Lingua 54 (1981) 165-210

North-Holland Publishing Company

THE SPANISH COPULAS AS ASPECTUAL INDICATORS

Marta LUJAN
The Universitl' o./ Te.vus at Austin, Dept. Ol Spunish uml Portuguese, L,'S,4

Received October 1980

O. Introduction

The correct syntactic analysis of the distinction signalled by the two

copulas in Spanish is the one in terms of the aspectual distinction 'perfective/
imperfective'. Such analysis has had very little acceptance, and it can only
be surmised that this is due to the conspicuous lack of understanding of
what this aspectual differentiation means in relation to copulative predicates.
This study attempts to define the contents of the terms perfective/imperfective,
and, hopefully, elucidate the nature of a semantic characterization that can
adequately account for the distribution and meaning of these predicates. 1.
The syntactic analysis assumed is one in terms of the features ~stative'
and 'perfective', which ark assigned in their positive and negative values
to the predicates bearing the two copulas. S e r occurs with stative and non-
stative predicates, and e s t a r only with stative ones. All adjectives and most
participles are stadve; the distinction determining the use of one or the other
copula with these terms is represented by the opposing values for [PERFECTIVE].
Thus, attributive predicates describing perfective states must occur with estar;
those referring to imperfective states require set'.
The readings assigned by the semantic rules to the feature combinations
defining perfective and imperfective states, simply include a temporal specifi-
cation of a delimited and of an undelimited time period, respectively. The
proposed semantic characterization adequately describes the opposing di-

* For text of notes see p. 204ff.

0 024-3841/81/0000-0000/$02.50 © North-Holland Publishing Company

166 M. l.ujdn Spanish aqmlas

mension of ser/estar, as well as their partial synonymy, an aspect which

has so far gone unnoticed.
From the proposed semantic readings is derived the inference describing
the fact that set-predicates imply estar-predicates, while the inverse implica-
tional relation is correctly blocked. The analysis also accounts for various
structural features of the copulas not previously accounted for, among
them, their distribution with past participles, locative phrases, and with
frequency and time adverbials. In addition, the semantic representations
are generalizable to the aspectual distinction of the same nature observed
by the verbal predicates of the language. The present proposal, thus, brings
the aspectual distinction signalled by the copulas ser/estar in line with the
overt distinction indicated by the compound tenses and by the two preterit
endings for the simple past and the imperfect.

I. Inadequacies of previous analyses

The analysis of ser/estar in terms of the imperfective/perfective distinction

is by no means novel. Gili y Gaya (1961) cites Hanssen (1913) as its originator,
though while adopting it in his grammar he goes in fact well beyoad the
concise original proposal by Hanssen. Gili y Gaya defines the contents of
this aspectual distinction in relation to adjectives by resorting to the notion
of "mc,dification'. While the characterization on the basis of this notion has
gained popularity, this has not happened with the characterization in terms
of the aspectual distinction perfective/imperfective.
The notion of modification has been used in recent years to discriminate
what constitutes a state and what does not. It is claimed that attributive
predicates with estar, but not with ser, denote states resulting from or
capable of modification. This definition has superseded the-more traditional
ones based on the aristotelian dichotomy of "essential" vs. °accidental' pro-
perties, or "permanent" vs. "temporary' characteristics. Traditional grammar
has usually attributed the use of the two copulas to the terms of that
opposition. For Keniston (1937) estar is used with an adjective "~to indicate
that the quality involved is regarded as accidental rather than essential,
and hence, by implication, that it is temporary rather than permanent"
Similarly, for Ramsey (1958) "'the use of ser to be by nature, inwardly,
absolutely, and estar to be by condition, outwardly, relatively, when intro-
ducing an adjective" is what characterizes the use of the two copulas. 2
These notions are not obviously precisely formulated, nor are they precisely
 M. Lujhn / Spauish copulus 167

true. It can easily be argued that they lead to incorrect predictions, and
counterexamples are not hard to find. A classic one is m u e r t o 'dead', which
requires e s t a r but which can hardly be said to describe a temporary quality.
If m u e r t o indicates a permanent quality, then it should take ser. But ser is
ungrammatical with m u e r t o :

(1) *Es muerto y enterrado desde hace mucho tiempo

'He's dead and buried since long ago'
*Todavia no soy muerta para que me despojen de mis bienes
"I'm not yet dead to be stripped of my possessions"

By contrast, an adjective such as t e m p o r a r i o "temporary' requires ser and

it is incompatible with estar, contrary to the expectation arising from the
fact that it denotes the property of temporality, e.g. :

(2) *Estfi temporario 'It's temporary'

The traditional grammar definitions are of little use when considering

predicate nominals, to which they should be applied, given that these nouns
are traditionally considered to be functioning as adjectives. However, nouns
are usually constructed with set" and not with estar. There is certainly no
a priori reason to consider that they designate properties that are in some
sense more essential than those denoted by adjectives, or that none of them
may describe accidental properties. Consider the example in (3):

(3) Mi hermana es operadora temporariamente

'My sister is an operator temporarily'

Even more problematic for a view that nouns can only denote essential
properties is an example like the-following:

(4) Ana /fue ( reina por un dia

[*estuvo J
"Ann was a queen for a day'

where the noun rebla "queen' could hardly be taken to indicate an essential
property of the subject. However, it is constructed with set', and it would be
unacceptable with estar.
Traditional grammarians have attempted to overcome these problems by
168 M. Luidn Spanish copuhts

sharply characterizing the use of e s t a r with an adjective as indicating a state

or a condition. According to Keniston (1937), "'by the XV! century estar
has become definitely established as the normal mode of expressing the
state that results from an action". Ramsey (1956) concurs by stating that
"'the use of estar with an adjective implies that the speaker considers the
subject as being in the state indicated by the adjective". Thus, by con-
centrating in a single semantic factor, and by providing a criterion lbr its
identification a more precise characterization was expected to be achieved.
But the criterion for identifying a state given by Keniston as "'that which
results from an a c t i o n " , is inadequate. It is too broad in one respect, and
too restricted and insufficient in another. For instance, not all participles
of active verbs may be constructed with estar, e.g. :

(5) La pared est;i {" pintada "The wall is { painted"

J tOgtldtt touched"
) *mirada looked at'
I. *sefialada pointed to"

On the other hand, the criterion is too limited because it excludes the
participles of' numerous verbs that do not refer to actions but to mental
or physical processes or states. These are typically constructed with estar,
being unacceptable with ser, as shown in:

st p e tbn 'I 1t oclo ,,i p l 1 ld

The identification of state has more recently been associated with the
notion of change or modification. Gili y Gaya (1961), Bull (1965), Rold~in
(1974). Querido (1976), among others, define a state as that which results
from a change or is potentially modifiable. This definition seelns to allow
lbr the correct discrimination of the participles of active verbs that are
appropriate with the copula estar. For instance, a wall suffers a modification
when it is painted, but not when it is merely touched, looked at or pointed to.
Thus would be explained the acceptability of the examples in (4).
The notion of modification for identifying a state, in addition, allows
for the inclusion of the stative verbs illustrated in (6) above, lbr these verbs
denote changes of states..lngu.s'ti~_r..~',',, 'to become anguished', enojarse "to get
angry', cansarse "to get tired', etc. all denote mental or physical changes
 ,lj. Lttlcbt .~ani.~h ('opuhl,~ 169

that give rise to certain states that tire describable by predicates bearing
('.~'tar, e.g. :

t7) Verb E.~tar- predica te

angu.~tiar.w "1o get anguished"
t'Oolor.w "tO gel angry'
~ali.qt,r'~'r "to satisfy"
,ot/.~ttrW 'to gel tired"
,,.'prcmh'r "1o surprise"
romper 'to break"
c~tar an t,,u.~tia~h) "to be anguished'
c.~tar cm,Bido "to be angry'
cstar sati.~h,(*ho "to be satisfied"
~,++t+tr ('+l~t'~'acb~ 'to be tired"
c.~tar .~L+o'pr('ndichJ 'to be stlrpri~,ed"
c~tar /'oto "to be broken'

Another seeming advantage in having recourse to the notion of modilica-

tion is that it permits the handling of the various predicates that behave
as counter-examples to the traditional definitions, such as the well-known
('star mu('rto "to be dead'. This predicate may be said to describe a state
resulting from a living organism suffering a modification, namely, m o r i r
"to die'. This would account ibr its being compatible with the copula estar,
but not with set, and it would be totally irrelevant, that the state of death
is permanent. For its part. s e t t e m p o r a r i o (but not * e s t a r tt'mp3/ztrh~) "tO
be temporary" would be explained on the basis that-, the quality of being
temporary in an existing individual is certainly not something that may
result from a change or that may be modified.
With the notion of state it seems that the meaning and use of ser/esn,"
may be defined in a simple and straightforward manner: namely, an attri-
butive predicate that describes a state takes estar, otherwise it takes .wr.
Now, by replacing the term "state' by the specitication given for its recog-
nition, the following definition, in all its extension, is obtained. An attributive
predicate that describes the result of a modification or that which is modili-
able takes (,star. otherwise it takes ser. The seeming simplicity disappears
in this new version of the definition. For the expression "that which is
modifiable" itself expresses a generality of such extcn.~ion that it invalidates
the criterion for identifying a state. A similar difliculty arises in trying to
identify states as results of modifications: the whole universe and every
item in it must be conceived as resulting from modifications. Thus, every
predicate attribute in relation to any item in this universe must be con-
structed with (,star, and there would be no use for ser-predicates.
Numerous contexts may be envisaged where one's capacity to determine
whether something is modifiable or the result of a given moditication is
practically null. However, the native speaker does not hesitate to use a
pre ticate with estar. For instance, locative and attributive predicates are
! 70 M. Luj6n Si~anish copula.~

perfectly acceptable with e s t a r in contexts where no modification is likely

to be conceived, as in (8):

(8) La isla de Cuba estti en el Atl~intico

"The Cuban island is in the Atlantic Ocean"
Las estrellas est~n alejadas de la tierra
'Stars are far away from the earth'
Jfipiter est;J rodeado por un anillo
"Jupiter is surrounded by a ring'

But esoteric examples such as these are hardly needed. Other attributive
predicates of a more ordinary nature can be lbund constructed with estar,
where no modification is implied, either as u cause or a future possibility, e.g. :

(9) Ana est~i siempre enojada

'Ann is always angry'
Su hermano est~i ioco, internado en un asilo desde su temprana infancia
"His brother is crazy, shut up in an as)lum since his early childhood"

The interpretation of these examples does not suggest that there has been
a modilication causing the described states: neither does it imply a fi~ture
modification of such states. In fact, these predicates seem to describe rather
intrinsic characteristics of the individuals concerned.
The data so far examined make it obvious that it is not automatic to
know what things or states are the result of modifications, or may be
viewed as such. The difference between (a) and tb) in the examples that
follow, cannot be satisfactorily described in terms of states resulting from
modifications:

(10a) Su trabajo es mediocre "His work is mediocre'

(10b) Su trabajo esth mediocre 'His work is mediocre'
(lla) i,D6nde es la salida? "Where is the exit?'
(! l b) i,D6nde estti la salida? "Where is the exit'?'

The elusi'vel~ess of the notion utilized to discriminate a state is made

conspicuous bv the need to widen the extension of the original criterion
so that it may include the mere possibility of change, i.e. a potential modifi-
cation. 3 According to Roldfin (1974) in (12a) the possibility of a change
in the future is not entertained, but it is in (12b):
 .~I. Luicin Spam.~h <Ol,Uht.~ 171

(12a) Jacinta es soitera "Jacmta is single"

(12b) Jacinta est/t soitera "Jacinta is single"

Notice that another interpretation would be noticeably more natural for

(12b) as th:~t of a state resulting from not having tblio,.vcd a course of
eYents in the p~st, namely, Jar'#Ira I;o .~'~' ha t'asado atbt Jacinta has not
yet married'. Howe,,'er, this proposition would be compatible with (12a)
as well."
Clearly, to be of any use the notion of modification must be conceived
in such general terms that its validity as the criterion for identifying a state
becomes null, and the definition based on the notion of state, most widely
accepted, is rendered ¢otally inadequate. Moreover. the insistence on idcnti-
lying s t a t e s with presupposed modifications, either projected towards the
future or tow~rds the past, leads to incorrect prcdic!ions, if it were true
that the predicates of Roldfin's pair of examples, given in (12). differ in
that only the second one implies the possibility of a change, thcn it should
not be possib'~e to expand them in the ft:.llowing manner:

(13a) Jacinta es soitera, pero no 1o sera por mucho tiempo

"Jacint~ is singlc, but she will not bc so for long"
(13b) Jacinta estfi soltera, y se quedarti soltcra toda su vida
"Jacint~t is single, and she will remain so all her iifc"

The definition in terms of states related to given or potential modifications,

would also determine that the examples in (14) arc unacccptablc, which
they are not:

(14) Ana es joven "Ann is young'

La gente vieja es canosa 'Old people arc gray-haired'

Very obviously these prt:dicatcs denote qualities or states which must be

associated with a future and inevitable modification in the first example,
and with a change in the past in the second example.
From the data so far examined two important conclusions may bc drawn.
First. the copula s e r is not incompatible with the notion of changc. Second.
the copula e s t a r need not always be related to a given or poteiatial modifi-
cation. It follows, in consequence, that the notion of modification and the
characterization of state based on that notion are insufficient to adequately
describe the distribution and meaning of tl:, copulative verbs.
172 M. Lu.jdtn ' Spanish copuht~'

An alternative to defining states is given by Ramsey (1956), who provides

equivalent expressions in other languages for ser- and estar-predicates. As
shown by the examples quoted in (15), he provides very accurate translations
in English"

(15) Estas manzanas son agrias

"These apples are (the) sour (kind)'
Estas manzanas est~in agrias
"These apples are sour [because th~:y haven't ripened yet]' (ibid.
p. 310)

Ramsey also gives equivalent expressions in an intbrmai logical language.

Thus, he identifies the use of a ser-predicate as equivalent to expressing
"is of such a class', while equating the use of an estar-predicate with ex-
pressing 'is in such condition or state', s However, Querido (1976) has
recently argued that by opposing "states" to 'classes" it is decided in an
arbitrary manner that accidental properties are uninteresting. Since all
predicates are potential classifiers, he argues, a characterization in such
terms does not allow establishing "states' as a disjoint set with respect to
the set of properly classifying predicates.
But it seems to me that what is needed here is not the specification of
estar-predicates as a disjoint class, but rather as an inclusive class with
~espect to ti~e other attributive predicates. Specifically, with respect to
adjectives and participles, it is appropriate to consider the class of those
that require ser as a subset of those that take estar. Querido (1976) claims
that it is always possible to find contexts where the terms that are normally
used with set', are acceptable with the copula estar. By contrast, the terms
that are restricted to estar are, without exception, unacceptable with the
copula ser.

(16) Ser-adjectives /A'tar-adjectives

cauto 'cautious'
~fi.~~'reto 'd i sc feet"
mtcligeute "intelligent'
prt.h'nte "pr udent'
mhio "wise"
ort~'s " p o l i t e '
capaz "capable"
jttSlo "just"
l'onslatl I~' ' c o I1sla n t"
ratio 'empty'
Ih,no "full'
¢'otl left I0 'CO !1t ell t"
sat L~?/i'cho "sa t i s fie d"
att~'ente 'a bsellt'
harto ' f e d - u p '
ch's~'al:'o "ba re- foo ted'
&'.mmh~ "naked"
distante 'distant"
 .ll. L u / a n S p a n i s h copula.~ 173

mortal/ "nlorla]" ~o/o ' a l o n e '

h'al "lo)a]" pr,J.\tnlo "next"
etc. tic,

(17) { Era
Estuvo } indiscreto "He was indiscreet'

(18) { *Era
Estuv° } vaci° 'It was empty"

This fact indicates that .~er and c.sta:" are partially synonymous. This is
an important aspect of the copulative xerbs that has been overlooked so far.
in fact, their partial synonymy may bc observed in the context of adjec-
tives and participles: a pr,zdicate with ser and one of these terms always
implies a similar predicate with c s t a r , as illustrated below:

(19) .~er gordo -* estar ,t,or~h, "to he fat"

.~cr ch'gante -~ c.~tar eh'gantc "to he elegant"
scr ttorma] •. est,lr n o r m a l "to be normal"
(20) .~on /irnla&~s . e.~t~in/irm(uh~s "are signed"
lit(' pintuthJ cstuvo pinta~h~ 'v,as painted"
era ch,.~i,em~(hJ •. ,,staha ~h,.~ignado 'was designated"

But the inverse implication does not hold"

( 2 ! ) c.~lar g o r d o .. .~('r .t,,or(h~

c.~lar c h ' g a n l c ., scr ch,gantc
('.~l~lr llorlllll[ ,~ .~('t" Ilorlllll]
(22) e.,tan /irma~h~s .. son lirtmuhJ.~
c.~tuvo pinta~h~ .~, /ue p#ttado
e.~taha ¢h'.~'~'l(t(hJ *'~" .Jill" (h'.~'~tll*l¢h)

The validity of this implicational relation is demonstrated by the (a) and

(b) sentences below. Observe that the (a) statements express irue propositions
while the (b) examples represent false statements"

(23a) Ana estfi hermosa porque es hermosa (True)

'Ann is beautiful because she is beautiful'
(23b) Ana es hermosa porque est~ hermosa (False)
(24a) Eran felices, por 1o tanto estaban felices (True)
'They were happy, therefore they were happy"
(24b) Estaban felices, por 1o tanto eran ;elices (False)
| 74 .~1. Lujan Spanish copuhls

It ~,, ai,,o demonstrated by the fact that the (a) examples in (25)--(27) are
pcrti:ctl} interpretable, but the (b) statements are contradictory:

~25a) Juan estfi muy alegre, pero no es alegre

"John's being very merry, but he's not merry'
~25b) *Juan es muy alegre, pero nunca estfi alegre
"John's very merry, but he's never merry'
{26a) Raid esta muy delgado, pero no es muy delgado
"Raol's very thin. but he's not very thin"
~26b~ *Ra61 es muy deigado, pero no estfi muy delgado
"Raui's very thin. but he's not very thin"
~27a~ Uno puede estar alegre aunque no sea por io general alegre
"One can be merry even though one's not generally merry'
t27b) *Uno puede ser alegre aunque no est6 por !o general alegre
"One can be merry, even though one's not generally merry'

All of the+ data confirm that the copulas are partially synonymous.
tt may be ~'cn that +wr is sufficient for estar, while e s t a r is not sufficient
but nece+mr} for wr." An adequate analysis must characterize this hyponym-
ou+ relation, in addition to the difference indicated by the two copulas•
Hence. the definitions that are limited to characterizing only their opposition
tannest gi,~e an adequate de+ription of this semantical relationship of
copulatl.,e predicates.

2. Perfecti~e and imperfective states

Tl,,e shortcomings of previous analyses may be overcome by adopting

the premise that all adjectives are stative, i.e. describe mental or physical
states !Querido 1976). The differentiation is ir'.~xoduced by distinguishing
perfective states from imperfective states. 7 A syntactic analysis may formally
c;,,prt.~s this characterization by assuming that the adjectives, and more
ger~eralb+. the predicates that may appear with one or the other copula.
ha~c the lexical feature composition as shown below: 8

+ Adjective

+ STATIVE + STAT! V E
PERFE('TIVF. + PERFECTIVE
 M. Ll(jdn ,g SpanMt copulas 175

In such syntactic characterization the semantic features that distinguish

two classes of predicates have the syntactic function of determining the
form of the copulative verbs. Thus, when the adjectives are used to refer
to imperfective states, they select the copula ser; when they are used to
refer to perfective states they select the copula e s t a r . '~
Two other possibilities for specifying the feature [PERI-ECTIVE] suggest
themselves. One is to assign it to the copulative verb itself; the other is
to have it as a separate categorial node, namely the terminal of the node
ASPECT. The latter alternative must be dismissed, however, upon consider-
ation of the fact that the copula itself, regardloss of its nature, must bear
endings for the perfective and the imperfective aspects when it appears in
its preterit form. The copulas behave in this respect like the rest of the
verbs, which add different endings for the preterit corresponding to the
perfective and imperfective aspects, e.g. cant-~ "sang', cant-aha "was singing"
or "used to sing'. The preterit forms of set are irregular, .lue "was" and era
"used to be'; those of e s l a r conform more to the regular paradigms, est;~vo
'was' and estaha "was being'. Thus, the perfective specification signalled
by the two different copulas must be distinguished from the specification
corresponding to the categorical node that must be assigned to aspect.
As for the alternative of specifying the value for [PFRVEC'rlVE] on the
copulative verb itself, i.e. in the complex of features specified under the
categorial node V, e.g.:

(29) ser Ot)U.~'O c'.s[ar O/~t'3,O

++ad, +V

I!v
I
Cop STATIVE + Cop S] ATi V E
PERFECTIVE + PERFECTIVE

it would accord with the subcategorization of the other elements in this

category between perfcctive and imperfective verbs (Gili y Gaya 1961)..
This alternative seems; highly appropriate if it were the case that every
adjective in the lexicon could be used with either copula. This not being the
case, howe~er, it seems simpler to specify the value for [PERFECTIVE] directly
in the complex symbol of the adjective, than to characterize its restriction
of combination with one of the copulas by means of a corresponding
specification in the form of a contextual feature.
In other words, an adjective like contento 'glad', if it is not directly
specified as [+ PERFECTIVE], must bear the c,.ntextual feature." [ PERFEC-
~o ~1 I.u/tin Spant.sh t'opuhl.s

~+~] " to guarantee its occurrence with estar but not with ser. But
~ the ~tdjecli~,es ztre directly specified as [_+ P~_RV~CT~VE], it will then be
just the two lexical entries for the copulas that must bear the specified
contextual features, such as " - _ _ [ - P~ ~-~c31vE]' and ' - ........ [+
P|:~l-|!(q~lV~]'. which will guarantee the no,a-occurrence of *ser contento
"t~ be glad'. *ser angustiado "to be anguished', *estar m o r t a l "to be mortal',
~+nd ~ forth. For the semantic characterization to be proposed in what
follo~,:s either alternative is adequate.
Itcre I p r o p o ~ that the semantic rules assign two distinct interpretations
u~ ~he two combinations of the features [STAT~v~] and [P~RFECT~V~] which
cb~r;~ctcrize the t~o clasps of predicate attributes given in (28). The
~cm~ntic interpretation corresponding to "perfective state" is as in "~°

[+ADJ. ++ ~ a ~ . +P~t:~'r~v~]: xe A at time t~

+lh+s c~pres~'s that to p r c d i a t e "e.'tar A" of an individual x is to say

~ h t ~ is in the class of individuals bearing the property A at a delimited
pcr+od of time ~ h o ~ beginning and end are both known or assumed or
~t lca~t one of them is
l h c |ntcrprctation corresponding to "imperfective state" is as in:

3~ ~ Imp~ rh'~+t;~ ' +~tat~'

[-~Adj. + s w;~11','~+. P~:Rlt~(-IIVQ x~ A at time tj... tj.k

|hl~ ~ ) ~ that to predicate ".s~,r A" of an individtml x is equivalent to ex-

pressing that x is in the class of individuals bearing the property A in a
F~+riod of time whose beginning or end are not assumed and which stretches
o,,cr a h u m o r of delimited time periods. A time period here designates
reDatz~+e space of time with ~ m e duration {e.g. a moment, an occasion,
~:tc,~+ ~uch that an',' portion of the time axis consists of a succession of
such periods which are represented here by tj+~, tj.2, tj+3+ .... t i + n , and
~hich are assumed to be linearly ordered. ~
Th+s anal~si~ expresses that the use of the two copulas indicate the
ca~c+t~ of t h ~ predicates to make a temporal reference in two distinct
manners. With the imp,zrfective copula ser is taken into consideration a
s~re~ch of time in its duration. With the perfective copula (estar), instead,
~b.at ~s ~k~.-n into consideration is one particular time period. Thus, 1 claim
ahat both copulas have the capacity to make a temporal reference. Hence,
 M. Lujdn / Spanish ctq,uhts 177

it cannot be accepted that the copula ser is "intemporal', and that only
estar is used in reference to an attribute as related to a temporal circum-
stance, as the most recently sanctioned grammar by the Real Academia
(1973) states. In the analysis that I propose here both copulas have the
capacity to denote a temporal reference. The difference resides in the nature
of the temporal reference that the two copulas make.
We may proceed to express the readings of (30) and (31) more generally
in terms of the predicate calculus, as shown below, and we may also speak
of perfective and imperfective predicates, and thus include verbal predicates,
e.g. saltar 'to jump', escrihir una carta "to write a letter', a~bnirar "to admire',
etc. (Gili y Gaya i961).

(30') Pelji, ctive predicate

A(x) at time t i

This expresses that a predicate A is to be true of an individual x relative

to a delimited time pe~'iod whose beginning and end are to be assumed
or at least one of them is. Predicates illustrating this denotation are: estar
obeso 'to be obese', saltc, r "to jump', escrit~ir tma c a r m 'to write a letter'.
among others.

(31') h;lpeiJbctive predicate

A(x) at times t i... tick

This expresses that a predicate A is to apply to an individual x during a

stretch of time with no beginning or end assumed and extending over a
number of delimited time periods. Predicates bearing this denotation are:
ser oheso 'to be obese', escrihir 'to write', athnirar "to admire', etc.
A valid inference may be drawn from the interpretations proposed.
which describes the partial synonymy of attributive predicates with .ser cxtar
previously indicated in (19)-(20):

(32) A(x) at times tj... tj.k Z A(x) at time t, V t~+ j V t~+_~... • t~,

This says that if a predicate A is true of an individual x during a stretch

of time covering a number of different time periods or occasions, such as
tj... tj+k, then it is also true of x at some time period or occasion properly
included in that stretch of time, such as t~, or t~+ E, or t t,2 . . . . . or t~, k.
This correctly describes the data previe,~sly cited. Rec::ll the (a) examples
~7~ ~,1 L~+l~Jn .5"panishcopuh~

+n ~23~ (24t. showing that a .s(,r-predicate is sufficient for a synonymous

.+tar-predicate to be true.
By contrast, the inverse relation between those predicates, indicated pre-
viously in (21)+(22j. is appropriately excluded by the proposed semantic
readings, as shown ~ l o w :

~33~ A{x) at time t~ ~ Alx) at times t,... tj+k

the+ expres~s that if a predicate A holds true o f an individual x at

+J pnrticular tmse period, such as t~. it does not follow that it holds true
f<,~r ~tn} stretch o f time extending over and above t~. The invalidity of
the reference is supported, indeed, by the (b) examples in ( 2 3 ) - ( 2 4 ) w h i c h
•~h+~w that a predicate with e.~+tar is not sufficient to establish the truth of
the corresponding version w+ith ~er.
- ~ ...... ~..~ ._r . . . . . . . e 0~.~. ,-. . . . . q gi .,~.,. where p re presen ts
+~ +t~tement with a .~er-predicate and q one with an estar-predicate, is
equi~,alent to the disjunction o f the consequent and the negation o f the
~mtcccdent. i.e. ~ p V q. as illustrated below"

~34~ S~ es o b e y . eslfi obeso o ha estado o b e ~ (p ~ q)

"If he's o b e y . he is or has been obese"
No e+ o b e y . o estfi o ha estado obeso ( - - p V q)
"Hc'~ nol obe~z, or he i+ or has been obese"

l h c inference m (32) i~+al~J equivalent to the ncg.ztion of the conjunction

~f the ant~.~'edent and the negation of the consequent, i.e. -~(p ^ --q).
~ ~ho~:n in ~35)"

+35~ No se pucde ~ r obeso y I nunca estar obeso ~.(p A -~q)

I no estar ni haber estado obeso
"One c~nnot be obese and j never be obese"
neither be nor have been obese"

The ~bo~,e inferences are a!! valid+ as attested b} the truth o f the illustra-
tive e~mple~, and they accord with the facts pointed out previously in
~2<~ ~_ ~ In addition, e ~ m p l e (35) illustrates the fact that the implication
ho~dmz between the p statement and the q statement in (32) is falsified
~fp ~:~ true ~nd q is fal~. Gi,~en that q represents a disjunctiox~ of predicates.
~hen tt ~s fai.~ m case the conjunction o f these predicates is i~alse•
 M. Lujdn Spanish copulas 179

(36} -~A(x) at t iA tj+ ~ ^ t i-~2.... A t j+k

That is, when the predicate A is not true of x at time t i, and at t~+~,
and at t j+2, and so on. In short, when it is not true at any time period
of the stretch of time represented by tj... tj+k. Thus, while (35) above is
~rue, a statement such as the following is false:

(37) *Es obeso, pero nunca est~ obeso

"He's obese, but he's never obese"

However, the implication given in (32) is not invalidated if one (or more)
of the disjoint predicates is false. Hence (32) also at:counts for the lack
of contradiction in the examples that follow"

(38) Ana es hermosa, aunque boy no est~i hermosa

'Ann is beautiful, even though today she's not beautiful"
Es obeso, pero ahora no estfi obeso
"He's obese, but he's not obese now'

It may be seen that (32) correctly predicts that a .wr-prcdicatc holds t)uc
even if the corresponding estar-predicate is not true at some point(s) of
time of a given extended time period. This points to a problem, l'~'r (32)
predicts that the truth of a ser-predicate will be upheld by the truth of the
estar-predicate at just one or any small number of time periods. This seems
counterintuitive, for the truth of a ser-predicate should correspond to the
estar-predicate being true a sufficient number of times as would be equi-
valent to 'characteristically' being the case over an extended time period.
Thus, to tighten ~.,,.,":"~_:, ~pecification is needed defining the notion "character-
istic'.
The validity of the implication represented in (32) is upheld by an
additional argument. Assuming the validity of p ~ q, if q is false, as repre-
sented previously in (36), then by modus tollens p must be false too. The
argument is borne out by the following data, which represent true statements"

(39) Ana nunca esta obesa, por 1o tanto no es obesa

"Ana's never obese, hence she's not obe:se"
Nunca han estado delgados, por Io tanto m~ son deigados
'They have never been thin, heno, they're not thin'
~+~ .ll. Luidn Spanish copula.~

X ' u m u c.~taha alegre, por Io tanto m~ era alegre

"ttc was never merry, hence he was not merry'
Su trabajo mtllca c.~td mediocre, por consiguiente su trabajo no es
mediocre
"His work has never been mediocre, hence his work is not mediocre"

The pre~nt ~mantic characterization adequately reflects the close relation-

~hip of Ihe attributive predicates vcith s e t and the corresponding ones with
+~+1ar, At the same time. it allows making the necessary differentiation
m~,nifested when these predicates are used contrastively. For instance, the
f+~lh~wing ~latement. where it is not emphasized by means of a contrastive
~!re~ the dimension in which the copulas are opposed, is contradictory:

~40j *No csla Ioco. es ioco

"Hc's not crazy, he is crazy"

B} contrast, if the ~cond copula is ~ i d with a contrastive stress the state-

men! i~ no longer contradictory:

~41) N~ estfi loco. ti.,i Ioco

"tte's not being crazy, he is crazy"

Rather. it expres~s precis,ely the opposition with respect to the relative

t+me w,:riod the predicate holds true.
The inference (32) derived from the semantic readings proposed for
j~rfccltve and imperfective s t a l e s finds support in other facts of the language.
in general..wr-predicaies imply corresponding e s t a r - p r e d i c a t e s . Even when
the: predicates bear nominals, which are known to be incompatible with
c+!ar. Thus. the existing e s t a r - p r e d i c a t e s are constructed with a prepositional
p h r a ~ of the form de "of" plus the nominal, e.g. :

~42j ~ r medico estar de medico

"to be a physician" "to be in a physician's capacity'
~r profesor estar de profesor
"to be a professor" "to be in a professor's capacity"
~-r pa red estar de pared
"to be a v.all" "to function as a wail"

]hough ~t Is certainly true that a person may be a physician or a professor

 't4. Luian J Spanish c, qmhls 181

and ~ot be exercising his profession, so that it would be perfectly acceptable

to make the following statement:

(43) Es medico, aunque nunca ha estado de medico en ninguna parte

'He's a physician, although he's never been in that capacity anywhere"

However, if a person is a physician or a professor at a given place, then

the corresponding predicate with estar must be also true, e.g. :

(44) Es medico en el Hospital Central, y estfi de medico alli

~He's a physician at Central Hospital, and he's in that capacity there"
(45) Era profesor en Berkeley, per 1o tanto estuvo de profesor alli
"He was a professor at Berkeley, hence he was in that capacity there"

Observe that by denying the estar-predicates of these examples with mmca

"never', they are rendered contradictory, e.g.:

(46) *Es medico en el Hospital Central, pero nunca ha estado de medico alli
'He's a physician at Central Hospital, but hc's never been in that
capacity there'
(47) *Era profesor en Berkeley, pero nunca estuvo de profesor alli
'He was a professor at Berkeley, but he was never in that capacily
there'

By contrast, the estar-predicates do not imply the set-predicates with

these nominals, just as they do not do so with adjectives and past participles.
This is demonstrated by the acceptability of the examples that follow,
where an estar-predicate bearing a nominal is asserted while the corres-
ponding version with ser is negated, e.g. :

(48) Estuvo de medico en ese hospital, aunquc no era medico, pues

todavia no habia sacado su diploma
'He was in a physician's capacity at that hospital, even though he
was not a doctor, as he had not yet got hi~ degree'
(49) Estuvo de profesor alli, pero no era reahnente profesor
"He was in a professor's capacity there, but he was r:ot really a
professor'
~50) Est~i de pared, aunque no es una pared sine un armario
"It's ftmctioning as a wallo although it is not a wall but. a hutch'
| X2 1 / Lujan S p a n i s h copuh£s

Thus. it may be seen that in general the estar-predicates of the language

do not imply the existence of corresponding set-predicates. It was pointed
out previously that the language has a numerous set of predicates with
~'~tar that cannot bc expressed with ser, some of which are the following:

~5]~ ~.~rar Ih'n,, "Io be full" * s e t lh.no

c ~ a r ~a~io "to be empty" *ser vacio
~.~¢a¢ augu~luad¢~ "Io iv.2 anguished" *scr attgttstiath~
e~hJr ctteqddo "|0 b~.' angr}" *ser cno/ado
¢'~t,lr ~¢~ "I~ ~,." dli~¢" *,s('r rivo ~2
~t~lr mm'rl¢~ "(o be dead" *ser ?1lilt,rio
¢~1a¢ dcw~ttll'udo "!0 be unconscious" *,~cr dt,.~mtli'ado
e~lat &,w;mb, "to be naked" * s e t dt'.~lllldo
, ~¢.¢ ,h +,.l:,, "t~ t~. bare-fi~oled" *scr eh'.scal-_o
~'~l~r llll~ltll" "|~-) be absent" *.scr ¢.lll.%t'tllU
, ~,'ar p ¢ ~ n l ~ "Io be pre,,cnl" *st'r present:,
o ~,'~1¢ ¢¢ot~hnlo "tO ~ mer~" *.g~,r t'olllUIll;,
~ 'at p, t p h ' / - "~o be perplexed" *.wr p e r p h T o

This state of affairs is consistent with the semantic relation assumed to

h~ld bet~'¢en ser- and e.star-predicates, more specifically, with !he direction
of ~he implicationai relation that describes their partial synonymy.
There is another semantic relationship that is considerably clarified and
more a&:quately understood within the present framework. This is the one
holding t'~t~een e star-predicates with adjectives or past participles and a
Jargc n;Jmber of verbs denoting actions or changes of state. It was seen
in the preceding section that most investigators have assumed that estar-
prcdica(cs alv,'a}s impi~ a preceding necessary change, as shown below:

52~ , ,1a a/~g,-rm "B~, open" * ha wd. ahtcrta "has been opened"
~u~,, ah.ert ~ "~a~ m e r D " -* w ah,gr6 "became merry"
, laha ~an~,ad. "v.a~, tared" . ~c hahia tansa&~ "had become tired"

But in the present framework, as indicated initially, it is asserted that the

rcJationship holds ...i" ,u,~,..,,opposite direction rather"

~'~ ~'~ ~m~,, a?,wrta "has been opened" --,. e.std ahierta "is open"
~.. u/,'e¢,, " ~ ' c a m e merr,," - c.~tu~o ah.grc "was merr)"
,~ ,~ar~a , a , ~ a d . "had P~'come tired" --. e.~taha can.sathJ " ~ a s tired"

I h b dir~-tion of the implicational relation holding between these predicates

is deducible from the present analysis. For every state resulting from the
 M . Lujan Spanish ('Olmhts 183

change or the action denoted by one such verb necessarily presupposes a

beginning, and must be conceived, in consequence, as a perfective state.
Thus, with respect to such verbs of action and of change of state there
must be expressions in terms of perfective states lexically related. But the
inverse relation, as has been assumed so far in the literature and is illustrated
in (52), does and need not hold. That is, perfective states are not related,
or must not alw:-~ys be associated with changes of states or with actions:

(54) estdt ahierta "is open' -7. ha sith~ ahierta "has been opened"
estuvo ah,gre "was r n e r r y ' ~ se ah'gr6 'became merry'
e.staha ('an.s'ath~ 'was tired" -~ se bahia C(l/lA'(ldo "had become tired"

All the arguments developed in the previous section are compatible with
this view, while it was shown previously that the insufficiency of the
definitions on the basis of the notion of modification proposed for the
use of ser/estar may be traced to assuming the opposite premise, namely,
that the implicational relation is as represented in (52).
In fact, the copulative predicates of the language behave as predicted
by the present analysis. As noted initially, for every active verb producing
a resulting state and for every stative verb denoting a change of state
there is a predicate with estar describing a corresponding perfcctive state
by means of a lc-xically related adjective or participle, e.g. :

(55) Verb (,star + adjective

ahrir "to ~ iJell" ('Mar al,/t,rlo "to be open"
pintar "to t ,int" ('star l;intath; "to be painted"
t'ol'l(ll" 'IC CU," ('SI(iI" ('o/'ltido "to be cul"
Capl.S'tirs(' 'to get tired" e.slar ct/n,sa(h~ 'to bc tired"
a/t'grar to make merry" ('.slar ah'gre "to be m e r r y '
engor(kir "to get fat" e.s'lar gor(h) "to be fat"
tltlS('lll(it',~'c 'tO leave" ('slat" til/,s'('/ll(' 'to be absent"

But the language has numerous estar-predicates with adjectives describing

perfective states which are not lexically related to any verbs, either stative
or active, e.g."

(56) estar + adjective Verb

esmr perph:jo "to be perplexed' *p('rld~ji:ar.w
estar soh, "to be alone" *solitariarsc
estar th,li('ioso "to be delicious' *adeli('iars('
estar listo "to be ready' *alislar,~e ~~
USI(II" 0~£',~'0 "tO be obese" *o&,sidar,w
184 M. Lujdn Spanish copulas

c~tar t,h~( t,n,, "m bc obscene" *OhSt't'lli2tlrst'

,'~tar h,,nita "to be pretty" *honitizarse
~,~tar ~,,Itcru to be single" *asolterarse
c.~ltlr .~tlhroso "to be savory" *.~ahoristlrst,
c.~tar h'liz "t,', be happy" *afi'lizarse
e.~tar viro "lo be alive" ,avivarset 3
e.star maitrccho "to be battered" *maitrecharse
t'~ltlr t ontel, t0 "[0 be merry' * t'Olllt'illtll'SC 13

Demontc (1978) points out this lack of correspondence with the adjectives
perph:/o "perple:,'.ed" and solo 'alone', and describes it as a lacuna in the
lexicon to be attributed to its "typically idiosyncratic nature". But such
an interpretation of the data follows from assuming that every state must
be resultive, i.e. must result from a preceding action or modification. Since
this is not assumed in the present analysis, the absence of lexically related
verbs for the adjectives of (56) cannot be considered a lexical gap, or an
idiosyncratic fact. Rather., it is consistent with the assumption held here
that perfective states do not imply preceding actions or modifications.
There is yet another fact showing that the lack of correspondence illus-
trated in (56) cannot be viewed merely as a lexical gap. There are periphrastic
constructions with inchoative verbs, such as ponerse "to put" and quedar
"to remain', which are equivalent to the lexically related verbs for most
adjectives, e.g. :

~57i AdlccLms c Verb Periphrasc

t,;,, "ugl~" a/cur w pnm'rse leo "to become ugly'
itcrmowJ "hcztutifti]" hctmo.wur.~c p o l l e r s e hertTloso "to become beautiful"
&~&a~b, "thin" ,,h'lga:ar pom~r.w ~h,igaeh~ "to become thin"
n.rnutl "norxrlal tltJrnlali-ur pOllt'rst" llO¢,lltl] "to become normal"
alto "tall ponerse alto "to become tall"
tth~'gqt "ohl.~%td" pq,tlerse ohe.w~ "to become obese"
tltltttltlt~ "old" p o n e r x e ant'iano "to become old'

However, in the case of many of the estar-predicates of (56), not only

is there no lexically related verb, but these adjectives are not even easily
acceptable in the periphrastic construction, e.g."

(~ c~lar ~ adjecID,e BECOMf- REMAIN

c~tar pcrphTn "perplexed" *pom'rse pcrphjo ?quedarse perph:jo
,~tar prc~cntc "present" *ponerse presett tc *quedarse presen le
c~lar (t~o "ali~e" *ponerse viro *quedarse vivo
c~tar s,.,lo "alone" *poncrsc s.h, quetkn'(se) .soh~
 M. Luj(m ,. Spanish copuhts 185

e.~tar soltero 'single" *pom,rse soltero que&u'(se) soltcro

estar maltrecho "battered" *pom, rse maltrecho qm'~hu" mallm,cho
estur listo "ready' *ponerse iisto ?que&tr listo
estar #ttacto 'intact" *ponerse itlldClo quedar intacto

This state of affairs is consistent with the direction of the inference as

indicated in (53) and (55), and opposite to what has generally been assumed
by many authors (Bull 1965; Demonte 1978 ; Querido 1976; Roldfin 1974,
etc.). Moreover, that the verbs imply resulting states, and not inversely,
is clearly demonstrated by the examples that follow, where the (a) state-
ments are true while the (b) sentences are false:

(59a) Si se ensuci6, estuvo sucio (T)

'If it became dirty, it was dirty"
(59b) Estuvo sucio, por lo tanto se ensuci6 (F)
'It was dirty, hence it became dirty'
(60a) Lo han pintado de amarillo, por lo tanto estfi amarillo (T)
'They have painted it yellow, therefore it is yellow"
(60b) Estfi amarillo, por 1o tanto 1o han pintado de amarillo (F)
'It's yellow, therefore they have painted it yellow"
(61a) Si se abri6 la puerta a las diez, estuvo abierto a esa hora (T)
"If the door was opened at ten, then it was open at ten'
(61b) Si la puerta estuvo abierta a l a s diez, se abri6 a esa hora (F)
"I' the door was open at ten, then it was opened at ten"
(62a) HaSia adelgazado con una dieta rigurosa, por 1o tanto estaba
delgado (T)
"He had become thin with a rigorous diet, therelbre hc was thin"
(62b) Estaba delgado, por 1o tanto habia adelgazado con una dieta
rigurosa (F)
"He was thin, therefore he had become thin with a rigorous diet'

That the (b) statements above are undoubtedly false is corroborated by

the fact that the estar-predicates may be overtly disassociated from the
lexically related verbs denoting actions or modifications, e.g.:

(63) Est~ sucio, no porque se haya ensuciado, sino porque hace mucho
que no 1o limpian
'It's dirty, not because it became dirty, but because it hasn't been
cleaned in a long time'
|g6 .ll. Lu]¢in Sp+o,i.~hcopu&.~

164t Estfin amarillas, no porque se pusieran amarillas, sino porque las

pintaron de amarillo
"They're yellow, not because they became yellow, but because they
were painted yellow'.
165) Estaba delgado, no porque hubiera adelgazado, sino porque era
delgado
"He was thin. not because he had become thin, but because he was
{had always been) thin"
{66) Esta puerta estfi abierta, no porque alguien la abriera, sino porque
siempre ha estado abierta
"This dool is open. not because someone opened it, but because
it has always been open"

i. n. . . ,h,,,-,
. . . . . . . . ,h
. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .." ';"
~.,. ana ly sis here proposed accounts for the partial
synonymy of set- and estar-predicates, while effectively characterizing the
truth-conditions for the use of these predicates., and their lexical relation-
~hips to other verbs in the language. The analysis is also applicable to the
lexical distinctiou between imperfective and pcrfective verbs (Gili y Gaya
19611 v, hich then together with estar- and ser-gredicates, may be classified
as perfective and imperfective predicates. Moreover, it is basically the
analysis that must be assumed for the distinctions falling under grammatical
-~Pt~-;. althot, gh in this study I will not explore what the specifications
must be of the meanings of iraperfective and perfective predicates when
u,,cd with perfect and imperfect aspects.

3. Additional arguments

The propo~d semantic characterization throws light on several features

of copulative predicates which have until now remained unexplained. For
instance, it is frequently observed that estar is normally used with locative
predicate,;, a~ the examples of (67) show"

~67~ M i J " e r m a n ° { B
estfi
u e n}° sen
AireS*es

M~, brother is in Buenos Aires"

Los nifios { *eran
esrmban } afuera

"The children were outside"

 M. Lujdm , Spanish ('OptthlS 187

While another class of examples has become notorious for accepting either
copula, e.g. :

(68) Elbafio { aesta

l l i e }s

"The bathroom is there"

i ' D 6 n d e / est~i}elc°rre°?es

'Where's the post office?'

In the present analysis this distribution of the copulas is explained by

the kind of individual with respect to which these predicates are applied.
Animate individuals are not normally co~lceived as fixed in a point in space.
In consequence, a reference in that sense requires presupposing a definite
period of time. Hence, the perfective copula is indicated for these predicates
when their subjects are animate, as in (67).
Motionless inanimate individuals, instead, may be conceived as fixed in
a spacial point, and, in their case, the reference need not be restricted to
a definite or delimited period of time. Consequently, the locative phrases
may be predicT:d of these entities with one or the other copula, as shown
in (68). But fir the movable inanimate individuals the restriction in the
manner of te: aporal reference must be the same as for the animate indivi-
duals. The locat:ve predicates, in their case, require the perfective copula, e.g. :

(69) Los libros J e,~tfin ~ e n el estante

~ *son J
'The books are on the shelf'
El pafiuelo J estaba ~, en su bolsillo
! *era J
"The handkerchief was in his pocket'

This analysis also accounts for the observation commonly pointed cut
in pedagogical grammar textbooks, concerning the meaning of a class of
nouns, such as discurso "speech', conferencia 'lecture', concierto "concert',
sinfonia "symphony', and others. These nouns are ambiguous and may
denote either events or physical objects. However, when they are constructed
with a copulative verb plus a locative phrase, they can only denote an event
if the copulative verb is ser, and, inversely, they can only refer to a concrete
object if the verb is estar, e.g.:
| ~8 tl. Ltadn Spanish copulas

(70) Eidiscurso/ eraestaba } aili

"The speech was there"

,71) L a c o n f e r e n c i a { e}s e n l a s a l a p r i n c i p a l e s ~

"The lecture is in the main room"

it was pre~'iously seen now concrete (animate or inanimate) entities that

are mobile of their own or that can be moved, and which, in general,
are not characterized by a fixed position in space, require the perfective
copula to de~ribe their location in space. Hence, this kind of predicate
must be compatible with those nouns in their reading as physical objects.
The Jmperfective predicate describing location, on the other hand, must be
mcx~mp~ti~!e wi|h such reading, according to this analysis. The imperfective
predicate must. in fact. ~ compatibie with their interpretation as events,
f~r only in that meaning may they be characterized as occurring in a fixed
t~sition in the space continuum. Of course, in the two readings of these
r+oun+~, as events and as concrete entities, they are compatible with both
'.ylT~'s o '+ temporal reference (perfective/imperfective) when they are con-
qructed v,'ith de~riptive rather than locative predicates, e.g.:

~721 El concierto { estuVOfue / aburrido

"The concert yeas boring"

,73, E, d i ~ ' u r ~ n o { estaba / e~rito
habia ,~ido
"[he speech was not written"

The" present analysis also accounts for the ability of ser- and estar-
predicates to combine with different classes of adverbials. For iastance,
frequency adverbs and time adverbials which delimit the temporal reference,
~+e. w+hich select definite or delimited periods in the time continuum require
a perf~tive predication and are incompatible with the copula ser. Observe
boy,+ the attributes callada "quiet silent" and tit,.:ida ~shy+ are compatible
~,~,ith both copulas:

t74~~JEraEStaba ~[callada "She was silent:quiet"

! "Es~
S h e '}s stimida
hy'Es
 M. Lujdn ,' Spanish copulas 189

However, in the examples (75) and (76) the perfcctivc copula must be
used, since the predicates are here constructcd with frequency a d v e r b s "~4

(75) Estuvo } callada tres veces

*Fue
'She was silent three times"
t Etsi tmuivd°a}v a r i a s v e c e s * F u e
"She was shy several times'
(76) tEstfi}
calladacuami°let°cohahlar*Es
"She is silent when it's her turn to speak"
Estaba ~, timida cada vez que h, tocaha dirigir
*Era
"She was shy every time it was her turn to direct"

In the present analysis this distribution follows from the interpretation of

these frequency adverbs; they denote sets of occasions, i.e. delimited time
periods, and, thus, they require the perfective copula.
Imperfective attributive predicates are compatible with time advcrbiais
that do not ~,Aect a delimited time period, e.g."

(77) Era allada antes

"She was quiet before'
Era timida cuando era pequega
"She was shy when she was small'
Era callada cuando la conocimos
'She was quiet when we first met her'

But time adverbs, in their rjaajority, lend themsclves to denoting a time

period in its duration, as stretching indefinitely over numerous occasions,
or, alternatively, they may refer to a delimited period on the time axis.
Consequently.. time adverbs, in general, are also compatible with perfective
copulas, e.g. :

(78) Estuvo callada antes

'She was quiet before"
Estuvo timida cuando /a e n c o n t r a m o s
'She was shy when we found her'
|+~ .11. l.u/~Jn Spanish ~'opulas

There is. however, a very noticeable meaning difference between the

prcdic~tcs of (77) and (78)"

~79a9 Era callada antes

"She was quiet before'/'She used to be quiet before"
~79b) E~turo callada antes "She was quiet before"

The truth conditions for these sentences are very different. Notice that a
~mtement such as ,V. hahia dicho una sola palahra "She had not said a word'
m~t~ f~llov, from (b) but not from (a):

[8Oa) Era caliada antes (*No habia dicho una sola palabra)
"She used to be quiet before" ('She had not said one word'9
~;~lb9 |-stw, o calh~da antes (No habia dicho una sola palabra)
,~K_+L
. . . . :11 ___~ |_ _ ~ _ _ _.

.~.c was s.ent oenore ('She had not said one word')

l+ik~.'v.l~, the statements given below are compatible with (b); by contrast,
m rchJtwon to (a9 they w,ould force taking its predicate as a misrepresentation
¢~f the fhct~ +

~Xlaj Era caJlada ante~ (*Habia sido muda) (*Habia hecho un voto de

"She u.,cd to be quiet before" ('*She had '~en mute' ),'( "*She had
taken a ~.ow of silence')
~ t b j I!,.tw.o caliada antes (Habia sido muda)~(Habia hecho un voto
dc :.denciol
"She v,+as silent before" ('She had been mute" )/( "She had taken a
,.or. of silence')

The distribution of frequency adverbs and these two distinct interpretations

ot attri~u'i'='e predicates bearing other time adverbials find a satisfactory
c~planation in the proposed analysis, thereby providing a strong supporting
~rgument.
The anal}~,i~,, v.hich gi~,es an a c c o u n t of the partial synonymy of the two
~:opuJas. predicts ~hat the area of overlap of ser and estar must be larger
than v.hat has generally been supposed, so it cannot be held that these verbs
'cxcep~ in tyro :~pects. are in perfect complementary distribution" (Stock-
~clt et a i 1965: |70A in the surface s~ructures in which they occur. For
instance, it has commonly been accepted that predicate sentences with
 M. Lt~jtits Spallish ~'opuht.s 191

sentential subjects are restricted to copula ser (Stockweli et al. 1965;' 257}.
This conclusion is reached on the basis of data like the tbllowing:

(82) { pEsr e c i s o} q u e e s t u d i e s . E s t f i

'It's necessary that you study'

Era } importante que termin/~ramos pronto
*Estaba
'It was important that we finished soon'

However, e s t a r - p r e d i c a t e s should be acceptable with sentential subjects,

since these, like other individuals (a man, a letter, an idea, etc.), may be
conceived in terms of states specifable in relation to a limited period of
time. The following examples corroborate this predictioi-~:

(83) / Estfi ~ bien claro que t0 no sabes nada

! *Es J
'It's quite clear that you know nothing'
Estfi ~, en la Biblia que Dios hizo al hombre en su propia imageI:~
*Es J
"It's i', the Bible that God made man in his ow, n image"

Again, it is also claimed that prepositional phrases denoting origin,

ownership, m,,terial or purposes of an individual or entity, must take .~'¢,r
and not estar in a predicate sentence. Observationally, this is gener,tlly true,
but it is not always so, as shown by the tbllowing example, where both
copulas are acceptable:

(84) E s t a t ° a l l a / eSestfi } p . a r a s e c a r p l a t o s

'This towel is for drying dishes'

Given that the purpose or function of an individual or entity, as well

as its ownership and material are modifiable, these properties may be con-
ceived as perfective states. For instance, the purpose or fanction of ~n
object may be changed at will. In that case the predicate se'ntence that is
used in reference to it rrnust be expressed with estar, thereby falsifying
the commonplace claim:
I q2 .ll. Lultin Spanish copuhts

l'SSjM°difiqu6estat°alladebafi°yah°rat est~i/parasecarplat°S*es

"I have modified this bath towel, and now it is for drying dishes"
~86) Este cuadro era para mi colecci6n privada, pero cambi6 de parecer
y d e s d e h o y { pestfi}
es
araservendidoalmejorpostOr,

"This picture was for my private collection, but I changed my mind

and starting today it is to be sold to the highest bidder'

Besides adequately accounting for the distribution and interpretation of

predicates bearing the copulative verbs, the present analysis reflects the
distinction between essential vs. accidental properties. The former corres-
pond to those characteristics that individuals have over stretches of time
covering a number of distinct occasions or delimited time periods, while the
latter correspond to those properties that individuals may have at delimited
time periods, i,e. occasionally. Thus, the analysis, razher than superseding
the traditional distinction, succeeds in incorporating it by giving an explicit
and formal definition of the terms of the distinction. Likewise, the analysis
defines what the relationship is between perfective predicates and those
denoting changes or modifications. Bu, notice that these consequences are
by-products of the analysis, since it does not require that perfective predicates
be related to modifications, nor does it prohibit imperfective predicates from
being related to predicates denoting changes of state.
in fact. that attributive predicates must be distinguished aspectually, as
proposed here, is further corroborated by the existence of two classes of
inchoative verbs. On the one hand, there are inchoative reflexive verbs that
must be perfective, such as ponerse "to put' and quedarse "to remain', for
the} can be constructed with perfective predicates. Notice that these verbs
are compatible with those adjectives that would require estar in a predicate
sentence, e.g. :

187a) Se puso muy contento cuando recibio tu carta

"He became very happy when he received your letter'
~87b~ Nos quedamos perplejos ante su respuesta
"We remained perplexed at his answer"
t87c~ Te pones .lurtoso si llegan tarde
"You get furious if ~hey arrive late'
!87d~ Se quedaron solas todo el dia
"They remained alone all day"
 M. L,]dn . Spa,L~h copuhts 193

On the other hand, there are reflexive inchoatives that must be imperfcctive,
such as voh,erse ~to turn into' and hacerse 'to be made into', and must be
constructed with attributive predicates displaying the same meaning they
have when they appear with ser, e.g.:

(88a) Se voh, i6 muy pesimista

~He turned into a great pessimist'
(88b) Su hija se ha hecho toda una mtdercita
'Her daughter has turned into a little woman"
(88c) Te has vuelto mentirosa
~You have become a liar'
(88d) Nos haremos ricos en poco tiempo
'We will be made rich in a short time"

Thus, the existence of inchoative verbs denoting changes of state for the
imperfective predicates as well as for the perfective ones raises no problem
in this analysis. The definition of imperfective predicates as denoting pro-
perties characterizing individuals over indefinite stretches of time throws
light on the semantic difference between the predicates constructed with
one or the other type of inchoatives. It seems clear that the examples
of (88) denole a more radical kind of modification undergone, by the
individuals r :ferred to in those sentences. That is, the inchoative verbs
there denot~ a change of state with respect to the essential properties of
the Aristote, ;an distinction. But the inchoatives of (87) must refer to changes
of state with respect to accidental properties; thus, they a~e understood
as involving superficial or temporary changes. This is precisely the difl'erence
of meaning between the predicates of the (a) and (b) examples below:

(89a) Se hicieron muy feliccs ~They became very happy'

(89b) Se pusieron mey felices

The semantic interpretation of the aspectual distinction imperfective/

perfective finds an independent justification in the interpretation of this
distinction in verbal forms, which overtly show two different endings for
the simple past tense, e.g. cant6/cantaba 'sang'. The interpretation of these
two forms of preterit requires a specification with respect to time period
in the terms proposed here for the attributive predicates. A rough approx-
imation would be the folllowing:
194 .~1. Lu/6n Spani~'h Colmhzs

<90a) Clx) at tk > to

(90b) ('ix) at t,... t,. ~, > to

where C stands tbr the predicate c a n t a r , to represents the present time or

time of utterance, and > indicates a precedence relation. It may be seen
,t...otllat (90a) corresponds to the interpretation of c a n t 6 as predicated of an
individu,d x. while (90b) describes the interpretation of c a n t a b a , predicated
with respect to the same individual. Notice that the second interpretation
would be ambiguous between the reading of habitual action (equivalent to
.~olia ~ a n t a r "used to sing') and that of an action in progress (equivalent
to e.~tahu c a n t a n d o "was singing'). In the former interpretation the reference
is to a succession of repetitions of the acti,,ity c a n t a r 'to sing" over a stretch
of time. In the latter reading, the reference is to that activity carried out on
a single occasion but regarded in its progressive dimension, that is. from
instant to instant.
The validity of the:,e interpretations is corroborated by the fact that the
inferences are parallel to the one described in relation to e s t a r - and ser-
predicates. The simplc (perfective) preterit and the imperfect preterit are
also partially :.y~onynlous. The latter implies the former: ~s

{91) Imperfect Preterit

mr t a b u -,. ~'an t6 "sa n g"
hacia -, hizo "made/did"
o rria ,. ~'orrio "ran"

Buy. the inverse relation is not valid: ~'

tt)2) Preterit Imperfect

cant6 -~ cantaha "sang"
hi-_o --,. hacia *made/did"
corrh'p --, c o r r i a 1, "ran"

Similarly. the distribution of some frequency adverbs is parallel to the

one described in relation to attributive predicates; that is, the perfective,
but not the imperfecti,,e simple past. admit these adverbs, e.g.:~s

{")3t I (-'ant6*Cantaba } varias veces

"She sang several times"

 M. Lujan / Spanish copuhts 195

L°/ *haciahiZ° } cuando le obligaron

"She did it when they forced her to"

Again, there are time adverbials that are compatible with those forms,
although the resulting combinations are not semantically equivalent, e.g.:

(94) Cantaba antes "She used to sing/was singing before"

Cant6 antes "She sang before'
(95) Lo hizo cuando era pequeiia
"She did it when she was small"
Lo hacia cuamto era pequeTta
"She used to do/was doing it when she was small'

The semantic difference in the sentences of these pairs of examples is related

to the relative time periods denoted by the preterit forms. The imperfective
past refers to an undelimited period stretching over a number of occasions,
while the perfective past selects one particular occasion or delimited time
period. These data, then, show that the interpretations and consequences
of the proposed analysis are generalizable to other verbal forms and also
account for the interpretation of time adverbials constructed with perfective
and imperfect~ Je tenses.
In short, tt,e semantic interpretation proposed for the aspectual differ-
entiation indi-ated by the use of the two Spanish copulas, besides accounting
for previously unaccounted distributional facts, as well as for their partial
synonymy, is also generalizable to the aspectual distinction perfective/im-
perfective in the verbal tenses of the language.

4. Adjectival participles

In the initial section it was pointed out that past participles may be
constructed with both copulas. The participle constructed with set makes up
a passive construction, e.g.:

(96) La carta fue escrita ayer

'The letter was written yesterday'

This sentence may be expanded by adding an agentive phrase, e.g.:

J96 .~t Luian Spanish copulas

~97) La carla fue escrita ayer por tu hermana

"The letter was written yesterday by your sister"

However. when the participle appears constructed with estar, the construc-
tion is not passi~,e, and a similar expansion is not possible, e.g. :

(g8) La carta estuvo escrita ayer

"The letter was written yesterday'
(99) *La carta esluvo escrita ayer por tu hermana
"The letter was written yesterday by your sister"

tkqlo calls the participle constructed with a copula "adjectival participle'

u~ d~ainguish it from the verbal participle used in the perfect tenses, e.g.:

"Fie ha~ become ( a n g r ) "

| I satisfied"
i , dll|~iL-r~|lll,y
Jngu~t|ado
:+~mbrado l anguished"
astonished"

Or:e ob~,iou,: differeJ~ce lies in the fact that the adjectival participles, like
|he ~tdJ~,~|ivC~. must agree in gender and number with the subject of the
~entencc in v.'hich they function as an attributive predicate. Thus, they are
characterized by their gender and number endings, e.g.:

!D0J) / a ~ c a r t a s e s t a n l e s c r i t a s / . p e r o l a c o m i d a n o e s t f i t p r e p a r a d a
*escrito *preparado
"The lettc~+s are v,'ritten, but the meal is not prepared"

*the ~.erbaJ participle, instead, always presents the invariable participial

or,dine -d- -to. e.g. :

~I02~ Ana todavia no ha J escrito [ la carta

/ *escrita
"Ann has not yet written the letter"

In addition, the adjectival participles behave like the adjectives in other

rc+~p~x:ts. The} may be modified by adverbs of degree or quantity, which
are c~c-~ar~} incompatible w'ith the verbal participle, as shown below:
 M. Lu/an / Spanish c~qmhl~' i9;

(1(13) Estfi muy (enojado "He is very I annoyed'

satisfecho satisfied"
angustiado anguished"
asombrado astonished"
(104) Se ha *muy enojado "He has become very { annoyed"
satisfecho satisfied'
angustiado anguished'
asombrado astonished'

However, not all participles that may be constructed with a copula ~should
be considered as adjectives. I think that two classes of adjectival participles
must be distinguished. One class includes participles like escrit- "written',
the other consists of participles like enojad- ~annoyed'. Only the latter class
of participles may be considered to be true adjectives. The criteria for this
discrimination are as follows.
First, participles like escrit- ~written' do not freely admit adverbia~ mod-
ifiers. The only adverbs that may modify the participles in this class are
precisely those that are compatible with the corresponding verbal forms, e.g. :

(105) La carta est~ii casi escrita "The letter is almost i written"

bien well
*harto *a lot
*extremadamente *extremely ,~,

*m~is * ITIO r¢2

*menos *less
*ba sta n te *enough

(106) Ca.si escribi6 la carta "He almost wrote the letter"

Escribi6 hien la carta "He wrote the letter well"

By contrast, participles like enojad- "annoyed', sati,s;/i,ch- "satisfied', angustiad-

"anguished' and many others, may be modified by any kind of adverbs,
e.g."

(107) Estfi casi enojado "He is almost annoyed"

bien well
harto mu~'h
muy very
extremadamente extremely
mils more
menos less
bastante enough
i~'8 ,'~1. Luitin Spani.~h copulas

~ c o n d . as is characteristic of the adjectives, participles like enojad-

"annoyed" ma) function as an attributive modifier in prenominal or post-
r.,m+nai position, e.g.

+ ar~gustiada
+/aon+hedanguished I,~
,x'oman
enc~jada annoyed (
~,~fecha satisfied .)
~;+~L~ mu~cr 1" a~mbrada
angu~tiada
¢nojada
~t+,~fecha

A participle like e.+trit- "written'. instead, cannot modify a noun in pre-

r~minat position, e.g.

"the written letter"

"the prepared meal"
L~ pucr~,~b+ert~ "the open door"
"the t+uJfiHedtask"

Ad~cct+~,c+~ t~picall) may occur as prenominal and postnominal modifiers,

+~!.~ L~)" hcr:r+,+~Jm~crc~mc

/ meier
the { ambitiousdi
ut=l
~'reetul./
anterestmgbCa
v,oma n"

m~ere~rJEe
d~Tre~

Hence. the rL:l~ that specify which modifiers may appear before a noun
+c+ther the~+ be generative or translormational) will be greatly simplified if
~hc> must mention only the class of adjectives. This reason, together with
the- facts about adverbial modification are sufficient for considering par-
~+c~p~ like ~'n+qad- "annoyed'..s+atislech - "satisfied', angustiad- "anguished',
~nd many more. as true adjectives, R'~ but not participles like e~s'crit- "written',
prcparad- "prepared', abiert- "open', and others.
 M. Luj6n Spanish c~qmhl.s' i 99

The participial adjectives are related to a class of reflexive inchoativc

verbs which denote changes of physical or mental states, and are charac-
teristically restricted to the copula estar, e.g.:

(114) *Son angustiados por su culpa

'They are anguished on his account'
*Fue enojada por su hijo
'She was annoyed by her son"

Tile adjectival participles, for their part, share the characteristic that they
may be constructed with estar or with ser, e.g. :

(I 15) La puerta estfi abierta "The door is open'

Las ventanas estfin cerrad~ls 'The windows are closed'
La comida esta preparada "The meal is prepared"
El t r a b ~ o estfi hecho "The work is done'
(116) La puerta fue abierta "The door was opened'
Las ventanas fueron cerradas "The window's ~'ere closed'
La comida fue preparada "The meal was prepared'
El trabajo rue hecho 'The work was done'

However, not every participle in the language may fulfill this double t'unc-
tion, and thu, be included in the same class with es~'rit- "written', as shown
below:

(I 17) *La ca J-eta estfi empujada "The cart is pushed"

*La sopa estfi tomada "The soup is eaten'
*El auto estfi manejado "The car is driven"
*Las cosas estan traidas "The things are brought'
*La pared estfi tocada "The wall is touched'

Thus, two questions arise in connection with past participles: why are
the participial adjectives like dnojad- 'annoyed' restricted to copula eslar,
and which participles are included in the same class as the adjectival
participle escrit- 'written'? The answers t.', these questions require a close
scrutiny of the semantic nature of the verbs involved.
The participial adjectives are related to inchoative verbs denoting changes
of physical or mental states, and are, c.)nsequently, stative just as these
verbs are stative. Now, this specification prevents it from combining with
ser in a passive sentence. The past participles that do so are active, i.e.
non-stative (Lujfin 1980~. But the reason why this class of participles, and
those such as e w r i t - 'written', may be constructed with the perfective copula
~ ?4. Lu/dn Spani.~h copulas

e~mr is to be found in the fact that they occur in perfective predicates.

The terbs from which these two types of past participle derive fall in the
c~itcgories postulated b) Vendler (1967) as "accomplishments" and 'achieve-
meats'. Examples of these two categories of verbal predicates are given
below:

A( ( O M P L I S H M E N T
c~rtblr u n a ~ a r t a "to ~ r i t e a letter"
ptcparar la ~mslda "to prepare dinner"
a h r l r ]a p u c r ; , t "to o p e n the door"
~rt~t tlilll t~li//~ °tO r u n ~1 mile"
prcts~6'r afltJgar itotti l u : "to turn o n off a light"
:~t III F_VF.MI:.NI
~ l n a r ~tnU ~arr~'r~ "|O ~,in a racc"
d~'h~ tar u n ~,rr~r "=~ delecI a ml,dake"
d~'¢~¢t~r~r uti t~,~or~, "I~~ di~o~,er a treasure"
~,~pr~'nd~rw "to be ~urpri~d"
a/cgrarw °Io l~" merry"
a~u~tur~, "~o i~. frightened"
a~,,mt~tatw "to bc amazed"

Vendler contrasts these categories with "activities" and "states" on the basis
of the time schemata required by the different kinds of predicates. He
defines accomplishments and achievements as requiring or implying unique
and definite time periods, while activities and ~ t e s would involve periods
of time that are non-unique and indefinite. The main criteria for determining
the time ~hemata invoked in the use of a given predicate lie in the types of
t~ne adverbials that are compatible with them, and the types of questions
involving temporal references that make sense or are appropriate with the
different t;ff~es of predicates (Vendler 1967). It may be seen that accomplish-
~ n t s and achievements are perfective by the present characterization.
Vendler's classification is specially useful here, because of the distinction
drav,n between accomplishment and achievement verbs and the class of verbs
denoting pure "activities'. such as manejar in manejar el auto "to drive the
~=ar'. empujar in empujar la carreta "to push the cart', tocar in tocar la pared
°~o teuch the v,alC. etc., whose past participles cannot be constructed with
e~lar "
b

~ - ~ "L~ a=t~ ~.~a ~ p ~ j a ~ "The zar is driven"

" l ~ ~a-'~.la ~.~td e m p u i ~ "The can is pushed"
 M. Lujdn / Spanish copulas 201

*La pared estd tocada 'The wall is touched'

*Sus vali/as estdn traidas 'His suitcases are brought'
*Su caheza estaba movida 'His head was moved'
*Sus manos estaban dadas 'Their hands were shaken'

Notice that these unacceptable constructions would correspond to activity

predicates, e.g. :

(121) Maneja el auto 'He drives/is driving his car'

Empujamos la carreta 'We push/are pushing the cart'
Tocaron ia pared 'They touched the wall'
Movi6 la cabeza 'He moved his head'
Se dahan la mano 'The were shaking'shook hands"

The predicates in (121), unlike accomplishments and achievements, cannot

be modified by a time adverbial indicating a unique or definite time period,
such as the adverbial phrases introduced by the preposition en "in', in the
following examples:

(122) *Maneja el auto en media hora

'He is driving the car in half an hour"
*Empujamos la carreta en tres horas
'We :.re pushing the car in three hours'
*To, aron la pared en un instante
'Thtv touched the wall in an instant"
*Mov;6 la cabeza en toda la entrevista
"He moved his head in the entire interview"

Nor does it make any sense to ask of the activities illustrated in (121) a
question such as gCudnto tiempo le Ileva/llev6, e t c . . . , hater ... ? "How Mng
does/did it take ... to d~ so and so?', e.g.:

(123) *LCufinto tiempo le lleva manejar el auto'?

'How long does it take him to d:'ive his car?'
*~Cu/mto tiempo les llev6 tocar la pared'?
'How long did it take them to touch the wall?"
*i,Cufinto tiempo le llev6 mover la cabeza?
'How long did it take him to move his head'?"
*/,Cufinto tiempo les llevaba darse la mano?
'How long did it take them to shake hands'?'
~2 t! i.u/an .S'pan~h ~.pula~

B~ contra,,!, it is appropriate to ask a question of that sort about accom-

plishments and achievements as well as to qualify them by means of a time
adverbial indicating a unique or definite time period, e.g."

~!24) i0Cminto !tempo ie Ilev6 escribir la carta? (Accomplishment)

"Hoax long did it take her to write the letter?"
i.CuAnto tiempo le lleva detectar un error'? (Achievement)
"tto~ hmg does it take him to detect a mistake?"
~125~ F.~r~b6 la carta en una hora
'She ~,rote lhe letter in an hour"
Det¢cta un error en meno:, de an segundo
"tte detect,, a mistake in less than a second"

l~ i~ pr~:~:m~'=y wJm u~¢: pd~t p ~ J u c q n ~ ~ u r ~ p u ~ u h ~ to accomplishment

and achie~ement predicates that the copula estar may be constructed.
The distribution of past participles with estar is explained by the aspectuai
nar~ure o f the ~,erbs involved. Accomplishment and achievement verbs,
~ml~ke ,~tC|i~,i|~ ~¢rbs. are perfective verbs denoting changes or modifications
~r the coming about of states. They denote an activity or a process wit.h
a lermmal p h a ~ . When the activity or process they denote takes place.
~he direct object (in the ca~e of a traLsitive verb like escrihir "m write')
~r the ~ub.tec! tin the case of intransitive verbs like re,fir "to die') have
~uffcred a niodification or have come to be. ] h a t is, they are found in a
d~flL~rcn! ~or nev, j ~tate or condition. The participles of such verbs may be
~:on~truct_cd v, ith the perfecti,~c copula e.~lar, then, because they describe
~tates w h o ~ beginning is defined or must be assumed. By contrast, mare:jar
~4 aul~J "to drive the car'. empujar la ca:reta "to push the cart', traer M:~
~oo~as "to bring the things', wear la pared "to touch the wall', and so forth,
gcneratl3 denote activities with no terminal phase or completion require-
men! Unlike accomplishments or achievements, these predicates hold true
for an~ subimer~al of the interval during which the activity they describe
take~ p l a c e if it is true that "Ann drove the car', then it is also true that
~he dro~e the car as ,_:oon as she started doing it. With a perfective predicate,
.,ns~c-ad. it does not follow that. for instance, if "Mary wrote a letter' is true,
it ~ a i ~ trt~e that "Ma%, wrote the letter" as soon as she started doing it"
~hc predica!~ i~ true onl~ if it is completed. Hence, predicates like m a m j a r
~4 auw "to dr~,c the car" are imperfective and their participles are incom-
pa~b|e w~id-~ zhe copula estar, as predicted by the analysis.
B,~ adopting Vendler's semantic characterization one may derive from it
 M. Luj6n / Spanish c~qvtht~ 2tl3

the specifications required for the perfective copula in the past p;trticiplcs
of verbs such as escrihir 'to write', preparar 'to prepare', abrir "to open',
cerrar 'to close', hater 'to do', cambiar ~to change', modi./icar 'to modify"
and many others. Thus, the characterization as stative and perfective for
the participles of these verbs is predictable from the specifications character-
izing accomplishment and achievement verbs, in particular, [+ PERF~CTIVF].-'°
Given ihis specification in the complex symbol of the verb in a phrase
marker, one only needs to postulate a lexical rule which replaces in that
complex symbol the teature [+ ACTIVE] for [+ STATIVE], when the verb is
combined with the ending -do to form the past participle:

(126)
PERFE('TIVE
L
+
[+ACTIVE] .. [+ STATIVE] -d.

The participial adjectives, such as enojad- "annoyed', a,gustiad- "anguished',

satisfech- 'satisfied" etc., do not undergo this rule. Recall that they derive
from reflexive inchoative verbs, such a s enojttrse ~to become annoycd',
angustiarse 'to become anguished', sati.~lacer "to satisfy', etc., which, besides
falling in Ve' dler's accomplishment class, are eminently stativc verbs. 2~
Hence, the .pecifications [+STATiVE, + PI-:RF~-~¢'TlV~-]of these participial
adjectives ar: derived from the verbs to which they are lexically related.-'-"
The analysis of the copulas in terms of the aspcctual distinction, as
proposed here, thus provides a sound account of the distribution of pas!
participles with respect to ser/estar, and, in particular, it succeeds in throw-
ing light on the restrictions defining the selection of cstar.

5. Conclusions

It was shown here that the traditional definitions in terms of undefined

notions such as essential vs. accidental prt, perties, modification and state,
are insufficient for describing the use of the Spanish copulative verbs. The
choice of copula in a predicate sentence entails an aspectual distinction
which is formally defined in the grammar by means of the fi,~ature [PER-
FEC'ilVE] and two distinct semantic interpretations assigned by the semantic
rules to the opposing values of the feature. Es'tar-predicates are perfective
and must be interpreted as inherently referring to a delimited time period,
i.e. a period of time whose beginning or end (or both) are assumed. Set-
2(14 M. Lujtin Spanish copulas

predicates are imperfective in that their temporal reference is with respect

| , an undelimited period of time. covering a number of distinct occasions
or delimited time periods, that is. a stretch of time with indefinite beginning
and end. The formal definition of these different interpretations regarding
temporal reference was shown to correctly characterize the partial synonymy
of the copulative verbs, as well as the traditional dichotomy, essential vs.
accidental, they are said to express. It also has thrown light on some
oh.~rved lexk, ai gaps and the relationship holding between verbs denoting
changes of state and perfective predicates with iexically related participles
or adjectives. In addition, the analysis provides an account for previously
u,accounted structural and semantical features, such as the distribution of
~he copulative verbs with past participles, locative phrases, and with fre-
quenc', ad:erbs, and the semantic differentiation the copulative verbs intro-
duce when u ~ d with time adverbials that are compatible with both copulas.
It v,as ~en. moreover, that the semantic definitions proposed here are
applicable to the aspectual distinction observed in other ,~:rbal forms, such
as the two simple preterit tenses. Their distribution as well as their inter-
prc|a~l,'m, and their combination with time adverbials is consistent with
the analysis Wha~ needs to be further investigated is the exact nature of
the combination,, ~f perfective and imperfective grammatical aspect with
~'rfective and imperfective types of predicates.

Notes

.E~'~c,~ri~¢- ~,cr,~,~n ,~! tha,~ anal~.,,J,, wa,. ¢,riginall~ presented .it the IXth Linguistic Sympt~.,,ium
~ Koraa~,.,- L.~r.g'.*,:,c~,. (icorgctown Uni~,cr.,,it). Washington D.C.. 1979.
Other aulhors ~.ho ha,,e deah with the meaning and use of the copulas are Bello (1~58),
|_~.-¢~J I|q25~. Na~,as Rui:! ~]963). and Roca Pons (1958).
] o th~,~ facl~r R~ldan aL,a) attributes the occurrence of estar in the following example,
~h,~h ,~he ~:llc,, to ilium,irate her p o i n t
~ .~,nl~.'~ de w,,ar a ~ g u r e ~ que los sellos est6n intactos
"Before u~mg lhem m a k e sure that the .seals are intact"
B~I [h~ predicate does not re'all}' impi} a possible change of state in the seals projected in
the: [u~ur~.-. bt~! ralhcr the: pos,,ibilit,, of having followed a course o f events in the past"
¢4~-- /u~ scu~,~ . ~l~;t? tt?la~ l~,.~ "thai the seals are intact" is here equivalent to expressing que ',;;.~
~,]/~,, ++~, haman ++:h+nzampulad:+_+ .+~ mtMtli+ath~.sj "that the seals have not been manipulated

+ R++>]dan,, ch~>+ce c,f examples in this particular ca.,,e is hardly felicitous+ as the predicate
+ +.~at ~++i¢,+re~. u'~'d non-fig-ratio, el,,. pragmatically implies .wr .soitera (see note 6). And. given
+ ~ t ~.~- ]at~.+.:r alma,,,, +replies the former, the copulas in this context are equivalent.
S+m:e Ram~+,. gl~.es accurate English translatior types, the learner is not left to decide
 M . Lu.j(m / Sl, anL~'h ('opu&s 205

what constitutes a state or implies a modilication, so his characterization seems to me the best
one pedagogically.
~' With some predicates, such as /oco "crazy', ('asado "married', .soll(,ro "single', divorciado
'divorced" (if used literally) estar is sufficient for ser:
('st(t loco --~ es loco estti solt('ro --,. es soltero
estd casado --, es casado estd divorciado -+ es divorciado
7 In reviewing the Spanish attributive predicates with distinct copulas, Comrie (1976) draws
a distinction between "contingent' states and "absolute" states corresponding to the use of estur
and set', respectively. Thus, for this author all adjectives refer to states. The reader may be
aware that my use of the terms "perfective' and "imperfective" does not follow the general use.
Their content will become clear when the formal definitions are given (see also note 10).
The classification in terms of the feature [STAriv~i] adopted here is quite different from the
one proposed by Lakoff (1966) in 'Stative adjectives and verbs in English'. In L a k o f f ' s
classification this feature dichotomizes English adjectives and verbs. Syntactically, the feature
determines whether a word can occur: (a) in the predicate of a command, (b) in a predicate
with the progressive aspect, (c) as a complement of verbs l i k e / o r c e a n d per.~ua&', (d) with
adverbs like ~h'liheratel.)' and ~'are/ull.v, and (e) with tim pro-form ,,I.,.,-s:)r)t,,'lhi;:.k,. Semantically,
the feature corresponds to something like 'inactivity'. Quite clearly, the distinction perfective
vs. imperfective states that 1 am proposing for Spanish does not correspond syntactically or
semantically to Lakoff's characterization, in the first place, in his classification there are
adjectives that are non-stative, while in the present proposal all adjectives are stativc wilhout
exception. The distinction drawn here does not correspond in its syntactic criteria to I, akoff's
subcategorization of the adjectives. There are adjectives with both .~cr and cstar that may
occur in commands, but there are others that cannot, e.g.:
(i) Est6 tranquil( "Be quiet" (ii) Sea bueno "Be good'
Est&te quietc "Be quiet" Sea discreto "Be discreet"
*Est6 conte ,to "Be glad" *Sea inteligente "Be intelligent"
*Est6 a n g u tiado "Be anguished' *Sea mortal "Be mortal"
Similarly, there a l . adjectives that can occur with either copula in t]-e complement ()1 verb,,
like p e r s u a d i r and h,rzar, while there are others that are unacceptable in such a context, e.g. :
be quiet"

ser discreta ~ t o be discreet"

.*ser morena k to be a brunette'
Except for point (b), the situation is repeated with the other criteria Lakoff uses to dis-
tinguish his stative from non-stative adjectives: there are both wr and e s m r adjectives lhat
may co-occur with the adverbs d e l i h e r a d a m e n t e "deliberately" dnd ('uidadosamcnle "carefully',
or that can be replaced by ha('er-h, "do something" in a pseudo-cleft construction, and there
are some ser and estar adjectives that are excluded f:',>m those contexts. Thus, the aspectual
distinction reflected by the Spanish copulas does not coincide with the terms of Lakoff's
classification. It is easy to see that not even the adjectives constructed with (,star, which may
be considered the specialized "stative" copula (since it only occurs with stative predicates, see
Luj~.n 1980), coincide with Lakoff's stative adjectives in their syntactic behavior as determined
by the criteria set up in his analysis. Given that Lakoff attempts t() define universal categories
of verbs and adjectives on the basis of this feature, the absence of parallels in Spanish would
refute the supposed universality of his classification and of the syntactic criteria on which
~+~ ,11. Lupin Spam.+h (opula.+

it s+ h,J~:d Ik. a a,, It ma). here ~t ,,, ,,ufficient to keep in mind that my use of the term
~a+~+~,c" lot Ih~,"adj¢~:il~c,, ,ind other predicates constructed v,ith a copula does not correspond
~th Ih¢ %~nlactt¢ ¢ia,,~+fication propo.,~'d by Lakoff.
+ | ~ r ~+r~," detad~ of the +,~ntactlc analysis see chapter ] in Lujan 1980.
°" In the~', as in d¢fimtions (30) and (31"). ! foUow Gili y G a y a ' s use o f the terms
"ig~+:~:w.e and "mmperfecu~.e'. which does not conform to the general use. His distinction
~mJYd correspond ,,:r~. roughly to the "durative" ,~s. "punctual" differentiation o f traditional
t ng~+h gr~Jmmar ~,,ee Comrie 19761 Since ! agree with Gilt y Gaya in equating this aspect
+,f the inherent meaning o f lexical items with the meaning of the grammatical distinction
,+~f~z6h:d h 3, p,+rfc~! and imperiect ten~,, in Spanish. it is only appropriate to pccserve the
~:rm~m~h~g~ rcfk'Ltmg ;hi,, ,.le~ ttowe~er, no confusion should arise since throv, ghout the
~°~p:~ p:d~'~.t~,e" and "~mpcrfi.'~tl~,e are used to reli:r Io the lexical content of the ~redicates.
~c p,~rf¢'~.'h+~,¢~mp+:r~¢tll',,¢ ten~e,, preterit,," ~,~,ill be u,,,ed v, hen rererring to grammatical

,X+ ~ o d here. the notion ~. different from the one standard in tense logic. In the latter
++ rc~er+ ~+ m.~,Jm,, +~r m~ment,, m an ab,,olute ,,on,c,:. obeying the axioms of density and

: rh~,, prcdg~te i,,, a~¢p:abJe bill ~|lh an unrelated meaning, where vivo is equivalent

Ibex< ~,crb+ are m the language but not ~ t h the meaning related to the corresponding

" /m g,~n~d Pc ,16~.eptabl¢ here. hal m a difk'rent reading, g here c a l h , ht is the past

+%tim: ++,+ ,,Ikm~ed three times b.,, the shouts of the crowd"
++ |h~- ~p~.,~;l~,n h~hJ,, a,, hmg as the ~,erb,, are taken in i,a)lation or as part of imperfect|re
~,~,~'~+c,, | h w , ,,#elar ~ ~mperk'c'm,e. but t u/ihlr tlllti l+tlll~lbtl "to sing a song" is perfect|re

¢ ~t~##]~1 +flTItg~, I lJtU~ IlPI~ -~" • ~lnllJ IlIT~I L LtIIL'IIJll

]'~a~ #+# +it+it pUf~It+Igi -- ht.Tt~ I t / I l l p l f l l l ' l l J

~H¢¢1 ett~d ~t~J[~2 ~ t t:rrit'~ UlI¢i t i l l H g l

-m+++ rnnmP++ ,~ ml|~:" "ran a ml~e"

~" S~g,¢ ;J~:g~¢~lK~. "to sing', hater :to do'. c o r r ¢ , r " t o run" and so on. have
sg~c'h aS ~ u n l u r
d ~ + ~h~ Wd~|+~¢ pre~'nt implies the imwrfccti~,c preterit in its sense of action in
p~'~ |h/~,c'~cr. ~l doe:,, not ~mpl~ the ~ n ~ o f habitual action of the imperfcctive preterit.
° T~- ,sb~-rg-e of +mpt~:at~on. as in ~92). seems quite clear with active verbs. However.
~ h ~,~.-~ ;ha~ ck-r~te mcnm| ,,t~:te., or p r o c c s ~ s it is not as clear that the inverse relation
+,++++~+~++++L.d But I '~J++| ,+..++aim ttmt it is not:

~+m+ -I- ~ + a . + a "+ + ~ "

gh~,~ ~'e,s;rg.l~n is ~o! ab,soiute For mslance, notice that cuntab, varia.s veces could be
~ 2 ¢ ~ ' e ~ ~ ¢ ¢ p ~ b , c m the ~o||o,~,mg context:

%~ ~ ~ ~mg sc~eral~ ;imes w,hen she was requested"

 M. LU/6n Spanish copuhts 207

Similarly, the frequency adverbs can occur with a predicate such ;is Io haciu, e.g.'
~ when forced to"
(ii) Lo hacia cuandOfrecuentemenle
obligabante "tie did it ] frequently'

varias veces I, several times'

However. these predicates differ sharply in meaning from"

(iii) Lo hizo { varias

cuando
frec Uenveces
temen
le obligaron
te 'He did it { when
t O ' suen
freq e vforced
etitimes,
ry'a l

In the context of these imperfective and perfective preterits (hacia hi-o), the frequency adverbs
behave like the other time adverbials in that their interpretation ~s deterrnined by the tense
of the verb they occur with. Thus, in (ii) the time adverbials refer to an ind,:finitc or
undetermined number of occasions (the frequency adverbs have an open-end type ol reading),
while in (iii) they refer to a delimited or definite number of occ,tsions (the frequency adverbs
having a close-end ,,pe of reading).
:'~ Morphologic' flS, they are also like adjectives: they admit the superlative suffix -i.~imo
and they " _ ve as base for the formation of adverbs in -me, t,,. The modifiers that are
exclusivel _ ,t-l,ominal do not share these .,._marr~hologicai; properties (Lujfin 19811).
'" ! am referring here loosely to types of predicates, i hat these verbs cannot be marked
in the lexicon with this specification is indicated by the fact thai the same verb ma2~ bc used
to describe an accomplishment or an activity (e.g.e.scril~ir 'write" with or without a direcl
object). However, the feature specification is predi,.,able from the contextual features of the
verb in a phrase r:.v.,~.rker, in particular, the t,.,:ccwrence of a direct object and the grammali,czfl
aspect in the At~X node.
-" In the case of the participial adjectives, it is possible that their related verbs must bc
lexicaily marked as [+PERFECTIVE]. These change-of-state verbs arc inchoalise, and a~,
such, they denote the initiation of a mental or physical state, and arc incompatible with the
sense of duration or incompletion (Luj~in 19771.
22 Lakoff (1965) has proposed a transformational derivation of the inchoative verbs from
structures containing the predicate adjectives. Roidtin (1971-), 1971) has developed such ,in
analysis for the Spanis~'~ reflexive verbs. However, it can be demonstrated that the analysis
is untenable (Lujtin 1977). A transformational analysis deriving the ester-past participle con-
structions from the sentences with the reflexive verbs is also untenable. In the first place, the
two types of sentence ~re not synonymous, though they are semantically related, e.g."
(i) (a) Juan se muri6 "John died'
(b) Juan esta muerto "John is dead"
(ii) (a) Se enoj6 ~She got mad'
(b) Estfi enojada "She is mad"
(iii) (a) Se angustiaron "Th-y became anguished"
(b) Esthn angustiados "They are anguished'
in these examples the (b) sentences describe states in which individuals are found, the
(a) sentences describe rather the processes undergone by the individuals involved. These pairs
of sentences cannot be considered as parallel to the pairs of active and.passive sentences.
Bello has already pointed out that in such pairs as given above, the related process always
precedes the resulting state denoted by the participial adjective. Hence, while the process is
referred to by means of the past tense, the resulting state may be described in the present
tense. This tense difference does not exist in the active-passive sentence pairs.
208 M. Lu/6n / Spanish copulas

Another important reason for rejecting Lakoff's proposal is that it would obliterate the
distinction perfective vs. imperfective states postulated for the adjectives. Recall that im-
perfective adjectives may also be constructed with inchoative verbs, such as voh'erse/hacerw
tornarse "become make into/turn into'. The adjectives that present a marked difference in
meaning, according to whether they appear with one or the other copula, preserve this
semantic difference in the inchoative constructions. Hence, aburrirse "to get bored" is not
the same as voh'erse ahurrMo 'to turn into a bore'; or her,'nosearse "to make oneself beautiful"
is not equivalent to voh'erse hermosa 'to become beautiful'. However, Lakoff's proposed
transformational derivation would lead to arbitrarily considering that the [+ PERFECTIVE]
specification is crucial in the lexicalization of inchoative constructions (in order to derive
,;hurrirse from ponerse ahurri~h~ but not from voh,erse aburrido), while the specification is
totally irrelevant in the generation of the original constructions (in order to allow the co-
occurrence of the two types of inchoative, voh,erse and pom, rse, with adjectives). However,
the specification ought to be relevant at that level too, for it is the factor that determines
the appropriate combinations of ponerse with angustiado and voh'erw with intell~gente, for
instance, disallowing the combinations *voh'erse angustia&~ and *pom,rse #tteligente.

References

Bello, A.-R. Cuervo, 1958. Gramtitica de la iengua castellana. 5ta. edici6n. Buenos Aires:
Editorial Sopena.
Bull. W., 1960. Time, tense and the verb: a study in theoretical and applied linguistics, with
particular attention to Spanish. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.
B~dl, W.. 1965. Spanish for teachers. New York: The Ronald Press.
Comrie. B., 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Demonte. V., 1979. Sem~ntica y sintaxis de las construcciones con ser y estar. Revista Espafiola
de Lingiiistica 9, 133-171.
Girl y Gaya. S., 1961. Curso superior de sintaxis espafiola. 9a. ed. Barcelona: Bibliograph.
Hanssen, F.. 1913. Gramfitica historica de la lengua castellana. Halle (GDR).
Keniston. H., 1937. The syntax of Castillian prose. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
Lakoff. G.. 1965. On the nature of syntactic irregularity. Mathematical Linguistics and
Automatic Translation, Report NSF-16, Harvard Univ. Computational Laboratory.
kakoff, G., 1966. Stative adjectives and verbs in English. Mathematical Linguistics and
Automatic Translation, Report NSF-17. Harvard Univ. Computation Laboratory.
Lenz, 1925. La oraci6n y sus partes. 2da ed. Madrid: Publicaciones de la Revista de Filologia
Espahola.
kuj:in, M., 1977. El antilisis de los verbos reflexivos incoativos. Revista Espafiola de Lingiiistica
7. 97--120.
Luj~in. M., 1980. Si~ltaxis y semfintica del adjetivo. Madrid: Ediciones Cfitedra.
Navas Ruiz, R., 1963. Ser v estar, estudio sobre el sistema atribu~ivo del espafiol. Acta
Salmanticencia, Filosofia y Letras, Tomo XVil.
Querido, A., 1976. The semantics of copulative constructions in Portuguese. In: M. Lujfin,
F. Hensey (eds.), Current studie,, in Romance linguistics, 343366. Washington, D.C. : George-
town Univ. Press.
Ramsey, M., 1956. A textbook of Modern Spanish. Revised by R Spaulding. New York:
Holt. Rinehart and Winston.
 ~l, Luldn Spani.~h c,¥mhts 209

Real Academia Espafiola. 19";3. Esl~;o de una nue~.a gramatica de la lengua espafiola.
Madrid: Espasa-Calpc.
Roca Pons, J., 1958. Estudio sobre perifrasis ve~bales dci e,,pafioi. Rcxista de t:ilologia
Espafiola, An,zio LXVII.
Roldtin, M., 1970. Ser and estar in a new light. Lar~guage Sciences 12, 17 20.
Rold,-in, M., 1971. Spanish constructions with .w. Language Sciences 18, 15 29.
Rold~in, M., 1974, Toward a semantic characterization of scr and t'.st~tr, tlispania 57, 68 75.
Stockwell, R., J. I~~wen, J. Martin, 1965. The grammatical structures of English and Spanish.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston
Vendler, Z., 1967. Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Corncll Univ. Prc.,,s.