Now when it comes to orality, sometimes writing, the fact is that, as users of the language, we have a lexical collection quite significant and, in view of the discourse that we propose to emphasize, we have at our disposal different ways of effect it. Thus, such positioning brings us to the disposition that we are choosing to put each word in its respective place, making the messages clear, precise and cohesive. It is worth stating, therefore, that the language we speak, in a way, grants us this flexibility, as in the following statements, only as an example:
Regarding what was signed at the meeting, we can only believe that all proposals will be accepted.
It remains for us to believe that all proposals will be accepted, regarding what was signed at the meeting.
It remains for us to believe, based on what was signed at the meeting, that all proposals will be accepted.
It is clear that the arrangement of the elements in all of them was different, however, this fact did not compromise the clarity of the message - which once again confirms that, depending on the sender's awareness that the relationship established between the words says With respect to the knowledge you have about syntax, you can choose a variety of ways to position the constituent elements of the speech.
However, it is worth stating that even with such possibilities, as users of the linguistic system, we need to realize that there are basic principles that guide this process and that not all the positions we choose to arrange the words will be grammatically accepted. In this sense, when referring to these principles, they postulate as necessary three basics, being they related à phrase harmony, clarity of meaning and expressiveness, i.e, to the stylistic effects that one wishes to obtain through the relation enunciator x enunciatee. Thus, let's see them, for the purpose of finding:
Placement related to speech harmony.
In this regard, it is not unreasonable to say that harmony maintains a close relationship with sound produced by the choices we make, materializing (or at least that is what is expected) in a perfect union. Thus, examples lend credibility to the statement highlighted:
I never bored you.(It should be noted that the connection between the verb and the pronoun did not result in a pleasant phonetic effect, which makes us believe, in terms of linguistic evidence, that the use of enclisis in this case it was not well accepted).
Do not stop now... There's more after the advertising ;)
In this way, when we rectify the speech in question, we obtain:
I never bothered you.
clarity of speech
When it comes to clarity, one immediately has an idea that the barriers that, perhaps materialized, obscure and make ambiguous the messages we produce are distinct, as can be seen in:
The passenger took the bus running a lot.
In this case, we do not have any resources that indicate to us that it was who was running: if the passenger or if the bus.
Correcting, in order to make clear what is intended to say, we have:
The passenger took the bus, which was running a lot.
Expressiveness in the message
“Style” represents a resource widely available to the issuer, as long as such skill is at the service of what he intends to achieve with the speech he produces. Thus, giving a more emphatic character to the speech becomes a widely acceptable procedure, which is often materialized by the placement that takes place between the noun and the adjective, which often reveals the load of subjectivity imprinted in what is intended to affirm, as in:
That look represented a sad bitterness of the times they lived together.
That look represented a bitterness sad of the times when they lived together.
meaning in speech
Meaning refers to the semantics which, in turn, is closely linked to the meaning we want to give to the idea we convey, for this reason, the same word, depending on the communicative situation, can take on different connotations, it is enough that we are able to recognize it. Starting from this premise, let's see:
I can see some meaning in his words.
Sense some I could see it in your words.
We found that in the first example, we have something positive; in the case of the second, we visualize a character negative printed on the message.
By Vânia Duarte
Graduated in Letters
