travaux de doctorat. Il s’agit d’un numéro spécial de la collection Linguistique contrastive et traduction dirigée par J. Guillemin-Flescher aux éditions Ophrys. Il est dédié à la mémoire de C. Bernigaud. Dans l’introduction, FDM expose son sujet et les limites de ce dernier. Elle part de l’idée intuitive selon laquelle think serait l’équivalent du français penser tandis que believe correspondrait presque systématiquement à croire. San..

Le livre de F. Doro-Mégy (ci-après FDM) se fonde sur ses travaux de doctorat. Il s’agit d’un numéro spécial de la collection Linguistique contrastive et traduction dirigée par J. Guillemin-Flescher aux éditions Ophrys. Il est dédié à la mémoire de C. Bernigaud. Dans l’introduction, FDM expose son sujet et les limites de ce dernier. Elle part de l’idée intuitive selon laquelle think serait l’équivalent du français penser tandis que believe correspondrait presque systématiquement à croire. San...