Affiliation:
1. 101230 University of Helsinki , Helsinki , Finland
2. Department of Languages , 3570 University of Gothenburg , Gothenburg , Västra Götaland , Sweden
Abstract
Abstract
This paper offers a new approach to the alternate use of Spanish hacerse ‘to make (reflexive)’ and volverse ‘to (re)turn (reflexive)’ to express a change of state. Hacerse and volverse belong to the core of the family of change-of-state verbs in Spanish and constitute a prime example of alternating forms. The aim is to evaluate the importance of the notion of construal as an explanation to alternation. We do this by testing one of the major explanations regarding the difference between hacerse and volverse, namely that of Delbecque and van Gorp (Delbecque, Nicole & Lise van Gorp. 2012. Hacerse y volverse como nexos pseudo-copulativos. Bulletin hispanique 114(1). 277–306, Delbecque, Nicole & Lise van Gorp. 2015. The pseudo-copular use of the Spanish verbs hacerse and volverse: Two types of change. Cognitextes 13), who suggest that the distinction is one of construal. A sentence completion task involving priming and non-priming visual stimuli is used to investigate to what extent the distinct conceptual images associated with hacerse and volverse affect the choice of verb in given contexts. The results show little evidence of the importance of construal for the choice of verb. Instead, established V + ADJ combinations seem to have a greater impact on choosing either verb. This calls into question the applicability of construal as an explanation to alternation, especially from the perspective of choice between alternating forms.
Reference38 articles.
1. Alba de Diego, Vidal & Karl-Axel Lunell. 1988. Verbos de cambio que afectan al sujeto en construcciones atributivas. In Pablo Jauralde, Jesús Sánchez Lobato, Pedro Peira & Jorge Urrutia (eds.), Homenaje a Alonso Zamora Vicente, vol. 1, Historia de la lengua: El español contemporáneo, 333–360. Madrid: Castalia.
2. Bybee, Joan & David Eddington. 2006. A usage-based approach to Spanish ways of becoming. Language 82(2). 323–355. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0081.
3. Bybee, Joan & Rena Torres Cacoullos. 2009. The role of prefabs in grammaticization: How the particular and the general interact in language change. In Roberta Corrigan, Edith A. Moravcsik, Hamid Ouali & Kathleen Wheatley (eds.), Formulaic language, vol. 1, Distribution and historical change, 187–218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
4. Conde Noguerol, María Eugenia. 2013. Los verbos de cambio en español. La Coruña: Universidade da Coruña doctoral dissertation.
5. Coste, Jean & Augustín Redondo. 1965. Syntaxe de l’espagnol moderne: Enseignement superieur. Paris: CDU-SEDES.