Cover not available
Part of
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. 135–154

On truth persistence

A comparison between European Portuguese and Italian in relation to sempre

ORCID logo | Indiana University
 | Université de Toulouse Le Mirail cCLLE-ERSS (CNRS & Université de Toulouse 2)
This paper analyzes a non-temporal interpretation of the adverb sempre “always” in European Portuguese and Italian, in which the adverb expresses persistence of the truth of a proposition over time and displays specific contextual constraints (TP-sempre). Despite an overlap in the contexts in which TP-sempre may occur in both languages, we provide data showing that its distribution is not exactly the same in European Portuguese and Italian. In view of these data, we propose that TP-sempre is a modal operator of confirmation in both languages, but that it is more restricted in Italian in that it has a plan presupposition only in this language.
Published online: 17 December 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.333.11ama
References (13)
References
Âmbar, Manuela, Manuela Gonzaga & Esmeralda V. Negrão. 2004. “Tense, Quantification and Clause Structure in EP and BP”. Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2002: Selected papers from Going Romance 2002, Groningen, 28–30 November 2002 ed. by Reineke Bok-Bennema, Bart Hollebrandse, Brigitte Kampers-Mahne & Petra Sleeman, 1–16. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brito, Ana Maria. 2001. “Clause Structure, Subject Positions and Verb Movement: About the position of sempre in European Portuguese and Brazilian Portuguese”. Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 1999: Selected papers from Going Romance 1999, Leiden, 9–11 December 1999 ed. by Yves D’hulst, Johan Rooryck & Jan Schroten, 63–85. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David. 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fiéis, Alexandra. 2010. “On the Position of Sempre in Medieval Portuguese and in Modern European Portuguese”. The Linguistic Review 27.75–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gonzaga, Manuela. 1997. Aspectos da sintaxe dos advérbios em Português. M.A. dissertation, University of Lisbon.
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard. 2004. “La polysémie de l ’ adverbe toujours ”. Travaux de Linguistique 49.39–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ilari, Rodolfo. 1992. Gramática do Português Falado. Vol. II: Níveis de análise lingüística. Campinas: Editora da Unicamp.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1931. “A New Science: Interlinguistics”. Psyche 11.57–67.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred, Francis J. Pelletier, Gregory Carlson, Alice ter Meulen, Godehard Link & Gennaro Chierchia. 1995. “Genericity: An introduction”. The Generic Book ed. by Gregory Carlson & Francis J. Pelletier, 1–124. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, David. 1975. “Adverbs of Quantification”. Formal Semantics of Natural Language ed. by Edward Keenan, 3–15. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lopes, Ana C.M. 1998. “Contribuição para o estudo dos valores discursivos de sempre”. Actas do XIII Encontro Nacional da APL ed. by Mailce A. Mota & Rita Marquilhas, 3–14. Lisboa: Colibri.Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen. 1992. “The ZPG Letter: Subjects, definiteness, and information-status”. Discourse Description: Diverse analyses of a fundraising text ed. by Sandra A. Thompson & William C. Mann, 295–325. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, Carlota. 2010. “The Temporal Reference of the English Futurate”. Text, Time, and Context: Selected papers of Carlota S. Smith ed. by Richard P. Meier, Helen Aristar-Dry & Emilie Destruel, 147–160. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar