Sobre “formas de tratamento” na Língua portuguesa

Abstract

vado a esta presença do francês fora da França? O futuro o dirá. Mas se tudo depender da vontade dos professores por toda parte esta presença se fará sentir ainda muito tem po. Foi o que demonstrou o recente Congresso da Association des Universités Partiellement ou Entièrement de Langue Française-AUPELFque reuniu em julho deste ano, na cidade de Estrasburgo, cerca de 800 professores de francês, representando 98 paises. Alem de amparar este professorado esperançoso, a Antologia da FIPF pres tará serviços a todo e qualquer intelectual desejoso de conhecer diferentes cul turas do mundo atual e deverá sem dúvida alguma, como o deseja seu prefaciador, "suscitar o prazer da literatura, a curiosidade pelo testemunho e o inte resse pela pesquisa" (p. 9). ítalo Caroni' * * * CINTRA, Luís F. L .-Sobre "form as de tratamento" na Língua portuguesa:

Perceptions of Forms of Address in European Portuguese in Online Metadiscourse or What Happens When You Use você in Court

“…For example, if the favourable emic assessments of tu are confirmed and increased in the future, this pronoun may stand to become part of a N-dimension repertoire whilst preserving its connotations of intimacy (which, in fact, is in line with a tendency observed by Cintra as early as 1972, predicting the expansion of tu beyond its restricted circle of intimacy). The same can be said for você, the expansion of which Cintra (1972) also predicted and has been equally suggested by Cook (2013), and which many speakers already perceive as dissociated from impoliteness and appropriate in a range of situations.…”

“…This is tied to the conceptualisation of você as a generally appropriate form and to negative evaluations of nominal forms, which are further evinced in the metacomments, effectively separating forms of address from the communication of politeness. In fact, whilst você is undoubtedly the most contentious and pragmatically complex form, results show that it is not the only one subjected to negative assessments-nominal forms such as titles and/or honorifics are also negatively conceptualised as over-politic behaviour; in other words, the 'substantive' semantic specifications of nominal forms (Cintra 1972), particularly those pointing to rank and social hierarchy-such as 'Madam Prosecutor', which is an occupational title-are perceived as excessive for speakers less concerned with rigid form-interlocutor matching. When examining cognitive strategies of EP address forms, for example, Oliveira (2013) finds that nominal address formulas such as a 'senhora dona + FN' (Mrs. + First Name) are often described by speakers using metaphors of light/weight and that such formulae are deemed too 'heavy'.…”

“…In the realm of the nominal format, it is also important to note that o senhor/a senhora are semi-pronominalised forms (Cintra 1972;Duarte and Marques 2023;Nascimento et al 2018) and show signs of clear grammaticalisation, namely semantic bleaching and an increasing deictic value, in addition to syntactic functions close to pronouns, as explained by Duarte and Marques (2023). They also elucidate that o senhor/a senhora, like personal pronouns, perform the function of a subject or complement and are fully integrated into the sentence structure (Duarte and Marques 2023, p. 300).…”

“…The expansion of nominal forms in the V dimension, replacing the now obsolete (in standard varieties, at least) second-person plural pronoun vós (Cintra 1972), has promoted the expansion of the morphological third person, albeit with a second-person referential meaning. This has caused significant 'grammatical rearrangements' (Faraco [1996] 2017; Lara-Bermejo 2023), whereby second-person pronouns can be indexed to third-person subjects.…”

“…Você is the result of the grammaticalisation of the nominal form Vossa Mercê, which also explains why it maintains grammatical agreement with thirdperson forms despite its second-person semantics. This seeming grammatical inconsistency is fully echoed in the variegated pragmatic effects of você, which, on the one hand, may lend itself to interactions where a fairly neutral, socially distant form is necessary or to situations where speakers may wish to avoid the T pronoun tu whilst maintaining an equality-based address occupying a middle ground between intimacy and distance (Cintra 1972;Hummel 2020). However, on the other hand, você is often seen as an intrinsically impolite pronoun, potentially causing offence and often avoided for the same reason (Carreira 2004;Duarte 2011;Guilherme and Lara-Bermejo 2015;Hammermüller 2004;Lara and Guilherme 2018;Nascimento et al 2018;Oliveira 1994Oliveira , 2009.…”