Eckhard Bick - VISL

a [a] DET F S @>N ‘the’
pergunta [pergunta] N F S @AS< ‘question’
de [de] PRP @N< ‘as to’
onde [onde] ADV @ADV> @#FS-P< ‘where’
mora [morar] V PR 3S IND VFIN @FMV ‘[he] lives’
Adverbial complements can, of course, co-occur with (same-level) adjuncts (3e) or
(dependent) set-operators (3f), making contexts more complicated for the CG-rules.
(3e)
(3f)
o [o] DET M S @>N ‘the’
tesouro [tesouro] N M S @SUBJ> ‘treasure’
ainda [ainda] ADV @ADVL> ‘still’
lá [lá] ADV @ADV> ‘there’
está [estar] V PR 3S IND VFIN @FMV ‘was’
$.
o [o] DET M S @>N ‘the’
tesouro [tesouro] N M S @SUBJ> ‘treasure’
nem [nem] ADV @>A ‘not even’
lá [lá] ADV @ADV> ‘there’
está [estar] V PR 3S IND VFIN @FMV ‘was’
$.
The @ADV tag (for valency bound adverbial) is used both for monotransitive and
ditransitive constructions, though one might argue that especially PLACE-adverbs
function somewhat like subject and object complements, respectively, predicating a
location of an NP. Ele está doente and Ele está no Rio would then both be regarded as
simple copula patterns, with an @SC tag for both the adjective doente and the locative
adverbial no Rio. However, since some copula verbs, like 'ser', do not appear with place
adverbial complements 176 , and some verbs, like 'ir', can't usually be used with
nominal complements, I prefer to make a valency class distinction based on complement
material (restricting copula class membership to nominal subject complementation),
and uphold the distinction between @SC/@OC and @ADV.
The two types of @ADV matching and valency, respectively, could
also be distinguished by hybrid terms (@ADV-SC and @ADV-OC), derived - in a (tobe-written)
CG mapping module - from the absence or presence of an accompanying
@ACC complement:
(4)
atirando [atirar] V GER @IMV @#ICL-ADVL ‘throwing’
176 apart from the special focus construction with ser
- 302 -