Ingressive verbal periphrases in Spanish and Portuguese

Ingressive verbal periphrases in Spanish and Portuguese1 Dana Kratochvílová— Jaroslava Jindrová (Prague) ABSTRACT The article analyses Spanish and Portuguese verbal periphrases that express the beginning of aprocess (ingressive manner of action). It analyses stylistically marked and stylistically unmarked ingressive constructions in order to determine similarities and differences between the two languages. The study is primarily based on the comparable web corpora Aranea which makes it possible to see the frequency of use of Spanish and Portuguese periphrases in contemporary language, compare them and determine semantic restrictions for auxiliated verbs in each construction. As aresult of this corpus analysis, it is possible to trace the main systemic correspondences between Spanish and Portuguese ingressive verbal periphrases and see the relationship between the original meaning of aconcrete semi-auxiliary verb and the group of infinitives that can appear in aperiphrasis introduced by that verb. KEYWORDS verbal periphrasis, manner of action, aspect, ingressive, inchoative 1. INTRODUCTION In this paper, we concentrate on Spanish and Portuguese verbal periphrases that express the beginning of aprocess. The aim is to show the similarities and differences that can be found between these two languages. The study is based on material obtained from language corpora wherein we analyse the most frequent Spanish ingressive constructions and, subsequently, we seek their closest Portuguese respondents. We take as astarting point the original meaning of aselected semi-auxiliary and, subsequently, analyse the frequency of use of concrete periphrases in both languages and their combinatorial possibilities (i.e. the characteristic of infinitives that appear in them). In this way we verify whether (or to which extent) the semantic characteristic of asemi-auxiliary verb in its original meaning has an influence on the meaning of the resulting verbal periphrasis and on the selection of auxiliated verbs. Since we work mainly with comparable corpora, our analysis also serves to analyse the respective frequencies of particular ingressive constructions in both languages. 2. INGRESSIVE VERBAL PERIPHRASES IN SPANISH AND PORTUGUESE Both Spanish and Portuguese have awide range of periphrastic constructions expressing the beginning of aprocess that are commonly referred to as inchoative or in1 This study was supported by the Charles University project Progres Q10, Language in the shiftings of time, space, and culture. DANA KRATOCHVíLOVá— JAROSLAVA JINDROVá 39 gressive verbal periphrases. The interpretation of the terms inchoative and ingressive is not always unanimous (see, for different approaches, Yllera, 1980; Gómez Torrego, 1999; Fernández de Castro, 1999; Pešková, 2006; Barroso, 1994; Castilho, 1966; Bechara, 2001). We will be using the terminology proposed by Zavadil and Čermák (2010) and the term ingressive manner of action which “characterises the process from the perspective of its beginning”2 (316). Zavadil and Čermák (2010) make the following further distinctions: 1. imminent ingressiveness (process that is imminently expected) 2. dispositive ingressiveness (process that is imminently intended) 3. initial ingressiveness (process that is beginning) 4. inceptive ingressiveness (process that is initial in aseries of other processes) (cf.316–319). Leaving aside subtypes 1, 2 and 4, our aim is to discuss the nature of initial ingressiveness, i.e. beginning of aprocess itself. For the sake of simplicity, the analysed constructions will be called ingressive periphrases. In both languages, the principal construction for expressing initial ingressiveness is: (semi)auxiliary verb + preposition a+ infinitive. In the case of Spanish, we can say that periphrastic constructions with the infinitive are typical of expressing the initial phase of aprocess, periphrases with the gerund are used for presenting aprocess from the perspective of its duration, the final phases are expressed by constructions with the infinitive or participle. This general assertion is based on the progressive character of the Spanish gerund which stands in opposition to the aspectually neutral infinitive and resultative participle.3 In Portuguese, the situation is less clear. Initial ingressiveness is expressed mainly through periphrases with the infinitive; nevertheless, in the Brazilian variety of Portuguese, some of them have synonymous constructions with the gerund (see Castilho, 1966).4 This can be seen as amanifestation of the suppression of the durative features of the gerund and its approximation to the infinitive. Also, some Portuguese periphrastic constructions with the infinitive manifest clear features of durativity, for example, one of the most common ones, estar a+ infinitive, that expresses aprocess which is taking place right now: 2 „charakterizuje pojmenovaný proces z hlediska jeho počátku“. Translation by the authors. 3 Here, we can trace a relationship between the category of manner of action and the category of aspect that are both related to the study of verbal periphrases. For different approaches to these categories in Czech and Romance tradition see, for example, RAE, 2009; Zavadil-Čermák, 2010; Pešková, 2006; Hricsina, 2006; Jindrová, 2015. 4 These constructions will not be analysed in our study due to their diatopical restriction and the fact that they often cannot be sufficiently separated from constructions that express inceptive ingressivity, i.e. the beginning of an action that is first in a series of actions (for this interpretation of inceptivity, see Zavadil and Čermák, 2010, 319): Começar falando = Começar a falar (To begin to talk) or Começar por falar (To begin talking about…). 40 LINGUISTICA PRAGENSIA 1/2017 (1) Estou acomer Be: 1st sg., pres., indicative; to (preposition); eat: infinitive Iam eating The same meaning is expressed in Spanish by aconstruction with the gerund: (2) Estoy comiendo Be: 1st sg., pres., indicative; eat: gerund Iam eating Similarly, asentence like (3) is ambiguous in Portuguese: (3) Paula entrou acantar Paula; enter: 3rd sg., past tense, indicative; to (preposition); sing: infinitive It could mean either Paula entered the room, singing, or Paula started to sing (entrar being here asemi-auxiliary in an ingressive periphrasis). Such an ambiguity would, however, be impossible in Spanish, where the infinitive cannot express asimultaneous process. That would have to be expressed by the gerund (5): (4) Paula entró acantar Paula; enter: 3rd sg.; past tense, indicative; to (preposition); sing: infinitive Paula started to sing (5) Paula entró cantando Paula; enter: 3rd sg., past tense, indicative; sing: gerund Paula entered the room, singing. Apart from these differences, the lists of the most commonly used Spanish and Portuguese ingressive periphrases seem to be quite similar. In both languages, we can find neutral constructions with averb that means to begin. They have no combinatorial restrictions and are used widely to express the beginning of any process that does not exclude separation into several phases. Secondly, we can find awide range of constructions with semi-auxiliary verbs that have lost, partially or completely, their original meaning and, together with the preposition aand alexical verb in the infinitive form, create periphrastic constructions that are stylistically marked and add aspecific quality to the original notion of the beginning of aprocess (suddenness, abruptness, inappropriateness, previous retention, etc.). These stylistically marked constructions also present several combinatorial limitations and appear only with certain types of verbs. In the next section, we analyse both types of ingressive periphrases. DANA KRATOCHVíLOVá— JAROSLAVA JINDROVá 41 3. STYLISTICALLY UNMARKED CONSTRUCTIONS 3.1 COMENZAR / COMEÇAR / EMPEZAR / PRINCIPIAR / INICIAR A+ INFINITIVE Spanish has several verbs that mean to begin or to start. Th e most frequent ones are comenzar (which has atotal of 84 543 occurrences in the corpus CORPES XXI 5), and empezar (83 116 occurrences). Less frequent is the synonym iniciar (41 470 occurrences); rarely used is the verb principiar (334 occurrences). All these verbs can, theoretically, form an ingressive construction that marks the beginning of aprocess (start to do something). Nevertheless, despite their semantic closeness, these verbs do not behave in the same way regarding the possibilities to form an ingressive construction. Using the corpus CORPES XXI, we have analysed the frequency of their occurrence outside and inside ingressive constructions (verb + a+ infi nitive). For each one of them, we used analytical forms of queries, given below. Outside aperiphrastic construction (Figure 1): figure 1.Corpus query (CORPES XXI) As apart of an ingressive verbal periphrasis (Figure 2): figure 2.Corpus query (CORPES XXI) Th e results are summarised in Table 1. 5 A reference corpus compiled by Real Academia Española, accessible from: http://web.frl. es/CORPES/org/publico/pages/consulta/entradaCompleja.view. In its version 0.82, it consists of 222 080 documents, the oldest from 2001, which altogether contain over 215 million tokens (cf. RAE, 2015a). 42 LINGUISTICA PRAGENSIA 1/2017 Autonomous Inside an ingressive periphrastic construction Comenzar 38 969 (46,1 %) 45 574 (53,9 %) Empezar 30 037 (36,1 %) 53 079 (63,9 %) Iniciar641 439 (99,9 %) 31 (0,1 %) Principiar 250 (74,9 %) 84 (25,1 %) table 1.Distribution of comenzar, empezar, iniciar and principiar outside and inside an ingressive periphrastic construction: the corpus CORPES XXI6 In Portuguese, there are only three verbs that generally express the beginning of an action: começar, iniciar and principiar. Unlike in Spanish, the verb empeçar is very rarely used. We have subjected them to asimilar analysis in the corpus CETEMPúblico7. In order to determine the frequency of their use, we employed the following queries: [lema="começar"] [lema="iniciar"] [lema="principiar"]. For their periphrastic uses, we adopted the following query which was analytical for the three of them: [lema="começar"][word="a"][temcagr="INF"]. The results we obtained are similar to those in Spanish. The most frequently used verb is começar (19 781 occurrences), the verb iniciar is used less often (5 390 occurrences), principiar is seldom used (145 occurrences). Their use as fully lexical verbs and as semi-auxiliaries is summarised in Table 2. Autonomous Inside an ingressive periphrastic construction Começar 12 334 (62,6 %) 7 384 (37,4 %) Iniciar85 390 (100 %) 0 (0 %) Principiar9134 (92,4 %) 11 (7,6 %) table 2.Distribution of começar, iniciar and principiar outside and inside an ingressive periphrastic construction: the corpus CETEMPúblico89 6 When formulating the query with a lemma, the results also include the occurrences of the form inicio functioning as a noun; these were removed manually. 7 Alarge corpus that consists of 191 687 833 words. All texts come from the Portuguese newspaper Público; it reflects, therefore, mainly the European variety of Portuguese. The texts were written between 1991 and 1998 (cf. Linguateca, 2007; Santos— Costa, 2005). 8 We have manually removed the occurrences of the form inicio functioning as a noun (despite the absence of acento ortográfico) that appeared in the original concordance. 9 We have manually excluded the occurrences of the form principio functioning as a noun (despite the absence of acento ortográfico) that appeared in the original concordance. ftn 5 DANA KRATOCHVíLOVá— JAROSLAVA JINDROVá 43 In order to make an extended comparison between Spanish and Portuguese, we performed the same analysis in the corpora Araneum Hispanicum Maius and Araneum Portugallicum Maius, which form part of the family of comparable web corpora compiled by Vladimír Benko (see, Benko, 2014). Its Spanish part (accessible since 2013) consists of 1 200 000 609 tokens, the Portuguese part (in its April 2015 version) consists of 1 200 006 068 tokens. We used the following queries (analogical for every verb): For Spanish: [lemma="comenzar"&!word="[Cc]omenzad.*"] and [lemma="haber.*"][word="comenzado"] for all uses of each verb and [lemma="comenzar"][word="a"][tag="VLinf"&!word="partir"] for verbal periphrases. For Portuguese: [lemma="começar"&!word="[Cc]omeçad.*"] and [lemma="ter.*"][word="começado"] for all uses of each verb and [lemma="começar"][word="a"][tag="V.*"&!word="partir"] for verbal periphrases. Whenever necessary, the results were adjusted manually. We will mention only those adjustments that were more frequent or considered especially relevant. Results are summarised in Tables 3 and 4. Autonomous Inside an ingressive periphrastic construction Empezar 183 316 (57,6%) 135 069 (42,4%) Comenzar 212 461 (66,4%) 107 370 (33,6%) Iniciar10 137 039 (99,8%) 301 (0,2%) Principiar11 678 (85,6%) 114 (14,4%) table 3.Distribution of empezar, comenzar, iniciar and principiar outside and inside an ingressive periphrastic construction: the corpus Araneum Hispanicum Maius1011 In both languages we can observe large differences among the analysed verbs as to the possibility of their use as semi-auxiliaries. The Spanish verbs comenzar and empezar are largely used in ingressive constructions. The percentage of their use as semi-auxiliaries is different in the CORPES XXI and the Araneum, which might be attributed to different types of texts that constitute these corpora; nevertheless, we can say that their distribution between fully lexical verbs and semi-auxiliaries is relatively balanced. 10 We manually excluded 31 occurrences of INICIO (a noun, usually, referring to the START button). 11 When using the query [lemma="principiar"], the corpus search found only the infinitive forms, therefore, we used a different type of query here: [word="[Pp]rincip.*"][word="a"] [tag="VLinf"&!word="partir"] for the verbal periphrases and [word="[Pp]rincipi.*"] for all appearances of this verb and, consequently, we manually excluded all the occurrences that were not of interest. 44 LINGUISTICA PRAGENSIA 1/2017 Autonomous Inside an ingressive periphrastic construction Começar 309 111 (57,6%) 227 651 (42,4%) Iniciar12 138 444 (99,9%) 196 (0,1%) Principiar13 841 (100%) 0 (0%) table 4.Distribution of começar, iniciar and principiar outside and inside an ingressive periphrastic construction: the corpus Araneum Portugallicum Maius1213 Similarly, in Portuguese the most frequent semi-auxiliary is the verb começar with similar distributions outside and inside an ingressive periphrastic construction (it is interesting to note that in the Aranea corpora the distributions of the Portuguese começar and the Spanish empezar are exactly the same). The use of the verb principiar in an ingressive construction is not very frequent in either language (even though the percentage is still greater in Spanish). The fact that we have not found asingle use of this construction in the Araneum Portugallicum Maius can be seen as proof that it is to alarge extent limited to literary style. The last verb from the set, iniciar, is perhaps the most interesting one. Even though it is frequently used in both languages as afully lexical verb, its occurrence in an ingressive construction is very rare. For Portuguese, there is no mention of such aconstruction in Barroso (1994), Bechara (2001), Mateus et al. (2003) or Drzazgowska (2011), and we have not found asingle case of an ingressive construction introduced by iniciar in the corpus CETEMPúblico, which includes only texts from the Portuguese newspaper Público (excluding, therefore, the Brazilian variety of Portuguese). On the other hand, we have been able to find 196 occurrences of iniciar + a+ infinitive in the Araneum Portugallicum Maius, which includes texts from Portuguese, Brazilian and Angolan web pages (this, however, still constitutes avery low percentage, compared to 138444 uses of this verb outside an ingressive construction). From this set, 176 occurrences were from Brazilian web pages, 2 from Angola, in 12 cases it was impossible to determine the nationality of the author (web pages that included posts from both Brazilian and Portuguese authors), only 6 occurrences were found on Portuguese websites. Based on these results, we can assume that in Portuguese the ingressive periphrasis iniciar a+ infinitive is strongly diatopically restricted and the use of iniciar as asemi-auxiliary is very limited. The Spanish counterpart of this periphrasis is usually not mentioned in the literature either (it is not listed in the extensive dictionary of verbal periphrases by García Fernández et al., 2006, similarly, it is not mentioned by Zavadil and Čermák, 2010; RAE, 2009; Fernández de Castro, 1999; or Gómez Torrego, 1988). Nevertheless, 12 When using the query [lemma="iniciar"], the results included also the forms inicio, Inicio and INICIO in the function of a noun (despite the absence of acento ortográfico), these were excluded manually. 13 When using the query [lemma="principiar"], the results included also the forms principio, Principio in the function of a noun (despite the absence of acento ortográfico), these were excluded manually. We also excluded manually other interferences such as principal-mente. DANA KRATOCHVíLOVá— JAROSLAVA JINDROVá 45 we have been able to find 31 occurrences of this construction in the CORPES XXI (2 in European Spanish, 29 in Latin America). Consequently, we analysed this construction in the corpus CREA14 (using the same form of query as for the CORPES XXI) and found only 6 cases, the oldest one from 1996, all from Latin America. The Araneum Hispanicum Maius yielded 301 occurrences of this construction, both from Latin-American and Spanish sites (although the Latin-American instances prevail). This might be seen as evidence of the increasing use of this construction in the last few years and of the preference for its use in Latin America (even though the diatopic restrictions are less strong than with its Portuguese equivalent). Despite the occurrences of ingressive periphrases with iniciar presented so far, the use of iniciar as asemi-periphrastic verb is very limited in comparison with empezar (Sp.), comenzar (Sp.) and começar (Pt.). This leads us to the conclusion that the semantic and syntactic criteria for distinguishing between periphrastic and nonperiphrastic constructions are not the only ones that should be taken into account when studying verbal periphrases. According to the criterion of semantic emptiness of the auxiliary word, the previously analysed constructions should not form part of the inventory of periphrastic constructions, for the verbs empezar, começar etc. do not lose their original meaning to begin (for an extended discussion of the semantic and syntactic criteria, see Pešková, 2006, 40–46). On the other hand, our analysis proves that both in Spanish and Portuguese there is aclear tendency to prefer concrete verbs of beginning as semi-auxiliaries, while the use of others, despite their synonymy, is strongly limited. The grammaticalization of asemi-auxiliary verb is, therefore, conditioned not only by the syntactic and semantic criteria, but also by the frequency of use and the level of stabilization of aconcrete ingressive construction in the speaker’s mind. 4. STYLISTICALLY MARKED CONSTRUCTIONS Spanish and Portuguese offer awide range of ingressive constructions that are, in some way, stylistically marked and bring additional semantic features to the original meaning of aprocess in its initial state. We will analyse the most frequent ones and compare the situation in Spanish and Portuguese. Since these constructions are not used as often as the previous ones and, therefore, there are fewer occurrences in the corpora, from now on, the analysis will concentrate on the comparable web corpora from family Aranea, which provide more examples both for Spanish and Portuguese and, due to their similar size and time of publication, they can very well reflect the possible differences in the frequency of use of aparticular construction in Spanish and Portuguese. The starting point will be the most frequent Spanish ingressive constructions with verbs that show higher levels of semantic emptiness: ponerse a, romper a, echar aand 14 Areference corpus created by RAE which includes over 160 million words. The texts are from the 1975–2004 period and come from all Spanish-speaking countries (cf. RAE 2015b). Its annotated version is accessible from: http://web.frl.es/CREA/. 46 LINGUISTICA PRAGENSIA 1/2017 echarse a. These constructions are frequently used and they are widely discussed in the relevant literature (see, for example, RAE, 2009; García Fernández, 2006; Fernández de Castro, 1999; Gómez Torrego, 1988; 1999). The semantic emptiness of these semi-auxiliaries will also help us to analyse with greater precision the results obtained from the corpus, since it is usually easy to separate an ingressive construction with ponerse, romper or echar(se) from other constructions “verb + a+ infinitive” that are not ingressive verbal periphrases. With less frequent constructions such as those with verbs like meterse (to get into something), lanzarse (to jump on something), entrar (to enter), largarse (to go away), or arrojarse (to plunge into something), the boundaries between an ingressive construction and aconstruction in which these verbs retain their original full meaning are less clear. The comparison between Spanish and Portuguese will be based on the semantic closeness of the semi-auxiliary verbs in their original meaning and, if possible, also on the combinatorial criteria. This approach allows us to analyse the impact of the original meaning of asemi-auxiliary on the meaning of averbal periphrasis and on its combinatorial possibilities. Unless indicated otherwise, the corpus queries are analogical for all the analysed verbs. For Spanish: [lemma="poner.*"&!word="[P]uest.*"][word="a"][tag="VLinf"] and [lemma="haber.*"][word="puesto"][word="a"][tag="VLinf"] for verbal periphrases. [lemma="poner.*"&!word="[Pp]uest.*"] and [lemma="haber.*"][word="puesto"] for all uses of aconcrete verb. For Portuguese: [lemma="pôr.*"&!word="[Pp]ost.*"][word="a"][tag="V.*"] and [lemma="ter.*"][word="posto"][word="a"][tag="V.*"] for verbal periphrases. [lemma="pôr.*"&!word="[Pp]ost.*"] and [lemma="ter.*"][word="posto"] for all uses of aconcrete verb. The results we obtained sometimes had to be adjusted manually in order to exclude constructions that are not of interest to us. We shall not enumerate all the excluded corpus errors, for their list would be excessively long; again, we will mention only those excluded cases we consider to be frequent or somehow important. 4.1 PONERSE / PÔR-SE A+ INFINITIVE In Spanish, the most frequent stylistically marked ingressive periphrastic construction is formed with the verb ponerse (= to put (on)), its Portuguese counterpart being the verb pôr-se. This periphrasis focalizes the beginning of aprocess with the notion of intentionality of the subject. García Fernández et al. (2006) also mention the combination with inanimate subjects, where this periphrasis points out asudden beginning of aprocess (cf. 218). Nevertheless, the combination of this construction with verbs such as DANA KRATOCHVíLOVá— JAROSLAVA JINDROVá 53 The great similarity between the two analysed languages was found in the total frequency of neutral ingressive constructions and in the distribution of empezar, comenzar, começar, iniciar and principiar as semi-auxiliaries / fully lexical verbs. Since the Portuguese começar usually stands for the Spanish empezar and comenzar, replacing both of them when they are fully lexical verbs, it also appears more often as asemi-auxiliary, in aconstruction corresponding to the Spanish ingressive constructions empezar aand comenzar a+ infinitive. The total frequency of the Spanish ingressive constructions with empezar and comenzar is similar to the frequency of the Portuguese começar a+ infinitive (242 439 : 227 651 occurrences or 202,03 : 189,70 in ipm). Similarly, the verb iniciar, despite its relatively frequent use outside an ingressive construction, appears rarely as asemi-auxiliary in both languages. Ingressive constructions with principiar were analysed together with styli stically unmarked ingressive periphrases, for they do not add any special feature like “abruptness” or “suddenness” to the expression of abeginning of aprocess and they do not display any combinatorial limitations regarding auxiliated verbs. On the other hand, the term stylistic unmarkedness might seem inappropriate here, since the verb principiar, in itself, is not very frequent in both languages and appears mainly in literary style. This characteristic seems to be reflected in the use of principiar a+ infinitive too. According to Zavadil and Čermák (2010), the Spanish ingressive construction with principiar a“is completely literary and is virtually not used at all in the general spoken language”20 (318). Similarly, the Portuguese principiar ais mentioned only by Baroso (1988), who based his research on excerpts from literature. While this seems to be the reason why we did not find many occurrences of this ingressive construction in the Aranea corpora, there is anotable difference between Spanish and Portuguese in the frequency distribution of this construction, which leads to the conclusion that it is more common in Spanish. This fact and the stylistic limitation of the construction principiar a+ infinitive place it among the stylistically marked constructions that were analysed in Section 4. The results we obtained regarding this group of ingressive constructions are summarised in Table 11: Spanish: Araneum Hispanicum Maius Portuguese: Araneum Portugallicum Maius Outside Inside Outside Inside Ponerse (Sp.) / Pôr-se (Pt.) 679 856 31 433 62 232 1 098 Romper 68 623 863 17 262 4 Desatar 10 092 01 215 212 Soltar 23 582 95 18 447 0 Echar(se)(Sp.)/ Deitar(-se) (Pt.) 99 905 4 208 11 574 15 Total 882 058 (96%) 36 599 (4%) 110 730 (98,8%) 1 329 (1,2%) table 11.Distribution of ponerse, pôr-se, romper, desatar, soltar, echar(se), deitar(-se) and principiar outside and inside an ingressive periphrastic construction: the corpora Araneum Hispanicum Maius and Araneum Portugallicum Maius 20 „zcela knižní avběžně mluveném jazyce prakticky nepoužívaná“. Translation by the authors. 54 LINGUISTICA PRAGENSIA 1/2017 While the previous set of results was similar for both Spanish and Portuguese (with the exception of constructions with principiar), Table 11 clearly shows distinctively higher frequency of stylistically marked ingressive constructions in Spanish. As in the case of principiar a+ infinitive, we can observe that the lower frequency of an ingressive construction is only partly related to the frequency of its semi-auxiliary when used as afully lexical verb. Frequent Portuguese verbs like romper, quebrar, partir or soltar rarely form an ingressive construction that would correspond to the Spanish romper aor soltar a+ infinitive. On the other hand, we found 212 occurrences of the Portuguese periphrasis with desatar athat constitute almost 15% of all the uses of this verb and no occurrence of the desatar a+ infinitive construction in the Spanish corpus. In spite of the fact that especially the Portuguese set of results was often limited, we were usually able to identify clearly the semantic limitations for auxiliated verbs that appeared in aconcrete construction. This leads us to the conclusion that the selection of auxiliated verbs in an ingressive construction is not primarily due to some kind of convention, but that there is astrong relationship between the original semantic characteristics of asemi-auxiliary and the auxiliated verb. This endorses our original assumption that an analysis of correspondences between Spanish and Portuguese ingressive constructions should also be based on the closeness of the original meanings of selected semi-auxiliaries. It may be interesting to note that asimilar conclusion can be drawn when analysing the Czech means for expressing the beginning of aprocess. As attested by an exhaustive analysis of alarge sample of Czech translations of Spanish ingressive periphrases made by Kratochvílová (2015), the selected Czech construction is to aconsiderable extent also influenced by the semantics of the auxiliated verb that appears in it (cf. 160–173). On the basis of the analogies between Spanish and Portuguese that can be found in the area of the original meaning of the semi-auxiliaries, in the semantic features associated with the resulting ingressive construction and in the characteristics of the infinitives that can appear in the periphrasis, it is possible to identify the main systemic correspondences between the most frequent ingressive constructions in Spanish and Portuguese. For the basic schema, see Figure 3. Spanish Portuguese ponerse pôr-se romper romper / partir desatar soltar(se) echar(se) deitar(-se) figure 3.Most frequent Spanish semi-auxiliaries in stylistically marked ingressive periphrases and their correspondences in Portuguese DANA KRATOCHVíLOVá— JAROSLAVA JINDROVá 55 However, as mentioned previously, Figure 3 displays only theoretical (systemic) correspondences and does not take into account the frequency of stylistically marked constructions. As we could see above, the difference between Spanish and Portuguese in this area is striking and opens up possibilities for further research. REFERENCES Barroso, H. F. (1988) Oaspecto verbal perifrástico em português contemprâneo (Ph.D. thesis). Braga: Universidade do Minho. Bechara, E. (2001) Moderna gramática portuguesa. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Lucerna. Benko, V. (2014) Aranea: yet another family of (comparable) web corpora. In: Sojka, P., A.Horák, I. Kopeček, K. Pala (eds) Text, Speech and Dialogue. 17th International Conference, TSD 2014, Brno, Czech Republic, September 8–12, 2014. Proceedings. LNCS 8655, 257–264. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Benko, V. (2015) Srovnatelné webové korpusy Aranea [Comparable Web Corpora Aranea]. Praha: Ústav Českého národního korpusu FFUK. Retrieved on 29 Feb 2016 from http:// www.korpus.cz. Castilho, A. T. de (1966) Introdução ao Estudo do Aspecto Verbal na Língua Portuguesa. Maria, FFCL. Ceolin, R. (2003) Falsos amigos estruturais entre oportuguês e ocastelhano. Ianua 4, 39–48. Drzazgowska, J. (2011) As perífrases verbais no português europeu. Romanistica Cracoviensia 11, 107–115. Fernández de Castro, F. (1999) Las perífrasis verbales en el español actual. Madrid: Gredos. García Fernández, L. et al. (2006) Diccionario de perífrasis verbales. Madrid: Gredos. Gómez Torrego, L. (1988) Perífrasis verbales. Madrid: Arco Libros. Gómez Torrego, L. (1999) Los verbos auxiliares. Las perífrasis verbales de infinitivo. In: Bosque, I. and V. Demonte (eds) Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, 3323–3389. Madrid: Espasa Calpe. Hricsina, J. (2006) Vývoj modotemporálních paradigmat uportugalského verba finita zdiachronního hlediska [Diachronic Study of the Evolution of Modotemporal Paradigmes of the Portuguese “Verbum Finitum”] (Ph.D.thesis). Praha: FF UK. Jindrová, J. (2015) Úvodem kingresivním perifrázím [An Introduction to Ingressive Periphrases]. In: Čermák, P. and O. Nádvorníková (eds) Románské jazyky ačeština ve světle paralelních korpusů [Romance Languages and Czech in the Light of Parallel Corpora], 150–154. Praha: Karolinum. Kratochvílová, D. (2015) Perifráze svýznamem iniciální ingresivnosti: španělština [Periphrasis with the meaning of initial ingression]. In: Čermák, P. and O.Nádvorníková (eds) Románské jazyky ačeština ve světle paralelních korpusů [Romance Languages and Czech in the Light of Parallel Corpora], 160–173. Praha: Karolinum. Mateus M. H. M. et al. (2003) Gramática da língua portuguesa. Lisboa: Caminho. Pešková, J. (2006) Slovesné vazby sinfinitivem agerundiem jako prostředek kvyjádření povahy slovesného děje vsoučasné španělštině [Verbal constructions with infinitive and gerund as amean of expressing the manner of action in contemporary Spanish] (Ph.D. thesis). Praha: FF UK. RAE (2009) Nueva gramática de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa. Santos, D.— Costa, L. (2005) ALinguateca e oprojecto “Processamento Computacional do português”. Terminómetro— Número especial nº 7— Aterminologia em Portugal e nos países de língua portuguesa em África, 63–69. Yllera, A. (1980) Sintaxis histórica del verbo español: las perífrasis verbales. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza. Zavadil, B. and P. Čermák (2010) Mluvnice současné španělštiny [AGrammar of Contemporary Spanish]. Praha: Karolinum. 56 LINGUISTICA PRAGENSIA 1/2017 SOURCES Linguateca (2007) CETEMPúblico: alarge corpus of Portuguese newspaper language. Retrieved on 25 Feb 2016 from http://www.linguateca.pt/. Linguateca CETEMPúblico. Retrieved on 25Feb 2016 from http://www.linguateca.pt/ cetempublico/. RAE (2015a) CORPES XXI. Retrieved on 25 Feb 2016 from http://www.rae.es/recursos/bancode-datos/corpes-xxi. RAE (2015b) CREA. Retrieved on 3 March 2016 from http://www.rae.es/recursos/banco-dedatos/crea. RAE Banco de datos (CORPES XXI, v. 0.82) [en línea]. Corpus del Español del Siglo XXI (CORPES). Retrieved on 25 Feb 2016 from http://www.rae.es. RAE Banco de datos (CREA) [en línea]. Corpus de referencia del español actual.. Retrieved on 25Feb 2016 from http://www.rae.es. Dana Kratochvílová Charles University, Faculty of Arts, Department of Romance Studies nám. J. Palacha 2, 116 38 Praha 1, Czech Republic [email protected] Jaroslava Jindrová Charles University, Faculty of Arts, Department of Romance Studies nám. J. Palacha 2, 116 38 Praha 1, Czech Republic [email protected]