Case Studies

  • Mário A. Perini


This chapter examines several constructions and discusses the best way to assign thematic relations to the complements of the sentence: constructions of force and resistance; constructions involving reciprocity relations; constructions containing the Portuguese verbs estar and ser, both translatable as “be” in English; discourse topic constructions; constructions denoting time of day; constructions involving possession relations; constructions involving alternate stimulus; transitive and ergative constructions. Derivations are given for sentences containing examples of surface contact; psychological feeling; and some curious cases of multiple syntactic coding of the same cognitive structure. In each case it is shown that assignment by default of a thematic relation of at least one complement is the best analysis to account for the observed data.


Force and resistance Identity of reference Possession relations Reciprocals Topic sentences 


  1. Aurélio. (1986). Novo dicionário Aurélio da língua portuguesa. [New Aurélio dictionary of the Portuguese language]. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira.Google Scholar
  2. Busse, W. (Ed.) (1994). Dicionário sintáctico de verbos portugueses [A syntactic dictionary of Portuguese verbs]. Coimbra: Almedina.Google Scholar
  3. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin and use. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  4. Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Culicover, P., & Jackendoff, R. S. (2005). Simpler syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Godoy, L. A. G. (2008). Os verbos recíprocos no PB: Interface sintaxe-semântica lexical [Reciprocal verbs in Brazilian Portuguese: lexical syntax-semantics interface]. Master’s thesis, UFMG.Google Scholar
  7. Klotz, M. (2007). Valency rules? The case for verbs with propositional complements. In T. Herbst & K. Götz-Votteler (Eds.), Valency: Theoretical, descriptive and cognitive issues. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  8. Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  9. Li, C., & Thompson, S. (1976). Subject and topic: a new typology of language. In C. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  10. Perini, M. A. (2002). Modern Portuguese: A reference grammar. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Perini, M. A. (2015). Describing verb valencies: Practical and theoretical issues. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Perini, M. A. (2018). The language-cognition interface and topic constructions in Brazilian Portuguese. In Coelho, S., & Tenuta, A. (Eds.). Uma abordagem cognitiva da linguagem: Perspectivas teóricas e descritivas (e-book) [A cognitive approach to language: Theoretical and descriptive perspectives]. 81-93. Belo Horizonte: POSLIN-UFMG.Google Scholar
  13. Pontes, E. (1986). Sujeito: da sintaxe ao discurso [Subject: from syntax to discourse]. São Paulo: Ática.Google Scholar
  14. Pontes, E. (1987). O tópico no português do Brasil [Topics in Brazilian Portuguese]. Campinas: Pontes.Google Scholar
  15. Schlesinger, I. M. (1995). Cognitive space and linguistic case: Semantic and syntactic categories in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Talmy, L. (1988). Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12, 49–100. Reprinted as chap. 7 of Toward a Cognitive Semantics (MIT Press 2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mário A. Perini
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidade Federal de Minas GeraisBelo HorizonteBrazil

Personalised recommendations