Gustar-Type Verbs

  • Victoria Vázquez Rozas
Chapter

Abstract

When comparing the verbal structures of English and Spanish, grammatical accounts underscore the differences between English like and Spanish gustar. Despite their closeness in meaning, these predicates exhibit a divergent syntactic behaviour: whereas like codes as subject the entity that experiences a certain feeling, and as object the stimulus responsible for that feeling, gustar expresses the experiencer through an indirect object (or dative) and the stimulus through the subject, illustrated in the examples (4.1) and (4.2).

Keywords

Direct Object Indirect Object Small Clause Prepositional Object Transitive Pattern 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackerman, F. and J. Moore (1999) ‘Syntagmatic and Paradigmatic Dimensions of Causee Encodings’, Linguistics and Philosophy, vol. 22, pp. 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, A. (1985) ‘The Major Functions of the Noun Phrase’, in T. Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Vol. I: Clause Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 62–154.Google Scholar
  3. Bello, A. (1847) Gramática de la lengua castellana destinada al uso de los americanos. Valparaíso.Google Scholar
  4. Bossong, G. (1997) ‘Le marquage de l’expérient dans les langues d’Europe’, in J. Feuillet (ed.), Actance et valence dans les langues de l’Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 258–94.Google Scholar
  5. Campos, H. (1999) ‘Transitividad e intransitividad’, in I. Bosque and V. Demonte (eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, Vol. 2. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, pp. 1,519–74.Google Scholar
  6. Comrie, B. (1976) ‘The Syntax of Causative Constructions’, in M. Shibatani (ed.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 6: The Grammar of Causative Constructions. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  7. — (1981) Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Croft, W. A. (1986) ‘Surface Subject Choice of Mental Verbs’, Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Cuervo, R. J. (1886–93) Diccionario de construcaón y régimen de la lengua castellana, Paris: A. Roger and F. Chernoviz.Google Scholar
  10. — (1874) Notas a la Gramática de la lengua castellana de Andrés Bello, ed. de Niceto Alcalá Zamora. Buenos Aires: Sopena, 1973.Google Scholar
  11. Dąbrowska, E. (1997) Cognitive Semantics and the Polish Dative. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Daneš, F. (1968) ‘Some Thoughts on the Semantic Structure of the Sentence’, Lingua, vol. 21, pp. 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. de Miguel, E. (1999) ‘El aspecto léxico’, in I. Bosque and V. Demonte (eds), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, Vol. 2. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, pp. 2,977–3,060.Google Scholar
  14. Di Tullio, A. (1996) ‘Verbos psicológicos en español’, Signo and Seña, Vol. 5, pp. 219–38.Google Scholar
  15. — (1998) ‘Alternancia acusativo-dativo en verbos psicológicos del español’, in Atti del XXI Congresso Internazionale di lingüística e filologia romanza, Vol. 2. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, September 1995, pp. 255–60.Google Scholar
  16. Dik, S. C. (1989) The Theory of Functional Grammar. Part I: The Structure of the Clause. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
  17. Dixon, R. M. W. (1979) ‘Ergativity’, Language, Vol. 55, pp. 59–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dowty, D. (1991) ‘Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection’, Language, Vol. 67, pp. 547–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Du Bois, J. (1985) ‘Competing Motivations’, in J. Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in Syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 343–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. DRAE. (1992) Diccionario de la Real Academia Española. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
  21. Fernández-Ordóñez, I. (1999) ‘Leísmo, laísmo y loísmo’, in I. Bosque and V. Demonte (eds), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, Vol. 1. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, pp. 1317–97.Google Scholar
  22. Fernández-Soriano, O. (1999) ‘Two Types of Impersonal Sentences in Spanish: Locative and Dative Subjects’, Syntax, Vol. 2, pp. 101–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fernández Ramírez, S. (1960) Gramática española. Los sonidos, el nombre y el pronombre. Madrid: Revista de Occidente.Google Scholar
  24. Fillmore, C. (1968) ‘The Case for Case’, in E. Bach and R. T. Harms (eds), Universals in Linguistic Theory. New York, Holt: Rinehart and Winston, pp. 1–88.Google Scholar
  25. García, E. (1975) The Role of Theory in Linguistic Analysis: The Spanish Pronoun System. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
  26. — and R. Otheguy (1977) ‘Dialect variation in leísmo: A semantic approach’, in R. W. Fasold and R. W. Shuy (eds), Studies in Language Variation, Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, pp. 65–87.Google Scholar
  27. Givón, T. (1976) ‘Topic, Pronoun, and Grammatical Agreement’, in C. N. Li (ed.), Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press, pp. 149–188.Google Scholar
  28. — (1979) On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  29. — (1983) ‘Topic Continuity in Discourse: An Introduction’, in T. Givón (ed.), Topic Continuity in Discourse. A Quantitative Cross-language Study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 5–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  31. Herslund, M. (1988) Le datif en français. Louvain-Paris: Peeters.Google Scholar
  32. Hopper, P.J. (1998) ‘Emergent Grammar’, in M. Tomasello (ed.), The New Psychology of Language. Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure, Mahwah. New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum, pp. 155–75.Google Scholar
  33. — and A. T. Sandra (1980) ‘Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse’, Language, Vol. 56, pp. 251–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hurst, D. A. (1951) ‘Influence of Subject and Connotation of Force’, Hispania, Vol. 34, pp. 74–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jespersen, O. (1924) The Philosophy of Grammar. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  36. Keenan, E. L. (1976) ‘Towards a Universal Definition of “Subject”’, in C. N. Li (ed.), Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press, pp. 303–33.Google Scholar
  37. Lakoff, G. (1970) Irregularity in Syntax. New York: Holt: Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  38. Langacker, R. (1991) Concept, Image, and Symbol. The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lazard, G. (1994) L’Actance, Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  40. Levy, P. (1980) ‘Una peculiar oposición entre le y lo en el español de México’, Anuario de Letras, Vol. 18, pp. 263–68.Google Scholar
  41. — (1994) ‘Verbos con sentido causativo en la construcción transitiva’, in A. Alonso, B. Guarza and J. A. Pascual (eds), II Encuentro de lingüistas y filólogos de España y México. Salamanca: Junta de Castilla y León and Universidad de Salamanca, pp. 347–66.Google Scholar
  42. Marantz, A. P. (1984) On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  43. Marín Gálvez, R. (2000) ‘El componente aspectual de la predicación’, Doctoral dissertation. Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
  44. Melis, C. (1999) ‘Variación sintáctica con los verbos de emoción’, Español Actual, Vol. 71, pp. 49–62.Google Scholar
  45. Mithun, M. (1991) ‘Active/Agentive Case Marking and Its Motivations’, Language, Vol. 67, pp. 510–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Orange, J. A. (1982) ‘Contextual Constraints on the Use of le and lo in Spanish’, Word, Vol. 33, pp. 201–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Postal, P. M. (1971) Cross-Over Phenomena. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  48. Roegiest, E. (1995) ‘Accusatif, ergatif et datif en espagnol moderne’, in Atti del XXI Congresso Internazionale di lingüística e fxlologia romanza. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, Vol. 2, pp. 739–49.Google Scholar
  49. Roldán, M. (1975) ‘The Great Spanish le-lo Controversy’, Linguistics, Vol. 147, pp. 15–30.Google Scholar
  50. Rotaetxe, K. (1999) ‘Tipología lingüística: dativo y datividad’, Revista Española de Lingüística, Vol. 29, pp. 1–33.Google Scholar
  51. Seco, M., A. Olimpia and R. Gabino (1999), Diccionario del español actual. Madrid: Aguilar.Google Scholar
  52. Tesnière, L. (1959) Éléments de syntaxe structurale. París: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
  53. Thompson, S. A. (1997) ‘Discourse Motivations for the Core-Oblique Distinction as a Language Universal’, in A. Kamio (eds), Directions in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thompson, S. A. and J. H. Paul (2001) ‘Transitivity, Clause Structure, and Argument Structure: Evidence from Conversation’, in J. L. Bybee and P. J. Hopper (eds), Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 27–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Treviño, E. (1992) ‘Subjects in Spanish Causative Constructions’, in P. Hirschbühler and K. Koerner (eds), Romance Languages and Modern Linguistic Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 309–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Uber, D. R. (1986) ‘Actions and Activeness in Spanish Clitic Selection’, in O. Jaeggli and C. Silva-Corvalán (eds), Studies in Romance Linguistics. Dordrecht: Foris, pp. 153–65.Google Scholar
  57. Whitley, M. S. (1995) ‘Gustar and Other Psych Verbs: A Problem in Transitivity’, Hispania, Vol. 78, pp. 573–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. — (1998) ‘Psych Verbs: Transitivity Adrift’, Hispanic Linguistics, Vol. 10, pp. 115–53.Google Scholar
  59. Wierzbicka, A. (1999) ‘Emotional Universals’, Language Design, Vol. 2, pp. 23–69.Google Scholar

Abbreviations used for the original texts cited Narrative

  1. ATC García Márquez, G., El amor en los tiempos del cólera, Bruguera, Barcelona, 1985.Google Scholar
  2. BMA Puig, M., El beso de la mujer araña, Seix Barrai, Barcelona, 1976.Google Scholar
  3. JÓVENES Aldecoa, J.R., Porque éramos jóvenes, Seix Barrai, Barcelona, 1986.Google Scholar
  4. HISTORIAS Bioy Casares, A., Historias desaforadas, Alianza, Madrid, 1986.Google Scholar
  5. CARTA Colinas, A., Larga carta a Francesca, Seix Barrai, Barcelona, 1986.Google Scholar
  6. GLENDA Cortázar, J., Queremos tanto a Glenda, Alfaguara, Madrid, 1981.Google Scholar
  7. CRÓNICA García Márquez, G., Crónica de una muerte anunciada Mondadori, Madrid, 1987.Google Scholar
  8. SUR García Morales, A., El sur (seguido de Bene), Anagrama, Barcelona, 1985.Google Scholar
  9. TERNURA Martínez de Pisón, I., La ternura del dragón, Anagrama, Barcelona, 1988.Google Scholar
  10. LABERINTO Mendoza, E., El laberinto de las aceitunas, Seix Barrai, Barcelona, 1982.Google Scholar
  11. DIEGO Poniatowska, E., Querido Diego, te abraza Quiela y otros cuentos, Alianza/Era, Madrid, 1987.Google Scholar
  12. SONRISA Sampedro, J.L., La sonrisa etrusca, Alfaguara, Madrid, 1985.Google Scholar

Theatre

  1. CAIMÁN Buero Vallejo, A., Caimán, Espasa-Calpe, Madrid, 1981.Google Scholar
  2. OCHENTA Diosdado, A., Los ochenta son nuestros, Antonio Machado, Madrid, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. COARTADA Fernán Gómez, F., La coartada, Antonio Machado, Madrid, 1987.Google Scholar
  4. 1 INFAN Olmo, L. y P. Enciso, Teatro infantil I, Antonio Machado, Madrid, 1987.Google Scholar
  5. CINTA Reina, M.M., La cinta dorada, Antonio Machado, Madrid, 1989.Google Scholar

Oral speech

  1. MADRID Esgueva, M. y M. Cantarero (eds), El habla de la ciudad de Madrid. Materiales para su estudio, CSIC (Miguel de Cervantes), Madrid, 1981.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Victoria Vázquez Rozas 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Victoria Vázquez Rozas

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations