Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Morphosyntactic and Lexical-Semantic Properties of Re in Argentinian Spanish
Morphosyntactic and Lexical-Semantic Properties of Re in Argentinian Spanish
1. Introduction
● re is mainly an intensifier and evaluative element. Within AP, AdvP, SP (cf. 1), it is common
in several geographical varieties of Spanish, especially in America. However, it is much more
extended in Argentinian (and Uruguayan) Spanish (particularly among the young), where it is
also used in verbal, clausal and nominal domains (cf. 2-4).
(1) a. re lindo / re grande / re viejo
RE nice / RE big / RE old
‘very nice’ / ‘very big’ / ‘very old’
d. se re enoja / le re teme
SE RE gets-he angry / him RE fears-he
‘He gets very angry’ / ‘He fears him a lot’
1
(3) Re que lo hago para quedar bien.
RE that it do-I to give a good impression.
‘I certainly do it to give a good impression.’
b. Es un re amigo / re médico
is-he a RE friend / RE doctor
‘He is a very good friend / doctor’
d. re campeón / re viajero
RE champion / RE traveller
‘a great champion / traveller’
e. re siesta / re trabajo
RE nap / RE job
‘a long nap’ / ‘a great job’
● The morphological, syntactic and semantic properties displayed by re turn it into an ideal
element to work on the several interfaces of grammar and, as a consequence, to question some
aspects related to its architecture. In particular, the data we are going to present here support
the “deconstructive” conceptions of the relation between lexicon, morphology and syntax, as
claimed by the Distributed Morphology (DM), as opposed to the most traditional lexicalist
theories.
One of the theoretic aims of this work is to discuss a series of aspects concerning the
interfaces between syntax and morphology and between syntax and the lexicon. Some of
these aspects are the status of word classes, the properties of functional categories, and the
possibility of syntax to access lexical-semantic information within the lexical entry.
2
2. Morphophonological properties
The properties exhibited by re show the paradox in claiming a sharp distinction between
bound and free morphemes.
● The fact that re can adjoin to coordinated words (cf. example 5) constitutes the first
violation of the Lexical Integrity Principle (Scalise 1984) or the Strong Lexicalist Hypothesis
(cf. Scalise 1984 and also DiSciullo & Williams 1987): “Syntactic rules cannot refer to any
aspect of the internal structure of the word” (presumably based on Chomsky 1970) or,
according to Lapointe (1978): “Syntactic transformations can never operate at a
morphological level”.
(5) re [bueno e inteligente]
RE [kind and intelligent]
‘very kind and intelligent’
● Moreover, as can be seen in the examples of (6), re may change its relative position in the
phrase without modifying its meaning.
(6) a. lo re habíamos discutido
[We] it RE had discussed
b. lo habíamos re discutido
[We] it had RE discussed
Not only the possibility of coordination but also the mobility in the phrase show that the scope
of re affects not only its “base” but also the whole phrase (cf. 7), which becomes a
problematic issue if re is classified as a derivative prefix –as it is generally done in grammars
(Varela & García 1999: 5026).
(7) un gato re [cazador de ratones]
a cat RE [hunter of mice]
‘a cat that is a great hunter of mice’
The interpretation and the properties of re vary according to the word category it adjoins to.
Next, we will review its behaviour with each category: adjectives, prepositions and adverbs,
first; then verbs and functional projections of the clause, and finally, nouns. As it will be
evident, the most interesting data rise from the combinations taking place exclusively in
Argentinian Spanish (i.e., verbal, sentence and nominal contexts).
3
[rather/quite], poco [few/a little]. This means that re combines with qualifying adjectives (8.a)
or adverbial and prepositional constructions that may receive degree modification (8.b-c).
(8) a. re lindo/ re grande (cf. muy lindo / muy grande)
RE nice / RE big (cf. very nice / very big)
c. re desde lejos/ re de entre casa (cf. muy desde lejos / muy de entre casa)
RE from far away / RE casual (cf. from very far away / very casual)
● Besides, re can also combine with verbal participles that admit modification of Degree
Phrases (compare 10.a with 10.b).
(10) a. Fue re aplaudido / celebrado / comentado por el público/ por la crítica
[He] was RE clapped / appraised / commented | by the audience / by the critics
(cf. Fue muy aplaudido / celebrado / comentado por el público)
(cf. [He] was much clapped / appraised / commented by the audience)
From these examples, it can be inferred that, combined with A, Adv and P, re functions as the
head of a Degree Phrase. As it happens to other elements expressing degree, the phrase
projected by re lacks, in general, internal structure1.
1
With the possible exception of re poco [RE (very) few] / muy poco inteligente [very little intelligent].
4
As regards the combination with other appreciative affixes, re is incompatible with
superlatives (12.a), but compatible with other suffixes of the same kind, such as diminutives
or augmentatives (12.b).
(12) a. *re lindísimo / * re bajísimo (cf. *muy lindísimo)
RE nicest / RE shortest (cf. very nicest)
c. re trabaja / re juega
RE works-he / RE plays-he
‘He works/ plays for a long time’
● Regardless of the aspectual nature of the verb, re can always be given a modal epistemic
interpretation (cf. 14.a-b)
(14) a. re llega / re termina los tallarines
RE arrives-he / RE finishes-he the pasta
‘He will certainly arrive’ / ‘He will certainly finish the pasta’
5
6
3.2.1 Aspectual interpretation of re
Together with verbs, re is generally associated to an AspP projection, in which the semantic
interpretation will depend on the telicity of the verb it adjoins to.
● In combination with telic verbs (which cannot be modified by quantifiers such as mucho or
bastante), re is understood as an intensifier of the perfective aspect expressed by the
morphological category of the verb. In these cases, re stresses the fact that the event has
reached its culmination.
When the verb is originally atelic, but it is bound by a complement or an adjunct, re gets an
iterative value (‘often’, ‘many times’); the same applies to semelfactive verbs (cf. examples
16):
● Together with atelic unergative verbs, re has a durative interpretation with the meaning of
‘for a long time’. Thus, with unergative verbs in present, as in (17a), the durative meaning
alternates with the iterative interpretation previously mentioned (‘he works / plays often’). In
the case of (17.b), where the verb is in the simple past, the durative reading seems to be the
only possible one.
(17) a. re trabaja / re juega
RE works-he / RE plays-he
‘He works/ plays very often OR for a long time’
Although this durative interpretation is presented here as being aspectual interpretation, the
possible paraphrase ‘a long time’ shows that it can be considered as a border case between
time and aspect.
● Bivalent transitive verbs, that admit the absence of a direct object, which is usually a
cognate object (e.g. Comió verduras con gusto [He ate vegetables with pleasure] / Comió con
gusto [He ate with pleasure]), behave in a different way from unergative verbs. In these cases,
the durative aspect of re is not quantified in terms of time but in terms of a quantity
concerning the cognate object (cf. 18)2:
2
This is a similar case to the one Bosque & Masullo (1996) call “argument quantification”, from examples such
as come mucho [he eats a lot] or corre bastante [he runs quite a lot]. However, in the case of re, it is evident that
this element does not satisfy an argument, since it doesn’t answer to What? but to How much? Moreover, re can
never replace the complement with pure transitive verbs (*re mató [*He RE killed], *re puso en la mesa [*He RE
put on the table]), which in the case of mucho is sometimes possible (cf. *mató mucho [*He RE killed a lot] vs.
7
(18) a. re come → come mucha comida
[He] RE eats → [He] eats a lot of food
Finally, the non aspectual interpretations of re in the VP come about with verbs denoting
states, which naturally block not only the durative and iterative readings but also the other
interpretations previously mentioned. Such is the case of the psychological verbs of (19):
It can be noticed from the paraphrases that in these cases re is interpreted as an adjunct of
manner or quantity.
b. RE sabe / RE trabaja
RE knows-he / RE works-he
‘He certainly knows / works’
The epistemic interpretation also occurs if que [that] appears as the head of the
Complementizer Phrase (cf. 21).
(21) a. re que no
RE that not
‘Certainly not’
b. re que lo hago para quedar bien
RE that it do-I to give a good impression
‘I certainly do it to give a good impression’
c. re que no leí un solo comentario
RE that not read-I a single comment
‘I certainly haven’t read a single comment’
3.3. Nouns
puso mucho en la mesa [He put a lot on the table]). This might be explained by the pronominal nature of mucho.
8
Within the DP, the interpretation of re depends on the syntactic-semantic properties of the
noun: with countable nouns it has an evaluative meaning, equivalent to ‘great’, ‘big’ or ‘good’
(cf. 22.a-b), whereas with mass nouns re only occurs in idiomatic expression with light verbs
and bare nouns, and it means ‘a lot of’ (cf. 22.c):
● The fact that the noun with re can’t be used either as subject or as direct object is evidence
of its lack of referential value:
(23) a. *El re hombre me dijo...
* The RE man told me...
i) Count nouns
In combination with count nouns re gets an evaluative interpretation and can be paraphrased
as ‘great’; in the case of artifacts (auto [car], compu [computer], idea [idea], mentira [lie]) its
equivalent is ‘good’; with natural class nouns (árbol [tree]) it refers to size:
(24) a. Consiguió el re auto / la re compu / Tiene una re idea / Dijo una re mentira
got-he the RE car / the RE computer / has-she a RE idea / told-he a RE lie
‘He got a great car / computer’; ‘She has a great idea’; ‘He told a great lie’
So, in the case of artifacts it stresses the function of the entity denoted by the noun; that is, in
terms of Pustejovsky (1995), in these cases, re binds the telic role. When there is no telic role
because the denoted entity is of a natural type, re binds the formal role instead (size, length,
width, etc.)
A special case within count nouns consists of those nouns with a human interpretation. In
those cases re can only be combined with nouns that allow selective binding of its telic role.
Thus, it can adjoin nouns denoting trades and professions, where it evaluates a person from
the point of view of its profession. Besides, re can also combine with relational nouns3:
3
When the noun (human) does not allow binding or coercion of the telic role, then it cannot combine with re:
*un re peatón/ fumador/ esquimal [*a RE (=good) pedestrian/ smoker/ Eskimo] vs. un re paciente/ conductor/
9
(25) a. un re médico/ arquitecto
a RE doctor / architect
‘a very good doctor / architect
In these cases re adjoins the noun (that lacks referenciality) and can be paraphrased as ‘a lot
of’ (tiene re cancha [she has RE experience] → ‘tiene mucha cancha [she has a lot of
experience]’). What enables the combination with re is the fact that it is intensifying the
idiomatic expression as a whole and not only the bare noun; that is, it modifies the whole
event ‘tener cancha [have experience]’. Besides, re can be adjoined with the same meaning
either before or after the light verb: re tiene confianza, tiene re confianza.
● As for the adjunction to eventive nouns, re can modify functional projections below the DP,
such as AspP (cf. Resnik 2005). This is why the examples of (28.a) are interpreted with an
iterative meaning (‘many times champion’), whereas the examples of (28.b) have a durative
reading (‘a long walk’). However, in many cases, re does not modify the eventive value but is
interpreted by default as ‘big’ or ‘great’ (cf. 28.c).
(28) a. re campeón / re viajero / re ganador
RE champion / RE traveller / RE winner
‘a many times champion / winner’; ‘a frequent traveller’
b. re caminata / re siesta
RE walk / RE nap
nadador [a RE (=good) patient/ driver/ swimmer].
4
Very often, this type of N can also be A (by conversion). In those cases, re is interpreted as ‘very’: Es re madre,
re amigo, re maestro [she is RE (=very) mother/ friend/ teacher]. This is the same interpretation that re receives
with names of nationality: Es re gitano, re uruguayo [He is RE (=very) gipsy/ Uruguayan]. The particular status
of this kind of nouns in relation with adjectives has been discussed in Di Tullio & Kornfeld (2005).
10
‘a long walk / nap’
● Some data suggest that re cannot occur when the noun is modified by a complement (cf.
29).
(29) a. *leyó el/un re libro de Tolstoi / *vio la/una re película de W. Allen
[He] read the/a RE book by Tolstoi / [He] saw the/a RE movie by W. Allen
4. Conclusions
The aim of this work has been to show that the interpretation and the properties of re depend
on the category it combines with. We can observe an asymmetry between the combination of
re with A, Adv and P or with verbs and clauses, on one hand, and with N, on the other hand:
- with A, Adv, P, V and clauses re functions as a syntactically independent element associated
to functional projections; that is the reason why it can modify phrases (cf. 31.a-b);
- with N, it can only modify a head (cf. 31.c).
(31) a. re [lindo e inteligente]
RE [nice and intelligent]
‘very nice and intelligent’
11
‘great car and computer’
Another related property of re is that it can constitute independent utterances only when it
modifies A, Adv, P, verbs or clauses, but not with N:
(32) a. –¿Es lindo? –Re.
–Is it nice? –RE (Very [nice])
c. –¿Venís? –Re
–Are you coming? –RE (Of course)
● According to some Distributed Morphology views (cf. Marantz 2001, Embick & Halle in
press), this difference takes place because in the case of nouns re occupies a position closer to
a root (and therefore more “lexical”, like a prefix), whereas it is located in functional
projections that are more external to the root in the case of A, Adv, P, verbs and clauses:
- in the case of A, Adv and P, the functional projection to which re is related would be the
Degree Phrase; in the case of verbs and clauses, it would be the Aspect or the Complementizer
Phrase;
- in the case of nouns, the semantic features related to re (‘big’, ‘great’, ‘good’) don’t have a
proper functional projection where they can be placed.
● Our analysis of re gives evidence in favour of the idea of the DM about the epiphenomenic
nature of the difference between affixes, clitics and free morphemes. On one hand, re moves
in a similar way to free morphemes: its mobility is always greater than the one a clitic may
have (apart from the fact that re has an emphatic stress of its own) and sometimes even
greater than words with analogous meaning (such as muy [very]). On the other hand, from the
syntactic point of view, the status of re varies according to the category it combines with –
even though it is a unique lexical entry–, depending on whether it may be associated or not
with a functional category.
● A theoretic issue that is left for further analysis is the relation between the functional
categories and projections involved in the behaviour of re. What enables a unique element to
be associated alternatively to degree, aspect and modality or, more specifically, to different
grammatical notions as ‘intensity’, ‘iteration’, ‘duration’, ‘certainty’, etc.?
Apart from these theoretic issues, the analysis of re presented here may lead to a revision of
other empirical questions as the following ones:
● We have showed that the possibility of combination with a functional category in syntax
seems to determine the syntactic status of re. This can also be seen in non evaluative prefixes,
such as inter, pro, pre, etc. (Kornfeld in press). Interestingly, it should be noticed that the
12
distribution of these prefixes is the opposite to re: the combination of inter with V and A is
more syntactically opaque than its combination with N (compare 33 with 31):
(33) a. *inter[nacional y provincial]
inter[national and provincial]
b. *inter[relacionar y cambiar]
inter[relate and change]
● The relations between functional projections from different domains (sentences, verbs,
adjectives, nouns) could be tested with other appreciative elements used as intensifiers in
Spanish:
(34) a. requete / recontra lindo
REQUETE / RECONTRA nice
b. un súper auto
a SUPER car
d. ??súper trabaja
??[He] SUPER works
e. *súper terminó
[He] SUPER finished
13
References
Bosque, I. & P. Masullo (1996) “On verbal quantification in Spanish”, in: Proceedings of
Third Workshop on the Syntax of Central Romance Languages, Girona, 9-63.
Chomsky, N. (1970) “Observaciones sobre la nominalización”, in: Sánchez de Zavala (comp.)
Semántica y sintaxis en lingüística transformatoria I. Madrid: Alianza, 1974, 133–187.
Di Sciullo, A.M & E. Williams (1987) On the Definition of Word. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Di Tullio, A. & P. Masullo (1996) “Construcciones ponderativas en el español coloquial de la
Argentina”, in: La oralidad (Actas de la Sociedad Argentina de Lingüística). Tucumán:
INSIL, 236-240.
Di Tullio, A. & L. Kornfeld (2005) “Condiciones para la conversión de nombres en adjetivos
en español”, paper presented in III Encuentro de Gramática Generativa, Universidad
Nacional del Comahue (Neuquén), August, 18-20, 2005.
Embick, D. & M. Halle (in press) Word Formation: Aspects of the Latin Conjugation in
Distributed Morphology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kornfeld, L. (in press) “Los prefijos: propiedades sintácticas y morfofonológicas”, in:
Ciapuscio, Guiomar (ed.) De la palabra al texto.
Lapointe, S. (1978) A Theory of Grammatical Agreement. Unpublished PhD Thesis,
University of Massachusetts.
Marantz, A. (2001) “Words and things”. Ms., MIT.
Pustejovsky, J. (1995) The generative lexicon. Massachussets: MIT Press.
Resnik, G. (2005) “La estructura funcional de los nombres eventivos no deverbales”, paper
presented in III Encuentro de Gramática Generativa, Universidad Nacional del
Comahue (Neuquén), August, 18-20, 2005.
Scalise, S. (1984) Morfología generativa. Madrid: Alianza, 1987.
Varela, S. & J. García (1999) “La prefijación”, in: Bosque I. & V. Demonte (eds.) Gramática
descriptiva de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa, volume 3, chapter 76, 4992-5039.
14