(Non) idiomatic verb-clitic constructions in Rioplatense Spanish: lexicon-syntax continuum of compositionality

ARELLANO, NICOLÁS ALEJANDRO

Oberlin, Ohio

Jornada; Anual Capstone Presentation (Department of English); 2018

Oberlin College

The following presentation is focused on the study of a particular group of novel verbal constructions with the accusative feminine clitic pronoun la in Rioplatense Spanish:(1) Ojalá sepa que no la va a volverHopefully know.SUBJ.PRES.3SG that not it.SG.ACC.FEM go.3SG to returna pegar como con Gangnam Style y Gentleman.to hit like with Gangnam Style and Gentleman.?Hopefully he knows he won?t get lucky again like (he did) with Gangnam Style and Gentleman?(2)Esa gente no deja de gorilearla nunca. That.FEM.3SG people not stop.PRES.3SG of gorila.VERB-it.SG.ACC.FEM never?Those people can?t stop behaving like an antiperonist, ever?(3)Me cuesta no buquearla con el mundialme.DAT struggle not book.VERB-it.SG.ACC.FEM with the World-Cup?It?s hard for me not to be extra with the World Cup?(4)Quizás la kirchnereo demasiado pensando en términos históricos.Maybe it.SG.ACC.FEM Kirchner.PRES.1SG too-much thinking in terms historical?Maybe I behave too much like a Kirchnerist by thinking in historical terms?As one can observe, the pronoun can be attached to (1) non-derived; (2) noun-derived; (3) loan-derived; and (4) proper noun derived verbal bases. In any case, the combination of the pronoun la and the verbal base creates a new word, with a new meaning, which implies that the process could be closer to a morphological operation. Nonetheless, the clitic still preserves syntactic features, such as the pronoun separability with regard to the verb and the potential pauses while reading or speaking. Semantically, the degree of productivity and idiomaticity differs depending on which group one has in mind. For group (1), I hold that new meaning obtained by combining the accusative pronoun and the verb is not predictable in the slightest (?to hit? pegar becomes ?get lucky? pegarla). On the other hand, for groups (2), (3), and (4), the process could be easily foreseen. Firstly, a new verb is created by adding the verbalizing suffix -ear to either a noun, a loan-word, or a proper noun, and thus a new meaning is created by choosing the most prototypical features of the picked words. Secondly, the novel verbal construction is formed by pairing the clitic pronoun la to the previously created derived verb. Through the study of a wide corpus mainly composed of written examples that emulate oral discourse attested in social media, I argue that the apparent difference among these types of new verbs created with la, contrary to what it is expected, could be analyzed as a semantic and syntactic continuum ?at the highest and lowest ends the most prototypical, clear examples. This idea emerges as a solution to a more formal reasoning that cannot take into account the subtle differences present throughout the multiple utterances that are attested in the corpus. I believe such a new model is the theory of Construction Grammar (Masini, 2015; Fillmore, 2006). Consequently, a suitable explanation could be found by adopting this theory that permits mismatches between form and meaning and accounts for processes that could be either productive or peculiar and idiosyncratic, since, in a constructionist perspective, syntax and morphology are not independent systems in language and, therefore, more semantic or more syntactic changes can be addressed at the same time. My main inquiry is to find out to what degree changes in meaning appear in the context of this new case of word formation.I also suggest that the new, (un)predictable meaning is understood and decodified by the hearer/addressee by blending two different mental spaces. This last mechanism of word formation is compatible with the basic unit of analysis in construction grammar, which is the construction, i.e. a conventionalized association of form and meaning that can have different degrees and shapes of complexity. By integrating construction grammar into blending, I believe I will be able to prove why some constructions attested have a great change of meaning with the addition of the clitic pronoun ?la? (e.g. [1]) and why others do not (e.g. [2, 3, 4]).Finally, I assume this work can contribute to the study of languages other than English under a cognitive approach and it can provide further evidence of synchronic and diachronic change processes affecting grammar structure.