“TOPIC-SUBJECT” CONSTRUCTIONS IN BRAZILIAN PORTUGUESE AND MINIMALITY WITHIN THE AGREE MODEL
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.9771/ell.i72.46534Parole chiave:
“Topic-subject” constructions, Brazilian Portuguese, Minimality, Inherent CaseAbstract
“Topic-subject” constructions have received considerable attention in the literature on Brazilian Portuguese (BP), as topics appear to be grammaticalized as subjects, triggering verb agreement. Chomsky’s (2000, 2001, 2008) Agree-based model seems to provide the necessary theoretical ingredients to analyze such constructions, as it takes C (a left periphery head generally associated with the mapping from syntax to discourse) to act jointly with T in determining verb agreement and licensing nominative Case. This paper discusses three representative analyses of “topic-subject” constructions developed within the Agree model (AVELAR; GALVES, 2011, 2020; and MUNHOZ; NAVES, 2012) and argues that approaches that attempt to analyze “topic-subjects” in terms of special properties ascribed to the C-T connection in BP are bound to face minimality problems. Following Kato and Ordóñez (2019) in taking the emergence of “topic-subject” constructions in BP to be related to changes within its vPs and DPs and assuming with Nunes and Kato (forthcoming) that these changes have led to a pervasive use of inherent Case in BP, I show that inherent Case provides the key factor in the derivation of “topic-subject” constructions, as it bleeds minimality computations (see NUNES, 2017).
Downloads
Riferimenti bibliografici
ANDRADE, Aroldo de; GALVES, Charlotte. A unified analysis for subject topics in Brazilian Portuguese. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, n. 13, p. 117-147, 2014.
AVELAR, Juanito; GALVES, Charlotte. Tópico e concordância em português brasileiro e português europeu. In: Costa, A.; Falé, I.; Barbosa, P. Textos selecionados, XXVI Encontro da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística. Lisboa: APL, 2011. p. 49-65.
______. Notas sobre constituintes locativos, caso e concordância no português brasileiro. Ms., Stockholm University and Universidade Estadual de Campinas, 2020.
BAKER, Mark. Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988.
CHOMSKY, Noam. A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In: Hale , H.; Keyser, J.: The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993. p. 1-52.
______. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995.
______. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In: Martin, R.; D. Michaels, D.; Uriagereka, J. Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000. p. 81-155.
______. Derivation by phase. In: Kenstowicz, M. Ken Hale: A life in language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2001. p. 1-52.
______. On phases. In: Freidin, R.; Otero, C. P.; Zubizarreta, M. L. Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2008. p. 133-166.
DEN DIKKEN, Marcel. Relators and linkers: The syntax of predication, predicate inversion, and copulas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006.
DUARTE, Maria Eugênia; Kato, Mary A. A mudança paramétrica e a orientação para o discurso. Paper presented at the XXIV Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística, Braga, 2008.
FERREIRA, Marcelo. Argumentos nulos em português brasileiro. Master’s thesis, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, 2000.
______. Null subjects and finite control in Brazilian Portuguese. In: Nunes, J. Minimalist essays on Brazilian Portuguese Syntax. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2009. p. 17-49.
GALVES, Charlotte. A sintaxe do português brasileiro. Ensaios de Linguística, n. 13, p. 31-50, 1987.
______. Tópicos, sujeitos, pronomes e concordância no português brasileiro. Cadernos de Estudos Lingüísticos, n. 34, p. 7-21, 1998.
GONÇALVES, Anabela; MIGUEL, Matilde. Porque é que os relógios não quebram os ponteiros em português europeu. In: Carrilho, E.; Martins, A. M.; Pereira, S.; Silvestre, J. Estudos linguísticos e filológicos oferecidos a Ivo Castro. Lisboa: Centro de Linguística da Universidade de Lisboa, 2019. p. , 713-738.
KATO, Mary A. Tópico e sujeito: Duas categorias em sintaxe? Cadernos de Estudos Lingüísticos, n. 17, p. 109-132, 1989.
KATO, Mary A.; NUNES, Jairo. A uniform raising analysis for standard and nonstandard relative clauses. In: Nunes, J. Minimalist essays on Brazilian Portuguese Syntax. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2009. p. 93-120.
KATO, Mary A; ORDÓÑEZ, Francisco. Topic-subjects in Brazilian Portuguese and clitic left dislocation in Dominican Spanish: Clitics and null subjects. Syntax, n. 22, p. 229-247, 2019.
LACERDA, Renato. Middle-field syntax and information structure in Brazilian Portuguese. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, 2020.
LUNGUINHO, Marcus. Partição de constituintes no português brasileiro: características sintáticas. In Silva, D. E. Língua, gramática e discurso. Goiânia: Cânone, 2006. p. 133-147.
MARTINS, Ana Maria; NUNES, Jairo. Raising issues in Brazilian and European Portuguese. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, n. 4, p. 53-77, 2005.
______. Apparent hyper-raising in Brazilian Portuguese: Agreement with topics across a Finite CP. In: P. E. Panagiotidis, P. E. The complementiser phase: Subjects and operators. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. p. 142-163.
MIYAGAWA, Shigeru. 2010. Why agree? Why move? Unifying agreement-based and discourse-configurational languages. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
MODESTO, Marcello. Topic prominence and null subjects. In: Biberauer, T. The limits of syntactic variation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2008. p. 375-406.
MUNHOZ, Ana; NAVES, Rozana. Construções de Tópico-Sujeito: uma proposta em termos de estrutura argumental e de transferência de traços de C. Signum, n. 15, p. 245-265, 2012.
NEGRÃO, Esmeralda. O português brasileiro: Uma língua voltada para o discurso. “Tese de livre-docência”, Universidade de São Paulo, 1999.
NUNES, Jairo. Subject and topic hyper-raising in Brazilian Portuguese: A case study on reference sets for economy computations. In: Kato, M. a.; Ordóñez. F. Morphosyntax of Spanish and Portuguese in Latin America. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. p. 107-134
______. Circumventing -minimality: On some unorthodox cases of A-movement in Brazilian Portuguese. In Lopes, R.; Avelar, J.; Cyrino, S. Romance languages and linguistic theory 12: Selected papers from the 45th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2017. p. 159-183.
______. Hiperalçamento em português brasileiro. Cuadernos de la ALFAL, n. 14.2, p. 199-227, 2020.
______. Generalized phasal defectivity in Brazilian Portuguese. Ms., Universidade de São Paulo, 2021.
NUNES, Jairo; KATO, Mary A. Approaching “topic-subjects” in Brazilian Portuguese from below. In: Rodrigues, C.; Saab, A. Formal approaches to languages of South America. New York: Springer, forthcoming.
PESETSKY, David; TORREGO, Esther. Tense, case and the nature of syntactic categories. In: J. Guéron and J. Lecarme (eds.): The syntax of time. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004. p. 495-538.
PONTES, Eunice. O tópico no português do Brasil. Campinas: Pontes, 1987.
SCHÜTZE, Carson. On the nature of default Case. Syntax, n. 4, p. 205-238, 2001.
TARALLO, Fernando. Relativization strategies in Brazilian Portuguese. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1983.
WIEDEMER, Marcos. Variação e gramaticalização no uso de preposições em contextos de verbo de movimento no português brasileiro. Doctoral dissertation, Universidade Estadual Paulista, São José do Rio Preto, 2013.
