Taming ser and estar with Predicate Adjectives

Abstract

In our article Sery Estar + Adjetivo Calificativo (Hispania, May 1983) a theory was set forth, according to which the selection of ser or estar in constructions with predicate adjectives is explained as expressing different types of implied comparisons. Ser is used to express an implied comparison of the type X/Y i.e., an entity X is compared with one or more entities Y which provide the standard by which a quality is attributed to X. For example, Pedro es rico asserts that Peter is rich in the sense that his wealth is greater than that of some putative average person. By contrast, estar expresses an implied comparison of the type X/X, i.e., an entity X is compared with itself, as in the example Pedro estd rico, which asserts that Peter is rich in the sense that his present wealth is greater than it is known or thought usually to be.' In the present article, our objective is to amplify and develop the theory of ser/estar with predicate adjectives in several ways.2 First, we shall look into the relationship between the theory and certain issues regarding the general semantic properties of adjectives. Second, we shall see how the theory in question provides an explanation for a variety of apparent paradoxes which have troubled earlier explanations of constructions of the type ser/estar + predicate adjective. In particular, we propose interpretations for a number of constructions such as Pedro estd muerto and El gerente estd bueno para tratar con el pziblico, which have traditionally not been well explained. As discussed in our earlier article, traditional explanations of the use of ser/estar with predicate adjectives, which are based on such dichotomies as permanent vs. temporary/ transitory or essential/inherent vs. accidental, fall short of being totally convincing because they are open to easy challenge by counter-example, e.g., Juan estd muerto, Pedro es rico,4 etc. Is death temporary, or is wealth permanent or inherent? The theory proposed in our article was able to accommodate such examples because it is based on the idea that in the case of subject-predicate adjective constructions the speaker is free to impose either of two interpretations, whereby each interpretation corresponds to a different type of implied comparison. Thus, to return to the example of rico, the difference between Pedro es rico and Pedro estd rico is seen as having nothing to do with such objective variables as the amount of money or other possessions Pedro might have at his disposal at the time either of these sentences is uttered, and indeed, this view is confirmed by observation of Spanish usage. The fact is that either of the sentences could be uttered by different speakers in exactly the same situation to comment on Pedro's wealth. Such observations would seem to clearly imply that the use of ser or estar with predicate adjectives reflects some sort of subjective reaction, judgment, or opinion of the individual speaker concerning Pedro's wealth. But what about our claim that the crucial variable underlying such individual reactions, judgments, or opinions is that one of two types of implied comparisons is being made? If this theory is correct, then it should account for the use of ser or estar not only in constructions with rico, but in constructions with any of the indefinitely many predicate adjectives which may be used with either ser or estar Furthermore, a highly valued theory of these constructions should provide a basis for accounting for the specific *Articles for this section may be sent to Prof. John P. Wonder, Dept. of Modern Languages, University of the Pacific, Stockton, California 95204. Please send a typed original and copy for each paper submitted. Maximum length is 20 double-spaced pages.