Palabras clave
Cómo citar
Resumen
O objetivo deste texto é o tratamento do conceito de transparência, em oposição ao de opacidade, entendido não como o caráter previsível do significado a partir da forma, que identifica a noção de iconicidade, mas como a quantidade de significados expressa pelas formas. Enquanto numa relação icônica, a estrutura da língua reflete de alguma maneira a estrutura da experiência, numa relação transparente, ocorre isomorfismo, ou seja, uma relação biunívoca entre as unidades de significado e as unidades formais, conforme entendida pela Gramática Discursivo-Funcional (Hengeveld; Mackenzie 2008) e, em particular, Hengeveld (2011), Leufkens (2015) e Hengeveld e Leufkens (inédito).
Citas
Bybee, Joan Lea (1985). Morphology. A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Croft, William (2003). Typology and universals. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Croft, William; Cruse, Alan (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Du Bois, John (1985). Competing motivations. In John Haiman (ed.). Iconicity in syntax, pp 43-65. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dik, Simon (1997a). The theory of functional grammar. Part I: The structure of the clause. Ed. by Kees Hengeveld. Berlim/Nova Iorque: Mouton de Gruyter.
Dik, Simon (1997b). The theory of functional grammar. Part II: Complex and derived constructions. Ed. by Kees Hengeveld. Berlim/Nova Iorque: Mouton de Gruyter.
Givón, T. (1985). Iconicity, isomorphism and nonarbitrary coding in syntax. In Jon Haiman (ed.). Iconicity in Syntax, pp. 187-219.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Greenberg, Joseph Harold (1966). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Joseph Greenberg (ed). Universals of language, pp. 73-113. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Haiman, John (1980). The iconicity of grammar: isomorphism and motivation. Language 56 (3): 515-540.
Haiman, John (1985). Natural syntax. Iconicity and erosion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haspelmath, Martin (2008). Frequency vs. iconicity in explaining grammatical asymmetries. Cognitive Linguistics 19: 1-33.
Hengeveld, Kees (1992). Non-verbal predication: theory, typology, diachrony (Functional Grammar series 15). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hengeveld, Kees (2011) Introduction: Transparency in Functional Discourse Grammar. Linguistics in Amsterdam. (Special issue: Transparency in Functional Discourse Grammar) 4(2): 1-22.
Hengeveld, Kees; Mackenzie, John Lachlan (2008). Functional discourse grammar. A typologically-based theory of language structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hengeveld, Kees; Leufkens, Sterre (inédito). Transparent and non-transparent languages. Amsterdam Center for Language and communication.
Itkonen, Esa (2004). Typological explanation and iconicity. Logos and Language V (1): 21-33.
Langacker, Ronald Wayne (1977). Syntactic reanalysis. In: Charles Li (ed.). Mechanisms of syntactic change, pp. 56-139. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Leufkens, Sterre (2013). The transparency of creoles. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages 28(2): 323-362.
Leufkens, Sterre (2015). The transparency in language: a typological study (Tese de Doutorado). Universidade de Amsterdam, Utrecht: LOT Publications.
Moura, Heronides (2015) A linguagem não é transparente: um estudo sobre a relação entre forma e sentido (Tese de Professor Titular). Santa Catarina: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina.
Saussure, Ferdinand de (1977[1916]). Curso de linguística geral. Trad. Antonio Chelini, José Paulo Paes e Izidoro Blikstein. São Paulo Cultrix.
LIAMES: Lenguas Indígenas Americanas utiliza la licencia de Creative Commons (CC), preservando así la integridad de los artículos en ambiente de acceso abierto.
Descargas
