LE DIJE A ELLOS INSTEAD OF LES DIJE A ELLOS: DEPRONOMINALIZATION OF THE SPANISH DATIVE CLITIC
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to show an analysis of the linguistic factors that motivate the lack of agreement in plural of the Spanish dative clitic in a context of duplication of the indirect object. A corpus of written Spanish sources from different provinces of Argentina in 2019-2020 was analyzed. The hypothesis is that the lack of agreement is produced mainly when the different clause elements, particularly the one that traditional grammar describes as indirect object, do not have their prototypic characteristics, when the speaker requires a greater cognitive process to conceptualize the indirect object, and when the linguistic context resists the flexion of le/s. This hypothesis has its basis on the evidence that the Spanish clitic le is depronominalized, in other words, it has loosed its anaphoric ability to be a particle that anticipates the presence of an indirect object.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Alcina Franch, J; Blecua, J. M. (1975). Gramática española. Barcelona: Ariel.
Barbeito, V. (2017). La ausencia de concordancia entre el pronombre dativo y su referente nominal en esquemas verbales ditransitivos. Pragmalingüística, (25), 50-61. https:77doi.org/10.25267/Pragmalinguistica.2017.i25
Company, C. (2003). La gramaticalización en la historia del español. En “Gramaticalización y cambio sintáctico en la historia del español”. Medievala. 35. Pp. 3-61.
Company, C. (2006). El objeto indirecto en Sintaxis histórica de la lengua española. Primera parte: La frase verbal, C. Company Company (dir.), 2 vols., México: Fondo de Cultura Económica y Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, pp. 479-574.
Cuenca, M.; Hilferty, J. (1999). Introducción a la Lingüística Cognitiva. Barcelona: Ariel.
García, E. (1975). The role of theory in linguistic analysis: The Spanish pronoum system. Ámsterdam: North Holland.
Gibson, E.; Pearlmutter, N. (1998). Constraints on sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Science. 2: 262-268.
Gili Gaya, S. (1980). Curso superior de sintaxis española. Barcelona: Vox.
Givón, T. (1976). Topic, pronoun and grammatical agreement. Subject and Topic. 149-188.
Givón, T. (1983): “Topic continuity in discourse: an introduction”. En Givón, T. (ed.): Topic continuity in discourse. A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam, John Benjamins, págs. 5-41.
Hopper, P. J.; Thompson, S. A. (1980). Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse. Language, 56, pp. 251-299.
Huerta Flores, N. (2005). Gramaticalización y concordancia objetiva en el español. Despronominalización del clítico dativo plural. En Verba: Anuario galego de filoloxia. No 32, 2005. Pp. 165-190.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, R. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1, Standford: Standford University Press.
RAE. (2009). Nueva Gramática de la lengua española: Morfología y Sintaxis I y Sintaxis II. Madrid: Espasa.
Traugott, E. (2010). Grammaticalization. En “Luragi, Silvia/Bubenik, Vit (edd.), Continuum Companion to Historical Linguistics. Londres: Continuum Press. Pp. 269-263.