Some Cases of Divided Usage in Spoken Brazilian Portuguese

a usted can prove convenient forms in that they may refer to either a masculine of a feminine recipient. For pedagogical purposes I personally prefer to for the direct object (masculine persons or things) for four reasons: (1) this is historically the correct form, (2) it enjoys wider currency in the Hispanic world, (3) the conservative Spanish Academy now recommends it, and (4) it makes for a less co plicated pronoun chart. For le it can be said that some of the best writers, such as Cervantes, have used it extensively. (Cervantes did not use it exclusively.) I believe it wasn't until the early nineteenth century that the grammarian Vicente Salva recommended the compromise policy of using le for masculine persons (i.e., 'him'), la for fe inine persons and things, and lo for masculine things. At first blush this sounds quite logical: le for 'him,' la for 'her,' and lo for 'it.' H wever, the language is not geared to a masculin -fe inineuter system but rather to the binary setup of masculinefeminine. I refer, of course, to nouns primarily, not overlooking the neuters esto, eso, aquello, lo bueno, etc

Brazilian Portuguese · Geography · Linguistics · Portuguese · Gender Studies in Language · History · Linguistics and Education Research · Philosophy · Spanish Linguistics and Language Studies