O clítico e seu status prosódico

Leda Bisol


Clitics have received great attention in recent years. Articles dealingwith their syntactic or prosodic structure enrich the literature. Butthe question we are raising here is about where clitics take prosodicstatus. Is it in the lexical or in the postlexical component?We will argue that clitics are prosodized in the postlexicalcomponent. Arguments will be provided for the difference betweenthe prefix that belongs to the Phonological Word formed in thelexical component and the clitic that belongs to the Clitic Group.The most important evidence that supports the idea that the cliticdoes not belong to the phonological word comes from Elision, asandhi rule, that applies between words including clitics.


AMARAL, M. P. do. As proparoxítonas: teoria e variação. 2000. Tese (Doutorado) - PUCRS, Porto Alegre, 2000.

BICKMORE, L. Branching nodes and prosodic categories. In: INKELAS, S., ZEC, D. (Org.). The Phonology-Syntax connection. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1990. p. 1-17.

BOOIJ, G., RUBACH, J. Morphological and prosodic domains in lexical Phonology. Working papers in Linguistics, v. 14, 1984. p. 1-27.

BOOIJ, G., LIEBER, R. Morphological and prosodic structure. HARGUS, S.; KAISSE, E. M. (Ed.). Studies in lexical Phonology. San Diego CA: Academic Press, 1993. p. 23-44.

CAMARA Jr, M. Estrutura da Língua Portuguesa. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1970.

FUDGE, E. Words and Feet. Journal of Linguistics, v. 35, p. 273-296, 1999.

HALPERN, A. L. Clitics. In: SPENCER, A.; ZWICHY, A. M. (Ed.). The handbook of Morphology. Oxford: Blackwell, 1998. p. 101-122.

HAYES, B. The prosodic hierarchy in meter. In: KIPARSKY, P., YOUMANS, G. (Ed.). Rhythm and meter. Orlando: Academic Press, 1989.

HARRIS, J. Syllable structure and stress in Spanish: a nonlinear analysis. Cambridge Mass: MIT, 1983.

KIPARSKI, P. On the lexical phonology of Icelandic. In: ELLERT, I. J.; STRANGERT, E. (Ed.). Nordic Prosodic III, 1984. p. 135-164.

LIBERMAN, M.; PRINCE, A. On stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry, v. 8, p.249-336, 1977.

MENUZZI, S.; VIDOR, D. Pronomes como determinantes: algumas propriedades do elemento interrogativo que em Português. PUCRS, 1999. (Trabalho inédito).

NESPOR, M., VOGEL, I. Prosodic Phonology. Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 1986.

SCHWINDT, L. C. O prefixo no português brasileiro: análise morfofonológica. Porto Alegre: PUCRS, 2000.

SELKIRK, E. Phonology and Syntax. The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge: The Mit Press, 1984.

SELKIRK, E. On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook, v. 3, p. 371-405, 1986.

SELKIRK, E., SHEN, T. Prosodic domains jil the phrasal phonology. In: INKELAS, S.; ZEC, D. The Phonology-syntax connection. San Diego: Academic Press, 1990. p 313-337.

VIGÁRIO, M. On the prosodic status of stressless function words in European Portuguese. In: HALL, T. A.; KLEINHEZ, U. (Ed.). Studies on the phonologial word. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1999. p.225-294. [Comunicação apresentada na “Conference on the Phonological Word”, Berlin, 1997].

ZEC, D. Rule domains and phonological change. In: HARGUS, S.; KAISSE, E. Phonetics and Phonology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1992. p. 365-403.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17851/2237-2083.9.1.5-30


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c)

e - ISSN 2237-2083 


Licensed through  Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional