Por vs. De: Agential Prepositions? Author(s): Margarita Suer Source: Hispania, Vol. 64, No.

2 (May, 1981), pp. 278-283 Published by: American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/341864 . Accessed: 22/01/2014 17:27
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hispania.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Wed, 22 Jan 2014 17:27:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

278

Hispania

(May 1981)

Grande do Sul e Santa Catarina, em partes do Parand e em algumas regiOes do Norte e do Nordeste. Nao tenho noticia de nenhum trabalho geogrdfico-dialectol6gico que vise a determinar as fronteiras de seu emprego. Sobre o uso de tu em poesia, veja-se Ivana Versiani, "Tu, Voce (e Outros Pronomes) na Poesia de Drummond," Minas Gerais, Suplemento Literdrio, 18 de dezembro, 1977, pdg. 6 (parte I) e 25 de dezembro, 1977, pdg. 6 (parte II). O emprego de tu como forma ret6rica de tratamento respeitoso ndo se enquadra no escopo deste estudo. 70 primeiro exemplo foi dito pelo guardador de cavalos de uma estancia quando falava com um cliente; o segundo, por um cobrador de 6nibus ao dirigir-se aos passageiros. Ambos os falantes eram obviamente de extraqdo rural. Hd diversos outros exemplos no corpus. 'Trata-se de fato assinalado por diversos autores, entre os quais Christopher Stavrou ("Portuguese Pronouns and Command Forms," Hispania, 56, 1 (marco 1973), 92-93), o qual exagera, porem, ao dizer que a diferenciaqio "between the possessives of the formal 'you' and the third person 'he,' 'she,' and 'they,' which technically are ... seu in Portuguese ... is done in Brazil by using seu(s) and sua(s) exclusively for voce and o senhor, and the analytical form dele(s) and dela(s) for the third person" (pAg. 93). No registro formal, o uso de seu com o valor de dele/dela e' comum. 9NMoobstante, o pronome si, que tanto em suas origens hist6ricas como na lingua normativa atual tem valor reflexivo, costuma ser empregado como objeto ndo reflexivo de preposiqao, em frases como pode guardar este canhoto para si ou o gerente quer falar consigo. Sobre este uso, vejam-se os comenthrios de Evanildo Bechara, LidOes de Portuguds pela Andlise Sintdtica, 2a ediCqo (Rio de Janeiro: Editora Fundo de Cultura, 1961), pigs. 110-11. '00 corpus cont6m exemplos da forma ti, como Isso e para ti. Tamb6m ocorre contigo, embora esporadicamente, nos meus dados sobre a fala paulistana: Um grande abrago para voce, e a semana que vemtconto contigo. "Luis Carlos Martins Pena, O Juiz de Paz na RoVa, Com5dias, vol. 1, ed. Darcy Damasceno (Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Nacional do Livro, 1956), pdg. 30. 2Martins Pena, pdg. 31. 3Ignacio de Loyola, Bebel que a Cidade Comeu (Sio Paulo: Editora Brasiliense, 1968), pdg. 72. Este romance retrata muito de perto a fala coloquial pau-

listana. "Loyola, pgg. 73. "Loyola, pgg. 28. '6Guilherme de Figueiredo, A Raposa e as Uvas, Teatro Brasileiro Contempordneo, 2a ediCaocorrigida e atualizada, eds. Wilson Martins e Seymour Menton (Nova York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1966), pdg. 214. '"Brian F. Head, "Social Factors in the Use of Pronouns for the Addressee in Brazilian Portuguese," Readings in Portuguese Linguistics, ed. Jiirgen Schmidt-Radefeldt (Amsterdd: North-Holland Publishing Company, 1976), pdg. 335. "Jorge de Andrade, A Morat6ria, Martins e Menton, 1966, pdg. 201. "'Andrade, pdg. 137. Este uiltimo exemplo ilustra o que revela a pesquisa de Head, ou seja, "a tendency for S [= o senhor] in the singular used for one addressee to be replaced by V [ = voces] in the plural for more than one. .... The degree to which V is used for multiple addressees in instances where S is used for a single addressee varies not only from one place to another but also from one role relationship to another. ... Plural V corresponds to singular S more commonly among the informants from Rio de Janeiro than among those of the other places surveyed, and more frequently in address of parents than in address of secondary school teachers, for example" (Brian F. Head, pdg. 335). "2Browne Gilman, pdg. 261. 2 Este artigo jA estava pronto e escalado para publicaCqo quando recebi c6pias de tres excelentes trabalhos de John B. Jensen sobre o tema dos pronomes e formas de tratamento em portugues, a saber: "Brazilian tu: An obituary?". Paper presented at the Northeast Modern Language Association meeting (Albany, N.Y., 1978); "Tratamento na sala de aula." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AATSP (Toronto, 1979); "A investigapqo de formas de tratamento e a telenovela: A Escalada, parte I," Revista Brasileira de Linguistica, Vol. 4, No. 2 (1977), pdgs. 45-73. Os dois primeiros apresentam dados de uma pesquisa de campo realizada no Brasil, e o uiltimo, uma andlise detalhada do tratamento pronominal num genero dramdtico que, por vdrias razOesexpostas pelo autor, reflete de perto a linguagem quotidiana. Juntamente com o trabalho de Head (nota 17), esses artigos, al6m de altamente informativos, constituem excelentes modelos para pesquisas sobre o tema.

POR vs. DE: AGENTIAL PREPOSITIONS?

MARGARITA SUIRER

Cornell University The main purpose of this paper is to define the parameters for the use of por and de as agential prepositions. This study has the following structure: Section I reviews the literature and explains what others have said about por vs. de. The results of a questionnaire' which was administered to 42 native speakers in Buenos Aires, Argentina, are intermingled throughout the discussion of this first section and are used either to corroborate what is found in the literature on the topic, or to signal to what degree contemporary usage departs from textbook explanations. By necessity any discussion which deals with por and de as introducers of agential noun phrases is inextricably related to that of the passive voice. Section II examines ser + past participle and estar + past participle and the manner in which they are

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Wed, 22 Jan 2014 17:27:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Language and Linguistics linked to agential phrases. A heretofore unmentioned construction of estar + participle + por phrase is discussed and the claim is made that this pattern occurs when the CAUSER leaves a "trace" on the verbal. In Section III, after summarizing the usages of por and de, it is concluded that de is never an agential preposition and furthermore, that por is replacing de in all cases in contemporary Spanish. I. Review of the Literature

279

A Concept Approach to Spanish (1965) defines the contrast in the following way: "Por translates by when referring to a physical action or motion. De is used when referring to state or condition, or to mental or emotional attitude."2 Some of the examples offered are:
(1.1) Fue rodeadopor sus admiradores. He was surrounded by his admirers(At that moment they surrounded him) = act of surrounding.
vs.

Thirty-eight (90%) native speakers reacted in favor of por, while only four indicated either por or de would be correct. Consequently, the rules of usage given by A Concept Approach not only do not account for all of the possibilities-cf. (1.1b) and (1.3a)-used by native speakers, but also these rules fail to adequately reflect the marked preference for por. Dalbor and Sturcken (1965:74-75) give the following explanation for the correct use of the prepositions under discussion: "De replaces por when the relationship is considered to be merely one of position ..., and estar, or some other construction, is ordinarily used."
(1.4)

(1.1a) Estabarodeadode sus admiradores.

It is true that by using different auxiliary verbs, i.e., ser in (1.1) as opposed to estar in (1.1a), a contrast is drawn between action and resultant condition or state. The question, however, is whether concomitantly a different preposition is required. In other words, would it be possible to say (1.lb)? The answer is "yes", por may be used before the passive agent after estar. Of 42 speakers, 29 (60%) indicated either por or de could be used for sentence (1. la), 9 preferred por and only four selected de. Moreover, Dalbor and Sturcken' offer the following example with estar and the proposition por:
(1.2) (1.1b) Estaba rodeado por sus admiradores.

He was (already) surrounded by his admirers.

Given the above sentence, native speakers reacted in the following way: 30 (71%) opted for por, 8 said either preposition could be used without a change in meaning, while 4 said there was a difference in meaning (which they did not explain) depending on the preposition. Stockwell, Bowen and Martin4 also remark on the use of de to define positional relation:
(1.5) Lleg6 acompafiado de varios amigos.

The officials were followed by some employees.

Los oficiales eran seguidos de unos empleados.

boss.

Estaba firmado por el jefe. It was signed by (bore the signature of) the

Not only is (1.2 grammatical, in spite of expressing a resultant condition and having por to express agency, but por is the only alternative because in replacing por by de we get the ungrammatical outcome:
(1.2a) *Estabafirmadodel jefe.

According to the definition given by A Concept Approach, de should be used for mental or emotional attitude. The example given is
(1.3) Eran odiados de todos. They were hated by all.

however, its alternative with por is possible:

(1.3a) Eran odiados por todos.

poignantly acknowledging that a syntactic change is taking place in the language by indicating that por is the preferred preposition for introducing the passive agent. Unfortunately, the RAE's statement still leaves some unanswered questions. What does "preferred" actually mean? Is the use of por always grammatical? We already know that some sentences with de are notcf. (1.2a). We will try to answer these questions after looking at other studies which directly or indirectly have dealt with the prepositions under discussion. Ramsey states that the preposition is por "when the action is a physical or bodily

dias. . . . Hoy se prefiere generalmente la preposici6n por. . . .". Thus, the RAE is

Again, 27 (64%) native speakers said there was no difference in meaning when por replaced de in sentence (1.5) and 10 preferred por outright. It may very well be that native speakers no longer react to the positional relation referred to by Dalbor and Sturcken, and Stockwell, Bowen and Martin. The Real Academia Espafiola points out: "En los textos literarios primitivos es general el empleo de la preposici6n de con el agente de la pasiva. ... En la 6poca clasica se usa de con mayor frecuencia que en nuestros

He arrivedaccompaniedby (in the company of) severalfriends.

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Wed, 22 Jan 2014 17:27:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

280

Hispania
(2.5) El nifto estd cubierto de polvo. The child is covered with dust.

64 (May 1981)

one" but de "when it is one of thought or feeling." He also adds, "De is more usual with acompafado, precedido, rodeado, seguido but por tends to displace de in all cases nowadays."6 So here again we find the distinction (if indeed there is one) being defined in terms of physical vs. mental attitude. Two of his examples that illustrate mental attitude are:
(1.6) (1.7) Era envidiada de todos. She was envied by all. El nifto es amado de todos. The child is loved by everybody. (p. 383) (p. 520)

Since Ramsey acknowledges the fact that de tends to be replaced by por in all cases nowadays, it is clear that the above two sentences should take por without a major difference in meaning. In order to establish the degree to which the replacement is taking place, I tested these two sentences with native speakers, the results overwhelmingly show the preference for por:
S1.6: por 39 (92%) speakers; either preposition: 3 speakers S1.7: por 40 (95%) speakers; either preposition: 2 speakers

where the verb estar is followed by a past participle followed in turn by de, one can question whether these sentences are passive in nature, i.e., whether de signals the presence of an agential prepositional phrase. The evidence seems to be against considering the above sentences as passives. First, if de is replaced by por the sentences become ungrammatical. Secondly, in this type of construction the most accurate translation for de is with and not by, a fact which is corroborated by the third point, which is that the de-phrases are not felt to be agential in nature. On the contrary, they are interpreted as being material, or means. If these sentences are turned into true passives (i.e., with the verb ser), the implication is that they would accept a por agential phrase. This prediction is supported by the following examples:
(2.3a) El patio fue construido de mosaicos por Juan. The patio was built of tiles by John. (2.4a) El techo fue cubierto de nieve por los tecnicos cinematogrAficos. The roof was covered with snow by the movie technicians. (2.5a) El nifto fue cubierto de polvo por sus compafneros. The child was covered with dust by his companions.

Up to this point we can tentatively conclude from the review of the literature: A. Use of the preposition de with mental attitudes is on the decline; native speakers overwhelmingly prefer por instead. B. Use of the preposition de to define positional relations is also being lost, although not as definitely as in designations of mental attitude. C. Use of de vs. por in agentive complements cannot be explained merely in terms of actions vs. states or resultant conditions, or in terms of ser vs. estar. II. In search of an Explanation Since the use of por vs. de is inextricably related to the passive voice, it is necessary at this point to discuss briefly what a passive sentence is. In Spanish, a sentence denoting an action can be passivized by adding a form of SER + the past participle (- do) of the main verb + por followed by the agent.7
(2.1) (2.2) Este libro deberd ser leido por los estudiantes. This book must be read by the students. Las chicas fueron perseguidas por tu perro. The girls were chased by your dog.

Having cleared up possible confusions inherent in sentences like those just considered, and having shown that these sentences (2.3-2.5) are not instances of true passive constructions, we turn our attention to the opposition por vs. de with regard to properties of the verb. In the first section we saw that these prepositions cannot be explained simply in terms of ser vs. estar, nor in terms of verbs which denote actions as opposed to verbs that denote states.8 The significant counterexample
(1.2) Estaba firmado por el jefe. It was signed by (bore the signature of) the boss.

Notice that in Spanish the past participle behaves like an adjective in that it agrees in number and gender with the subject of the passive sentence. But in sentences like the following
(2.3) (2.4) El patio estA construido de mosaicos. The patio is built of tiles. El techo estaba cubierto de nieve. The roof was covered with snow.

has a stative verb (estar). Instead of the expected preposition de we encounter por. This example is particularly interesting because when de is substituted for por the outcome is an ungrammatical sentence. On the other hand, it is safe to assume that non-stative verbs require por as the agential preposition; should de be used instead, the resulting sentence would be ungrammatical. This prediction is borne out by the following examples:
(2.6) El c~sped fue cortado por el jardinero. The lawn was mowed by the gardener. *El c6sped fue cortado del jardinero.

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Wed, 22 Jan 2014 17:27:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Language and Linguistics

(2.7) La magnifica cena fue preparada por el duefto de casa. The magnificent dinner was prepared by the host. *La magnifica cena fue preparada del duefto de casa. (2.8) Los libros recomendados fueron leidos por todos los alumnos. The recommended books were read by all the students. *Los libros recomendados fueron leidos de todos. ...

281

The crux of the problem rests, then, in finding the cases in which por can be used
(2.9) Action:

with stative verbs as opposed to the instances in which it cannot. Bull provides us with a partial answer to the problem. When describing the passive voice, he notices that "there are two patterns which depend on the nature of the event."9 In the first pattern, the action is terminated and the resultant state begins. Since the resultant condition is descriptive it cannot include an agent and consequently both prepositions de and por are barred from this type of construction:

La casa fue destruida por la tormenta.10 1por Juan. The house was destroyed by the storm.
I by John.

State: (2.10) Action:

State: (2.11) Action: State:

La casa estd destruida *por/*de la tormenta. I*por /*de Juan. La puerta fue cerrada por el viento. Ipor Juan. The door was closed Jby the wind. Iby John. La puerta estA cerrada *por/*de viento. i*por/*de Juan. El auto fue estacionado por Juan. The car was parked by John. El auto estA estacionado *por/*de Juan.

The second pattern is far more interesting. Bull writes that "when the state resulting from an action will not persist
(2.12) Action: State: Action: State:

without the continued intervention of an agent, estar also combines with por to form a passive voice" (p. 292)."

(2.13)

El ladr6n fue sujetado por el policia. El ladr6n estaba sujetado por el policia. The thief was held by the policeman. El camino fue bloqueado por las tropas. El camino estaba bloqueado por las tropas. The road was blocked by the troops.

According to Bull, then, por may be used with states but a feature such as [ + maintenance of state] is necessary. Will this feature cover all cases of the use of por with resultant conditions? In Ramsey (1956: 383-4), we find the following examples of statives followed by por:
(2.14) (2.15) Las olas estaban todavia agitadas por el viento. The waves were still stirred up by the wind. Este articulo estA escrito por una persona indocta. This article is written by an uneducated person.

mentioned (1.2) (repeated here for convenience):

(2.16) Estaba firmado por el jefe It was signed by (bore the signature of) the boss.

and also
Ese puente estA construido por un ingeniero con experiencia. That bridge is built by an experienced engineer. (2.18) Estd diseftado por un modisto famoso. It is designed by a famous designer. (2.19) EstA hecho por los incas. It is made by the incas. (2.20) Las cerezas estaban picoteadas por los pdjaros. The cherries were pecked by the birds. (2.17)

Example (2.14) fits nicely with [+ maintenance of state] but this feature does not seem to cover (2.15). In (2.15) the article is already written, displayed on paper, so it is not the case that the state will not persist without the continued intervention of an agent.'2 A parallel example is the already

It is obvious that Bull's definition requiring maintenance of state needs to be expanded or supplemented, since examples (2.15)-(2.20) fall outside of its scope."

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Wed, 22 Jan 2014 17:27:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

282

Hispania

64 (May 1981)

What these examples have in common, besides the fact that they portray states and that they allow for a por-phrase, is that the agent has left evidence or a trace of himself in the states described. It is as if there was "something" in the verbal itself which "reveals" or "points to" the responsible being, the one who brought about the state. The state itself has been "branded" by the CAUSER. The nature of this brand could be as tangible as a signature (2.16), a way of eating that reveals the culprit (2.20), or a more subtle clue such as a style (2.17-2.19) or a manner of writing that could be correlated to degree of education (2.15).'" In recapitulating this section, we conclude that: A. Por is the agential preposition used with non-stative verbs. B. Por is also the agential preposition with statives or resultant conditions, if the state and the action cannot exist independently of each other. ("El ladr6n fue sujetado por el policia" implies "El ladr6n estaba sujetado por el policia" and viceversa because if the policeman were not there holding the thief, this latter one would not be held), or if there is evidence or trace of an agential force (cf. 2.15-2.20). C. The preposition de is barred from use in either (A) or (B). III. Summary and Conclusions

also be used with estar + past participle should the action and the state be simultaneous, or if there is evidence or a trace of the CAUSER in the state itself.'" NOTES
'The questionnaires were administered in the following manner: a group of written sentences (not all of them pertinent to the opposition de vs. por) was presented to 42 native speakers. The testing was conducted in Buenos Aires, Argentina among university students. They were asked to complete each sentence with either one or both prepositions according to their preferences. If neither preposition fit the context, the sentence was to be marked as being ungrammatical. Granted that this may not be the best way to test native speakers, we could have waited until sufficient numbers of the utterances under investigation are spontaneously given, but this requires an incredible amount of time and patience and may not necessarily yield more reliable data. A given native speaker might also react differently to the same data presented on another occasion. Hopefully the method adopted gives a faithful indication of native speaker's usage. Because some speakers did not complete all the sentences, some totals do not add up to 42. 2Zenia Sacks DaSilva and Gabriel H. Lovett, A Concept Approach to Spanish (NY: Harper and Row, 1965), p. 212. 3John B. Dalbor and H. Tracy Sturcken, Oral Spanish Review (NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965), p. 75. 4R. P. Stockwell, J. D. Bowen and J. W. Martin, The Grammatical Structures of English and Spanish (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1965), p. 213. 'Real Academia Espaifola, Esbozo de una nueva gramdtica de la lengua espalola (Madrid: EspasaCalpe, 1974), pp. 378-79. 6Marathon M. Ramsey and R. K. Spaulding, A Textbook of Modern Spanish (NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1956), p. 382. 7As in English, the por-phrase is optional in Spanish. Care must be taken, however, not to equate the Spanish with the English passive. The Spanish passive is subject to several constraints, but specifying them here will take us too far afield. 'For a study of the feature stative in Spanish, see: L. D. King and M. Sufer, "On the Notion of Stativity in Spanish and Portuguese," in F. H. Nuessel, Jr. (ed.), Contemporary Studies in Romance Languages (Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club, 1980). 9William Bull, Spanish for Teachers: Applied Linguistics (NY: Ronald Press, 1965), p. 292. 'ONotice that in this discussion the definition of Agent encompasses not only willful animate beings but also what in a Fillmorean case grammar would be considered Instrumentals. Both notions could be grouped under the single label: CAUSE. "This idea is expressed in a more recently published grammar (Yolanda R. Sole and Carlos A. Sole,
Modern Spanish Syntax [Lexington, Mass.: Heath, 1977], p. 265) in similar terms: "When estar + past

In the quest for an explanation of the prepositions por and de used after past participles, and prompted by the literature on the subject, we have looked at three types of verbs: (a) those that denote mental or emotional attitude; (b) those that denote positional relations; (c) others in stative and non-stative constructions. After examining the data and testing it on native speakers, we conclude that: A. Currently, de is never an agential preposition."' Its use is almost nonexistent with type (a) verbs, and even its use to signal spatial relations is being lost-type (b) verbs. Furthermore, it yields ungrammatical sentences when used with type (c) verbs in non-stative constructions. Our findings confirm Ramsey's statement (1956:382), "por tends to displace de in all cases nowadays.' 6 B. Por introduces the agent in passive voice sentences.'7 It has almost completely replaced de with type (a) verbs, and the results of our questionnaire indicate that it is preferred over de with type (b) verbs. In examples with type (c) verbs, por is the only possibility for non-stative verbs; it may

participle occurs with a participle that refers to non-

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Wed, 22 Jan 2014 17:27:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Languageand Linguistics
conclusive, durative action (the state of being is simultaneous with the sustained action), an agent may co-occur with the construction." Their examples are: La fdbrica estA administrada por su sobrino. The factory is managed by his nephew. La prensa estA controlada por el gobierno. The press is controlled by the government. El pueblo estA oprimido por el tirano. The people are oppressed by the tyrant. El programa estA dirigido por un extranjero. The program is directed by a foreigner. "This example and the following ones (2.16-2.20) are not covered by the Sole and Sol6's (1977:265) explanation. See note 5 above. '3I have been unable to find any sources which even mention, let alone explain this type of example. "The exact delimitation of this use of por with states is an interesting problem in itself. How much of a trace is required for the utterance to be appropriate and well-formed? The reaction of native speakers is extremely interesting. (These examples were tested in the U.S.A.; I discovered the problem too late to test it while in Argentina). Notice the contrasts in the following examples where question marks indicate hesitation or sentence-awkwardness: a) ?La invenci6n de Morel estd escrita por Bioy Casares. La invenci6n de Morel is written by Bioy Casares. Hasta hace poco tiempo pens6 que La invenci6n de Morel era de Borges pero recientemente descubri que estA escrita por Bioy Casares. Till a short while ago I thought that La invenci6n de Morel belonged to Borges but recently I discovered that it is written by Bioy Casares. b) ?Esa casa estA pintada por un albafnil. That house is painted by a bricklayer. Mira los detalles, esa casa estd pintada por un simple albanfily no por un profesional. Look at the details, that house is painted by a mere bricklayer and not by a professional. c) ?La cena estA preparada por la sehfora. This dinner is prepared by the lady of the house. Te apuesto a que la cena estA preparada por la sefiora porque se positivamente que la criada siempre quema todo y esto estd fantdstico. I bet you that this dinner is prepared by the lady of the house because I know for a fact that the maid always burns everything and this is great.

283

It appears that native speakers sometimes find it hard to discover the (less tangible kind of) trace of the agent in the state described, but, once enough context is provided and the justification for the trace is given, the sentences are found to be completely natural. When the trace is self-evident this problem does not arise: d) Estos libros estAn roidos por los ratones. These books are gnawed by the rats. Los documentos estdn inicialados / firmados por el gerente. The documents are initialled/signed by the manager. "Since tradition dies hard, allow me to use one more quotation in support of my contention. Both de and por are equivalent of English by. The difference between them is that de is "relational" while por is "active". De shows position in space or time; por shows exertion. To say, for example, that A is surrounded by B de would be used if we merely pictured A with B around it (The girl is surrounded by her companions. La nifa estd rodeada de sus compafleras), but por would be used if the meaning is "hemmed in" or "protected" (She is surrounded by the police. Ella estd rodeada por la policia). An extreme case of the active relationship is the passive voice. Thus El tirano fue rodeado por los estudiantes would mean that he GOTsurrounded by them. El tirano estuvo rodeado por los estudiantes would mean that he was there with the students around him in some posture (e.g., threatening or protecting) other than mere position relative to him. Por is used in both because more than position is involved. (D. L. Bolinger, J. E. Ciruti and H. H. Montero, Modern Spanish: A Project of the Modern Language Association [NY: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1966], p. 339). '6The pedagogical implications of these findings are clear: most textbooks need to revise their statements on de usage. 17More accurately, it introduces the CAUSER, it could be an agent, an instrument or anything capable of displaying agential force (wind, storms, etc.). "My thanks go to Larry D. King, Wayles Browne and Erik J. Beukenkamp for frequently discussing earlier versions of this paper with me. I am also thankful to Amanda Chacona for her native speaker's intuitions. As usual, all errors of interpretation remain entirely my responsibility.

BILINGUAL BICULTURAL STUDIES: INTERESTED? AATSP members contemplating moving into the bilingual bicultural field should read the information booklet "Training Teachers for Bilingual Bicultural Education" ($.25). Write the Executive Director, Richard B. Klein, AATSP, Holy Cross College, Worcester, MA 01610. As this area of service to students becomes more and more significant, members should feel the obligation to familiarize themselves with the best possible information in the field.

This content downloaded from 193.54.110.35 on Wed, 22 Jan 2014 17:27:49 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions