Cover not available

In:Variation within and across Romance Languages: Selected papers from the 41st Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Ottawa, 5–7 May 2011
Edited by Marie-Hélène Côté and Eric Mathieu
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 333] 2014
► pp. 297–314

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

The role of the copula in the diachronic development of focus constructions 
in Portuguese

 | Universidade Estadual de Campinas | CNPq
Published online: 17 December 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.333.20kat
Old and Classic Portuguese had two positions for contrastive focus: one at the sentence initial position, followed by the verb, a ‘V2’ sort of pattern (XPVS), and one at the sentence final position, constituting the Romance post-verbal subject (V(XP)S). This paper analyzes the role of the copula in the innovations that occurred in Modern Portuguese focus structures: (a) the expansion of cleft constructions, from wh-clefts to that-clefts, (b) from inverse clefts to canonical clefts and (c) the reduction of that-clefts, a grammaticalization that affected only Brazilian Portuguese (BP). In European Portuguese (EP), XPVS and V(XP)S survive together with modern clefts while in BP clefts and reduced clefts took over the old constructions completely.
References (31)
References
Ambar, Manuela. 1992. Para uma sintaxe da inversão sujeito-verbo em Português. Lisboa: Edições Colibri.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barbosa, Pilar. 2001. “On Inversion in Wh-questions in Romance”. Romance Inversion ed. by Alfke Hulke & Jean-Yves Pollock, 2–59. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Belletti, Adriana. 2004. “Aspects of the Low IP Area”. The Structure of IP and CP: The cartography of syntactic structures 2 ed. by Luigi Rizzi, 16–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berlinck, Rosane de Andrade. 2000. “Brazilian Portuguese VS Order: A diachronic analysis.” Brazilian Portuguese and the Null Subject Parameter ed. by Mary A. Kato & Esmeralda V. Negrão, 175–194. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Casteleiro, João. M. 1979. “Sintaxe e semântica das construções enfáticas com “é que””. Boletim de Filologia XXV.97–1166.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2007. “Approaching UG from Below”. Interfaces + Recursion = Language? ed. by Uri Sauerland & Hans-Martin Gärtner, 1–29. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Costa, João. 1998. Word Order Variation: A constraint-based approach. The Hague: Holland Acedemic Graphics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Costa, João & Ana Maria Martins. 2011. “On Focus Movement in European Portuguese”. Probus 23.217–245. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duarte, M. Eugenia. 1992. “A perda da ordem VS em interrogativas-Qu no Português do Brasil”. DELTA 8.37–52.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1993. “Do pronome nulo ao pronome pleno”. O Português Brasileiro: Uma viagem diacrônica ed. by Ian Roberts & Mary A. Kato, 107–128. Campinas: Editora da Unicamp.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. A perda do princípio ‘Evite pronome’ no Português Brasileiro. Ph.D. dissertation, UNICAMP.
Hornstein, Norbert, Jairo Nunes & Kleanthes Grohmann. 2005. Understanding Minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1937. Analytic Syntax. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kato, Mary A, M. Luiza Braga, M. Aparecida Lopes-Rossi, & Nilmara Sikansi. 1996. “As constuçoes-Q no Português Brasileiro”. Gramática do Português Falado ed. by Inegedore Villaça Koch, Vol. VI, 303–370. Campinas: Editora da Unicamp.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kato, Mary A. 2007. “Free and Dependent Small Clauses in Brazilian Portuguese”. DELTA 23 (Especial): Homenagem a Lucia Lobato, 85–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kato, Mary A. & Sonia M.L. Cyrino. 2010. “On semi-clefts and IP ellipsis in Portuguese”. Paper presented at the Linguistics Symposium on Romance Languages, 41, Ottawa, Canada, May 2011.
Kato, Mary A. 2012. “Variation in Wh-Questions in Brazilian Portuguese”. Paper presented at The Second Cambridge Colloquium on the Histories of the Ibero-Romance Languages –Norman MacColl Symposium 2012.
Kato, Mary A. & Eugenia M. Duarte. 2002. “A Diachronic Analysis of Brazilian Portuguese Wh-Questions”. Santa Barbara Portuguese Studies 6.326–339. University of California at Santa Barbara, Center for Portuguese Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kato, Mary A. & Esmeralda V. Negrão. 2000. Brazilian Portuguese and the Null Subject Parameter. Frankfurt: Vervuert-IberoAmericana.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kato, Mary A. & Eduardo Raposo. 1996. “European and Brazilian Word Order: Questions, focus and topic constructions”. Aspects of Romance Linguistics ed. by Claudia Parodi, A. Carlos Quicoli, Mario Saltarelli & Maria-Luisa Zubizarreta, 267–278. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kato, Mary A. & Ilza Ribeiro. 2009. “Cleft Sentences from Old Portuguese to Modern Brazilian Portuguese”. Focus and Background in Romance Languages ed. by Andreas Dufter & Daniel Jacob, 123–154. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 2001. “A Framework for the Analysis of Cleft Constructions”. Linguistics 39.463–516. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lopes-Rossi, M. Aparecida. 1996. A sintaxe diacrônica das interrogativas-Q do Português. Ph.D. dissertation, UNICAMP.
Modesto, Marcelo. 2001. As Construções Clivadas no Português do Brasil. São Paulo: Humanitas.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nunes, Jairo. 2004. Linearization of Chains and Sideward Movement. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ordoñez, Francisco & Antxon Olarrea. 2006. “Microvariation in Caribbean-non Caribbean Spanish Interrogatives”. Probus 18.59–97. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Resenes, Mariana S. de. 2009. Sentenças Pseudo-Clivadas do Português Brasileiro. M.A. Thesis, Florianópolis, UFSC.
Ribeiro, Ilza. 1995. “Evidence for a Verb-Second Phase in Old Portuguese”. Clause Structure and Language Change ed. by Adrian Battye & Ian Roberts, 110–139. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. “The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery”. Elements of Grammar ed. by Liliane Haegeman, 281–338. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi & Ian Roberts. 1989. “Complex Inversion in French”. Probus 1.1–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Uriagereka, Juan. 1995. “An F Position in Western Romance”. Discourse Configurational Languages ed. by Katalin É. Kiss, 153–175. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Kato, Mary Aizawa
2016. Affirmative polar replies in Brazilian Portuguese. In Romance Linguistics 2013 [Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory, 9], ► pp. 195 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue