关于巴西葡萄牙语单语和双语使用者 VS 顺序缺失的实验研究

IF 0.3 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Probus Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1515/probus-2024-2006
Esther Rinke, Cristina Flores, Priscila Oliveira, Liliana Correia
{"title":"关于巴西葡萄牙语单语和双语使用者 VS 顺序缺失的实验研究","authors":"Esther Rinke, Cristina Flores, Priscila Oliveira, Liliana Correia","doi":"10.1515/probus-2024-2006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents an experimental approach to subject inversion in Brazilian Portuguese (BP). We investigated the acceptability of SV and VS sentences by two groups of speakers: monolingually-raised and bilingual heritage speakers of BP, using acceptability judgment tasks to test the effect of verb type, definiteness and pragmatic context. Results confirm that BP lost VS order with the exception of unaccusative constructions. Both speaker groups accept SV orders in all contexts, rejecting VS in sentences with transitive and unergative verbs. With respect to unaccusative verbs, pragmatic context and definiteness play a role in the acceptance of VS structures: with narrow focus on the subject, monolingual speakers accept VS order with definite and indefinite postverbal subjects. However, in all-new contexts, they tend to reject definite postverbal subjects. Given this differential behavior in the two contexts, we assume that BP exhibits two different syntactic positions for postverbal subjects in unaccusative constructions. Heritage speakers of BP are generally stricter in rejecting VS order. They do not allow for postverbal definite subjects in VS clauses independent of pragmatic context, indicating that they are progressively eliminating a residual postverbal focus position in unaccusative constructions. We take this as another indication that heritage speakers may promote and accelerate ongoing diachronic change.","PeriodicalId":45039,"journal":{"name":"Probus","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An experimental study on the loss of VS order in monolingual and bilingual speakers of Brazilian Portuguese\",\"authors\":\"Esther Rinke, Cristina Flores, Priscila Oliveira, Liliana Correia\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/probus-2024-2006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper presents an experimental approach to subject inversion in Brazilian Portuguese (BP). We investigated the acceptability of SV and VS sentences by two groups of speakers: monolingually-raised and bilingual heritage speakers of BP, using acceptability judgment tasks to test the effect of verb type, definiteness and pragmatic context. Results confirm that BP lost VS order with the exception of unaccusative constructions. Both speaker groups accept SV orders in all contexts, rejecting VS in sentences with transitive and unergative verbs. With respect to unaccusative verbs, pragmatic context and definiteness play a role in the acceptance of VS structures: with narrow focus on the subject, monolingual speakers accept VS order with definite and indefinite postverbal subjects. However, in all-new contexts, they tend to reject definite postverbal subjects. Given this differential behavior in the two contexts, we assume that BP exhibits two different syntactic positions for postverbal subjects in unaccusative constructions. Heritage speakers of BP are generally stricter in rejecting VS order. They do not allow for postverbal definite subjects in VS clauses independent of pragmatic context, indicating that they are progressively eliminating a residual postverbal focus position in unaccusative constructions. We take this as another indication that heritage speakers may promote and accelerate ongoing diachronic change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45039,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Probus\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Probus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2024-2006\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Probus","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2024-2006","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文介绍了巴西葡萄牙语(BP)中主语倒置的实验方法。我们使用可接受性判断任务来测试动词类型、定语和语用语境的影响,调查了两组讲葡萄牙语的人对 SV 和 VS 句子的可接受性,这两组讲葡萄牙语的人分别是单语种和双语传承讲葡萄牙语的人。结果证实,除非指称结构外,BP 失去了 VS 顺序。两组说话者在所有语境中都接受 SV 顺序,但在使用及物动词和非及物动词的句子中则拒绝接受 VS 顺序。对于非及物动词,语用语境和定义在接受 VS 结构中起了作用:在狭义的主语上,单语使用者接受带有定语后主语和不定语后主语的 VS 顺序。然而,在所有新语境中,他们倾向于拒绝定语后主语。鉴于这两种语境中的不同行为,我们假定,在非指称结构中,BP 的语后主语表现出两种不同的句法位置。讲传统 BP 的人通常更严格地拒绝 VS 顺序。他们不允许在 VS 分句中出现与语用语境无关的语后定语主语,这表明他们正在逐步消除非指称结构中残余的语后焦点位置。我们认为,这再次表明,遗产语使用者可能会促进和加速正在发生的异时变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An experimental study on the loss of VS order in monolingual and bilingual speakers of Brazilian Portuguese
This paper presents an experimental approach to subject inversion in Brazilian Portuguese (BP). We investigated the acceptability of SV and VS sentences by two groups of speakers: monolingually-raised and bilingual heritage speakers of BP, using acceptability judgment tasks to test the effect of verb type, definiteness and pragmatic context. Results confirm that BP lost VS order with the exception of unaccusative constructions. Both speaker groups accept SV orders in all contexts, rejecting VS in sentences with transitive and unergative verbs. With respect to unaccusative verbs, pragmatic context and definiteness play a role in the acceptance of VS structures: with narrow focus on the subject, monolingual speakers accept VS order with definite and indefinite postverbal subjects. However, in all-new contexts, they tend to reject definite postverbal subjects. Given this differential behavior in the two contexts, we assume that BP exhibits two different syntactic positions for postverbal subjects in unaccusative constructions. Heritage speakers of BP are generally stricter in rejecting VS order. They do not allow for postverbal definite subjects in VS clauses independent of pragmatic context, indicating that they are progressively eliminating a residual postverbal focus position in unaccusative constructions. We take this as another indication that heritage speakers may promote and accelerate ongoing diachronic change.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Probus
Probus Multiple-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Probus is intended as a platform for the discussion of historical and synchronic research in the field of Latin and Romance linguistics, with special emphasis on phonology, morphology, syntax, language acquisition and sociolinguistics. The journal aims to keep its readers abreast of the developments in Romance linguistics by encouraging problem-oriented contributions that combine the solid empirical foundations of philological and linguistic work with the insights provided my modern theoretical approaches.
期刊最新文献
Null objects, null nominal anaphora and antilogophoricity Nondeictic accusative and dative clitics and their variant forms in European and Brazilian Portuguese D-features or ellipsis in null subject licensing? Evidence from Brazilian and European Portuguese A gradient typology of gerund clauses: revisiting the internal and external syntax of Portuguese gerund clauses Agree, agreement dissociation and subject ellipsis. Towards a new characterization of the Null Subject Parameter
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1