Existential constructions and the problem of linguistic evaluation
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Domínios de Lingu@gem |
Texto Completo: | https://seer.ufu.br/index.php/dominiosdelinguagem/article/view/40617 |
Resumo: | Considering that the study of a speech community should not be exhausted in the description and characterization of its linguistic traits, it should also seek to make explicit its evaluative attitudes, because the prestige or stigma that a community associates with a given variant can accelerate or prevent a change in the language, we measured the subjective norms of the maceioense speakers in relation to the variation of “ter” and “haver” in existential constructions and the verbal agreement associated with these verbal forms. To do so, we use the Theory of Language Variation and Change (WEINREICH; LABOV; HERZOG, 1968; LABOV, 1972) and we used a subjective reaction test composed of 20 questions, which was applied to 60 maceioenses informants. Our data suggest not only that “ter” is the preferred existential verb, but, in the formal situation and in the imperfect, perfect and future of the present times, there is an increase in the choice of “haver”, which seems to indicate that we are before linguistic marker, that to “haver” and “ter” in the third person plural – 3PP are the preferred variants, being more frequent in the formal situation and at imperfect and perfect times, suggesting that there is no stigma in the use of these variants. |
id |
UFU-12_b0bea0c2bc10bf62c6ad7b36d57bb4f8 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.www.seer.ufu.br:article/40617 |
network_acronym_str |
UFU-12 |
network_name_str |
Domínios de Lingu@gem |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Existential constructions and the problem of linguistic evaluationAs construções existenciais e o problema da avaliação linguísticaTer existencialHaver existencialConcordância verbalAvaliação linguística“Ter” existential“Haver” existentialVerbal agreementLinguistic evaluationConsidering that the study of a speech community should not be exhausted in the description and characterization of its linguistic traits, it should also seek to make explicit its evaluative attitudes, because the prestige or stigma that a community associates with a given variant can accelerate or prevent a change in the language, we measured the subjective norms of the maceioense speakers in relation to the variation of “ter” and “haver” in existential constructions and the verbal agreement associated with these verbal forms. To do so, we use the Theory of Language Variation and Change (WEINREICH; LABOV; HERZOG, 1968; LABOV, 1972) and we used a subjective reaction test composed of 20 questions, which was applied to 60 maceioenses informants. Our data suggest not only that “ter” is the preferred existential verb, but, in the formal situation and in the imperfect, perfect and future of the present times, there is an increase in the choice of “haver”, which seems to indicate that we are before linguistic marker, that to “haver” and “ter” in the third person plural – 3PP are the preferred variants, being more frequent in the formal situation and at imperfect and perfect times, suggesting that there is no stigma in the use of these variants.Tendo em vista que o estudo de uma comunidade de fala não deve se esgotar na descrição e caracterização de seus traços linguísticos, mas também deve buscar explicitar suas atitudes avaliativas, pois o prestígio ou o estigma que uma comunidade associa a determinada variante pode acelerar ou barrar uma mudança na língua, mensuramos as normas subjetivas dos falantes maceioenses em relação à variação ter e haver em construções existenciais e à concordância verbal associada a essas formas verbais. Para tanto, recorremos à Teoria da Variação e Mudança Linguística (WEINREICH; LABOV; HERZOG, 1968; LABOV, 1972) e utilizamos um teste de reação subjetiva composto por 20 questões, que foi aplicado a 60 informantes maceioenses. Nossos dados apontam não só que ter é o verbo existencial preferido, mas na situação formal e nos tempos pretérito imperfeito e perfeito e futuro do presente, há um aumento na escolha de haver, o que parece indicar que estamos diante de um marcador linguístico, como também que haver e ter na terceira pessoa do plural – 3PP são as variantes preferidas, sendo mais frequentes na situação formal e nos tempos pretérito imperfeito e perfeito, sugerindo que não há estigma no uso dessas variantes.PP/UFU2018-09-21info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://seer.ufu.br/index.php/dominiosdelinguagem/article/view/4061710.14393/DL35-v12n3a2018-16Domínios de Lingu@gem; Vol. 12 No. 3 (2018): Número Atemático; 1825-1858Domínios de Lingu@gem; Vol. 12 Núm. 3 (2018): Número Atemático; 1825-1858Domínios de Lingu@gem; v. 12 n. 3 (2018): Número Atemático; 1825-18581980-5799reponame:Domínios de Lingu@geminstname:Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)instacron:UFUporhttps://seer.ufu.br/index.php/dominiosdelinguagem/article/view/40617/24001Copyright (c) 2018 Elyne Giselle de Santana Lima Aguiar Vitórioinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessVitório, Elyne Giselle de Santana Lima Aguiar2019-05-09T13:34:37Zoai:ojs.www.seer.ufu.br:article/40617Revistahttps://seer.ufu.br/index.php/dominiosdelinguagemPUBhttps://seer.ufu.br/index.php/dominiosdelinguagem/oairevistadominios@ileel.ufu.br||1980-57991980-5799opendoar:2019-05-09T13:34:37Domínios de Lingu@gem - Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Existential constructions and the problem of linguistic evaluation As construções existenciais e o problema da avaliação linguística |
title |
Existential constructions and the problem of linguistic evaluation |
spellingShingle |
Existential constructions and the problem of linguistic evaluation Vitório, Elyne Giselle de Santana Lima Aguiar Ter existencial Haver existencial Concordância verbal Avaliação linguística “Ter” existential “Haver” existential Verbal agreement Linguistic evaluation |
title_short |
Existential constructions and the problem of linguistic evaluation |
title_full |
Existential constructions and the problem of linguistic evaluation |
title_fullStr |
Existential constructions and the problem of linguistic evaluation |
title_full_unstemmed |
Existential constructions and the problem of linguistic evaluation |
title_sort |
Existential constructions and the problem of linguistic evaluation |
author |
Vitório, Elyne Giselle de Santana Lima Aguiar |
author_facet |
Vitório, Elyne Giselle de Santana Lima Aguiar |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Vitório, Elyne Giselle de Santana Lima Aguiar |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Ter existencial Haver existencial Concordância verbal Avaliação linguística “Ter” existential “Haver” existential Verbal agreement Linguistic evaluation |
topic |
Ter existencial Haver existencial Concordância verbal Avaliação linguística “Ter” existential “Haver” existential Verbal agreement Linguistic evaluation |
description |
Considering that the study of a speech community should not be exhausted in the description and characterization of its linguistic traits, it should also seek to make explicit its evaluative attitudes, because the prestige or stigma that a community associates with a given variant can accelerate or prevent a change in the language, we measured the subjective norms of the maceioense speakers in relation to the variation of “ter” and “haver” in existential constructions and the verbal agreement associated with these verbal forms. To do so, we use the Theory of Language Variation and Change (WEINREICH; LABOV; HERZOG, 1968; LABOV, 1972) and we used a subjective reaction test composed of 20 questions, which was applied to 60 maceioenses informants. Our data suggest not only that “ter” is the preferred existential verb, but, in the formal situation and in the imperfect, perfect and future of the present times, there is an increase in the choice of “haver”, which seems to indicate that we are before linguistic marker, that to “haver” and “ter” in the third person plural – 3PP are the preferred variants, being more frequent in the formal situation and at imperfect and perfect times, suggesting that there is no stigma in the use of these variants. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-09-21 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://seer.ufu.br/index.php/dominiosdelinguagem/article/view/40617 10.14393/DL35-v12n3a2018-16 |
url |
https://seer.ufu.br/index.php/dominiosdelinguagem/article/view/40617 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.14393/DL35-v12n3a2018-16 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://seer.ufu.br/index.php/dominiosdelinguagem/article/view/40617/24001 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2018 Elyne Giselle de Santana Lima Aguiar Vitório info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2018 Elyne Giselle de Santana Lima Aguiar Vitório |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
PP/UFU |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
PP/UFU |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Domínios de Lingu@gem; Vol. 12 No. 3 (2018): Número Atemático; 1825-1858 Domínios de Lingu@gem; Vol. 12 Núm. 3 (2018): Número Atemático; 1825-1858 Domínios de Lingu@gem; v. 12 n. 3 (2018): Número Atemático; 1825-1858 1980-5799 reponame:Domínios de Lingu@gem instname:Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU) instacron:UFU |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU) |
instacron_str |
UFU |
institution |
UFU |
reponame_str |
Domínios de Lingu@gem |
collection |
Domínios de Lingu@gem |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Domínios de Lingu@gem - Universidade Federal de Uberlândia (UFU) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revistadominios@ileel.ufu.br|| |
_version_ |
1797067716534730752 |