Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2010 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Santos, Fernanda Zanelato Oliveira dos
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Ikeda, Sumiko Nishitani |
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Linguística Aplicada e Estudos da Linguagem
|
| Departamento: |
Lingüística
|
| País: |
BR
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/13488
|
Resumo: |
The subordinating adverbial clauses have been studied taking into account its syntactic function, that is, its structure (the concept of a subordinating clause). In this approach, there is a main clause and another one, which is subordinate to that generally through a number of subordinating conjunctions. However, its discourse functions, that is, what these clauses are for, have not been widely researched. In this context, this research focuses on the subordinating adverbial clause, broadly speaking, the condition in clauses started, not necessarily, by conditional subordinating conjunctions, including the condition without indication by means of connectors which herein will be called conditional construction (henceforth, CC) and the discourse functions performed by them in interlocutions that took place in interviews documented by Projeto de Estudo da Norma Lingüística Urbana Culta do Brasil (NURC), by Castilho and Preti (1986). The CCs are traditionally considered as constituted by two parts: the so-called subordinating adverbial clause and the main clause (Bechara,1969). On the other hand, Moura Neves (1999), studying the CCs from the logical-semantic point of view, says that, inside a CC the subordinate proposition is commonly called protasis and the main clause apodosis. According to Ikeda (2002), apud van der Auwera (1997), the CCs have been researched by the western linguistics for more than fifty years, being Bolinger (1952) its precursor. According to Bloor (1998), the CCs have aroused great discussions among several fields of study. Thus, it has been so in the philosophy field (JACKSON, 1991); linguistics (discourse analysis) (HORSELLA; SINDERMANN, 1992); law (CRYSTAL; DAVY, 1969); economics (MEAD; HEDERSON, 1983; PINDI; PINDI,1987). The study of the CCs is important as it involves questions concerning persuasion currently considered one of the most important language functions especially the ones done implicitly. The CCs perform discourse functions such as (i) the constraint of the development of the message in the clause (HAIMAN, 1978), through the topicalization function (ii) the creation of 'possible worlds' (FAUCONNIER, 1985; 1997 apud DANCYGIER; SWEETSER, 2000); (iii) assuaging of face-threatening acts (BLOOR, 1998); (iv) epistemic or deontic modalization (AUER, 2000), (v) appraisal in CC proposals (AUER, 2000) and (vi) summary/repetition (AUER, 2000). More recent literature cites different types of CCs, among normal CCs and pragmatic CCs (MAZZOLENI, 1994), the latter subdivided into four types: thematic, the Dutch sentence, imperative, the act of speech to which Dancygier e Sweetser (1996, 2000) added one more: metalinguístic. The current research aims to examine the interlocutions within the oral mode in order to check the types of CCs, their expression (whether explicit or implicit; whether placed before or after the main clause) and the discourse functions that the CCs perform in such context. Therefore, it must answer the following questions: (a) What types of CCs are found in oral interlocutions? (b) How is the Condition realized in these interlocutions? (c) Which discourse functions are realized by the CCs? To analyze the CCs in the interview, we will refer to Thompson and Longacre´s typological classifications (1985) and Mazzoleni´s (1994); as for discourse functions, we rely on Haiman (1978), Fauconnier (1985; 1997) e Auer (2000), among others |
