Université de Montréal - Thèse sous forme numérique

194provides this kind of information, we decided to include it so as account for the way FEsare profiled specifically in each term. It will be shown that some terms may display coreFEs alternations that are not necessarily applicable to all terms in a frame. Thus, actantialstructures correspond to the abstract level of description of terms right before the mostabstract level of frame description.Actantial structures were identified based on the analysis of the contexts in whichtarget terms appear. Consider the following contexts of the term violate 2 :[1] The searches of the accused did not violate s. 8 of the Charter.[2] The issue was whether such use violated s. 8 of the Charter.[3] An unwanted blood transfusion violates what Chaoulli describes as the fundamentalvalue of "bodily integrity free from state interference" (para. 122).[4] Did the agency violate via's right to procedural fairness?[5] As to the second, we agree that the Crown violated its Charter obligations of disclosure.[6] I conclude that the IRPA unjustifiably violates s. 7 of the Charter by allowing theissuance of a certificate of inadmissibility based on secret material without providing forindependent agent at the stage of judicial review to better protect the named person'sinterests.The term violate 2 has two obligatory participants or actants: one that typicallycorresponds to the syntactic subject of the verb, and another that typically corresponds tothe syntactic object of the verb. Search, use, blood transfusion, agency Crown and IRPA areexamples of the linguistic occurrences of the first actant of violate 2 . S., what Chaoullidescribes as the fundamental value of "bodily integrity free from state interference", rightand obligations are examples of the linguistic occurrences of the second actant.