Eckhard Bick - VISL

complements, direct objects (the last two lumped together as “objects”) and free subject
predicatives (which he calls “attributes”). Of all clause level arguments discussed here,
OC is the only one that can not be topicalised by fronting:
Os antigos (SUBJ) consideram este monte um lugar sagrado.
Este monte (ACC) os antigos consideram um lugar sagrado.
*Um lugar sagrado (OC) os antigos consideram este monte.
Sagrado (SC) não é mais, mas alto ainda.
In four cases, agreement can be used as a criterion for establishing a function category:
Constituent function Agreement base
SUBJ agrees with the predicator (number and person)
SC and PRED agree with the subject (number and gender)
OC agrees with the direct object (number and gender)
A constituent passes the agreement test if either (a) its inflexion agrees with the
agreement base concerned, or (b) it can be co-ordinated with a word or group that
features such agreement. Thus, exceptions like ’As guerras na África (SUBJ-plural) são
uma desgraça (SC-singular)’ can be made to work: ’As guerras na África são [eternas
(feminine plural) e] uma desgraça’.
In most traditional systems of syntax, case is interpreted as a function marker, and in
Romance languages, pronoun substitution is used to elicit case in the face of case-less
nouns and np-groups. I have made this case-relation explicit by using caseabbreviations
in some of my CG function tags. For @SUBJ and @ACC, pronoun
substitution seems to be a straightforward test. Subjects can be replaced by nominative
pronouns (ele, ela, eles, elas, eu ...), direct objects by pronouns in the accusative
(o/a/os/as). Some @ACC, however, do not allow pronoun substitution:
Comeu 7 bolos. Os comeu.
Detesta lavar-se. ?O detesta.
Comeu peixe. *O comeu.
Comeu bananas. *As comeu.
The problem in the examples with ’peixe’ and ’bananas’ is that pronouns are referential,
while the word forms used are generic. ’lavar-se’ is problematic, since it is a nonnominal
object. In order to make substitution tests work in these and other cases, they
should be read as:
”If a constituent X can be (a) replaced with Y or (b) co-ordinated with a
constituent, that – on its own – could be substituted with Y.”
- 213 -