Made available in DSpace on 2014-12-17T15:07:08Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 NaraJMCM_DISSERT.pdf: 1183698 bytes, checksum: 8d3625f2ab250f1d640eb44f5cc7ddaa (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-01-31 / Based on studies on the structure of copulates sentences in Brazilian Portuguese (PB), according to grammar theory, it s analyzed on this dissertation, the complex copulate sentences what, in the PB, initiated by the formation ? ruim que in the PB, bringing the hypothesis that they can have one predicacional reading (PRED) and other especificacional reading (ESP). It s revealed what, though they are similar slightly, that makes the different that are triggered is structural configuration of sentence and the form as come emerged the its constituents: that of PRED interpretation, that we defined as Common Copulate Sentence (or SCC), it s checked that the constituent ruim, and only it, is predicate of a Small Clause, and appears in the structure on even position wherein is pronounced, not passing by the method of movement, from where introduce wide predication on all subject, that is the CP built-in; those sentences ? ruim que understanding ESP, that denominate of Negative Copulate Sentence (or SCN), whereas the fixed expression contradict or right what is asserted in built-in, it s perceived what the ruim is a part of this fixed expression, and surely crystallized, which appears in structure per movement, germinated as adjunct of Inflexional Phrase (IP) and being elevation to specifier to FocP (or SpecFocP), where acquires discursive interpretation of focus. Besides the mode as the ruim or the fixed expression emerge in that sentences, the relation between the copula and main verb likewise contribute to distinguish the sentences: 1) regarding flexion of mode, when is a SCC, the copula must be in the mode indicative, and the main verb, in the subjunctive; when is a SCN, copula and main verb must be always on indicative; 2) regarding flexion of temp, both the copula as main verb of the SCC can be flexed, whereas at the SCN, the main verb can vary in present, past and future, but the copula should appear, necessarily, in third persona of present of indicative, what confirms our hypothesis that there is an fixed expression at the copulate sentences with ? ruim que ESP. Other two evidences are pointed as characteristics that distinguish the sentence with ? ruim que PRED of sentence with ? ruim que ESP: 1) in semantics, the constituent ruim equals not good, that has appreciation, when the reading will PRED; already the pair ? ruim equals not, at the ESP; 2) in prosody, there discrete sound elevation the ruim on the other constituents of SCC, PRED, while there is accentuated acoustic elevation on the ruim of SCN, ESP. Our search it is grounded in authors as Zanfeliz (2000), Modesto (2001), Mioto (2003), Kato & Ribeiro (2006), Lobo (2006), Quarezemin (2006, 2009, 2011, 2012) e Resenes (2009), researchers that devoted their attention on studies the formation and organization of the constituents of cleaved sentences and focalization of constituent, basing itself in approach generative of linguistic / Embasados em trabalhos sobre a estrutura das senten?as copulares no Portugu?s Brasileiro (PB), conforme a teoria da gram?tica, analisamos nesta disserta??o as senten?as copulares complexas encabe?adas pela estrutura ? ruim que no PB, trazendo a hip?tese de que elas podem ter uma leitura predicacional (PRED) e outra especificacional (ESP). Revelamos que, apesar de serem superficialmente id?nticas, o que contribui para que as distintas leituras sejam desencadeadas ? a configura??o estrutural da senten?a e a forma como aparecem os seus constituintes: naquelas de interpreta??o PRED, que as definimos como Senten?a Copular Comum (ou SCC), checamos que o constituinte ruim, e somente ele, ? o predicador de uma Small Clause, e surge na estrutura no lugar mesmo em que ? pronunciado, n?o passando por processo de movimento, de onde insere ampla predica??o sobre todo o sujeito, que ? o CP encaixado; naquelas ? ruim que de entendimento ESP, que chamamos de Senten?a Copular de Nega??o (ou SCN), tendo em vista a express?o fixa negar ou corrigir o que ? afirmado na encaixada, verificamos que o ruim faz parte dessa express?o fixa, e j? cristalizada, a qual aparece na estrutura por meio de movimento, nascendo como adjunto de IP e sendo al?ado at? o especificador de FocP (ou SpecFocP), onde adquire fun??o discursiva de foco. Al?m da forma como o ruim ou a express?o fixa surge nessas senten?as, a rela??o entre a c?pula e o verbo principal tamb?m contribui para distinguir as senten?as: 1) quanto ? flex?o de modo, quando ? uma SCC, a c?pula deve estar no modo indicativo, e o verbo principal, no subjuntivo; quando ? uma SCN, c?pula e verbo principal devem estar sempre no modo indicativo; 2) quanto ? flex?o de tempo, tanto a c?pula quanto o verbo principal das SCC podem ser flexionados, enquanto nas SCN, o verbo principal pode variar entre presente, passado e futuro, mas a c?pula deve aparecer, necessariamente, na terceira pessoa do presente do indicativo, o que vem confirmar nossa hip?tese de que h? uma express?o fixa nas estruturas copulares com ? ruim que ESP. Outras duas evid?ncias s?o apontadas como caracter?sticas que distinguem a senten?a com ? ruim que PRED da senten?a com ? ruim que ESP: 1) na sem?ntica, o constituinte ruim equivale a n?o ? bom, que tem valor apreciativo, quando a leitura for PRED; o par ? ruim equivale a n?o, nas ESP; 2) na pros?dia, h? uma discreta eleva??o sonora do ruim sobre os demais constituintes das SCC, PRED, enquanto h? uma acentuada eleva??o ac?stica sobre o ruim das SCN, ESP. Nossa pesquisa est? fundamentada em autores como Zanfeliz (2000), Modesto (2001), Mioto (2003), Kato & Ribeiro (2006), Lobo (2006), Quarezemin (2006, 2009, 2011, 2012) e Resenes (2009), pesquisadores que dedicaram aten??o ? forma??o e constru??o das constru??es clivadas e focaliza??o, baseando-se na perspectiva da corrente gerativa da lingu?stica