Content uploaded by Hans-Ingo Radatz
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hans-Ingo Radatz on Jan 24, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Leísmo y Marcado Diferencial de Objeto: dos soluciones paralelas acerca del pansincretismo de caso en el español peninsular
Abstract
El artículo trata de la variación morfológica en los pronombres clíticos de tercera persona conocida bajo los nombres 'leísmo', 'loísmo' y 'laísmo'. Todos estos fenómenos tienen en común que, en ellos, los clíticos no siguen las pautas del sistema pronominal tradicional, también llamado el “sistema etimológico”.
Hay por lo menos dos aspectos bajo los que dichos fenómenos se relacionan con el proceso morfológico de sincretismo que nos ocupa en nuestra sección: 1. la extensión de formas en el dominio de otras dentro de un paradigma morfológica constituye un sincretismo
en si; 2. la patente pérdida del concepto de caso en las innovaciones puede verse diacrónicamente como el último paso dentro de un proceso milenario de sincretismo que alcanzó a todas las lenguas románicas.
Con vistas a dar una representación de conjunto de dichas innovaciones, se sugiere una diferenciación terminológica entre diversos grados de sincretismo:
• Sincretismo parcial = homonimia de formas dentro de un paradigma flectivo sin alteración en la estructura del mismo.
• Sincretismo total = homonimia masiva de formas dentro de un paradigma flectivo resultando en la reducción estructural del mismo (pérdida de categorías enteras).
• Pansincretismo = sincretismo total de la última oposición de un paradgima erosionado por sincretismos anteriores, conllevando la desaparición del mismo paradigma.
Considerando el sincretismo como un proceso esencialmente reductivo, hay que distiguir de él el fenómeno de la “reinterpretación sincretística”:
• Reinterpretación sincretística = reinterpretación de las formas residuales de un paradigma en avanzado estado de sincretismo resultando en la creación de un (o varios) paradigma(s) esencialmente nuevo(s).
Una comparación entre el francés y el español muestra que, tanto en los nominales como en los pronominales, el francés mantiene el concepto morfosintáctico de caso y no cuenta con importantes innovaciones en su sistema de clíticos de objeto. El español, en cambio, ha abandonado el concepto de caso en favor del Marcado Diferencial de Objeto (MDO) en sus nominales mientras que aún mantiene un sistema casual análogo al sistema francés en sus
clíticos pronominales (“sistema etimológico”). El desajuste entre los dos sistemas de categorización de objetos en español (MDO en los nominales, caso en los pronominales) es presentado como una importante motivación para abandonar el sistema etimológico y para el surgimiento de innovaciones en los clíticos. Siguiendo este análisis, el leísmo el leísmo constituye una reinterpretación sincretística de la oposición lo(s) / la(s) / le(s) a base de una analogía con el sistema binario que establece el MDO en los nominales con la finalidad
de llegar otra vez a un sistema unitario para la categorización de los objetos, tanto nominales como pronominales.
... Dies funktioniert bisher aber nur bei maskulinen Objekten und stellt einen natürlichen Sprachwandel dar, der sich normativ (RAE) aber nicht entfalten darf (cf. Radatz 2011). ...
It is well known that in Germanic languages, the profiling of the source of a stealing event (that is, its degree of participation in or affectedness by the event) can be expressed by both lexical (e.g. the steal-rob alternation) and syntactic means (e.g. the dative alternation). This paper examines to what extent these alternations apply to Romance verbs of stealing by contrasting semantics and syntax, and more particularly the different constructional possibilities of two specific verbs of dispossession: voler in French and robar in Spanish. By analysing a comparable corpus, we aim to give an account of the formal, semantic or discourse-pragmatic parameters which possibly determine the speakers' choice for one of the competing constructions, i.e. the dative construction (with or without clitic doubling in Spanish), the pronominal factitive construction in French, and the genitive construction. The analysis shows that the source (i.e. the injured participant or the victim of the dispossession event) plays a central role in this constructional alternation.
The Lattice of Case and Agentivity Scott Grimm The typological literature has demonstrated that semantic parameters such as agentivity, affectedness, and object individuation affect the realization of case-marking. Yet, explicitly connecting case-marking with semantics has proven elusive. This thesis proposes a feature-based representation of agentivity properties, loosely based on Dowty's proto-role theory, which is reformulated in terms of privative opposition and hierarchically organized via a lattice. The resulting agentivity lattice is used as a theoretical construct by which the semantics of case and case systems can be articulated. The general meaning of a case can be specified with respect to a region of the lattice. As opposed to other approaches which resort to listing the properties and qualities of a case, the region of the lattice gives a structured set of properties, which are couched in a context of opposition to other properties. Practical results include treatments of many language-particular semantic uses of case, such as case alternations, which have resisted proper analyses under more syntactic approaches to case. A further advantage of this approach is its ability to model the interaction among multiple semantic parameters, such as agentivity, animacy and definiteness. The investigation begins in Chapter 2, discussing the general principles of case-marking with reference to how case-marking is realized in a variety of languages and how case-markers are formed via the process of grammaticalization. Chapter 3 constructs a hierarchical representation of the semantic properties at work in argument structures, i.e., agentivity, patientivity, etc., via a lattice, which is the core theoretical contribution of this study. Chapter 4 discusses a number of typological generalizations predicted by the lattice and accounts for the different systems of core case-marking, i.e, the marking of subjects and objects, including a treatment of Differential Object Marking. The lattice is then used throughout Chapter 5 to provide an explanatory model of non-canonical case marking in particular languages, that is, phenomena such as case alternations (Hindi, Russian) and case attraction (Ancient Greek). Chapter 6 considers the relation of this study to, and presents several challenges for, varieties of formal semantics. The final chapter draws conclusions and discusses some problems for further research.
A formal approach to the typology of differential object marking (DOM) is developed within the framework of Optimality Theory. The functional/typological literature has established that variation in DOM is structured by the dimensions of animacy and definiteness, with degree of prominence on these dimensions directly correlated with the likelihood of overt case-marking. In the present analysis, the degree to which DOM penetrates the class of objects reflects the tension between two types of principles. One involves iconicity: the more marked a direct object qua object, the more likely it is to be overtly case-marked. The other is a principle of economy: avoid case-marking. The tension between the two principles is resolved differently in different languages, as determined by language-particular ranking of the corresponding constraints. Constraints expressing object markedness are derived throughharmonic alignment of prominence scales. Harmonic alignment predicts a corresponding phenomenon ofdifferential subject marking. This too exists, though in a less articulated form.
