Cover not available
Part of
Changes in Meaning and Function: Studies in historical linguistics with a focus on Spanish
Edited by Jorge Fernández Jaén and Herminia Provencio Garrigós
[IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literature 25] 2020
► pp. 195–220

Something seems to have changed

Diachronic evidence for the semantic shift of parecer + infinitive

| Utrecht University
This paper examines the claim that when a full verb is grammaticalized and becomes an auxiliary it is subjected to a process of desemanticization or semantic bleaching. For this matter, the Spanish periphrasis parecer + infinitive (‘to seem’) is analysed on the basis of the three semantic-pragmatic tendencies proposed by Traugott (1989). It is shown how in the course of time the original meaning of physical appearance of the periphrasis developed into the current epistemic and evidential meaning, shifting from a concrete to a more abstract meaning. The semantic shift, so it is argued, does not involve a loss of meaning but constitutes a case of generalization, allowing for the use of the periphrasis with all six grammatical persons.
Keywords: Spanish, verbal periphrases, parecer + infinitive, epistemic modality, evidentially, semantic bleaching, subjectification, speaker-oriented
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The periphrastic nature of parecer + infinitive
  • 3.The origin of parecer + infinitive
  • 4.The semantic evolution of parecer + infinitive
  • 5.Epistemic and evidential meaning
  • 6.Parecer + infinitive in first person singular
  • 7.Summary and conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 2 April 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ivitra.25.09nie
References (61)
References
CORPES XXI = Real Academia Española, Banco de datos CORPES XXI. Corpus del Español del Siglo XXI. Accessed June 2016. [URL]
CREA = Real Academia Española, Banco de datos CREA. Annotated version. Corpus de referencia del español actual. Accessed June 2016. [URL]
GRADIA = Corpus compiled by the research group GRADIA. [URL]
Ausín, A., and M. Depiante. 2000. “On the Syntax of Parecer (‘To Seem’) with and without an Experiencer.” In Hispanic Linguistics at the Turn of the Millennium. Papers from the 3rd Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, ed. by H. Campos, E. Herburger, A. Morales-Front, and T. J. Walsh, 155–170. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Bassols de Climent, M. 1956. Sintaxis Latina. Madrid: CSIC.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. 1980. “Wanna and the Gradience of Auxiliaries.” In Wege zur Universalienforschung: Sprachwissenschaftliche Beiträge zum 60. Geburtstag von Hansjakob Seiler, ed. by G. Brettschneider, and C. Lehmann, 292–299. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
1991. Essays on Spanish: Words and Grammar. Newark Delaware: Juan de la Cuesta.Google Scholar
Blakemore, D. 1987. Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. 1985. Morphology: A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins (online resource). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003. “Mechanisms of change in grammaticalization: The role of frequency.” In The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, ed. by B. D. Joseph, and R. D. Janda, 602–623. Malden: Blackwell (online resource). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Casas, C. de las. 1570. Vocabulario de las dos lenguas toscana y castellana. Accessed December 2016. [URL]
Cornillie, B. 2007. Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality in Spanish (semi-) auxiliaries: A Cognitive-functional Approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter (online resource).Google Scholar
2012. “La historia de la complementación con parecer y resultar. Apuntes sobre la (inter)subjetivización.” RASAL Lingüística 1: 77–94.Google Scholar
Corominas, J., and J. A. Pascual. 1985. Diccionario crítico etimológico castellano e hispánico. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Covarrubias Horozco, S. de. 1611/2006. Tesoro de la lengua castellana o española. Madrid: Iberoamericana/Vervuert.Google Scholar
Ernout, A., and A. Meillet. 1932. Dictionnaire Étymologique de la Langue Latine. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Ernout, A., and F. Thomas. 2002. Syntaxe latine. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Escandell-Vidal, V., M. Leonetti, and A. Ahern. 2011. “Introduction: Procedural Meaning.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, ed. by V. Escandell-Vidal, M. Leonetti, and A. Ahern, xvii–xiv. Bingley: Emerald (online resource). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fernández de Castro, F. 1990. Las perífrasis verbales en español. Oviedo: Departamento de filología española.Google Scholar
2003. “El lugar de las perífrasis verbales en la descripción de las lenguas: los verbos auxiliares y la determinación del verbo.” In Verbalperiphrasen in den (ibero-)romanischen Sprachen/ Perífrasis verbals en les llengües (ibero-)romániques/ Perífrasis verbales en las lenguas (ibero-)románicas, ed. by C. D. Pusch, and A. Wesch, 11–22. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
Fernández Leborans, M. J. 1999. “La predicación: las oraciones copulativas.” In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, ed. by I. Bosque, and V. Demonte, 2357–2460. Madrid: RAE/Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Fernández Leborans, M. J., and M. C. Díaz Bautista. 1990. “Sobre la sintaxis del verbo español «parecer».” Boletín de la Real Academia Española LXX: 353–420.Google Scholar
Fogsgaard, L. 2002. Algunas perífrasis aspectuales del español. Alicante: Publicaciones Universidad de Alicante.Google Scholar
Fontanella de Weinberg, M. B. 1970. “Los auxiliares españoles.” Anales del Instituto de Lingüística X: 61–73.Google Scholar
Garachana Camarero, M. 2017. “Los límites de una categoría híbrida. Las perífrasis verbales”. In La gramática en la diacronía. La evolución de las perífrasis verbales modales en español, ed. by M. Garachana Camarero, 36–80. Madrid-Frankfurt: Iberoamericana-Vervuert. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García Fernández, L. (dir.). 2006. Diccionario de perífrasis verbales. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Glare, G. W. (ed.). 1976. Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Claredon Press.Google Scholar
Gómez Torrego, L. 1999. “Los verbos auxiliares. Las perífrasis verbales de infinitivo.” In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, ed. by I. Bosque, and V. Demonte, 3323–3389. Madrid: RAE/Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Grossman, E., and Rosemeyer, M. 2015. “Presuppositions and language change. The grammaticalization of FINISH anteriors in Spanish and beyond.” Paper presented at the 48th Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Leiden, September 2–5.
Heine, B. 1993. Auxiliaries: Cognitive Forces and Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2002. “On the role of context in grammaticalization.” In New Reflections on Grammaticalization, ed. by I. Wischer, and G. Diewald, 83–102. Amsterdam/Philadelpha: John Benjamins (online resource). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hernanz, M. L. 1999. “El infinitivo.” In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, ed. by I. Bosque, and V. Demonte, 2197–2356. Madrid: RAE/Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. J., and E. C. Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization. Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keniston, H. 1937. The Syntax of Castilian Prose. The Sixteenth Century. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, C. T., and Ch. Short. 1879. A Latin Dictionary; Founded on Andrews’ edition of Freund’s Latin dictionary. Accessed December 2016. [URL]
Menéndez Pidal, R. 1977. Cantar de Mio Cid. Texto, gramática y vocabulario. Tercera parte: Vocabulario. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
1980. Orígenes del español. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Mez de Braidenbach, N. 1670. Diccionario muy copioso de la lengua española y alemana. Accessed December 2016. [URL]
Nieuwenhuijsen, D. 2017. “Parece ser perífrasis: categorización y evolución diacrónica de parecer + infinitivo”. In La gramática en la diacronía. La evolución de las perífrasis verbales modales en español, ed. by M. Garachana Camarero, 287–328. Madrid-Frankfurt: Iberoamericana-Vervuert.Google Scholar
Nuyts, J. 2001. Epistemic modality, language, and conceptualization: a cognitive-pragmatic perspective. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins (online resource). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olbertz, H. 1998. Verbal Periphrases in a Functional Grammar of Spanish. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oudin, C. 1607. Tesoro de las dos lenguas francesa y española. Thresor des deux langues françoise et espagnolle. Accessed December 2016. [URL]
Palmer, F. R. 2001. Mood and Modality. Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Percival, R. 1591. Bibliothecae Hispanicae pars altera. Containing a Dictionarie in Spanish, English and Latine. Accessed December 2016. [URL]
Pinkster, H. 2015. The Oxford Latin Syntax. Vol. 1 The Simple Clause. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Porroche Ballesteros, M. 1990. Aspectos de la atribución en español. Zaragoza: Libros Pórtico.Google Scholar
Prinz, O., and J. Schneider (eds). 1967. Mittellateinisches Wörterbuch. Munich: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
Real Academia Española. 2005. Diccionario panhispánico de dudas. Accessed December 2016. [URL]
. 2014. Diccionario de la lengua española. Accessed December 2016. [URL]
Real Academia Española, and Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española. 2010a. Nueva Gramática de la Lengua Española. Segund Edition. Madrid: Espasa Libros.Google Scholar
. 2010b. Nueva Gramática de la Lengua Española. Manual. Madrid: Espasa Libros.Google Scholar
Roca Pons, J. 1958. Estudios sobre perífrasis verbales del español. Madrid: CSIC.Google Scholar
Sobrino, F. 1705. Diccionario nuevo de las lenguas española y francesa. Accessed December 2016. [URL]
Souter, A. (ed.). 1957. A Glossary of Later Latin to 600 A.D. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Squartini, M. 1998. Verbal Periphrases in Romance. Aspect, Actionality, and Grammaticalizacion. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E. C. 1989. “On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English: An Example of Subjectification in Semantic Change.” Language 65 (1): 31–55. [URL]
2003. “From subjectification to intersubjectification.” In Motives for Language Change, ed. by R. Hickey, 124–139. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (online resource). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E. C., and E. König. 1991. “The Semantics-Pragmatics of Grammaticalization Revisited.” In Approaches to Grammaticalization. Vol. I. Theoretical and Methodological Issues, ed. by B. Heine, and E. C. Traugott, 189–218. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins (online resource). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Willet, T. 1988. “A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticization of evidentiality.” Studies in Language 12 (1): 51–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D., and D. Sperber. 1993. “Linguistic Form and Relevance”, Lingua 90 (1–2): 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yllera, A. 1980. Sintaxis histórica del verbo español: Las perífrasis medievales. Zaragoza: Departamento de Filología Francesa, Universidad de Zaragoza.Google Scholar