abstract: In this thesis, I explore Cognate Object Constructions COCs (e.g. The clown "laughed" a creepy "laugh") through three research questions: (1) What verbs can accept Cognate Objects COs? (2) Why can these verbs accept COs and other verbs cannot? and (3) How are COCs derived? I demonstrate that Sorace's Hierarchy sheds light on which verbs can accept COs and which cannot by explaining the discrepancies in grammaticality judgments that exist in the literature. I then argue that Hale and Keyser's Conflation account of COCs is not minimalist because it relies on a phenomenon that can be reduced to Merge. After commenting and repairing their account, I provide an outline for a more minimalist framework, which I refer to as "Problems of Projection Extensions" PoP+, that focuses on MERGE, workspaces, labeling theory, phases, and determinacy. Inside this framework, I then develop my own account that depends on only Internal Merge and the constraint in English against stranded articles. With my account situated in this PoP+ framework, I am able to approach the research questions from a syntactic perspective, arguing that the Unergative Restriction on COCs is a result of a determinacy violation in the derivation of Unaccusative COCs. Finally, I point out that, being situated in the PoP+ framework, my account opens COCs up to further investigation not possible before. / Dissertation/Thesis / Masters Thesis Linguistics and Applied Linguistics 2019

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-10-04T15:37:21Z No. of bitstreams: 1 marcelolopesdasilva.pdf: 2035405 bytes, checksum: f42ad3f2f4b21d576dad7666e1d3c360 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Adriana Oliveira (adriana.oliveira@ufjf.edu.br) on 2016-10-04T16:19:02Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 marcelolopesdasilva.pdf: 2035405 bytes, checksum: f42ad3f2f4b21d576dad7666e1d3c360 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-10-04T16:19:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 marcelolopesdasilva.pdf: 2035405 bytes, checksum: f42ad3f2f4b21d576dad7666e1d3c360 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-04-05 / Investigam-se as construções com objeto cognato (cOC) na língua portuguesa não apenas quanto às hipóteses gerativistas, mas principalmente com base nas hipóteses sociocognitivas e construcionista-unificacionistas. Verifica-se a ocorrência de tipos de cOC com os verbos intransitivo inergativo, intransitivo inacusativo e transitivo-opcional. Nas cOCs com os verbos intransitivos, ocorre um desencontro sintático-semântico que é licenciado no nível pragmático, para que eles suportem o termo cognato em posição de foco sintático: um espelhamento do padrão transitivo. Tal motivação se baseia, primariamente, na pressuposição de que seja instanciada alguma especificação como fator de identificabilidade para o nome cognato enfocado e, secundariamente, num apenas realce da noção verbal. Essas restrições contextuais para a ocorrência do objeto cognato são descritas nos níveis internos das relações sintático-semânticas, vinculando-se a elas um conjunto de efeitos estilístico-fonografêmicos e aspectualpsicológicos. Verificam-se os seguintes fatos: Que a nominalização efetua, simultaneamente, um recorte dos argumentos verbais e um livre preenchimento informacional no sintagma nominal cognato. Que a repetição do radical verbo-nome coocorre com outras licenças contextuais de repetição, por um lado, aparentando redundância, e por outro, valorizando cada informação nova como parte da cena reconstruída no discurso. Que numa cOC, a especificação, informação nova, concentrase no modificador e/ou no determinante forte e/ou nos sufixos do nome cognato. Que a variação quanto ao número de argumentos instanciados com um mesmo verbo confirma a hipótese de heranças múltiplas, referida como ‘valência emprestada’, associada às licenças pragmáticas para as cOCs serem adequadamente interpretáveis em contextos descritivos. A investigação empírica consiste na verificação de ocorrências no Google, classificadas e parcialmente anexadas no Corpus representativo das cOCs em Português; e a formalização dos dados teóricos consiste na implementação aplicativa aos modelos: Gramática das Construções (CxG), Gramática dos Enquadres Semântico-Cognitivos em Redes (FrameNet), e Gramática das Construções Baseada no Signo (SBCG). Pela investigação das cOCs é reconhecida a interferência direta do nível pragmático nos outros níveis que compõem a gramática, confirmando a maior plausibilidade de uma gramática de contexto ou uma Gramática (Sócio)Cognitiva e (Sócio)Construcionista. / The Portuguese cognate object construction (COC) research goes through generative hypothesis to find solid grounds in usage-based cognitivist and unificationalconstructionist lands. It is observed that COCs occur with optional transitive verbs, with unergative intransitive and also with unaccusative intransitive verbs. The COCs with intransive verbs instantiates a syntatic-semantic mismatch, which non-default relations are pragmatically licensed for them to support the cognate noun in a syntactic focus position: as in a transitive pattern mirrowing. This motivation is based, firstly, on the pressuposition that some specification will be structurally given to identify the cognate noun, and, secondly, it is based on the possibility of a CO to be constructed as a ‘single focus’ of that verbal scenic conceptual reconstruction. Such COCs’ contextual restrictions are explained within syntax-semantics relational levels, to which is bound a set of stylistic-fonographical and aspectual-psychological effects. These following facts are observed: Firstly, that nominalization, simultaneously, pruns verbal arguments and enables free informational filling-up in a cognate noun phrase. Secondly, that nounverbal root repetition occurs among other licenced repetitions, on the one hand, apparently just redundant stuffs, on the other hand, it valorizes each specific new information that, in COs, concentrates on a modifier and/or on a strong determiner and/or even on a cognate noun suffix. Thirdly, that the variation in number of instantiated arguments of a same verb confirms the ‘multiple inheritance’ hypothesis, referred to as ‘borrowed valence’, locally unified to pragmatic licences for adequate interpretability of COCs in descriptive contexts. The empirical approach amounts Google occurrences, partially annexed and classified in a ‘Representative Portuguese COCs Corpus’; and the formalization of theoretical data consists in an applied implementation to the following models: Construction Grammar (CxG), Semantic Frames Grammar (FrameNet), and Sign-Based Construction Grammar (SBCG). By the COCs inquiry, it is recognized a direct pragmatically leveled interference into the other grammatical levels, a sufficient condition to prove the plausibility of a contextual grammar or a (Socio)Cognitive and (Socio)Constructionist Grammar.

Le dialecte syrien de Tartous ne dispose pas d’adverbes dérivés d’un adjectif, comme c’est le cas en français, pouvant fonctionner comme adverbes de manière. Par contre,Les deux langues utilisent deux moyens similaires pour exprimer la manière. Le premier concerne la construction introduite par la préposition avec en français et parla préposition bə (‘associatif’) en syrien de Tartous, et le second, l’objet interne en français et l’objet dit absolu en syrien de Tartous. Compte tenu de la différence entre les systèmes linguistiques des deux langues, nous pourrons faire l’hypothèse que même dans les cas des deux moyens comparables dont disposent les deux langues pour exprimer la manière, ils ne sont pas soumis aux mêmes types de contraintes syntaxiques et sémantiques en français et en syrien de Tartous. Cette étude comparative nous permettra de comprendre le fonctionnement de chacun des moyens utilisés dans les deux langues pour exprimer la manière, et par là de faire ressortir les différences syntaxique et sémantique qui séparent les compléments de manière dans les deux langues. / The Syrian dialect of Tartous does not have adverbs derived from adjectives that work as adverbs of manner, like in French. On the other hand, both languages use two similar ways of expressing condition ; the first one is construct introduced by thepreposition ‘with’ (‘avec’ in French, ‘bi’ in Syrian). The second way is the cognate object, or what is known in Syrian as ‘absolute effect’.With the differences between the two language systems in mind, we can assume that even if we have similar ways of expressing manner, yet they are controlled by different grammatical and semantic rules.Comparing the two languages allows us to understand the method of expressing manner in each language, and then identify the semantic and grammatical distinctions between the adverbs of manner in the two languages.