A carregar...
Publicação
Variação na concordância verbal com expressões partitivas em português europeu: estudo de aceitabilidade
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 997.06 KB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
A concordância verbal com expressões partitivas é uma das áreas de hesitação da língua portuguesa, observando-se, frequentemente, variação nos padrões de concordância com estas estruturas. A possibilidade de dupla concordância com este tipo de expressões – no singular, vista como formal ou canónica (Brito, 2003; Martins, 2012; Peres & Móia, 1995; Raposo, 2020), ou no plural – é avaliada e descrita de forma distinta em obras de referência.
Numa primeira parte, procurou-se definir e delimitar as estruturas partitivas, para, de seguida, se poder confrontar as considerações de diversos autores, portugueses e espanhóis, sobre a gramaticalidade da escolha da concordância verbal no plural e sobre usos diários. Essencialmente, a escolha do tipo de concordância está relacionada com a interpretação dos falantes quanto ao núcleo principal da expressão (Cerqueira, 2017; Raposo, 2020): por um lado, elegem o primeiro núcleo, ou seja, o quantificador, como desencadeador da concordância; por outro, consideram o substantivo pós-preposicional, ou núcleo semântico, como o núcleo principal. Autores como Cunha e Cintra (2015) não identificam preferências, considerando os dois tipos de concordância sujeito-verbo como igualmente admissíveis.
O objetivo deste trabalho foi desenvolver um estudo de aceitabilidade, apresentado na segunda parte, que nos permitiu verificar as preferências de concordância dos participantes, falantes nativos do português europeu, com diferentes tipos de expressões.
Os participantes avaliaram a gramaticalidade de frases com expressões partitivas do tipo a maioria de, expressões de percentagem e expressões do tipo n em cada m. Procurou-se, ainda, testar frases com estruturas passivas e sujeitas a modificação restritiva, através de
sintagma adjetival, e a modificação apositiva, recorrendo-se a testes de relevância estatística que permitissem comparar resultados para itens com e sem modificação e para itens nas vozes ativa e passiva.
Os resultados gerais apontam para uma preferência pela concordância verbal canónica, embora a concordância no plural não possa ser considerada completamente inaceitável ou agramatical, sendo inclusivamente indicada por autores (Demonte & Pérez-Jiménez, 2015) como predominante no domínio da oralidade.
Verbal agreement with partitive expressions is one of the areas of hesitation in the Portuguese language, with variation in agreement patterns often observed with these structures. The possibility of double agreement with this type of expression – singular, seen as formal or canonical (Brito, 2003; Martins, 2012; Peres & Móia, 1995; Raposo, 2020), or plural – is evaluated and described differently in reference literature. In the first part of this dissertation, we aimed to define and delimit partitive structures, so that we could then confront the considerations of various Portuguese and Spanish authors on the grammaticality of choosing plural verb agreement and on everyday usage habits. Essentially, the choice of agreement type is related to the speakers' interpretation of the main core of the expression (Cerqueira, 2017; Raposo, 2020): on the one hand, they choose the first part of the expression, the quantifier, as the trigger for agreement; on the other hand, they consider the post-prepositional noun, or semantic core, as the main core. Authors such as Cunha e Cintra (2015) do not point out any preferences, considering both types of subject-verb agreement as equally acceptable. The purpose of this work is to conduct an acceptability study, presented in the second part, which allowed us to to verify the agreement preferences of participants, native speakers of European Portuguese, with different types of expressions. Participants evaluated the grammaticality of sentences with partitive expressions, such as a maioria de, percentage expressions, and n em cada m expressions. We also tested sentences with passive structures and items subject to restrictive modification, through adjectival phrases, of the quantifier, and appositive modification of the whole nominal group, using statistical relevance tests that allowed us to compare results for items with and without modification. The overall results point to a preference for canonical verbal agreement, although plural agreement cannot be considered completely unacceptable or ungrammatical, being even recognised by authors (Demonte & Pérez-Jiménez, 2015) as being prevalent in the domain of oral language
Verbal agreement with partitive expressions is one of the areas of hesitation in the Portuguese language, with variation in agreement patterns often observed with these structures. The possibility of double agreement with this type of expression – singular, seen as formal or canonical (Brito, 2003; Martins, 2012; Peres & Móia, 1995; Raposo, 2020), or plural – is evaluated and described differently in reference literature. In the first part of this dissertation, we aimed to define and delimit partitive structures, so that we could then confront the considerations of various Portuguese and Spanish authors on the grammaticality of choosing plural verb agreement and on everyday usage habits. Essentially, the choice of agreement type is related to the speakers' interpretation of the main core of the expression (Cerqueira, 2017; Raposo, 2020): on the one hand, they choose the first part of the expression, the quantifier, as the trigger for agreement; on the other hand, they consider the post-prepositional noun, or semantic core, as the main core. Authors such as Cunha e Cintra (2015) do not point out any preferences, considering both types of subject-verb agreement as equally acceptable. The purpose of this work is to conduct an acceptability study, presented in the second part, which allowed us to to verify the agreement preferences of participants, native speakers of European Portuguese, with different types of expressions. Participants evaluated the grammaticality of sentences with partitive expressions, such as a maioria de, percentage expressions, and n em cada m expressions. We also tested sentences with passive structures and items subject to restrictive modification, through adjectival phrases, of the quantifier, and appositive modification of the whole nominal group, using statistical relevance tests that allowed us to compare results for items with and without modification. The overall results point to a preference for canonical verbal agreement, although plural agreement cannot be considered completely unacceptable or ungrammatical, being even recognised by authors (Demonte & Pérez-Jiménez, 2015) as being prevalent in the domain of oral language
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Expressões partitivas Concordância verbal Concordância híbrida Juízos de aceitabilidade Partitive expressions Subject-verb agreement Hybrid verbal agreement Acceptability judgements