{"id":252086,"date":"2018-02-07T15:23:52","date_gmt":"2018-02-07T17:23:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/?p=252086\/"},"modified":"2018-02-07T15:23:52","modified_gmt":"2018-02-07T17:23:52","slug":"ataliba-teixeira-de-castilho-the-libertarian-linguist","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/ataliba-teixeira-de-castilho-the-libertarian-linguist\/","title":{"rendered":"Ataliba Teixeira de Castilho: The libertarian linguist"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"L\u00c9O RAMOS CHAVES<\/span><\/a>Labeling himself a country bumpkin because he was born in Ara\u00e7atuba and grew up in S\u00e3o Jos\u00e9 do Rio Preto, the linguist Ataliba Castilho enjoys it when language changes. One of the most recent examples of such change is the transformation of the invariant Portuguese pronoun que<\/em> [which] into a variant, as in Ques pessoas<\/em>? [which-es people], a novelty identified on social media by one of Castilho\u2019s doctoral students at the University of Campinas (Unicamp). In the professor\u2019s opinion, \u201cwhen grammarians tried to get people to obey rules, they didn\u2019t see that they were telling Brazilians to shut up.\u201d Castilho\u2019s criticism of grammarians does not mean that he is averse to the norms of standard Portuguese, but only that he appreciates the language\u2019s geographic and historical boundaries.<\/p>\n

Professor at S\u00e3o Paulo State University (Unesp) from 1961 to 1975, Unicamp from 1975 to 1991, and the University of S\u00e3o Paulo (USP) from 1993 to 2006, Castilho has led major research projects that helped define the identity of Portuguese as spoken in Brazil. The most recent was the project \u201cTowards a History of Brazilian Portuguese\u201d (PHPB, in its Portuguese acronym), which brought 200 researchers together from around the country; their consolidated results are now being published. To better understand Brazilian Portuguese, Castilho developed a multisystem approach to language, which is a method of analysis where any linguistic utterance calls into simultaneous play four systems, which should be viewed integrally: lexicon, grammar, semantics, and discourse.<\/p>\n

Castilho is married to C\u00e9lia Maria Moraes de Castilho, likewise a linguist, and has three children and four grandchildren. His frequent travels took him to a conference in Lisbon in July 2017 and he will be attending another, in Coimbra, in October 2017. He received the Pesquisa FAPESP<\/em> team at his home in Campinas, near Unicamp, from which he retired in 1991. He continues to work there as a voluntary collaborating professor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Age <\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
80<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Specialty <\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Linguistics<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Education <\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Undergraduate degree in the classics (1959) and PHD in linguistics (1966) from the University of S\u00e3o Paulo<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Institution<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Unicamp<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Scientific production <\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
62 articles; master\u2019s and doctoral advisor; author of Nova Gram\u00e1tica Do Portugu\u00eas Brasileiro (Contexto, 2010), among other books<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

How are things going with \u201cTowards a History of Brazilian Portuguese,\u201d one of your most recent projects?<\/strong>
\nThat project began at USP in 1987. We had initiated studies on spoken language in the 1970s and when the results started emerging, I asked my colleagues where all that had come from. So we began reconstructing the history of the establishment and development of Brazilian Portuguese, using the same method applied in earlier projects: forming work groups, setting timetables, holding national seminars, and publishing results. Ten volumes of studies were released, and now the consolidated results are coming out in 12 volumes, seven of which should be published in 2017. The first will be volume four, on the history of nouns, adjectives, and prepositions; C\u00e9lia Lopes, of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, is the editor. Did everything come from European Portuguese, or did we invent something? A PhD student whom I\u2019m advising at Unicamp, Fl\u00e1via Orci Fernandes, searched social media and found plural markers on the pronoun que <\/em>[which], which no longer is an invariant. Nowadays people say and write ques<\/em> pessoas<\/em> [which-es people].\u00a0 How do we explain this dynamic aspect of language? We have to document and explain it. Changes in language create new rules. The educated haven\u2019t accepted this yet, but it\u2019s a matter of time; they\u2019ll eventually accept it. The language is entering a new stage.<\/p>\n

What other changes are you seeing?<\/strong>
\nOur studies have indicated that the plural will no longer be expressed by adding the morpheme \u2018s<\/em>\u2019 to the end of a noun but by adding it solely to the article\u2014as in os menino <\/em>[the-s boy]\u2014which is the result of a phonological mechanism involving open syllables. It seems that consonants are changing more than vowels. Isn\u2019t fazer<\/em> [to do] turning into faz\u00ea<\/em>? Other final consonants are dropping off, like duas vez<\/em> [two time] instead of duas vezes <\/em>[two times]. Both words are marked for the plural, which is redundant; it might be more economical to mark only the first element and leave the other alone. French still maintains final consonants in writing but not in speech anymore, as in l\u2019enfant<\/em>, les enfants <\/em>[the child, the children]\u2014the \u2018s<\/em>\u2019 isn\u2019t heard in spoken French. We believe we\u2019ll end up with another language, unlike Portuguese from Portugal. The two languages are still the same, but they\u2019re already displaying many differences. Using statistical methods to project the pace of these changes, we find that 200 years from now, the Brazilians and the Portuguese won\u2019t be able to understand each other anymore (see Pesquisa FAPESP<\/em> Issue No. 230<\/a>).<\/p>\n

What do you find most fascinating about Brazilian Portuguese?<\/strong>
\nThe incredible variations in accents and ways of using the language. This is a consequence of our history. Since the Portuguese came over in a number of waves, each region developed its own modality of the same language. My wife, C\u00e9lia, has been studying who these Portuguese were and where they came from. They began arriving in S\u00e3o Vicente in 1532, and it was in what is now the state of S\u00e3o Paulo that the Portuguese began colonizing Brazil. The Portuguese reached Rio de Janeiro, Salvador, and Recife in the 16th<\/sup> century. In the 18th<\/sup> century, Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul received more waves of Portuguese, from the Madeira Islands and the Azores\u2014not the continent, like the previous century. To learn what the Portuguese language was like in the 16th<\/sup> and 17th<\/sup> centuries, C\u00e9lia looked at the authors of wills left by the Portuguese. She found that 20% of the authors were new Christians\u2014Sephardic Jews\u2014who had gone to Portugal after being expelled from Spain. Few people knew how to write back then. She separated out the writings by these Jewish immigrants, who lived in isolation. The women never left the house and their Portuguese was very conservative. The men had a more conservative side, used inside the family, and another, less conservative, used in doing business. C\u00e9lia compared the writing of the new Christians and the Portuguese and separated the era\u2019s modern language\u2014used by the Portuguese\u2014from the conservative version, a linguistic variation. She also studied specific features of grammar to uncover the historical basis of caipira <\/em>[rural or, literally, hillbilly] Portuguese, which preserves 15th<\/sup>-century Portuguese. Our pronunciation known as the caipira<\/em> \u2018r<\/em>\u2019 is a remnant of the conservative Portuguese spoken then.<\/p>\n

Is the <\/strong>caipira \u2018r\u2019<\/em> 500 years old?<\/strong>
\nNo one knows for sure. Some say that Indians from the Para\u00edba Valley used this \u2018r<\/em>\u2019, but this explanation would only hold if it were proven that the tribe extended over S\u00e3o Paulo and followed frontier adventurers into the interior. Other phonologists think the caipira<\/em> \u2018r<\/em>\u2019 is a feature that didn\u2019t develop within Portuguese phonology but might have appeared naturally, as a consequence of the phonological system, and not through contact with the Indians. A phonological system is a system of sounds. There are always tendencies to combine sounds that account for the changes. One tendency in Brazilian Portuguese has to do with how sibilants are dealt with. It\u2019s what distinguishes S\u00e3o Paulo natives from people living in Rio de Janeiro, the South, and the Northeast. Where does the palatalization of the final \u2018s<\/em>\u2019 come from, as in ash<\/em> crianssash<\/em> [as crian\u00e7as; <\/em>the children]? From the tendency to palatalize the sibilant. This has gone a step farther now, because palatal vowels are becoming diphthongized, as in aish<\/em> pessoaish<\/em> (as pessoas<\/em>; the people).<\/p>\n

Why were Portuguese and grammar classes always so boring and full of rules?<\/strong>
\nBecause linguistics didn\u2019t exist yet, just school grammar. Grammarians take a very narrow view of language. They see themselves as having to defend language against change. Linguists also talk about rules because they feel it\u2019s their duty to explain them, but they don\u2019t stop there, and they see the rules as fascinating. Why is it like that? Was it always? Is it like that all over? Grammarians stick to the application of rules and see new things as wrong and old as right. The problem is that when grammarians tried to get people to obey linguistic norms, they didn\u2019t see that they were telling Brazilians to shut up. As if they were saying: \u201cYou have to speak and write according to the rules. Don\u2019t speak wrong!\u201d And because people are afraid to fail, they don\u2019t speak or write very much. This is a consequence of preaching traditional grammar. It hasn\u2019t been a good thing. People have to feel at ease about expressing themselves, taking part in discussions, developing a democratic spirit. Language belongs to the speaker, not to the grammarian. We learn language with the speaker, as he speaks it, and we try to figure out why he\u2019s speaking like this or that. Did the expression come from Latin? Was it created here? And we can use the structures, not just classify and name them. What\u2019s the point of only knowing the sub-classes of subordinate clauses? It\u2019s not a scientific attitude, an attitude of discovery, to say that someone is speaking incorrectly. Linguistics has replaced the order to shut up with the pleasure of scientific discovery. It was only through linguistics that our vision expanded and we began considering any topic worthy of study.<\/p>\n

How did this change come about? <\/strong>
\nLinguistics started in Brazil in the 1970s. It was quite an upset, because prior to that, only grammarians studied the language. In terms of linguists, there were Joaquim Mattoso C\u00e2mara J\u00fanior [1904-1970], in Rio de Janeiro; Theodoro Henrique Maurer J\u00fanior [1906-1979], in S\u00e3o Paulo; and Ros\u00e1rio Far\u00e2ni Mansur Gu\u00e9rios [1907-1987], in Curitiba. It was Mansur who steered Aryon Dall\u2019Igna Rodrigues [1925-2014] towards indigenist studies when he said: \u201cIn Portuguese, you\u2019re only going to rediscover what we already know, but not in indigenous languages, because they\u2019re not Indo-European and they have completely different solutions and categories. That would be something truly new.\u201d He was right; in terms of structure, indigenous languages have categories that nobody can imagine. And Aryon inaugurated indigenous linguistics in Brazil. A linguist from the United States, Daniel Everett, came to Unicamp in the 1970s and then studied the language of the Pirah\u00e3 community, in the state of Amazonas. He butted heads with U.S. linguist Noam Chomsky, who said that what we call recursion is universal. Recursion refers to the fact that we can apply the same grammar rule multiple times when building sentences. In Portuguese, whenever I want to put something in the plural, I add an \u2018s<\/em>\u2019. <\/em>But Everett didn\u2019t find any recursion in the Pirah\u00e3 language\u2014which also has no words for numbers or colors. Chomsky had to recognize this exception to a rule he thought was general. Brazilian linguists can contribute a lot to the general theory of languages. Today there are 160 indigenous languages in Brazil. There used to be twice as many, but the Indian speakers have died. Of these languages, only 60 have been described.<\/p>\n

In the 1970s, you began the project \u201cStandard Urban Portuguese\u201d (NURC). Tell us about it. <\/strong>
\nThe idea was to describe standard spoken Portuguese. It was surprising, because standard Portuguese contained a lot that had been condemned by grammarians, showing that our catalogue of \u201cmistakes\u201d didn\u2019t take into account how the Portuguese language is really used in Brazil. The project began with a Spanish professor from El Colegio de M\u00e9xico, in Mexico City, Juan Miguel Lope-Blanch [1927-2002]. He worked in dialectology\u2014in other words, he described the language of rural regions\u2014until he realized that people were migrating to cities. So he decided to do urban dialectology. In the 1960s, Lope-Blanch launched the idea of studying the standard urban language spoken in federal capitals, not only Spanish but other languages across the Americas and in Portugal. This proposal reached Brazil through another dialectologist, Nelson Rossi [1927-2014], of the Federal University of Bahia, who compiled the first linguistic atlas of Brazil. At a meeting in S\u00e3o Paulo in 1969, Rossi said that Lope-Blanch wanted to study the language of federal capitals, but in Brazil, our capital, Brasilia, wouldn\u2019t serve as an example of relevant linguistic fact, because it was very new. So we chose five state capitals: Recife, Salvador, Rio de Janeiro, S\u00e3o Paulo, and Porto Alegre. We followed precisely the same methodology as the original project. NURC did a very good job recording interviews and then doing transcriptions, but it fell short in its descriptions. A huge corpus was compiled from 1,500 hours of recordings. But when it came to describing structures\u2014phonology, morphology, syntax\u2014it didn\u2019t work, because the questionnaire used in the interviews lacked theoretical consistency; it was cumbersome. I applied the questionnaire to study aspect and verb tenses, and I saw that it wouldn\u2019t produce any results because each question corresponded to one theory, different from the theory underpinning the next question. I wrote a paper about how the questionnaire wasn\u2019t workable for the most important step: description, knowledge. In 1981, I read the paper at a conference at Cornell University, in the United States. I thought Lope-Branch would kill me, because he was always very forceful when he had something to say, but I was bowled over. Do you know what he said? \u201cYou\u2019re right.\u201d When we couldn\u2019t reach a decision, we\u2019d put the matter to a vote, as if science were a democracy. It\u2019s not. You\u2019ve got to be coherent with your concepts and not decide by vote. After what he said, I came to the conclusion that we needed to leave the project. But at the same time, we couldn\u2019t just ignore the wonderful quantity of data produced by NURC.<\/p>\n

\"\"

Personal archives<\/span><\/a> Castilho with classmates Jo\u00e3o de Almeida (left<\/em>) and Wladimir Olivier (right<\/em>) at their graduation from the USP School of Letters in 1959Personal archives<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

So what did you do?<\/strong>
\nI came back disillusioned by the project\u2019s direction, but then I got the idea of reaching out to the best linguists in Brazil, who weren\u2019t taking part in NURC yet. I reached out to Mary Kato and Rodolfo Ilari, of Unicamp; Leda Bisol, of PUC [Pontifical Catholic University], in Rio Grande do Sul; Luiz Ant\u00f4nio Marcuschi [1946-2016], of the Federal University of Pernambuco; and a number of others. I explained that NURC had hit a wall because its methodology lacked consistency. I asked if they would agree to do a grammar using material from NURC. So then they asked me what kind of grammar I wanted. I said, \u201cNot what kind I want; what kind we want. It\u2019ll be a group effort.\u201d So I launched the idea that we each go off to our own corner and write a paper entitled \u201cMy grammar as I conceive of it\u201d\u2014precisely in that stilted language. Groups with theoretical affinities gathered spontaneously\u2014generativists, functionalists, structuralists, each in its own corner. Each group wrote something that ended up forming a work group for the project, and we divided up according to these sets of ideas and planned to meet once a year to discuss our results, in all frankness. After our discussions, we each took what was left of our papers\u2014because the discussions were really hard-hitting\u2014and then we redid the essays. They were published next, forming a nine-volume collection. Then came the job of consolidating the results of the grammar itself. The first of the eight-volume Gram\u00e1tica do Portugu\u00eas Falado<\/em> [Grammar of spoken Portuguese] was released in 2006 by Unicamp\u2019s university press. It was entitled A Constru\u00e7\u00e3o do Texto Falado <\/em>[Construction of the spoken text] and was edited by Cl\u00e9lia Jubran, of Unesp, and Ingedore Koch, of Unicamp. They devised a theory to explain the features of oral texts. Seven volumes came out in a second edition, published by Contexto between 2012 and 2016. As a result, Brazilian Portuguese became the only romance language in the Americas to have its standard version broadly documented and described.<\/p>\n

And what are its features?<\/strong>
\nSpoken language is hesitant, interrupted, redundant, unplanned, fragmented, incomplete, not thought out much, with little informational density and short simple sentences. We talk and create at the same time. Another feature are discourse markers, like t\u00e1?<\/em> [okay] and n\u00e9? <\/em>[right], always at the end of sentences. So there\u2019s a placement rule. Spoken language displays different regularities than written Portuguese. Another thing is that we learn the spoken modality first and then the written language. It seems like a silly detail but it makes all the difference. Written language comes later, imposed on us, because we learn spoken language in our family and written at school. All of this makes for a tremendous difference between the two modalities. Traditional grammar is only concerned with written language. If the description of a language is concentrated on its written form, then I\u2019d be grabbing the point of arrival not of departure, and I\u2019d be taking as true a bunch of misconceptions about how the language works. I was bitten by this bug in the 1980s, and I asked myself what theory I could draw from it. I devised the multisystem approach to language, which I used as the foundation for Nova Gram\u00e1tica do Portugu\u00eas Brasileiro<\/em> [New grammar of Brazilian Portuguese]. I reworked it for a presentation at the 11th<\/sup> Lusistanistentag\u2014the day of scholars of the language, literature, and culture of Portuguese-speaking nations\u2014held two years ago in Aachen, Germany.<\/p>\n

How do you define the multisystem approach?<\/strong>
\nIt\u2019s very simple. All of linguistics has always revolved around three axes: phonetics and phonology [the study of speech sounds], morphology [the study of word forms], and syntax [the study of relations between words]. In addition to this system, which constitutes grammar, we have semantics, which deals with meaning; discourse, which is how people compose a text; and lexicon, that is, words. So we\u2019re talking about language as a set of four systems: lexicon, grammar, semantics, and discourse. To describe a phenomenon thoroughly, I have to rely on these four systems: lexicon, semantics, grammar, and discourse. Can this be done by one person alone? No. The study of a language has to be a group effort. This is the corollary of NURC, the Gram\u00e1tica do Portugu\u00eas Falado<\/em>, and the project \u201cTowards a History of Brazilian Portuguese,\u201d which also fosters exchange between people with different views, including sociolinguists, generativists, functionalists, and cognitivists.<\/p>\n

How do you bring people with different perspectives together?<\/strong>
\nI respect different ways of thinking. And when you show respect, you bring people together. No one wants to get beaten up by others. Science isn\u2019t meant for that purpose, but for uniting people in the discovery of knowledge. Some people find it easier to do this and others, harder. When things get stuck and opinions seem irreconcilable, sometimes I\u2019ve got to remember: \u201cAnd our obligation, our duty?\u201d I bring out my Presbyterian discourse. I was raised in that church in S\u00e3o Jos\u00e9 do Rio Preto.<\/p>\n

Who was your first Portuguese teacher and what was she or he like?<\/strong>
\nIt was Amaury de Assis Ferreira [1920-1995], father of Brazilian television host Amauri Jr. He was a really good teacher. He read and studied a lot, and he\u2019d get all excited showing us the books he\u2019d bought. I\u2019d go to his house once in a while; my dad was an electrician and he\u2019d go to change the element in his electric stove. He\u2019d call me over and show me his library and the books he\u2019d bought. He really enjoyed what he did. I thought, \u201cI want to be a guy like this.\u201d I had other wonderful teachers in S\u00e3o Paulo, like Theodoro Maurer, my doctoral advisor. Quiet type, skinny, the son of Swiss immigrants. Working alone, he wrote one of the world\u2019s most thoroughgoing works on the grammar and syntax of Vulgar Latin. He also engaged in another type of leadership, which I discovered by accident when I was walking in the neighborhood of Consola\u00e7\u00e3o, in S\u00e3o Paulo. As I passed a house, I heard some Presbyterian hymns. I peeked in the door and there was Maurer and a professor of philology, Isaac Nicolau Salum [1913-1993]. They were studying the Gospel of St. Matthew, everybody reading Greek! I was studying the classics, Latin and Greek, and I was amazed to see the professors discussing in the original Greek. I asked him, \u201cWhy don\u2019t you invite your students?\u201d \u201cI can\u2019t,\u201d he said. \u201cIt\u2019s a lay university.\u201d In addition to being a professor of romance languages and an evangelical pastor who knew Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, he was president of the S\u00e3o Paulo chapter of a political party. And he didn\u2019t say anything about this at the university.<\/p>\n

Did you attend USP on a scholarship from the City of Rio Preto? <\/strong>I did. My family was quite humble and I had to pay room and board in S\u00e3o Paulo. A classmate of mine said that the City of Rio Preto was awarding scholarships to students who got into either USP or what was then called the National University of Rio de Janeiro. Shortly after I was accepted, in 1956, I took my enrollment form in and they gave me a scholarship on the spot. It was 200 cruzeiros<\/em>, paid out in a lump sum, to last the whole year. Inflation rose in the third year and the scholarship only covered half the year. Then I started teaching, to supplement these funds. In 1959 and 1960, I taught Portuguese at Francisco Roswell Freire, a state high school in S\u00e3o Miguel Paulista, and in 1960 I taught Latin at the Suzano state high school and teacher\u2019s college, in Greater S\u00e3o Paulo. I loved the experience. S\u00e3o Miguel was an industrial neighborhood, and for its students, the school was their way of getting into a profession and out of that world. They treated the teachers really well. The first thing I noticed when I got to S\u00e3o Miguel was that the school had no library. How could I teach Portuguese without a library? But there was a kind of school association that raised money from the parents who could afford to give. I asked the principal if I could use the money to buy books and he said yes. I lived on Guaianazes Street, across from the publishing house Editora Nacional, and I\u2019d buy the books at a discount and leave them at school, where a student looked after them. I\u2019d buy historical novels by Paulo Set\u00fabal [1893-1937] and Monteiro Lobato [1882-1948] and some titles from the Book Club collection. The students liked that a lot. I met my wife at S\u00e3o Miguel. She was studying there, although she wasn\u2019t my student.<\/p>\n

What did you teach at S\u00e3o Miguel?<\/strong>
\nI copied my teacher from Rio Preto. I tried to give lively classes. I assigned students homework, showed appreciation for what they did, put the pressure on when something wasn\u2019t right. I didn\u2019t teach much grammar. I did what the program required, but emphasized reading. I was later invited to work at what would become the Mar\u00edlia campus of Unesp. A small town, a small group, with people searching for their paths. The Latin professor, Enzo Del Carratore, had been my classmate at USP. We were all young and tried to establish a work program. We looked at what they were studying at USP. Historical linguistics? So let\u2019s do descriptive linguistics. They were focusing on written language? So let\u2019s study spoken language. That defined our lives, because we soon decided what to do. We wanted to research different topics. At our invitation, great linguists\u2014Maurer, Mattoso C\u00e2mara J\u00fanior, Nelson Rossi\u2014came to read their papers.<\/p>\n

What was your participation at the Portuguese Language Museum?<\/strong>
\nIn 2004, Jarbas Mantovanini, who worked at the Roberto Marinho Foundation, came to USP, presented the museum project, and said he wanted to ask two things of me. First, he wanted me to offer some ideas for the museum; then to draw up a timeline on the history of Portuguese. Aryon was going to cover the part on indigenous languages, while Yeda Pessoa de Castro, of the Federal University of Bahia, would address African languages. Jarbas told me to invite whoever I wanted to. I invited M\u00e1rio Viaro and Marilza de Oliveira, both from USP, to cover the other parts. Jarbas asked me how I wanted to represent the timeline, using films or panels. I preferred panels, because films were going to be shown on the other side of the room. I delivered the project, and he liked it. \u201cIt\u2019s all very lovely, but I\u2019m going to replace the last panel with a mirror. Everybody is going to travel that incredible 2,000-year history and when they get to the end, they\u2019ll see themselves.\u201d You know, he hit the nail on the head. A lot of the folks who saw themselves after taking this historical journey broke into tears. A colleague from Minas Gerais, Maria Antonieta Cohen, at first went to see the museum and then to see the people when they got to the mirror. She asked me: \u201cWhy do you suppose they cry?\u201d I thought about it a lot. People certainly cried because they saw their identity there. What is the Portuguese language? It\u2019s me, who now represents this whole journey. Language is my identity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Linguist says that language belongs to the speaker, not to the grammarian","protected":false},"author":17,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[161],"tags":[244],"coauthors":[5968],"class_list":["post-252086","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-interview","tag-linguistics"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/252086","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/17"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=252086"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/252086\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=252086"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=252086"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=252086"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=252086"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}