{"title":"The Portuguese pluperfect: diversity of forms, polysemy and interaction with adjuncts","authors":"Telmo Móia","doi":"10.1515/probus-2024-2008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses the contemporary use of the Portuguese simple and two compound pluperfect forms (with the auxiliary verbs <jats:italic>ter</jats:italic>, and <jats:italic>haver</jats:italic>) of the indicative mood in written texts. Four topics are addressed. First, the claim that the simple pluperfect is currently a defective paradigm lacking the third person plural; this claim is confirmed and substantiated by looking at specific distinguishing contexts in corpora. Secondly, the competition between the three pluperfect forms, in written contemporary European and Brazilian Portuguese; it is shown that – contrary to some frequent comments in the literature – all three forms still have widespread usage, and occur in a relatively balanced way, in the type of registers considered (newspaper writing, modern literary texts, modern literary translations), in both varieties of the language. Thirdly, as regards semantic polyvalence, the possible existence of a deictic rather than anaphoric (temporal) pluperfect; it is argued that this type of pluperfect does indeed exist, and deserves separate grammatical recognition. Fourthly, the well-known cases of ambiguity in structures with pluperfect and temporal locating adjuncts, where the latter can act either as markers of the past perspective point required by the pluperfect, or as markers of the location time of the described eventualities; facts in English and Portuguese are compared, with some differences highlighted.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2024-2008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper discusses the contemporary use of the Portuguese simple and two compound pluperfect forms (with the auxiliary verbs ter, and haver) of the indicative mood in written texts. Four topics are addressed. First, the claim that the simple pluperfect is currently a defective paradigm lacking the third person plural; this claim is confirmed and substantiated by looking at specific distinguishing contexts in corpora. Secondly, the competition between the three pluperfect forms, in written contemporary European and Brazilian Portuguese; it is shown that – contrary to some frequent comments in the literature – all three forms still have widespread usage, and occur in a relatively balanced way, in the type of registers considered (newspaper writing, modern literary texts, modern literary translations), in both varieties of the language. Thirdly, as regards semantic polyvalence, the possible existence of a deictic rather than anaphoric (temporal) pluperfect; it is argued that this type of pluperfect does indeed exist, and deserves separate grammatical recognition. Fourthly, the well-known cases of ambiguity in structures with pluperfect and temporal locating adjuncts, where the latter can act either as markers of the past perspective point required by the pluperfect, or as markers of the location time of the described eventualities; facts in English and Portuguese are compared, with some differences highlighted.
本文讨论了葡萄牙语指示语气的单复数形式和两个复数形式(带助动词 ter 和 haver)在书面文本中的现代用法。本文涉及四个主题。首先,简单复数形式是目前缺乏第三人称复数的缺陷范式的说法;通过研究语料库中的具体区别语境,证实并证实了这一说法。其次,三种复数形式在当代欧洲和巴西葡萄牙语书面语中的竞争;研究表明,与文献中经常出现的一些评论相反,这三种形式仍然广泛使用,并且在两种语言的语域类型(报纸写作、现代文学文本、现代文学翻译)中以相对平衡的方式出现。第三,在语义多义性方面,可能存在一种deictic而不是anaphoric(时间性)的pluperfect;有人认为这种pluperfect确实存在,而且值得在语法上单独承认。第四,众所周知的带有复数和时间定位助词的结构中的歧义情况,其中时间定位助词既可以作为复数所要求的过去透视点的标记,也可以作为所描述的事件发生的地点时间的标记;对英语和葡萄牙语中的事实进行了比较,并强调了一些差异。