Cover not available
Part of
Hispanic Linguistics at the Crossroads: Theoretical linguistics, language acquisition and language contact
Edited by Rachel Klassen, Juana M. Liceras and Elena Valenzuela
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 4] 2015
► pp. 49–68

The semantics and pragmatics of andar and venir + gerund

| The Ohio State University
| The Ohio State University
This study builds on existing research regarding the characterization of Spanish aspectual periphrases, such as vivir + gerund or ir + gerund, and explores and compares the distribution of the periphrases andar + gerund and venir + gerund in Peninsular Spanish. We propose that a complete analysis requires both semantic and pragmatic considerations. First, although both andar + gerund and venir + gerund behave as frequentative pluractional operators, we show that they differ with respect to the nature of the frequency of event repetitions. Second, we posit that these periphrastic constructions differ pragmatically as a result of two generalized conversational implicatures from which differing meanings involving the agent’s intention towards the accomplishment of a goal and the agent’s level of engagement arise.
Keywords: aspectual periphrases, conversational implicatures, Peninsular Spanish, pluractionality
Published online: 30 July 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.4.03sai
References (13)
References
Abeillé, A., & Danièle, G. (2010). Complex predicates in the Romance languages. In A. Abeillé & G. Danièle (Eds.), Fundamental issues in the Romance languages (pp. 107–170). Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Amaral, P. (2013a). The pragmatics of number: The evaluative properties of vivir + V[Gerund]. Journal of Pragmatics, 51, 105–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2013b). On how to live and keep dying. In C. Howe, S. Blackwell, & M. Quesada (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 15th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, (pp. 269–280). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Birner, B.J. (2013). Introduction to pragmatics. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Fernández de Castro, F. (1990). Las perífrasis verbales en español: Comportamiento sintáctico e historia de su caracterización. Oviedo: Departamento de Filología española.Google Scholar
García Fernández, L. (2006). Diccionario de perífrasis verbales. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Grice, H.P. (1975). The logic of conversation. In P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Huang, Y. (2007). Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Laca, B. (2002). Romance “aspectual” periphrases: Eventuality modification versus “syntactic” aspect. In J. Guéron & J. Lecarme (Eds.), The syntax of time (pp. 425–440). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. (2004). Progressive, pluractionals and the domains of aspect. In O. Crouzet, H. Demidache, & S. Wauquier (Eds.), Domain(e)s, Proceedings of the Journée de Linguistique de Nantes (pp. 87–92).
. (2006). Indefinites, quantifiers, and pluractionals. What scope effects tell us about event pluralities. In S. Vogeleer & L. Tasmowski (Eds.), Non-definiteness and Plurality (pp. 191–217). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olbertz, H. (1998). Verbal periphrases in a functional grammar of Spanish. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Squartini, M. (1998). Verbal periphrases in Romance: Aspect, actionality, and grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar