The term constantif, which Metz borrowed from Austin, should be rendered by "constantive" and not by "ascertaining"
(p. 25). Finally, "actor" to translate Greimas 's concept of actant is misleading and actant is usually kept (see Ducrôt and Todorov, Encyclopedic
Dictionary of the Sciences of Language, Johns Hopkins University Press,
1979, p. 224), and discours image when translated as "image discourse" is not very clear, since it is referring to film, which is made up of images.
The following rough spots occur only once each: "Unusual" (p. 5) translates weakly insolite, which has also the connotation of strange, disquieting, surprising, unexpected, and uncanny. A "slice of cinema" (p.14) would be preferable to a "piece of cinema." "Narrative agency" rather than "instance"; "de-realization"or "de-realizing" rather than "unrealizing."
"A seminal concept" (p. 58) doesn 't really render une notion gigogne
(again the idea of embedded concepts). The title of Lang 's film which is translated by The Damned is actually M. "Signifying statements" should be "semenes" (p. 26). I have not found an English equivalent for mise en grilles, which refers to a gridlike breakdown of linguistic units and which Taylor translates by "pigeon-holing"