https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w Just click on the (+) and insert your answer en-us 2020-09-29 00:13:16 UTC 2020-10-13 20:59:17 UTC hello@padlet.com https://padlet.net/icons/png/1f4aa.png antonellamolina1 https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/793140122 2020-09-30 22:19:46 UTC https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/793140122 https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/796533480 In middle constructions, the agent is implicit, and the subject is always located in preverbal position. ]]> 2020-10-01 22:33:10 UTC https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/796533480 anapaezenrico https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/799370307 The type of verbs that predominate are verbos intransitivos ergativos o inacusativos, i.e., verbs whose subject performs the thematic role of patient or theme. In the text there are cases of se diacrítico as in “corresponderse”, “encontrarse”, “presentarse” and “destacarse”, cases of se intransitivizador as in “invertirse”, “completarse”, “depositarse” and “desarrollarse”, and, finally, cases of se recíproco as in “relacionarse”, in both instances. The predominant type of “se” in the text is se diacrítico, whose presence yields the existence of two lexemes, one that is pronominal and another one that is not. Another type of “se” found in the text is se intransitivizador, which affects the realization of the argument structure of the verb, as the external argument is “absorbed” by the pronominal “se”, while the internal argument is syntactically expressed as the subject. In the case of se recíproco, “se” is used as a reciprocal pronoun that denotes a mutual interaction between the two subjects (there must be more than one entity acting as subject as a requirement). In all cases there are pronominal constructions at stake because “se” is used as a pronominal.

Páez Enrico, Ana Carolina
Perez, Catalina
Zapana, Dana]]> 2020-10-03 01:15:22 UTC https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/799370307 https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/800201769 The sentence in a) is acceptable in English as an example of middle voice, middle construction. Although there is no generic interpretation for the syntactic subject “she” points to a specific person and not people in general. The stativized verb “photograph” attributes a certain property to the externalized argument “she” plus a modalizing adverbial “well” that emphasizes the attribute and facilitates the situation represented in the verbal form. One possible interpretation may be: “it is easy, for everyone, to photograph her”. Sentence b) is acceptable because, unlike sentence a), it does not attribute a property of the Patient, but rather describes a happening/occurrence that took place in the past. In this case, “it” is the externalized argument, the syntactic subject in the middle voice, while the Agent is selected for by the verbal predicate, but it is implicit. 

Carranza, Lorena Giselle
Coria, Betina Magalí
Rueda, Rocío Carolina ]]> 2020-10-04 00:12:23 UTC https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/800201769 grcontrastiva https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/806299766 The sentence in a) is acceptable in English as an example of middle voice, middle construction. Although there is no generic interpretation for the syntactic subject “she” points to a specific person and not people in generalLG. The stativized verb “photograph” attributes a certain property to the externalized argument “she” LG plus a modalizing adverbial “well” that emphasizes the attribute and facilitates the situation represented in the verbal form(1). One possible interpretation may be: “it is easy, for everyone, to photograph her(2)”. Sentence b) is acceptableX because, unlike sentence a), it does not attribute a property ofLG the Patient, but rather describes a happening/occurrence(3) that took place in the past. In this case, “it” is the externalized argument, the syntactic subject in the middle voice, while the Agent is selected for by the verbal predicate, but it is implicit.
1) Careful with ML here. The notion of "facilitator" of the situation represented by the verb is associated with the properties that the Subject is said to possess. In turn, this notion is further made explicit by the modalizing adverbial.
2) Therefore, this would not be an instance of a canonical middle construction, for what is in focus is a specific individual and not a type or a class of individuals. In any case, your explanation is valid and you could argue that, although not prototypical, this is an instance of a middle construction (in which the verb appears in middle voice).
3) Yes, but note this event cannot take place spontaneously, the verb "to build" cannot be used in middle voice intransitively, ergatively, it should have been "it was built well"]]> 2020-10-06 11:57:02 UTC https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/806299766 grcontrastiva https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/806301756 Thanks for your contribution!  Please take a look at the comments (1-2-3) added to your analysis.
The sentence in a) is acceptable in English as an example of middle voice, middle construction. Although there is no generic interpretation for the syntactic subject “she” points to a specific person and not people in generalLG. The stativized verb “photograph” attributes a certain property to the externalized argument “she” LG plus a modalizing adverbial “well” that emphasizes the attribute and facilitates the situation represented in the verbal form(1). One possible interpretation may be: “it is easy, for everyone, to photograph her(2)”. Sentence b) is acceptableX because, unlike sentence a), it does not attribute a property ofLG the Patient, but rather describes a happening/occurrence(3) that took place in the past. In this case, “it” is the externalized argument, the syntactic subject in the middle voice, while the Agent is selected for by the verbal predicate, but it is implicit. Carranza, Lorena GiselleCoria, Betina MagalíRueda, Rocío Carolina
1) Careful with ML here. The notion of "facilitator" of the situation represented by the verb is associated with the propertities that the Subject is said to possess. In turn, this notion is further made explicit by the modalizing adverbial.
2) Therefore, this would not be an instance of a canonical middle construction, for what is in focus is a specific individual and not a type or a class of individuals. In any case, your explanation is valid and you could argue that, although not prototypical, this is an instance of a middle construction (in which the verb appears in middle voice).
3) Yes, but note this event cannot take place spontaneoulsy, the verb "to build" cannot be used in middle voice intransitively, ergatively, it should have been "it was built well"]]> 2020-10-06 11:58:03 UTC https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/806301756 grcontrastiva https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/806307929
(1)The type of verbs that predominate are verbos intransitivos ergativos o inacusativos, i.e., verbs whose subject performs the thematic role of patient or theme(2). In the text there are cases of se diacrítico as in “corresponderse”, “encontrarse”, “presentarse” and “destacarse”, cases of se intransitivizador as in “invertirse”, “completarse”, “depositarse” and “desarrollarse”, and, finally, cases of se recíproco as in “relacionarse”X(3), in both instances. The predominant type of “se” in the text is se diacrítico, whose presence yields the existence of two lexemes, one that is pronominal and another one that is not. Another type of “se” found in the text is se intransitivizador, which affects the realization of the argument structure of the verb, as the external argument is “absorbed” by the pronominal “se”, while the internal argument is syntactically expressed as the subject. In the case of se recíproco, “se” is used as a reciprocal pronoun that denotes a mutual interactionX(4) between the two subjects (there must be more than one entity acting as subject as a requirement). In all cases there are pronominal constructions at stake because “se” is used as a pronominal.

1) Although we could argue, as you do, that some instances of these verbal forms belong to "se diacrítico", there is a common denominator in all of them, which is that they represent occurrences, happenings, that take place spontaneously without the intervention of an agent. Thus, we could argue that, having this perspective into account, most of them (except for "corresponderse") can be considered instances of "se intrasitivizador".

2) And there is no agentivity involved.

3) Incorrect: consider that "se recíproco" entails the use of a transitive, agentive, verb, which is not the case here.

4) Incorrect. Consider that if you apply the paraphrase test, the "se" is maintained in the paraphrase, which proves this verb is not "recíproco".

]]> 2020-10-06 12:01:13 UTC https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/806307929 https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/810031125 Sentence E is an acceptable middle voice construction, given that the transitive verb "open" shows an active morphology by agreeing with the syntactic subject "window", which, in fact, would be the internal argument of an active construction.  Furthermore, this sentence includes an adverbial modifier , "easily", which is required for the middle construction to be acceptable. In consequence, this construction describes a property of the window: it opens easily.
Sentence F is unacceptable in English, because although there is a transitive verb, "cook", and a direct object which has been promoted to function as syntactic subject ("the pasta"), middle constructions are not compatible with progressive tenses because of their non-eventive, habitual interpretation. In addition, this cannot be considered a passive contruction either, because the verb ("cook") shows active morphology. Finally, the realization of the agent through the by-phrase ("by the chef"), would be acceptable if this sentences was a passive contruction.]]> 2020-10-07 12:49:30 UTC https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/810031125 grcontrastiva https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/817185985 re: sentence F. You are right, it's a middle construction and you may claim it's not a "standard" one as what is in focus is not a type/class of entity/individuals
re: sentence G. You can just add that middle constructions do not allow for agents to appear explicitly ]]> 2020-10-09 15:57:35 UTC https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/817185985 https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/826557840 Margarita Mariana Falco]]> 2020-10-13 20:18:11 UTC https://padlet.com/grcontrastiva/ama1ag4v0gqij34w/wish/826557840