On the meanings and functions of grammatical choice: The Spanish first-person plural in written-press discourse

Miguel A. Aijón Oliva

Abstract

Grammatical persons and their variable referential scopes play an important role in the configuration of discourse and in the achievement of communicative goals. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the use of the Spanish first-person plural from the viewpoint of morphosyntactic choice and style construction. The study focuses on clauses with unexpressed subjects, which in the case of nosotros ‘we’ are by far the more frequent option. A written-press corpus is analyzed whose materials are distributed into five different textual genres, while participants are characterized through two psychosocial features: Socioprofessional identity and gender. The overall frequencies of first-person plural subjects, as well as the rates of audience-exclusive vs. -inclusive uses, are calculated according to each external factor. Subsequent qualitative analysis shows that the choice of the first-person plural situates discourse in an intermediate zone along the continuum from subjectivity to objectivity, helping to shape an intersubjective perspective, most clearly in its inclusive uses. It is also concluded that the qualitative, interactional facet of linguistic choice is by no means independent of statistical variation patterns: Both types of data contribute to the understanding of morphosyntactic choices as creative stylistic resources.

Keywords:
Quick links
A browser-friendly version of this article is not yet available. View PDF
Aijón Oliva, Miguel A
(2006) Variación morfosintáctica e interacción social. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca.Google Scholar
(2011) Variación sintáctica y creación de estilos: Los clíticos reflexivos en el discurso. In M.J. Serrano (ed.), Variación variable. Almería: Círculo Rojo / Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, pp. 21-56.Google Scholar
Aijón Oliva, Miguel A., and María J. Serrano
(2012) Towards a comprehensive view of variation in language: The absolute variable. Language & Communication 32: 80-94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alarcos, Emilio
(1980) Estudios de gramática funcional del Español. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Albentosa Hernández, José I., and Arsenio J. Moya Guijarro
(2000) La reducción del grado de transitividad en la oración del discurso científico en lengua inglesa. Revista Española de Lingüística 30: 445-468.Google Scholar
Almela Pérez, Ramón
(2000) ¿Es nosotros el plural de yo ? Estudios de Lingüística de la Universidad de Alicante 14: 9-17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter
(ed.) (2007) Style and Social Identities. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Badía Margarit, Antoni
(1988) La omisión del sujeto en español. In P. Peira (ed.), Homenaje a Alonso Zamora Vicente. Madrid: Castalia, pp. 361-367.Google Scholar
Bello, Andrés
(1860) Gramática de la lengua castellana destinada al uso de los americanos. Bogotá: Echevarría.Google Scholar
Bhat, D.N.S
(2004) Pronouns. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas
(1988) Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, and Susan Conrad
(2009) Register, Genre, and Style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blas Arroyo, José L
(2003) ‘Perdóneme que se lo diga, pero vuelve usted a faltar a la verdad, señor González’: Form and function of politic verbal behaviour in face-to-face Spanish political debates. Discourse & Society 14: 395-423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary, and Kira Hall
(2005) Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies 7: 585-614. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Deborah
(1993) Language and sex in the quantitative paradigm. In J. Coates, and D. Cameron (eds.), Women in their Speech Communities. London: Longman, pp. 3-12.Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer
(2011) Gossip revisited: Language in all-female groups. In J. Coates, and P. Pichler (eds.), Language and Gender: A Reader. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 199-223.Google Scholar
Coupland, Nikolas
(2007) Style: Language Variation and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Croft, William, and D. Alan Cruse
(2004) Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crossley, Nick
(1996) Intersubjectivity: The Fabric of Social Becoming. London: Sage.Google Scholar
De Cock, Barbara
(2011) Why we can be you: The use of 1st person plural forms with hearer reference in English and Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 2762-2775. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Dorgeloh, Heidrun, and Anja Wanner
(2010) Introduction. In H. Dorgeloh, and A. Wanner (eds.), Syntactic Variation and Genre. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1-26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duszak, Anna
(ed.) (2002) Us and Others. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope
(1989) The whole woman: Sex and gender differences in variation. Language Variation and Change 1: 245-267. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
(2000) Linguistic Variation as Social Practice. Oxford: Blackwell.  BoPGoogle Scholar
(2008) Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12: 453-476. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckert, Penelope, and Sally McConnell-Ginet
(eds.) (2003) Language and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Edwards, John
(2009) Language and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Farrar, Kimberley, and Mari C. Jones
(2002) Introduction. In M.C. Jones, and E. Esch (eds.), Contact-Induced Language Change. An Examination of Internal, External and Non-Linguistic Factors. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1-16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Finegan, Edward, and Douglas Biber
(2001) Register variation and social dialect variation: The Register Axiom. In P. Eckert, and J.R. Rickford (eds.), Style and Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 235-267.Google Scholar
García, Erica C
(2009) The Motivated Syntax of Arbitrary Signs: Cognitive Constraints on Spanish Clitic Clustering. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy
(2001) Syntax: An Introduction, vol. 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E
(1995) Constructions. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Haddington, Pentti
(2007) Positioning and alignment as activities of stancetaking in news interviews. In R. Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Interaction, Evaluation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 283-317. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Helmbrecht, Johannes
(2002) Grammar and function of ‘we’. In A. Duszak (ed.), Us and Others. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 31-49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
(2007) Intersubjectivity and progressivity in person (and place) reference. In N.J. Enfield, and T. Stivers (eds.), Person Reference in Interaction. Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 255-280.Google Scholar
Hirschman, Lynette
(1973) Female-male differences in conversational interaction. Paper presented at the Linguistic Society of America , San Diego.
Holmes, Janet, and Stephanie Schnurr
(2006) ‘Doing femininity’ at work: More than just relational practice. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10: 31-51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J., and Elizabeth C. Traugott
(2003) Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joos, Martin
(1961) The Five Clocks. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, Gitte, and René Dirven
(2008) Cognitive sociolinguistics: Rationale, methods and scope. In G. Kristiansen, and R. Dirven (eds.), Cognitive Sociolinguistics: Language Variation, Cultural Models, Social Systems. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1-17. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Labov, William
(1966) The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.  BoPGoogle Scholar
(1972) Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W
(1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
(2009) Investigations in Cognitive Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logo  MetBibGoogle Scholar
Lavandera, Beatriz R
(1978) Where does the sociolinguistic variable stop? Language in Society 7: 171-182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Macaulay, Ronald K.S
(2009) Quantitative Methods in Sociolinguistics. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maltz, Daniel N., and Ruth A. Borker
(2011) A cultural approach to male-female miscommunication. In J. Coates, and P. Pichler (eds.), Language and Gender: A Reader. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 487-502. First published in J.J. Gumperz (ed., 1982) Language and Social Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 281-312.Google Scholar
Nuyts, Jan
(2001) Epistemic Modality, Language and Conceptualization: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Penny, Ralph
(1993) Gramática histórica del español. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
Posio, Pekka
(2012) Who are ‘we’ in spoken Peninsular Spanish and European Portuguese? Expression and reference of first person plural subject pronouns. Language Sciences 34: 339-360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Real Academia Española & Asociación de Academias de la Lengua
(2009) Nueva gramática de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
Richards, Keith
(2006) Language and Professional Identity: Aspects of Collaborative Interaction. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rickford, John R., and Penelope Eckert
(2001) Introduction. In P. Eckert, and J.R. Rickford (eds.), Style and Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-18.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Rivarola, José L
(1984) ¿Quién es ‘nosotros’? Estudios de Lingüística de la Universidad de Alicante 2: 201-206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Satorre Grau, Francisco J
(2002) Revisión del sistema pronominal español. Revista de Filología Española 82: 345-380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheibman, Joanne
(2007) Subjective and intersubjective uses of generalizations in English conversation. In R. Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Interaction, Evaluation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 111-138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret
(2009) Communicative style. In S. D’hondt, J.-O. Östman, and J. Verschueren (eds.), The Pragmatics of Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 20-39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Serrano, María J
(2011) Otras personas y yo: Variación socioestilística de la expresión/omisión del sujeto pronominal nosotros en las conversaciones espontáneas. In M.J. Serrano (ed.), Variación variable. Almería: Círculo Rojo / Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, pp. 93-126.Google Scholar
Serrano, María J., and Miguel A. Aijón Oliva
(2011) Syntactic variation and communicative style. Language Sciences 33: 138-153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
in press) Discourse objectivization, social variation and style in the use of Spanish tú . Folia Linguistica 47.
Sidnell, Jack
(2010) Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Siewierska, Anna
(2010) Person forms. In J.J. Song (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 322-343.Google Scholar
Stewart, Miranda
(2001) Pronouns of power and solidarity: The case of Spanish first person plural nosotros . Multilingua 20: 155-169. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah
(ed.) (1993) Gender and Conversational Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Virtanen, Tuija
(2010) Variation across texts and discourses: Theoretical and methodological perspectives on text type and genre. In H. Dorgeloh, and A. Wanner (eds.), Syntactic Variation and Genre. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 53-84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wulff, Stefanie
(2006) Go-V vs. go-and-V in English: A case of constructional synonymy? In S.T. Gries, and A. Stefanowitsch (eds.), Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-Based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 101-125.Google Scholar