Cover not available
Part of
Constructions in Spanish
Edited by Inga Hennecke and Evelyn Wiesinger
[Constructional Approaches to Language 34] 2023
► pp. 156–192

Chapter 7
On deconstructing mood

A construction grammar approach to the Spanish subjunctive

| University of Bamberg
The Spanish subjunctive has traditionally been described by some linguists as an inflection expressing mood and by others as a marker of subordination. In this contribution I will argue that both functions can be observed, but that Spanish (and Romance) subjunctives increasingly become associated with subordination and lose their modal semantics in the process. I will therefore claim that taking the subjunctive paradigm as a monolithic category with one central semantic value is inadequate for representing all the various constructions in which subjunctive forms appear. As an alternative, I will suggest to model the various Spanish subjunctive constructions within a construction grammar framework informed by Traugott & Trousdale’s work on constructionalisation. An abstract subjunctive schema is posited from which a non-assertion, a modal agreement and a modal trigger subschema are derived. Of these three, two are essentially procedural with little to no semantic content, while only the non-assertion schema partly corresponds semantically to the traditional assertion vs. non-assertion analysis.
Keywords: Romance subjunctive constructions, constructionalisation, demodalisation, modal agreement, subordination, marker
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Two theories and a logical conundrum
  • 3.The theory of a central value: Diachronically conclusive, synchronically inadequate
  • 4.The subjunctive in independent clauses?
  • 5.A grammaticalisation account of the Romance subjunctive
  • 6.A constructionalisation account of the Romance subjunctive
  • 7.The Spanish subjunctive schema
    • 7.1The subjunctive schema [S [que Vsubj]]
    • 7.2The non-assertion subschema ( = ‘nonassertion’) [S [que Vsubj (/Vind)]
    • 7.3Modal agreement subschema [[Vtrigger] [que Vsubj]]
      • 7.3.1Orphaned subordinate subschema S [[(que) Vsubj]]
      • 7.3.2Imperative-subjunctive subschema
    • 7.4Modal trigger subschema [S [Conjtrigger Vsubj]]
    • 7.5Protasis construction
  • 8.Deconstructing the modal analysis for the Spanish subjunctive
  • 9.Conclusion and outlook
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 July 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.34.07rad
References (55)
References
Bally, C. (1932). Linguistique générale et linguistique française. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar
Betz, K. (2016). Adverbien und Depiktive im Spanischen als radiale Kategorien. Bamberg: University of Bamberg Press.Google Scholar
Blaikner-Hohenwart, G. (2006). Der subjonctif als ,gefrorene Morphosyntax‘? Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie, 122, 613–623. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C. (2003). L’équilibre des modalités positives ou négatives. Aspects de la modalité. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, D. L. (1974). One subjunctive or two? Hispania, 57, 462–471. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1976). Again – one or two Subjunctives? Hispania, 59, 41–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borrego Nieto, J., Gómez Asencio, J. J., & Prieto de los Mozos, E. (1995). El subjuntivo. Valores y usos. Madrid: Sociedad Española de Librería.Google Scholar
Bosque, I. (Ed.). (1990). Indicativo y subjuntivo. Madrid: Taurus Universitaria.Google Scholar
(2012). Mood: Indicative vs. Subjunctive. In J. I. Hualde, A. Olarrea, & E. O’Rourke (Eds.), The Handbook of Hispanic Linguistics (pp. 373–394). Malden: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Briz, A., & Grupo Val.Es.Co. (2002). Corpus de conversaciones coloquiales. Madrid: Arcos.Google Scholar
Chiquito, A. B. (2014). La modalidad. In S. Fernández, & J. Falk (Eds.), Temas de gramática española para estudiantes universitarios (pp. 171–196.). Frankfurt a. M.: Lang.Google Scholar
Cressey, W. (1971). The Subjunctive in Spanish: A Transformational Approach. Hispania, 54, 895–896. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W. & Cruse, D. A. (2004). An overview of construction grammars. In Id. (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 257–290). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Bruyne, J. (²2002). Spanische Grammatik. Translated by D. -J. Gütschow. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Knop, S., & Mollica, F. (2013). Die Konstruktionsgrammatik für die Beschreibung romanischer Sprachen. In: S. De Knop, F. Mollica, & J. Kuhn (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik in den romanischen Sprachen (pp. 9–23). Frankfurt a. M.: Lang.Google Scholar
Fernández-Serrano, I. (2016). El subjuntivo como concordancia modal. Nueva propuesta teórica y bases para su aplicación didáctica. Ph.D. Thesis. Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma.Google Scholar
Gebhardt, H. (1979). Modus und Pragmatik: Untersuchungen zum Gebrauch des Konjunktivs im Spanischen. In W. Bergerfurth (Ed.), Festschrift Rupprecht Rohr zum 60. Geburtstag (pp. 169–181). Heidelberg: Julius Groos.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Green, J. (1988). Spanish. In M. Harris, & N. Vincent (Eds.), The Romance Languages (pp. 79–130). London/Sidney: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Grice, H. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haase, M. (1994). Respekt. Die Grammatikalisierung von Höflichkeit. München/Newcastle: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
(1997). (In-)Finitivkonstruktionen – Baskisch und Romanisch. In U. Maas (Ed.), Infinitive – Sprachtypologische Studien (pp. 36–57). Osnabrück: Secolo.Google Scholar
Harris, M. (1974). The subjunctive mood as a changing category in Romance. In J. M. Anderson, & Ch. Jones (Eds.), Historical linguistics: Proceedings of the first international conference on historical linguistics, vol. 2 (pp. 169–188). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Hengeveld, K. (2000). Illocution, mood, and modality. In G. Booij, C. Lehmann, & J. Mugdan (Eds.), Morphology – An International Handbook on Inflection and Word-Formation, 2. Halbband (pp. 1190–1201). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hummel, M. (2001). Der Grundwert des spanischen Subjunktivs. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
(2004). El valor básico del subjuntivo español y románico. Cáceres: Universidad de Extremadura.Google Scholar
(2012). Einzelaspekt: Modus. In J. Born, R. Folger, Ch. Laferl, & B. Pöll (Eds.), Handbuch Spanisch (pp. 324–329). Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Google Scholar
Knauer, G. (1998). Der Subjuntivo im Spanischen Mexicos. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, R. T. (1968). Abstract Syntax and Latin Complementations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lapesa, R. (92005). Historia de la lengua española. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Lehmann, C. (1984). Der Relativsatz. Typologie seiner Strukturen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
(²2002). Thoughts on Grammaticalization. Erfurt: Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar
Manteca Alonso-Cortés, Á. (1981). Gramática del subjuntivo. Madrid: Cátedra,Google Scholar
Meier, H. (1967). [Rev. of:] Wolfgang Rothe – Strukturen des Konjunktivs im Französischen. Romanistisches Jahrbuch, 18(1), 145–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Navas Ruiz, R. (1990). El subjuntivo castellano. Teoría y bibliografía crítica. In I. Bosque (Ed.), Indicativo y subjuntivo (pp. 107–141). Madrid: Taurus.Google Scholar
Noonan, M. (2008). Complementation. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description (pp. 52–150). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Penny, R. (²2002). A History of the Spanish Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Posner, R. (1996). The Romance Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Radatz, H. -I. (2021a). Tempus (und Modus?) – Synthetisches vs. analytisches Futur. In Id., Spanische Grammatik im Fokus (pp. 189–212). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021b). Tempus und Aspekt – Präteritum vs. Imperfekt. In Id.: Spanische Grammatik im Fokus (pp. 129–149). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Real Academia Española (1973). Esbozo de una nueva gramática de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
(2009). Nueva gramática de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Ridruejo, E. (1999). Modo y modalidad. El modo en las subordinadas sustantivas. In V. Demonte, & I. Bosque (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (pp. 3209–3252). Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Rothe, W. (1967). Strukturen des Konjunktivs im Französischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz Campillo, J. P. (2008). El valor central del subjuntivo: ¿informatividad o declaratividad? MarcoELE – revista de didáctica ELE, 7, 1–44.Google Scholar
Schifko, P. (1967). ‘Subjonctif’ und ‘subjuntivo’. Zum Gebrauch des Konjunktivs im Französischen und Spanischen. Wien: Braumüller.Google Scholar
Takagaki, T. (1984). Subjunctive as the marker of subordination. Hispania, 67(2), 248–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Terrell, T., & Hooper, J. B. (1974). A semantically based analysis of mood in Spanish. Hispania, 62, 484–494. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thieroff, R. (2004). Modale Tempora – non-modale Modi. Zu Bedeutung und Gebrauch inhärenter Verbalkategorien in verschiedenen europäischen Sprachen. In O. Leirbukt (Ed.), Tempus/Temporalität und Modus/Modalität im Sprachenvergleich (pp. 63–85). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Traugott, E. (2012). Pragmatics and language change. In K. Allan, & K. M. Jaszczolt (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 549–566). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E., & G. Trousdale (2013). Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Väänänen, V. (²1985). El subjuntivo. In Id., Introducción al Latín Vulgar (pp. 232–233). Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Wandruszka, U. (2000). Über die Bedeutung des romanischen Konjunktivs und die Geburt des Nebensatzes. Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie, 116(1), 56–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ziem, A., & Lasch, A. (2013). Konstruktionsgrammatik, Konzepte und Grundlagen gebrauchsbasierter Ansätze. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar