Verbos recíprocos

  1. Quintana Hernández, Lucía irene
Zeitschrift:
Dicenda: Estudios de lengua y literatura españolas

ISSN: 0212-2952,  1988-2556

Datum der Publikation: 2014

Nummer: 32

Seiten: 265-312

Art: Artikel

DOI: 10.5209/REV_DICE.2014.V32.47148 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen Access editor

Andere Publikationen in: Dicenda: Estudios de lengua y literatura españolas

Zusammenfassung

Despite appearances, constructions with reciprocal verbs, i.e. irreducibly symmetric verbs, such as Se casaron (They married), Se mezclaron (They mixed), etc. are different from reciprocal constructions such as Se ayudaron (They helped each other), and Se aman (They love each other). Only constructions with reciprocal verbs are unaccusative, telic and dynamic. Like other unaccusativity constructions, constructions with se with reciprocal verbs allow bare plural nouns in postverbal position. As for telicity, these constructions are compatible with absolute participle constructions and with verbal periphrases which focus on the end of the event, such as acabar de / terminar de (to finish), etc. In addition, reciprocal verbs allow focusing on the duration of the event, i.e. not only on the end of the event, what shows that these verbs are also dynamic. Only a syntactic proposal which integrates symmetry and aspect as semantic features may account for the complexity of the data with reciprocal verbs.

Bibliographische Referenzen

  • BENEDICTO, E.: “Verb Movement and its Effects on Determinerless Plural Subjects”, en Romance Linguistics: Theoretical Perspectives, Amsterdam, John Benjamins, 1997, pp.25-40.
  • BORER, H.: Structuring Sense, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2005.
  • BOSQUE, I.: “Sobre las oraciones recíprocas en español”, Revista Española de Lingüística, (1985), pp. 59-96.
  • BOSQUE, I. y GUTIÉRREZ REXACH, J.: Fundamentos de sintaxis formal, Madrid, Akal, 2009.
  • BOUCHARD, D.: On the content of empty categories, Dordrecht, Foris, 1984.
  • CINQUE, G.: “On Si Constructions and the Theory of Arb”, Linguistic Inquiry, 19 (1988), pp. 521-581.
  • COLL-FLORIT, M. “Aproximación empírica a los modos de acción del verbo: Un studio basado en corpus”, Signos, 44(77) (2011), pp. 233-250.
  • CHOMSKY, N.: “Beyond Explanatory Adequacy. Structures and Beyond”, en Belletti, A. (ed) The Cartography of Syntactic Structures Vol. 3, Oxford, OUP, 2004, pp. 104-131.
  • DE MIGUEL, E. y FERNÁNDEZ LAGUNILLA, M.: “El operador aspectual se”, Revista Española de Lingüística 30, 1, (2000), pp. 13-43.
  • DEMONTE, V. y McNALLY, L.: Telicity, Change and State: A Cross-Categorial View of Event Structure, Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics, Oxford, OUP, 2012.
  • DOWTY, D.: “Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument selection”, Language, 67 (1991), pp. 547-619.
  • GARCÍA FERNÁNDEZ, L.: “Algunas observaciones sobre se aspectual”, en Juan Cuartero Otal, Luis García Fernández y Carsten Sinner: Estudios sobre perífrasis y aspecto, Madrid, Peniope, 2011.
  • GARCÍA FERNÁNDEZ, L. y CARRASCO, A.: Diccionario de perífrasis verbales, Madrid, Gredos, 2006. GALLEGO, A.: Phase Theory, Amsterdam, John Benjamins, 2010.
  • GUÉRON, J.: “Tense, Person and Transitivity”, N. Erteschik-Shir&T. Rapoport (eds.): The Syntax of Aspect: Deriving Thematic and Aspectual Interpretation. Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics, Oxford, OUP, 2005, pp.89-116.
  • GRIMSHAW, J.: Argument Structure, Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 1990.
  • HALE, K. y KEYSER, S.: “On argument structure and the lexical expression of grammatical relations”, en K. Hale y S. Keyser (ed): The view from building 20. Essays in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1993, pp. 53-110.
  • HALE, K y KEYSER, S.: “Aspect and the syntax of argument structure”, en N. Erteschik-Shir&T. Rapoport (eds.): The Syntax of Aspect: Deriving Thematic and Aspectual Interpretation. Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics, Oxford, OUP, 2005, pp. 11-41.
  • KEMPCHINSKY, P.: “Romance Se as an Aspectual Element”, en Auger, J. et al., (eds.): Contemporary Approaches to Romance Linguistics, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins, 2004, pp. 239-256.
  • KRATZER, A.: Telicity and the Meaning of Objective Case, Ms., 2002.
  • KRATZER, A.: “On the Plurality of Verbs” en J. Dölling and T. Heyde-Zybatow (eds): Event Structures in Linguistic Form and Interpretation, Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, 2005.
  • KRIFKA, M. “Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution”, en I. Sag y A. Szabolcsi (ed): Lexical Matters, Chicago University Press, CSLI publications, 1992.
  • KRIFKA, M.: “The origins of telicity”, en S. Rothstein (ed): Events and Grammar,. Dordrecht, Kluwer, 1998, pp. 197-235.
  • LABELLE, M.: “The French reflexive and reciprocal se”, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 23 (2008), pp. 833-876.
  • LAKA, I.: “Unergatives that Assign Ergative, Unaccusatives that Assign Accusative”, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 18, Papers on Case and Agreement, 1 (1993), pp. 149-172.
  • LÓPEZ, L.: A Derivational Syntax for Information Structure. Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics, New York, OUP, 2009.
  • MARÍN, R. y McNALLY, L.: “Inchoativity, change of state and telicity: Evidence from Spanish reflexive psychological verbs”, Natural Language Linguist Theory (2011).
  • McDONALD, J.: The Syntactic Nature of Inner Aspect: A Minimalist Perspective, John Benjamins, 2008.
  • MENDIKOETXEA: “Relaciones de interficie: los verbos de cambio de estado”, Cuadernos de Lingüística del I. U. Ortega y Gasset, 7 (2000), pp. 125-144.
  • MENDIKOETXEA: “Passive and se constructions”, en I. Hualde, A. Olarrea y O’ourke (ed): The Hispanic Linguistics Handbook, Oxford, Wiley Blackwell, 2012.
  • OTERO, C. P.: “Los pronombres reflexivos y recíprocos”, en Bosque, I. y Demonte, V. (eds.), Gramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española, Madrid, RAE, Espasa Calpe, 1999, pp. 1427-1517.
  • PÉREZ JIMÉNEZ, I. y MORENO QUIBÉN, R.: “Argumentos a favor de la centralidad de las nociones aspectuales en la interficie léxico-sintaxis: la correlación telicidad-inacusatividad en español”, en Juan Cuartero Otal y Gerd Wotjiak (eds.): Algunos problemas específicos de la descripción sintáctico-semántica, Berlín, Frank and Timme Verlang, 2005, pp. 197-213.
  • RAPOSO, E. y URIAGEREKA, J.: “Indefinite se”, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 14 (1996), pp. 749-810.
  • REINHART, T. y SILONI, T.: “Against the Unacussative Analysis of Reflexives”, en Studies on Unacussativity: the Syntax-Lexicon Interface, Cambridge, CUP, 2004, pp. 159-180.
  • ROTHSTEIN, S.: Structuring Events: A Study in the Semantics of Lexical Aspect, Explorations in Semantics, Blackwell, 2004.
  • ROTHSTEIN, S.: “Telicity, atomicity and the Vendler classification of verbs”, en Susan Rohtstein (ed): Theoretical and Crosslinguistic Approaches to the Semantics of Aspect, Amsterdam, John Benjamins, 2007.
  • ROTHSTEIN, S.: “Another Look at Accomplishments and Incrementality”, Violeta Demonte y Louise McNally (eds.): Telicity, Change and State: A Cross-Categorial View of Event Structure, Oxford, OUP, 2012, pp. 60-101.
  • SILONI, T.: “The Syntax of Reciprocal Verbs: An Overview”, EkkehardKönig y Volker Gast (eds.): Trends in Linguistics. Reciprocals and Reflexives: Theoretical and Typological Explorations, Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, 2008.
  • TENNY, C.: Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface, Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 52. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994.
  • TORREGO, E.: “Unergative-Unaccusative Alternations in Spanish”, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, Functional Heads and Clause Structure (1989), pp. 253-272.
  • VENDLER, Z.: Verbs and Times. Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca (New York), Cornell University Press, 1967.
  • VERKUYL, H.: On the Compositional Nature of the Aspects, Dordrecht, Kluwer,1972.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet