SINGULARITIES IN THE SYNTAX OF BRAZILIAN PORTUGUESE WRITTEN IN THE NORTHEASTERN REGION IN THE 19TH AND 20TH CENTURIES

ABSTRACT

In the field of diachronic syntax, I present a diatopic-diachronic overview of three different studies regarding morphosyntactic phenomena from Portuguese written in Brazil in the 19^thand 20^thcenturies: the use of the subject pronoun você (you); the expression of the dative complement with reference to the second person singular; and the clitic syntax in relation to agreement and position in simple and complex predicate sentences. This diatopic-diachronic overview supports the hypothesis that, in the vast Brazilian territory of the 19^thand 20^thcentury, the innovative forms of the Brazilian Portuguese grammar are implemented expressively in the end of the 19th century. The Northeast region stands out first in comparison to the Southeast and South regions. Writings from the 19^thcentury, from Northeastern Brazil, present reflections of a system that was already implemented (1) with the pronoun você in the function of subject, (2) with the pronoun lhe as a form of dative complement with reference to the second person singular, with an expressive increase of the prepositioned forms ( a/para + te/tu/você ), and (3) with a system of clitics with few cases of interpolation and contraction of pronouns and innovative forms without elevation in verbal complexes and with proclisis in the initial position most common in the sentence.

diachronic syntax; pronoun você; second person datives; clitics; northeast region of Brazil

RESUMO

No campo disciplinar da sintaxe diacrônica, apresento neste artigo um mapeamento diatópico-diacrônico de resultados de diferentes estudos de três fenômenos morfossintáticos do português escrito no Brasil dos séculos XIX e XX: a implementação do pronome você na função de sujeito; a expressão do complemento dativo com referência à segunda pessoa do singular; e a sintaxe de colocação e posição dos pronomes pessoais clíticos em sentenças finitas simples e em predicados complexos. Esse mapeamento diatópico-diacrônico me permite trazer à tona argumentos a favor da hipótese de que, no vasto território brasileiro oitocentista e novecentista, as formas inovadoras da gramática do Português Brasileiro são implementadas com mais expressividade, já na escrita do final do século XIX, primeiro na região Nordeste quando comparada às regiões Sudeste e Sul. Na escrita do século XIX, no Nordeste brasileiro, há reflexos de um sistema já implementado (1) com o pronome você na função de sujeito, (2) com o pronome lhe como forma de complemento dativo com referência à segunda pessoa do singular, com um aumento expressivo das formas preposicionadas ( a/para + te/tu/você ), e (3) com um sistema de clíticos com poucos casos de interpolação e contração de pronomes e formas inovadoras sem alçamento em complexos verbais e com próclise em posição inicial do período.

sintaxe diacrônica; pronome você; dativos de segunda pessoa; clíticos; nordeste

Introduction

The first objective of this article is to present a diatopic-diachronic overview of different morphosyntactic phenomena of the Portuguese along the 19^thand 20^thcenturies. I support the hypothesis that, in the vast territory of Brazil of that period, the innovative grammar in Brazilian Portuguese (BP) is expressive in the Northeast region compared to the other regions ( TARALLO, 1993 ). In other words, I demonstrate that relevant diatopic differences, with the implementation of innovative forms of BP, are reflected in texts written in the Northeast region in relation, mainly, to the Southeast and South regions of Brazil.

I present and summarize results of different studies on three morphosyntactic phenomena: (1) the implementation of the subject pronoun você , (2) the dative complement with reference to the second person singular, and (3) clitic syntax in relation to agreement and position. The occurrences were extracted mainly from the database of the project Towards a History of the Brazilian Portuguese (PHPB) and the analyses were carried out based on variationist theoretical-methodological assumptions from Historical Sociolinguistics.¹ I demonstrate the innovative forms of BP grammar are more implemented in the writing of the Northeast region when compared to the Southeast and South regions.

The article is divided into 3 sections: I present a brief overview of the Brazilian Portuguese database, built in Brazil – the database remains growing –, especially in the Northeast region, within the scope of the PHPB Project. I present results of the three morphosyntactic phenomena listed above; I summarize the main results that show the particularities of BP in the writing of the Northeast region, seeking to contribute to the description of the history of written Portuguese in Brazil.

On Brazilian Portuguese historical corpora (that include the Northeast region)

The studies presented here are based on analyses of historical documents that are organized within the framework of the project Towards a History of Brazilian Portuguese (PHPB). This important project was created in 1997, it was coordinated until 2019 by Professor Ataliba de Castilho and has added more than 200 researchers from different higher education institutions. The project focuses on research in historical linguistics in the Brazilian scenario, covering the grammatical evolution and social history of BP, in addition to the pioneering work developed at the Federal University of Bahia, by Rosa Virginia Mattos e Silva, and at UNICAMP, by Mary Kato. Two of the project’s most important contributions were the organization of databases of print texts and manuscripts written in Brazil in the 19^thand 20^thcenturies that are published openly and freely² and the organization and publication (ongoing since 2019) of 12 issues of the collection História do Português Brasileiro ( CASTILHO, 2018 ).

The database of historical documents under the PHPB are organized in

1. print , with texts from newspapers (letters from readers, letters from authors and advertisements);

2. manuscripts , with personal and official letters, and

3. differential corpora , with various texts (such as plays, wills, among others) which are also classified by state.

In the Northeast region, the national project is organized into regional teams of different higher education institutions in the states of Bahia, Alagoas, Sergipe, Pernambuco, Paraíba, Rio Grande do Norte and Ceará.

In Bahia, more specifically, another important contribution is the Program for the History of the Portuguese Language (PROHPOR)³ which was founded in 1990 and was coordinated for many years by Professor Rosa Virgínia Mattos e Silva, from the Federal University of Bahia. The PROHPOR, currently under the coordination of Tânia Lobo, was a pioneer in studies on historical documentation for the study of Portuguese in Brazil. It has gathered important documents and has regularly published reference works that analyzed these texts. In addition to the PROHPOR, an important documentation project of historical texts of Brazilian Portuguese is the Electronic Corpus of Historical Documents from the Hinterlands (Sertão) (DEDOHS)⁴ , which is coordinated by Zenaide Carneiro and Mariana Oliveira.

Particularities in the syntax of Portuguese written in Northeastern Brazil in the course of the 19th and 20th centuries

I present the results of 3 studies of morphosyntactic phenomena that show particularities in written Portuguese from the Northeast region in the course of the 19^thand 20^thcenturies in comparison to the Southeast and South regions in Brazil:

1. the implementation of the subject pronoun você ;

2. the expression of the dative complement with reference to the second person singular, and

3. clitic syntax in relation to agreement and position.

The implementation of the subject pronoun você

My first objective is to show empirical evidence that the implementation of the subject pronoun você follows different routes diachronically regarding the Northeast, Southeast and South regions of Brazil, which supports the hypothesis that I present in this article. The hypothesis is that innovative forms of BP were first implemented in the Northeast region and moved from the Northeast to the Southeast and to the South in the course of the 19^thand 20^thcenturies.

Martins et al. (2015) present an analysis of the alternation você~tu following the theoretical and methodological assumptions of variationist Sociolinguistics ( LABOV, 1972 , 1994 ) through qualitative analysis based on pragmatic factors and the social roles of speakers ( CONDE SILVESTRE, 2007 ).⁵ The authors investigate the implementation of the subject pronoun você in 813 personal letters written by Brazilians born between the 19^thand 20^thcenturies from three states in the Northeast region: Rio Grande do Norte (RN), Pernambuco (PE) and Bahia (BA).⁷ The authors also present an analysis that contemplates the intrinsic relationship between socio-pragmatic motivations and interpersonal relationships in authors with respect to the use of forms of address, which were outlined through social relations that were classified according to the dichotomy between Power and Solidarity ( BROWN; GILMAN, 1960 ).

Here, I consider exclusively the general results on frequency percentages related to the implementation of você in those letters, especially in opposition to the pronoun tu . In the 813 letters investigated in these three states of the Northeast region, the authors state that, even in symmetrical relations in covariation with the pronoun tu , the use of você as a form of address in socio-discursive contexts is already significantly high in personal letters from the first decade of the 20^thcentury, or even further in the past, in the end of the 19^thcentury, when compared to the use of the pronoun tu . Such is the case of letters from BA. In relation to the different forms of address in the Brazilian writing of the 19^thand 20^thcenturies – (i) exclusive você , (ii) exclusive tu , and (iii) você ~ tu alternation – as proposed by Lopes and Cavalcante (2011) , the analysis by Martins et al . (2015) presents robust empirical evidence that, in letters from BA, PE and RN, from the 19^thand 20^thcenturies, the forms of address that prevailed in almost all decades of the investigated time frame composed the subsystem of subject pronoun exclusive você as an established system in the first decade of the 20^thcentury, from 1900 to 1910. This is shown in the excerpt in (1)⁷ and is illustrated in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1
– Implementation of the subject pronoun você in personal letters of the Northeast region: Rio Grande do Norte, Pernambuco and Bahia (1860-1999)

(1) [20.1 PL PE] [...] Eu queria que VOCÊ fosse lá na 4ª feira (amanhã é feriado) e CONVERSASSE em meu nome com o chefe da casa a respeito do assumpto. Caso elles possam enviar o radio, VOCÊ peça para [inint.] no trem de 5ª feira pois eu tenho desejo de revever [inint.] com ingenho, depois de experimentar outros apparelhos – Outro pedio: VOCÊ procure tambem o Edvaldo Guimarães (o do seu Joaquim) e indique aelle dos rádios <Philco> que [fol. 1v.] possuo, bons , e de preço equivalente ao 141 Victor, K. 80 G.E. etc. si puder, PEÇA para avaliar. [...] (de Mário Sette para o filho, 29 de outubro de 1937, Pernambuco/Acervo Mário Sette).

[...] I wanted YOU [VOCÊ] to go there on Wednesday (tomorrow is a holiday) and SPEAK on my behalf with the head of the house about the subject. If they can send the radio, YOU [VOCÊ] ask [unintelligible] on the train on Thursday because I have a desire to [unint.] with boldness, after trying other devices – Another request: look for Edvaldo Guimarães too (the one related to Joaquim) and recommend him <Philco> radios that I have good ones and with a price equivalent to 141 Victor, K. 80 G.E. etc. if you can, ask him to consider. [...]

As shown in Figure 1 , the pronoun você appears as an established form of address in the second half of the 19^thcentury (between 1860 and 1899) in Bahian letters, with frequency equal to or approximately 100%, as opposed to the pronoun tu ⁹ . The authors’ study also covers an aspect that is not reflected in the chart in Figure 1: in opposition to other forms of address ( Vossa Excelência, Vossa senhoria, o senhor, Vossa mercê and tu ), the pronoun você at the end of the 19^thcentury presents a low frequency. However, as opposed to the pronoun tu , as shown in Figure 1 , the frequency of the form você rose to 100% as early as the beginning of the 20^thcentury (between 1900 and 1929) and remained high through the century. However, between 1940-1969, the indexes dropped in opposition to the use of all forms, the pronoun você reached an average of 100% in the second half of the 20^thcentury (from 1960 to 1999). Regarding the pronoun tu, according to the authors, only 6 cases were identified, all of them null subjects, as expected, when the speakers had more intimacy, when they were friends, for example, as shown in (2), or were couples in informal situations, as in (3):

(2) [19,2 PL BA] Vê se Ø COMBINAS com o Pedreira e Sinimbu alguma cousa a meu respeito. (de F. M. Alvares d’Araujo para Martim Francisco, 19 de setembro de 1878, Bahia/Cartas para Vários Destinatários)

See if you can get something out about me from Pedreira and Sinimbu.

(3) [20,2 PL BA] Bem Ø SABIS que é a maior representante de minha vida? (de Arnaldo para a esposa Maria, 1 de setembro de 1971, Bahia/Acervo Cartas da Família Oliveira)

You do know well that you are the most important person in my life?

A similar behavior can be observed in letters from PE. There is a “strong predominance” of the use of the pronoun você at the end of the 19^thcentury (80% in 1880-1889), and it is established in letters of the 20^thcentury (100% in the last analyzed decades). The authors found 64 uses of the tu pronoun in the sample (out of 354 analyzed occurrences with all pronouns). All these occurrences were associated with socio-pragmatic motivations, eventually in asymmetrical hereditary relationships (between parents and children) and in symmetrical relationships in more intimate contexts between friends and between couples, as in texts with love themes, as shown in the following example:

(4) [20,1 PL PE] Não TENHAS medo, minha febre não é paludismo, é loucura por ti. Vem ver-me e olhar muito para mim. Não te ESQUEÇAS de que é com as linhas de teus braços e com a cor de teus olhos que minha alma vai todos os dias desenhando o seu ideal. (Arthur Orlando”- cartas amorosas foram enviadas por Arthur Orlando à esposa Maria Fragoso Orlando da Silva).

DO NOT be afraid, my fever is not malaria, it is madness for you. Come see me and look at me longtime. DON’T FORGET that it is with the lines of your arms and the color of your eyes that my soul goes every day drawing its ideal.

In letters from RN, the same scenario is observed: você is the categorical pronominal form in letters from the first decade of the 20^thcentury (92%) and the uses of the pronoun tu are motivated by loving and fraternal relationships – boyfriend, groom or husband letters to girlfriends, brides or wives, and vice-versa – as illustrated in (5)¹⁰:

(5) [20,1 PL RN] Deixe-me andar assim no teu caminho, por toda a vida amor, de vagarinho até a morte me levar consigo... TU ÉS a vida da minha própria vida por isso e que te amo amo 365X365, que Deus te conserve bonita e bela para mim. (de Walter Oliveira para Lucinha, 31 de setembro de 1949, Rio Grande do Norte/Acervo).

Let me walk like this alongst your way, for all your life, love, slowly until death take me with her... YOU ARE the life of my own life for this and that I love you love 365X365, may God keep you pretty and beautiful to me.

The form of address that most occurred in the first decade of the 20^thcentury, and even at the end of the 19^thcentury, was você , an already well established form in the Northeast region. As studies have shown (LOPES; RUMEU, 2013; LOPES et al ., 2018), this is not the situation in the Southeast and South regions of Brazil. Lopes et al . (2018), published in a volume of História do Português Brasileiro (LOPES et al ., 2018) which was coordinated by Célia Lopes from Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, stemming from Lopes and Rumeu (2015) and others, summarize results from years of studies on forms of address in the Southeast region, in the states of Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo and Minas Gerais and investigate 522 personal letters from the 19^thand 20^thcenturies¹¹ . The implementation of the pronoun você in personal letters in these states can be seen in Figure 2:

Figure 2
– Implementation of the subject pronoun você in personal letters from the Southeast region: Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo and Minas Gerais (1860-1999)

The pronoun você in Rio de Janeiro (RJ) was not frequent until the beginning of the 20^thcentury (31% in 1870-1879, 17% in 1880-1889, and 16% in 1890-1899) in comparison to the use of the pronoun tu . The 1930s are a milestone with a significant increase in the use of você, from 41% in letters from 1930 to 1939 to an average of 98% in 1940-1949, reaching 100% in other periods of the second half of the 20^thcentury. Lopes et al . (2018) interpret these results from Souza’s (2012) hypothesis considering three stages in the implementation of você , considering the analysis of letters written in RJ: “I. from 1870 to 1899: tu was more frequent than você ; II. From 1900 to 1939: tu and você presented approximated frequencies; and III. From 1940 to 1979: você predominated over tu ”¹² (LOPES et al ., 2018, p. 50, our translation). The authors also indicate:

The pronoun você was less frequent than its tu form in 1870, remaining as such until the turn of the 19^thto the 20^thcentury. The distribution of these two forms changed since then, with a balanced frequency from 1930 to 1939. From 1940 onward, there was another change with the inversion of the behavior of tu and você in relation to the initial phase. The usage of você became predominant with the decline of the tu pronoun in the analyzed letters (LOPES et al ., 2018, p. 50, our translation).¹³

In fact, there is a clear upward curve when tu is replaced by você in the 1930s in the results of the RJ charts. This seems to be the milestone of that change.

In Minas Gerais (MG), there is “a high productivity of você , with 84% (189 occurrences), as opposed to the very low frequencies of tu , with 12% (28 occurrences), and of Vossa Mercê , with 4% (9 occurrences)”¹⁴ (LOPES et al ., 2018, p. 50, our translation). As shown in Figure 2 , the pronoun tu is concentrated in letters from the 1930s, which, in the authors’ words, is “motivated by asymmetrical top-down family relations, such as dads to sons and between sisters”¹⁵ (LOPES et al ., 2018, p. 76, our translation). In this way, the system with você exclusively seems to have been predominant since the first decade of the 20^thcentury in MG, or at least that scenario is set in the analyzed letters.

The same picture can be found in São Paulo (SP) from 1870 to 1930. The analysis “indicates a tendency of the pronoun você as predominant over time, which is understood as a neutral strategy that is extended to most social relations”¹⁶ (LOPES et al . 2018, p. 90, our translation). Between the use of the pronouns você and tu, from the occurrences analyzed in SP, few present tu , the desinential use occurs in contexts where there is an intention of establishing intimacy and affection. In MG and SP, therefore, the picture differs in part from that found in RJ, where the frequency of the pronoun você increased significantly in the 1930s.

If the writing in the Southeast, particularly in RJ, shows particularities in the implementation of você in relation to the Northeast, the situation is even more distinguished in the South region, considering the occurrences from Santa Catarina (SC). Nunes de Souza and Coelho (2013 , 2015 )¹⁷ investigate 71 letters from SC written by illustrious and unillustrious people from two cities from SC – Florianópolis and Lages. The authors assign two contrasting tables regarding the implementation of você in these letters. They point out:

[...] the first contrast was between the conservative use of the tu pronoun with null subject by the illustrious authors from Florianópolis, and the variable use of the pronouns null tu and expressed você by the unillustrious. The second contrast was observed between the prevailing use of the tu pronoun by the unillustrious from Florianópolis and of the você pronoun by the unillustrious from Lages, indicating a case of diatopic variation. These results reflect, in a certain way, the heterogeneous character of the Santa Catarina state (LOPES et al ., 2018, p. 106, our translation).¹⁸

A particular analysis of the data shows a picture in which the pronoun presents low frequency in SC in the course of the 20^thcentury, even considering the relevant diatopic differences between the cities of Florianópolis and Lages. The second half of the 20^thcentury still presents high rates of subject você , at times pronominally.

From the implementation of the pronoun você in a diatopic-diachronic perspective, therefore, considering the empirical results, it is possible to conclude there seems to be a significant difference between the states of the three regions in Brazil during the 19^thand 20^thcenturies: você seems to be implemented as subject pronoun in the writing of letters in the Northeast region, up until the end of the 19^thcentury, and that same situation seems to be the case in letters from MG and SP, aside from a few occurrences of tu, and was always motivated by socio-pragmatic factors. This picture differs substantially from the writing in RJ, where there is a clear implementation of você from the 1930s onwards, and from the writing in SC, which presents low frequency in the second half of the 20^thcentury. It is important to say here the analysis undertaken for the different sets of letters written by Brazilians from the three regions take into account – “only” – frequency percentages, and the concept of implementation in its Labovian sense should be relativized, since these are not considered conditioning factors in the change process that may lead to relative weights or other relevant statistical-probabilistic indexes. However, frequency percentages are an important argument when considering historical data ( CONDE SILVESTRE, 2007 ) and the indexes of você versus tu: the trajectory of você in the Northeast region clearly shows this pronoun was already implemented in the linguistic system of this region at the end of the 19^thcentury, and throughout the 20^thcentury, and this is not the case for the Southeast and South regions.

Dative complement referring to the second person singular

I summarize here the results from studies on dative complement referring to the second person singular in personal letters from the Northeast region in comparison to the Southeastern and Southern states¹⁹ .

Costa da Silva (2017) investigates 248 personal letters written in the 20^thcentury (from 1910 to 1999) from the states of Rio Grande do Norte, Pernambuco and Bahia, in the Northeast region, and analyzes 610 occurrences of dative complements, arguments or the indirect object (IO) of verbs referring to the second person singular. In the variationist field of Historical Sociolinguistics ( CONDE SILVESTRE, 2007 ), the author observes the distribution and evolution of the following forms in the period:

(a) pronouns te and vos and prepositioned ti (cf. 6),

(6)

a. [20,2 PL RN] ainda não tenho uma resposta pra TEdizer . (Walter a Lucinha, S ão Paulo 18.10.91). I still don’t have an answer for YOU .

b. [20,1 PL BA] Com os mais attenciosos cumprimentosVOS apresento o XI volume dos “Archivos do Museu” (Alipio de Miranda Ribeiro ao Excelentissimo Sr. Governador do Estado da Bahia, Feira de Santana, 17-12-1901). With the most kind regards, I present YOU the 11th volume of “Archives from the Museum”

c. [20,2 PL RN] Este que é capaz de dar a vidaPOR TI caso fosse preciso. (Walter a Lucinha, S ão Paulo, 08-12-1992) This is the one who is able to give his life FOR YOU in case it is necessary.

(b) clitic lhe ( 7 ),

(7) [20,2 PL RN] também não creio estar pedindo - LHE nada demais. (Walter a Lucinha, São Paulo, 22-05-93). I don’t think I’m asking YOU too much either.

(c) null pronoun (8),

(8) [20,2 PL RN] Lucinha, peço (ᴓ) que se possível mim ligue domingo. (Walter a Lucinha, São Paulo, 20-11-92). Lucinha, I ask you to call me on Sunday if possible.

and (d) prepositioned pronouns você / tu (9):

(9)

a. [20,2 PL RN] um homem que continha muito apaixonadoPOR VOCÊ (Walter a Lucinha, São Paulo, 22-05-93). A man who was very much in love WITH YOU.

b. [20,2 PL RN] o passado nêgro não quero ja mais, apelo PARA TU, para o futuro para que o meu sonho sêja realizado. (Lourival a Ruzinete, Mumbaça, 17-02-1946).

I do not want the dark past anymore; I appeal TO YOU, to the future, to make my dream come true.

The implementation of the four variants for the expression of the dative complement referring to the second person singular in these letters can be seen in Figure 3 below:

Figure 3
– Implementation of the second person singular in dative forms in personal letters from the Northeast region (1900-1999)

The pronominal forms te/ti/vos are no longer frequent in texts from 1900 to 1930 (4%), and remain very low throughout the 20^thcentury. There is a small increase in the use of these forms over the following decades, however, as Costa da Silva (2017) affirms, the increase in the use of te/vos forms occurs in letters from 1931 to 1970 by Ruzinete, who makes categorical use of a system of tu in all her love letters from 1946 to 1972. According to the author’s analysis, this is not the general trend in the analyzed letters, where the use of te/ti/vos forms is very uncommon. Secondly, there is a steep drop in the frequency of use of the pronoun lhe from 1900 to 1930 (81%), from other decades, i.e., in letters from 1931 to 1970 (33%) and in letters from 1971 to 1999 (27%). Regarding this decrease, it is important to note the use of the innovative form lhe already seems to be very frequent in texts from the early 20^thcentury and seems to be significantly infrequent in letters from the second period. Thirdly, there is an increase in the use of null forms: from 13% in texts from 1900 to 1930 they rose to 31% in texts from 1931 to 1970, and to 23% in texts from 1970 to 1999. Finally, there is a significant increase in the use of the innovative variant with prepositioned forms ( preposition a/para + você/tu ) in the course of the 20^thcentury, from 4% in letters from the first period to 11% and 34% in charts from subsequent periods.

The change associated with the use of the innovative form lhe was already fully implemented in the system of datives for IO expression at the beginning of the 20th century in the writing from the Northeast and is becoming less frequent over time. First, the firm is replaced by null forms, which begin to appear timidly in letters at the beginning of the 20th century, and then by prepositional forms which frequency of use increases expressively from 4% to 34%. In other words, the innovative form associated with the pronoun lhe was already implemented in the early 20^thcentury system and the null and prepositioned forms increase significantly over the three periods from the sample.

Oliveira (2015) investigates 318 letters written between 1880 and 1980 in RJ. The table created by the author indicates 811 occurrences of the dative complement referring to the second person singular in its four variants, as shown in Figure 4²⁰:

Figure 4
– Implementation of the second person singular in dative forms in personal letters from Rio de Janeiro (1900-1999)

The tendency for the four variants to change in the letters from the Northeast region is also observed in the Rio de Janeiro charts. However, there are some distinguished changes over time. First, there is a significant decrease in the frequency of use of the pronominal form te (69.6% > 59.8% > 68.3 > 30%), a result partially similar to the change in the charts from the Northeast region. This form, however, was still widely used during the late 19^thcentury (1880-1905) and in the first half of the 20^thcentury (1906-1930) in letters from Rio de Janeiro, differently than the Northeast. Secondly, there is a timid increase in the frequency of use of the pronoun lhe from the first (10%) to the last period (24.5%) in the letters from RJ. This diverges from letters from the Northeast, since, in RJ, the pronoun seems to be established during the 20^thcentury, with a significant increase in letters from the 1930s. Thirdly, there is a slight increase in the frequency of use of null forms, from 14.5% in 1880-1905 to 30% in 1956-1989, and this increase also seems to be sensitive to writing from the 1930s. Finally, there is a timid increase in the frequency of use of the innovative prepositioned form in BP ( preposition + você ) –Oliveira (2015) does not find any occurrence of preposition + tu – from 1.4% in the last decade of the 19^thcentury to 13% in the second half of the 20^thcentury. The frequency of use of the null form accompanies the use of the pronoun lhe in the letters from RJ and this is different from the letters from the Northeast. In the latter region, the prepositioned forms ( preposition + você/tu ) draw a clear change in the curve that seems to be established in the 20^thcentury system.

This change is even more different in letters from the South. Nunes de Souza (2015) investigates three sets of letters from writers from two cities in SC: a sample from 1882 to 1898 with letters from Cruz e Sousa; a sample from 1932 to 1992 with letters from Maura de Senna; and a sample from 1984 to 1992 from Harry Laus. In the first set, out of 79 occurrences, 72 present the pronoun te , 3 the pronoun lhe and 2 present null pronouns (NUNES DE SOUSA, 2015, p. 134). In the second set, the 173 occurrences are distributed in 39 te , 69 null pronouns, 1 ti , 58 lhe and 5 prepositioned forms para você (NUNES DE SOUSA, 2015, p. 143). In the third set, the 70 occurrences of datives/IO are distributed in 48 te , 3 ti , 17 nulls and 2 pronouns lhe (NUNES DE SOUSA, 2015, p. 157). These results indicate the letters from SC : first, the use of the pronoun te is very frequent in the course of the late 19^thcentury and in the course and the end of the 20^thcentury (from 1882 to 1992), the period corresponding to the letters analyzed by Nunes de Sousa (2015); second, the occurrence of the pronoun lhe is very low throughout the sample, with few occurrences that are mostly from Senna Maura’s letters; thirdly, there are also few occurrences with the null form; and, finally, there are almost no prepositioned forms, and only 5 occurrences of preposition + você were found in the same letters of Maura de Senna, who is always the most innovative writer in the sample, according to Nunes de Sousa (2015).

Very similar results for RJ and SC can be found in Oliveira, Carvalho e Silva (in press) who investigated 255 private letters. The authors found 291 occurrences in letters from SC and 357 in letters from RJ. The 291 occurrences from RJ are distributed in: 55.2% of te ; 10.4% of lhe ; 25% null pronouns; 2.2% of a/para prepositions + ti ; and 6.4% of a/para prepositions + você. The occurrences from SC are distributed in: 77% of te ; 8.2% of lhe ; 11.3% of null pronouns; 2.4% of a/para preposition + ti; and 1% of a/para prepositions + você. The evolution of these variants in SC between the end of the 19^thcentury and the second half of the 20^thcentury can be observed in Figure 5:

Figure 5
– Implementation of the second person singular in dative forms in personal letters from Santa Catarina (late 19th century and second half of the 20th century)

These results show the implementation of the variants for the expression of the dative complement referring to the second person singular in letters from SC differs from the letters from RJ, and these states present differences from the Northeast region. In SC, the use of the pronoun is still very frequent at the end of the 19^thcentury (90.2%) and in the second half of the 20^thcentury (56%); secondly, there is a small increase in the frequency of use of the pronoun lhe , reaching 13.4% in letters from the second half of the 20^thcentury; thirdly, the increment of the null form is very small; and, finally, there are almost no prepositioned forms with a/para + ti/você in the sample.

These results solidly indicate the evolution of the variant forms for which the expression of the dative complement referring to the second person singular is different when comparing the three Brazilian regions. Samples from the Northeast, the Southeast and the South display that the Northeastern charts there is a very particular diachronic-diatopic distribution in which the pronominal variant te is significantly less frequent at the beginning of the 20^thcentury; the innovative variant lhe is already implemented in the pronominal system of this period; and the frequency of use of the (more) innovative null forms and prepositioned forms, especially the latter, with the preposition + tu , are increments in the system, which are used gradually and expressively.

Even though the data here is solely based on frequency, the indexes, often very revealing when crossed with historical data, show significant diatopic differences, revealing peculiarities in the written Portuguese syntax from the Northeast when compared to the Southeast and South regions.

Clitic syntax in relation to position and agreement

The overview presented in Martins (2018) , based on a database of letters from readers, letters from writers and advertisements from Brazilian newspapers in the states of Rio de Janeiro, Bahia, Pernambuco and Ceará, regarding the syntax of clitics, confirms the results from previous studies on the patterns in the writing in Brazil from the 19^thand 20^thcenturies ( PAGOTTO, 1992 ; LOBO, 1992 , 2001 ; CARNEIRO, 2005 ; MARTINS, M. A., 2009, 2012, 2013). The author shows the proclitic pattern of the BP grammar manifests itself in different syntactic contexts in the Brazilian writing uniformly, but points out the uses of innovative forms regarding the position of clitics are strongly associated with diatopic issues, i.e., writing in the Northeast is more innovative, and writing in the Southeast, with RJ as the most representative case, is more conservative.

Innovative writing in the Northeast region is evidenced, as Martins (2018) shows:

(a) In general, the interpolation with different phrases of the não negation marker, which is distinctive in Classic Portuguese, is restricted to writing in 19^thcentury Brazil, with a decrease from 57 to 11 occurrences in texts from the first to the second half of this period, as shown in (10):

(10) [19,1 CL CE] Senhor Redactor. – O Padre Joaõ Marrocos Teles, que acaba de ser justa, e merecidamente removido de professor de latim do Crato para Baturité, hum dos actos do Excelentíssimo Senhor Doutor Moraes Sarmento, que muito honra sua sabia administração, tem vexado aos senhores doutores Ramos, promotor P., Vigario, agente do correio, padre Lima Seca, e mais outros para lhe darem attestado de sua conduta moral, e que tem sua aula aberta, e nella insina com freqüência. ME muito AFOÍTESA, senhor redactor pedirem se taes attestados: os dois primeiros senhores ja lhe diceraõ abertamente, que naõ lhe davaõ atestados

(b) With frequent use in modern European Portuguese (MARTINS, A. M., 2013), the contraction of clitics disappears in texts from the 20^thcentury, with few occurrences in texts from the 19^thcentury, mostly in the RJ state, as seen below (11):

(11) [19,1 CL RJ] Parece-me incrivel; e entretanto M’O AFFIRMA pessôa que tem rasão para saber do facto.

(c) In complex predicates, the innovative placement that is distinctive in BP, with proclisis in absolute position in the clause and in the sentence, appears timidly, with 3 occurrences, in the first half of the 19^thcentury in the writing from the press from the Northeast region, in the states of Ceará and Pernambuco, as in (12):

(12) a. [19,1 CL PE] Assim poiso Senhor Rego Albuquerque dizendo que estava informando, que não affirmou que alli esteve o Senhor Rangel, e sim communisou o que chegou a sua noticia. Como a vista desse modo de fallar pode ser tachado de calumniador? O Senhor Rangel procurou saber se appareceraõ essas noticias nos Afogados? Estou que não. SE INDAGOU. Constou-lhe que nunca se desse tal cousa? Duvido .

Thus came Lord Rego Albuquerque saying that he was informing, that he did not affirm that Lord Rangel was there, but communicated that his news had arrived. How can one seeing this way of speaking call him a slanderer? Did Mr. Rangel try to find out if this news appeared in the Afogados? I’m sure he didn’t. HE ASKED HIMSELF . Did he tell you that such a thing never happened? I doubt it.

b. [19,1 A PE] Na rua d’Agoas-Verdes. numero 46. SE DIRÁ quem vende um excellente moleque de idade de 17 annos, muito proprio para servir a uma casa, pois é muito fiel, bom comprador, e não tem vicio [...]

In the street of Agoas-Verdes, number 46, IT IS SAID an excellent 17-year-old boy is being sold, very suitable to serve a house, because he is very faithful, a good buyer, and has no vices [...]

c. [20,2 CL CE] O que se questiona é quem colocaremos novamente no poder? Pois, sabemos que nosso País foi colonizado por meliantes oriundos de Portugal, onde ao chegarem aqui, encontraram índios e escravos africanos, que dessa miscigenação resultou no produto final – o brasileiro. NOS RESTA, somente aguardar o próximo furo de reportagem da revista Veja, e logo em seguida, a matéria detalhada nos jornais de grande circulação, para sabermos a quem será atribuída a nova falcatrua ou patifaria . [Gustavo César Lima Peixoto]

The question is, who do we put back in power? Well, we know that our country was colonized by bandits from Portugal who, when they arrived here, found Native-Americans and African slaves, which resulted in the final product - the Brazilian. WE CAN only wait for the next scoop from the Veja magazine, and the forthcoming detailed article in the widespread newspapers, to know to whom will be attributed innovative cheating or naughtiness.

Carneiro (2005) and Carneiro and Galves (2010) in personal letters from Bahia show the same picture, with occurrences of clitic in the absolute first position in the first half of the 19^thcentury.

(d) In complex predicates, the frequency of clitics climbing to auxiliary verb in constructions with aspectual and modal verbs is significantly decreased, and this decrease seems to be sensitive according to region. The phenomenon of clitic climbing occurs when a clitic is outside the verbal domain – clitic climbing depends on this verbal domain, which depends on structures with complex predicates. This element moves (climbs) to a functional domain (temporal, aspectual or modal) of the sentential structure or to a superior verb, depending on the proposed representation adopted. From a perspective that confronts clitic climbing, we can suppose that of the four possible positions in sentences with complex predicates (as shown in 13), those with clitic climbing, as in (13c) and (13d), are conservative constructions as opposed to the variant without clitic climbing and enclisis to the thematic verb, as in (13b), and to the innovator variant from BP without clitic climbing and proclisis to the thematic verb, as in (13a).

(13) a. [19,1 CR CE] Uma vez que os Cearenses naõ PODEM SE LIGAR em um só pensamento politico

Since the Cearenses CANNOT MERGE into one political thought

b. [19,2 CA RJ] Sob estas condições, ninguém PODE SURPREENDER-SE da violência produzida, cuja origem é evidente .

Under these conditions, no one CAN BE SURPRISED by the violence produced, the origin is evident.

c. [20,2 CL CE] Não SE PODE CONCEBER que este tipo de abuso continue a acontecer, sem que nada de concreto se faça para coibir estes desmandos

It CANNOT BE CONCEIVED that this type of abuse keeps happening, without anything concrete being done to curb these disdains

d. [20,2 CR CE] PODE-SE AFIRMAR que, em linhas gerais, a economia oferece perspectiva favorável para 1982.

IT CAN BE SAID that, in general terms, the economy offers a favorable outlook for 1982.

Constructions without clitic climbing and enclitics to the thematic verb are also conservative constructions and are associated with a grammar with the unstressed clitic third person forms o / a . However, in general, the forms with clitic climbing are conservative variants from the writing in Brazil, and Martins (2018) shows there is a significant diachronic-diatopic difference in the conditioning of the elevation, through multivariate analysis with GoldVarbX, a statistical analysis package, and through relative weight. In the author’s sample, there is a difference of 0.62 in the relative weight for the texts from Rio de Janeiro, in the Southeast region, as opposed to the texts from the Northeast region, with relative weights of 0.45 in Pernambuco, 0.43 for Ceará and 0.42 in Bahia, as shown in Table 1:

Table 1
– Frequencies of uses and relative weights of clitic climbing by state

	Apl/Total	RW
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil	101/150 – 67%	0,62
Pernambuco	183/262 – 69%	0,45
Ceará	81/128 – 63%	0,43
Bahia	131/226 – 57%	0,42
TOTAL	496/766 – 64%

• Log likelihood = -397,339 Significance =0,048
Martins (2018

Considering the relationship between clitic syntax and the evolution of the null object in BP, from the geographical point of view in relation to the particularities of aspects in the innovative syntax of BP, considering the writing from the Northeast region in relation to the other regions of Brazil, it is important to refer to the work of Cyrino (2018) , who analyzes the evolution of the null object in letters from readers and writers and advertisements from newspapers and private letters from different states (Bahia, Minas Gerais, Pernambuco, Rio de Janeiro, Paraná, and São Paulo). The author’s results show the state of Rio de Janeiro is also the most conservative in relation to the use of the null object in readers’ letters.

On the clitic syntax, considering the occurrences from Santa Catarina in the South region, in relation to finite affirmative sentences with a verb in the initial position in neutral XV contexts (as given in (14-17) below), Martins et al . (in press) contribute with an interesting result to the hypothesis brought here.

(14) Matrix sentences with verbs preceded by subordinate clauses

[20,1 CL SC] Scientes agora o seu pensamento em relação a greve com a qual Vossa senhoria não poderá concordar, attendendo ao seu longo passado, todo dedicado a ordem, as industrias e ao progressão da terra brasileira, pensamento do qual nos não podemos discordar, CUMPRE NOS todavia levar ao conhecimento de Vossa senhoria que não podemos mais evitar a explosão do nosso operariado que esta se manifestando profundamente desgostoso com a attitude do Senhor Neitsch.

We are now aware of your thought in relation to the strike with which you might not agree, attending to your long past, all dedicated to order, to the industry and to the progress of the Brazilian land, a way of thinking with which we cannot disagree, but WE MUST take to your knowledge that we can no longer avoid the explosion of our industry workers who are deeply disgusted with the attitude of Mr. Neitsch.

(15) Verb preceded by subject

a. [20,2 CL SC] Vocês SE LEMBRAM daquela umsiquinha que diz assim: Choveu, choveu Choveu. Canasvieiras enche Quando chove

YOU REMEMBER that little song that goes like this: It rained, it rained. Canasvieiras is overflown when it rains.

[19,1 CL SC] Dito e feito. A pirataria POZ-SE em actividade; e muitas embarcações nacionaes forão tomadas a pretexto de reprezalia !

Said and done. Piracy HAS BEEN SET into operation; and many national vessels have been taken under the pretext of reprehension!

(16) Verb preceded by prepositional syntagm

a. [19,1 A SC] No armazem de Henrique Schutel VENDE-SE milho a 1:280 réis o saco

In Henrique Schutel’s warehouse, corn IS SOLD at 1:280 réis the bag

b. [19,1 A SC] Precisa-se de um menino para caixeiro de uma casa de molhados que tenha alguma prataica deste negocio. Nesta Typographia SE DIRÁ com quem deve tratar .

Looking for a boy to be a liquor store clerk who has some practice in this business. In this typography, ONE WILL SAY who to get in touch with.

(17) Verb preceded by adverb

[19,2 CL SC] Minha filha tomou 18 frascos [de] Peitoral de Cambará e hoje ACHA-SE completamente restabelecida .

My daughter took 18 vials [of] Peitoral de Cambará and today SHE IS completely recovered.

Through variable rule analysis with data from five Brazilian states (Ceará, Pernambuco, Bahia, Rio de Janeiro and Santa Catarina), through GoldvarbX, the authors find a diatopic specificity when comparing the data from SC with the other states in the history of written Portuguese in Brazil. The texts from SC, with a relative weight of 0.27 (10/102 – 10%), inhibit the innovative proclisis of BP in these contexts in relation to the RJ texts, with a relative weight of 0.64 (45/119 - 0.64), BA with a relative weight of 0.58 (18/80 - 20%), of PE, with a relative weight of 0.56 (27/99 – 27%) and the CE, with a relative weight of 0.41 (24/63 - 38%), as Table 2 shows:

Table 2
– Proclisis by region/state: data from the first half of the 19th century – 1800-1850

	Apl/Total	RW
Santa Catarina (SC)	10/102 – 10%	0,27
Rio de Janeiro (RJ)	45/119 – 38%	0,64
Bahia (BA)	18/80 – 20%	0,58
Pernambuco (PE)	27/99 – 27%	0,56
Ceará (CE)	24/63 – 38%	0,41
TOTAL

• Log likelihood -376.092; = Significance =0.000
et al

These results show, on the one hand, that the interpolation and contraction of clitic are lost in the writing of 19^thcentury Brazil, and the few remnants are specially found in the writing from the Southeast region; on the other hand, in the writing of the press from the Northeast region of this period occurrences with proclisis are found in absolute position in the clause and in the sentence, in the first half of the 19^thcentury, an innovative construction in the BP grammar. Moreover, conservative constructions with clitic climbing are sensitive according to region, thus texts from RJ, in the Southeast region, as opposed to the texts of the Northeast region, are more conservative, while SC, in the South region, is more conservative in relation to the other states in the use of proclisis in affirmative matrix sentences in neutral environments.

Tying up the loose ends and conclusion

The results in this article on the implementation of the subject pronoun você and the expression of the dative complement referring to the second person and the syntax of position and agreement of the clitic show a diatopic-diachronic overview of written Portuguese in Brazil in the course of the 19^thand 20^thcenturies. We can conclude that the implementation of the pronoun você in the Northeast region seems to be established in writing at the end of the 19^thcentury, while in the Southeast and South regions, especially in the states of Rio de Janeiro and Santa Catarina, there is a clearly established você in writing from the 1930s to the 20^thcentury, or even later as shown in the occurrences from Santa Catarina.

The implementation of the variants for the expression of the dative complement referring to the second person singular, likewise, seems to follow the same direction, so that the pronominal variant te is significantly less frequent at the beginning of the 20^thcentury in the writing from the Northeast, while the innovative variant lhe is already fully implemented in the pronominal system from this period; additionally, the innovative null and prepositioned forms are highly frequent in the course of the 20^thcentury. This is not the picture from the Southeast and the South region, where, although the path towards implementation seems to be the same, the distribution and frequency of use of innovative forms is not so high and these forms are established in the writing later on.

Likewise, the results on the syntax of position in simple sentences and agreement in sentences with complex predicates, in relation to clitics, show that innovative forms such as proclisis in absolute initial position in the sentence is more frequent in the writing from the Northeast, while conservative forms, such as interpolation and contraction of clitics and clitic climbing, in the writing from the Southeast and South regions, are more frequent – those forms are even conditioned, as shown by the statistical-probabilistic indexes from the analysis of Martins (2018) and Martins et al . ([2021?]).

This diatopic-diachronic overview allows us to build up arguments in favor of the hypothesis presented in the introduction of this article; namely, in the vast Brazilian territory in the course of the 19^thand 20^thcenturies, the BP innovative grammar is more expressive in the Northeast region when compared to the Southeast and South regions of the country ( TARALLO, 1993 ).

REFERÊNCIAS

• BROWN, R.; GILMAN, A. The pronouns of power and solidarity. In: SEBEOK, T. A. (ed.). Style in Language . Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1960. p. 253-276.
• CARNEIRO, Z. Cartas brasileiras (1809-1904): um estudo linguístico-filológico. 2005. 2329f. Tese (Doutorado em Linguística) – Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, 2005. Orientadora: Charlotte Galves.
• CARNEIRO, Z; GALVES, C. Variação e gramática: colocação de clíticos na história do português brasileiro. Revista de Estudos Linguísticos , São Paulo, v. 18, n.2, p. 7-38, 2010.
• CASTILHO, A. T. A linguística brasileira e o desenvolvimento de projetos coletivos. Blog da Editora Contexto . 2018. Disponível em: https://www.editoracontexto.com.br/blog/a-linguistica-brasileira-e-o-desenvolvimento-de-projetos-coletivos-ataliba-t-de-castilho/ Acesso em: 14 mar. 2019.
  » https://www.editoracontexto.com.br/blog/a-linguistica-brasileira-e-o-desenvolvimento-de-projetos-coletivos-ataliba-t-de-castilho/
• COMPANY, C. C. El objeto indirecto. In: COMPANY, C. C. (dir.). Sintaxis histórica de la lengua española: Primera parte: La frase verbal. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica y Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 2006. p. 479-574.
• COMPANY, C. C. Reanálisis em cadena y gramaticalización: dativos problemáticos em la história del espanhol. Verba: Anuario Galego de Filoloxía, Santiago de Compostela, v.29, p.31-69, 2002.
• CONDE SILVESTRE, J. C. Sociolinguística histórica . Madrid: Gredos, 2007.
• COSTA DA SILVA, F. O emprego das formas dativas de segunda pessoa na escrita do Nordeste brasileiro do século XX: uma mudança em curso. 2017. 105f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Estudos da Linguagem) – Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2017.
• CYRINO, S. O objeto nulo. In: CYRINO, S.; TORRES MORAES; M. A. (org.). Mudança sintática no português brasileiro: perspectiva gerativista. São Paulo: Contexto, 2018. p. 210-251.
• LABOV, W. Principles of Linguistic Change: internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.
• LABOV, W. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1972.
• LOBO, T. C. F. Para uma sociolinguística histórica do português no Brasil: Edição filológica e análise linguística de cartas particulares do Recôncavo da Bahia, século XIX. 2001. Tese (Doutorado em Letras) - Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2001.
• LOBO, T. C. F. A colocação dos clíticos em português: duas sincronias em confronto. 1992. Dissertação (Mestrado em Letras) - Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, 1992.
• LOPES, C.; CAVALCANTE, S. R. de O. A cronologia do voceamento no português brasileiro: expansão de você sujeito e retenção do clítico te. Linguística , Madrid, v. 25, 2011.
• LOPES, C. R.; MARCOTULIO, L., L.; BRITO, M. C. R. DE ; OLIVEIRA, T. L.; SOUZA, J. P. F ; COELHO, I. L.; GOMES, V. S.; CARNEIRO, Z.; ANDRADE, A. L.; MARTINS, M. A.; OLIVEIRA, M. F.; MONTE, V. M.; SOUZA, C. M. N.; BALSALOBRE, S. R. G.; MOURA, K. K.; CRUZ, I. A.; CARDOSO, N. D. A Reorganização no Sistema Pronominal de 2a. pessoa na História Do Português Brasileiro: Posição De Sujeito. In: LOPES, C. (org.). História do português brasileiro: mudança sintática das classes de palavra: perspectiva funcionalista. São Paulo: Contexto, 2018. v. 4. p. 7-105.
• LOPES, C. R. dos S.; RUMEU, M. C. de B. A difusão do você pelas estruturas sociais carioca e mineira dos séculos XIX e XX. LaborHistórico , Rio de Janeiro. v. 1, p. 12-25, 2015.
• MARTINS, A. M. Posição dos pronomes pessoais clíticos. In: RAPOSO, E. B. P.; NASCIMENTO, M. F. B. do; MOTA, M. A. C. da; SEGURA, L.; MENDES, A. Gramática do Português. Lisboa: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, 2013. v.II. p. 2231-2302.
• MARTINS, M. A. A sintaxe dos pronomes pessoais clíticos na história do português brasileiro. In: CYRINO, S; TORRES MORAES; M. A (org.). Mudança sintática no português brasileiro: perspectiva gerativista. São Paulo: Contexto, 2018. p. 53-103.
• MARTINS, M. A. Para o estudo da propagação da mudança na colocação de clíticos no Português Brasileiro. In: FERREIRA LIMA, M. A.; ALVES FILHO, F.; COSTA, C. de S. M. (org.). Linguística e literatura: percorrendo caminhos. Teresina: EDUFPI, 2013. v. 1. p. 83-98.
• MARTINS, M. A. Reflexos da gramática do PC na escrita brasileira do século 19: uma análise das construções XclV. In: LOBO, T.; CARNEIRO, Z.; SOLEDADE, J. ALMEIDA, A.; RIBEIRO, S. ROSAE: Linguística histórica, história das línguas e outras histórias. Salvador: EDUFBA, 2012. p. 333-356.
• MARTINS, M. A. Competição de gramáticas do português na escrita catarinense dos séculos 19 e 20. 2009. 326f. Tese (Doutorado em Linguística) – Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, 2009.
• MARTINS, M. A.; ANDRADE, A. L. de; MOURA, K. K.; LACERDA, M.; GOMES, V. S.; CARNEIRO, Z. Para um panorama socio-histórico das formas de tratamento na função de sujeito na região Nordeste. LaborHistórico , Rio de Janeiro. v. 1, p. 26-48, 2015.
• MARTINS, M. A.; ANDRADE, A.; SCHEIDT, G. H.; SILVA, J. S.; DUARTE, R. R. Análise diatópico-diacrônica dos clíticos em jornais brasileiros dos séculos XIX e XX e especificidades da escrita em Santa Catarina. In: COELHO, I. L.; MONGUILHOTT, I. O. S; MARTINS, M. A.; GÖRSKI, E. M. Aspectos sócio-históricos e linguísticos do português escrito em Santa Catarina dos séculos XIX e XX . Florianópolis: EDUFSC, no prelo.
• MOURA, K. K. A implementação do você em cartas pessoais Norte-rio-grandenses do século XX. 2013. 100f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Linguística Teórica e Descritiva) – Centro de Ciências Humanas, Letras e Artes, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2013.
• NUNES DE SOUZA, C. M. N. A alternância entre Tu e Você na correspondência de florianopolitanos ilustres no decorrer de um século. 2015. 181f. Tese (Doutorado em Linguística) – Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, 2015.
• NUNES DE SOUZA, C.; COELHO, I. L. Caminhos para a investigação da alternância de pronomes de segunda pessoa em Santa Catarina. LaborHistórico , Rio de Janeiro. v. 1, p. 49-61, 2015.
• NUNES DE SOUZA, C.; COELHO, I. L.O sistema de tratamento em Santa Catarina: uma análise de cartas pessoais dos séculos XIX e XX. Revista do GELNE, Natal, v. 15, p. 213-243, 2013.
• OLIVEIRA, T. L. de. Os pronomes dativos de 2ª pessoa na escrita epistolar carioca. LaborHistórico , Rio de Janeiro, v. 1, p. 81-98, 2015.
• OLIVEIRA, T. L; CARVALHO, B. B. A; SILVA, T. F. T. A. Convergências e divergências na expressão do dativo de segunda pessoa: análise de cartas pessoais catarinenses e cariocas dos séculos XIX e XX. In: COELHO, I. L.; MONGUILHOTT, I. O. S; MARTINS, M. A.; GÖRSKI, E. M. Aspectos sócio-históricos e linguísticos do português escrito em Santa Catarina dos séculos XIX e XX. Florianópolis: EDUFSC, no prelo.
• PAGOTTO, E. A posição dos clíticos em português: um estudo diacrônico. 1992. 168f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Linguística) – Instituto de Estudos da Linguagem, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, 1992.
• SOUZA, J. P. F.Mapeando a entrada do você no quadro pronominal: análise de cartas familiares dos séculos XIX-XX. 2012. 148f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Letras) - Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, 2012.
• TARALLO, F. Diagnosticando uma gramática brasileira: o português d’aquém-mar e d’além-mar ao final do século XIX. In: ROBERTS, I; KATO, M. (org.). Português brasileiro: uma viagem diacrônica. Campinas: Ed. da Unicamp, 1993.
• TORRES MORAIS, M. A.; BERLINCK, R de A. O objeto indireto: argumentos aplicados e preposicionados. In: CYRINO, S. M. L.; TORRES MORAIS, M. A. Mudança sintática no português brasileiro: perspectiva gerativista. São Paulo: Contexto, 2018. p. 251-307.

• 1
  In the following sections more information about PHPB in the Brazilian context is presented, together with the theoretical and methodological assumptions of the analyses from the previous studies presented in this text.
• 2
  Available at: https://sites.google.com/site/corporaphpb/ .
• 3
  Available at: http://www.prohpor.org/ . Access on: 3 Aug. 2021.
• 4
  Available at: http://www5.uefs.br/cedohs/ . Access on: 3 Aug. 2021.
• 5
  The authors’ analysis is in Lopes et al . (2018).
• 6
  In the sample from Bahia (BA), 383 personal letters were analyzed, relating to the period from 1810 to 1990, from the collection of the Electronic Corpus of Historical Documents of the Sertão (CE-DOHS) and 838 occurrences of forms of address that refer to the second person in subject position were identified, between filled and null subjects ( Vossa Excelência, Vossa senhoria, o senhor, Vossa mercê e tu ); in the sample from Pernambuco (PE), 126 personal letters dated 1869 to 1969 were analyzed and 354 occurrences were identified in address pronouns (você , tu, Vossa Mercê, o/a senhor/a ); in the sample from Rio Grande do Norte (RN), 304 letters were analyzed and 892 occurrences were forms of address (você, tu , o /a senhor/a ). The letters of PE and RN are mostly available on the website of the Project for the History of the Brazilian Portuguese corpora .
• 7
  The data cited in this article were extracted from different studies presented here. Such data is encoded in the following manner: Century - 19.1, 19.2, 20.1 and 20.2. Textual genre - PL: personal letters; LR: letters from readers; LJ: letters from journalists; A: advertisement; TP: play. Brazilian state - SC: Santa Catarina; RJ: Rio de Janeiro; BA: Bahia; PE: Pernambuco; RN: Rio Grande do Norte; CE: Ceará.
• 8
  The results presented in the chart refer to the total use of the forms você vs. tu . In order to observe the implementation of você in the same socio-discursive contexts of tu , the use of the other forms of address in the letters were not included (Your Excellency, Your Lordship, you, Your mercy and you). For a detailed analysis, cf. Martins et al . (2015).
• 9
  A second very recurring form in the Bahian letters of the 19 century was the pronoun Vossa Excelência . Martins et al . (2015, p. 30) state: “ Vossa Excelência appears on the charts with 40% frequency in the first half of the 19 century (1810-59), reaching 82% in the second half of that century.”
• 10
  In the RN sample, there are letters from the period 1940 to 1959 with high rates of You (62% and 100%), but are all given in love letters exchanged between the couple Lourival and Ruzinete. Since we understand here that they are uses motivated by interpersonal relationships and by the beloved context of the letters, these occurrences were excluded from the graph in Figure 1 . For more details on see Moura (2013) , Martins et al . (2015) and Lopes et al . (2018).
• 11
  In the sample from Rio de Janeiro (RJ), 366 personal letters written between 1870 and 1979 were analyzed and 1,525 occurrences from você and tu ; in the sample from Minas Gerais (MG), 89 letters written between 1850 and 1989 were analyzed and 266 occurrences from você, tu and Vossa Mercê ; in the sample of São Paulo (SP), 67 letters written between 1870 and 1930 were analyzed and 148 occurrences from você, tu, o/a senhor/a, vossa senhoria and vossa excelência in subject position.
• 12
  Original: “ I. de 1870 a 1899: tu era mais frequente que você; II. de 1900 a 1939: tu e você apresentando frequências próximas; e III. de 1940 a 1979: predomínio de você sobre tu. ” (LOPES et al., 2018, p. 50).
• 13
  Original: “ O pronome você era menos produtivo que a forma tu em 1870, mantendo-se assim até a virada do século XIX para o XX. A distribuição das duas formas se alternou a partir de então, com índices de frequência bastante equilibrados até 1930-1939. De 1940 em diante, houve outra mudança com a inversão do comportamento de tu e você em relação à fase inicial. O uso de você tornou-se majoritário com o declínio do pronome tu nas cartas em análise. ” (LOPES et al. 2018, p. 50).
• 14
  Original: “ alta produtividade de você, com 84% (189 dados), em oposição às baixíssimas frequências de uso de tu, em 12% (28 dados) e do Vossa Mercê, em 04% (9 dados) ” (LOPES et al , 2018, p. 50).
• 15
  Original: “ relações familiares de superior para inferior das cartas mineiras novecentistas: de pais para filhos e entre irmãs .” (LOPES et al , 2018, p. 76).
• 16
  Original: “ aponta para a tendência de que o pronome você apresenta um uso majoritário ao longo do tempo, compreendido como uma estratégia neutra que perpassa a maioria das relações sociais ” (LOPES et al. 2018, p. 90).
• 17
  These results are also presented partially in Lopes et al . (2018).
• 18
  Original: “ o primeiro [contraste] entre o uso conservador do pronome tu com sujeito nulo pelos remetentes ilustres florianopolitanos e o uso variável dos pronomes tu nulo e você expresso pelos não ilustres; o segundo contraste foi entre o uso majoritário do pronome tu por não ilustres de Florianópolis e do pronome você por não ilustres de Lages, indicando um caso de variação diatópica. Esses resultados refletem, em certa medida, o caráter heterogêneo do estado de Santa Catarina .” (LOPES et al ., 2018, p. 106).
• 19
  There are many different propositions to address the broad phenomenon of “dativity” in languages ( COMPANY, 2002 , 2006 ) and the relevant changes in the expression of the dative/indirect object in Brazilian Portuguese ( TORRES MORAIS; BERLINCK, 2018 ). Concurring with Costa da Silva (2017) , dative complements are considered here prepositioned internal arguments of verbs, which, in BP, are identified by an oblique complement introduced by the lexical prepositions a/para . In this sense, I assume the form lhe , as well as the prepositioned forms a/para você/tu , express Indirect Object or dative complement to refer to the second person singular over time, because they are identified by the same thematic roles that are characteristic of Indirect Objects, particularly in contexts of verbs that express transfer and/or motion events.
• 20
  In order to compare the results from Oliveira (2015) from Rio de Janeiro, in the Southeast region, and Costa da Silva (2017) from the Northeast, I present here only the results related to the variants lhe, te, preposition ( a/para ) + você and null . These are the most occurring forms in both studies.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  01 Nov 2021
• Date of issue
  2021

History

• Received
  16 Mar 2019
• Accepted
  23 May 2020