| dc.description.abstract | Considering the theoretical and methodological assumptions of Dialectology and, also, the studies of Coseriu (1982, 1986), Weinreich, Labov e Herzog, (2006); Tarallo (2007), Gimeno Menéndez (1990), Chambers and Trudgill (1994), Montes Giraldo (1997), Miroslav Valeš (2012), Rosa (2012), among others, this dissertation aims to describe the use of indirect object of 3nd person of the Spanish of Montevideo, capital of Uruguay, seeking to identify the variations and their linguistic and social variables. The data were obtained through 54 sociolinguistic interviews that integrate the corpus PRESEEA (Proyecto para el estudio sociolingüístico del español de España y de América). Samples are organized according to the social factors: genus – male and female; age group - 1 (20-34 years), 2 (34-54 years) and 3 (more than 55 years); and schooling – elementary, secondary and higher education, using, like this, three interviews for each group of factors. The structure of the interviews is composed of topics such as the greeting, the time, the place where he lives, family and friendship, the customs, the risk of death, jokes important in life and desire for economic improvement and results in vernacular language data of the speech community. Previous studies on the use of indirect complement of 3rd person in America (KENISTON, 1937, apud ALEZA, 2010; LAPESA, 1981; LOBATO, 1994, ÁLVAREZ & BARRÍOS, 1995 apud QUESADA PACHECO, 2002; ALLARCOS, 2006; COMPANY CAMPANY, 2006; ALCAINE, 2010; ALEZA IZQUIERDO, 2010; CAICEDE, 2011, GARCÍA, 2014) indicate the following variations: (a) Etymological use of 3rd person object pronouns, in other words, le, les in function of CIND. This case distinguishing system does not occur in countries with historical bilingualism; (b) Isolated cases of leísmo and laísmo in countries without historical bilingualism; (c) Use of se los and se las in which the plural mark is present in the object pronoun in the direct complement function, but does not appear in the direct lexical complement, but in the indirect complement. Therefore, there is a transfer of the mark of plural of the lexical CIND to the object pronoun CDIR in view of the fact that the PA se does not present the morpheme of number This variation is present in all social classes; (d) Invariability of the object pronoun le used in duplication of CIND both for referring that are in the singular and in the plural; (e) Absence of the preposition to the Syntagma of CIND that occurs generally when the lexical indirect object appears in pre-verbal position, being accepted in standard educated. The results confirm the changes already made by previous studies, but also indicate other changes, namely, the non-concordance of number of the double CIND and the double omission of CIND. | |
