Pedro Manuel Suárez Martínez

Questions and Answers (8) View all

• Answer added in Latin
  4 Does anyone know of a 1st century Latin text in which "ars" was used to signify a display piece?
  By James Williams · Soka University Of America
  Pedro Manuel Suárez Martínez · Universidad de Oviedo

  Ok. Thanks, I understand now. I don't know uses of "ars" in sense of "display pieces". And I think it'll be difficult to find them. Romans always inte... [more]

  Ok. Thanks, I understand now. I don't know uses of "ars" in sense of "display pieces". And I think it'll be difficult to find them. Romans always interpreted the word "ars" (to my knowledge) as a technical treatise in order to teach or learn something. Moreover, the lack of freedom confined the speeches to private spheres (academies), where teachers taught to compose a well done speech, not in order to make students good citizens, ready for public life, but to giving them a certain traditional culture, more useful for literature than for forums. They learned by means of some kind of exercises, called "suasoriae" and "controuersiae", as you know.You will find instances of them in the little Seneca's (the Older) collection.
  Following
• Answer added in Latin
  4 Does anyone know of a 1st century Latin text in which "ars" was used to signify a display piece?
  By James Williams · Soka University Of America
  Pedro Manuel Suárez Martínez · Universidad de Oviedo

  Could you be more specific or explain a little more the context? 

  Could you be more specific or explain a little more the context?
  Following
• Answer added in Applied Linguistics
  43 The use of We in academic writing: Hiding behind your Mama's skirt?
  By Juan Pino-Silva · Simon Bolívar University
  Pedro Manuel Suárez Martínez · Universidad de Oviedo

  Dear friends: I have read more or less deeply all your contributions and I think everybody has some reason. In fact, almost all of you talk (widely) a... [more]

  Dear friends: I have read more or less deeply all your contributions and I think everybody has some reason. In fact, almost all of you talk (widely) about pragmatics factors conditioning the use of I or of WE. Several kind of scientific texts must be distinguished. When you write a doctoral dissertation, it is obvious that you are not alone in your opinions. Your thesis director is behind or beside you, though you can explain your own opinions, even not shared by your director. In this case, I think it is always better to use WE. The meaning of this WE can be interpreted in different ways: you + your director, you alone as author (author plural), you + the reader (inclusive plural) or you + your director and your reader (superinclusive plural –see above, my first contribution). In papers signed by plus than one author, the use of WE is obviously obliged. To distinguish individual ideas, the use of the proper name of one of the authors is necessary. Nevertheless, when you sign alone a paper for a certain journal, the use of WE or I is more personal and entries in the field of stylistics. You can use I to underline that certain idea is properly yours or to make readers know you are the only researcher of that paper or results. But you can also use WE with the same value, including the readers to make them share your investigation, to implicate them in your ideas, to make the reader think you are not alone in your own opinions. In this case, the reader must be helped to understand you are the person who is behind that ideas, for instance, adding parenthetical phrases as “at least that is what we think” or “as we are demonstrating” or “we try to demonstrate” and so on. Sometimes, you can also use I, if you want to make contrast between others’ opinions and yours. As you may see, there are several possibilities depending on the text nature, the country, the culture, the author's personality... No one rule can be suggested for all kind of papers nor for all styles of writing. Thanks.
  Following
• Answer added in Linguistics
  12 Is the "'zero person' construction" well known among linguists, and if so, is it widely recognized as distinct from other "impersonal" constructions?
  By Jim Wilce · Northern Arizona University
  Pedro Manuel Suárez Martínez · Universidad de Oviedo

  Dear Eugenia: Yes, I think so. This is exactly the Spanish equivalent to the latin impersonal passive. You can also compare with transitive verbs, lik... [more]

  Dear Eugenia: Yes, I think so. This is exactly the Spanish equivalent to the latin impersonal passive. You can also compare with transitive verbs, like "comer" in "aquí se come bien". "Comer" is usually a transitive verb, but here it hasn't nor subject, nor object. I think that "se" is the only spanish morpheme for getting a true passive form, equivalent to the latin passive voice in third person (the one used to construct impersonal phrases): -tur. Thanks.
  Following
• Answer added in Linguistics
  12 Is the "'zero person' construction" well known among linguists, and if so, is it widely recognized as distinct from other "impersonal" constructions?
  By Jim Wilce · Northern Arizona University
  Pedro Manuel Suárez Martínez · Universidad de Oviedo

  "Like the passive, the so-called zero construction implies a human participant the reference of which is left non-specific and open for construal on t... [more]

  "Like the passive, the so-called zero construction implies a human participant the reference of which is left non-specific and open for construal on the basis of contextual cues". It is obvious that everything written or said is human being production; the human being is implied in every speech act, he is always behind. The impersonal passive is called "impersonal" because, human or not human, the subject, it is the "person" of the 3rd verbal no-person is unknown. No matter if it is concrete or collective, man or woman, thing or human being: it is simply unknown. One can imagine whatever he wants: it doesn't change the main and most important fact, namely, the subject remains unknown. Thanks.
  Following