RELATIVIZATION STRATEGIES IN BRAZILIAN PORTUGUESE

This study analyzes competing relativization strategies in spoken Brazilian Portuguese (=SBP). It demonstrates that relativization in SBP is done through a deletion rule, not through wh-movement. In contrast, relativization in the written language follows the standard analysis of relativization as postulated by Chomsky in 1977. The competing relativization strategies found in SBP are: (1) the gap-leaving variant, superficially identical to standard written language relatives (it applies in subject and direct object relatives); (2) the resumptive pronoun strategy which surfaces with the gap position filled with a pronoun (it applies throughout the syntactic scale); and (3) the PP-chopping strategy which also involves a gap (it applies only to lower syntactic slots). The dissertation analyzes a wide variety of material: forty-five hours of tape-recorded interviews with informants from urban Sao Paulo; media speech data; and diachronic data. The deletion analysis is motivated by similar patterns of pro-drop effective in main clauses and in subordinates other than relatives. Patterns of pronominal retention and deletion outside relative clauses directly match the gap/pronounce alternation found inside relatives. On the socio-stylistic level this work demonstrates that: (1) lower-class speakers favor the use of resumptive pronoun, unlike middle-class and upper-class speakers, who favor the PP-chopping strategy, and (2) spontaneous style favors resumptive pronouns. The diachronic data analysis situates PP-chopping as the result of a drastic change in the pronominal system in the 19th century. This change entailed pro-drop reaching down to direct object, and prepositional phrase positions, a change that was first implemented in main clauses. On the whole, this dissertation describes two different grammatical models: one for the spoken language, namely relativization by deletion; and one for the written language, i.e. relativization as part of the general, universal wh-movement rule. The linguistic, social, stylistic, and pragmatic factors, as well as the structural vs. functional ones that resolve this competition, are discussed in full detail