Advances in Cognitive Sociolinguistics (Cognitive Linguistic Research)

Lexical convergence and divergence in Portuguese 57

they may, at the same time, or alternatively, suggest a less careful attitude
towards stylistic refinement in today’s Brazilian press, compared to the
Portuguese press.
We will now turn to the results regarding clothing terms. Table 5
presents U/U’ values for the 22 onomasiological profiles from the lexical
field of clothing. Figure 2 systematizes U/U’ and I/I’ results related to the
three issues analyzed in this section. These results are presented in the same
way as the football terms (Figure 1).

Table 5. U and U’ percentages for the 22 clothing profiles

P50/B50 P70/B70 P00/B00 Total

U U’ U U’ U U’ nº

BLOUSE F 86,9 8,8 79,4 8,0 85,3 7,8 1213

CARDIGAN M/F 87,3 0,4 7,1 0,1 15,5 0,1 97

COAT F 78,6 4,0 41,0 3,0 37,5 3,2 896

COAT M 3,9 0,1 5,1 0,1 22,2 0,1 138

DRESS F 96,2 23,0 80,6 13,2 92,4 16,1 2335

JACKET M/F 36,9 0,5 88,7 1,9 35,3 0,4 198

JACKET (BLOUSON) M/F 15,4 0,1 98,4 1,8 76,9 1,6 193

JEANS M/F 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 77,5 2,9 180

JUMPER M/F 36,8 0,7 34,4 2,1 7,1 0,4 573

LEGGINGS F 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 81,8 0,2 12

OUTFIT F 61,5 6,6 79,3 5,9 23,9 0,9 849

OVERCOAT M/F 39,7 2,7 56,7 3,3 71,8 2,5 642

RAINCOAT M/F 60,3 1,2 65,1 1,5 34,3 0,3 207

SHIRT M 100,0 1,3 83,3 0,7 97,6 0,9 128

SHORT JACKET F 69,3 1,3 66,0 1,2 79,2 0,9 195

SHORT JACKET M 85,0 0,6 0,0 0,0 100,0 0,1 39

SHORT TROUSERS M/F 68,2 1,3 67,9 2,6 19,9 0,9 454

SKIRT F 99,8 21,9 90,5 16,2 86,1 15,0 2337

SUIT M 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 88

TAILORED JACKET M/F 79,1 1,9 80,0 0,1 56,3 0,2 106

TROUSERS M/F 66,4 2,0 25,5 2,9 13,6 2,0 1327

T-SHIRT M/F 0,0 0,0 65,3 1,0 17,7 0,6 244

Total 61,6 78,4 58,7 65,7 51,4 57,1^12451

As for question (1), U and U’ percentages give evidence of a divergent
trend that has emerged through time: U’ decreases 12.88% between 1950
and 1970 (from 78.80% to 65.92%) and 8.81% between 1970 and 2000
(from 65.92% to 57.11%); generally, U’ decreases 21.69% throughout the
whole period.