The plural marking in Brazilian Portuguese (BP) presents several number inflection strategies, so the absence of a simplified rule entails the use of allomorphs for the pluralization of the same morphological group or lexia and such marking may occur partially and/or just at the syntactic level. Thus, this investigation seeks to understand how the plural is marked in Portuguese in the state of Bahia from the interface between the morphological, phonological, phonetic and lexical levels through an analysis with the theoretical-methodological basis of Dialectology and Sociolinguistics (WEINREICH; LABOV; HERZOG, 2006 [1968]). The sample consisted of 74% (92) of surveys carried out between 2003 and 2007 in 22 points in Bahia, provided by the Linguistic Atlas of Brazil Project (ALiB) and complemented with a further 26% (32) of surveys applied in 2020 in seven of these original locations. For the qualification exam of this preliminary text, the first chapter dealt with the Morphology field, its concepts and interaction with other areas of knowledge; in the second chapter, in a systematic and intercomparable way, 49 manuals of grammar, orthography and other texts that deal with the prescription of number inflection in PB and in European Portuguese (EP) were analyzed in order to understand any changes in the standard norm and disagreements between the prescription in BP and EP over the centuries, as well as a subsection written on the research carried out on the pluralization of the metaphonic group; in the third chapter, the theoretical-methodological assumptions were described; in the fourth chapter, the analysis of the pluralization of one of the controlled morphological groups was concluded. Thus, in the metaphonic group, in one of the statistical analyzes processed in R, the following variables were selected: i) filling in the antecedent syntactic context; ii) number of syllables; iii) order of realization; iv) frequency of occurrence; v) lexical item; vi) mesoregion of Bahia; vii) year/sample; viii) exposure to television; ix) exposure to radio; x) contact with the public in the labor market; xi) education level and xii) monitoring level. The percentages of gender and age group variables did not show significant differences in the chi-square test, both in the round that was considered standard morph versus zero morph and in the opposition to the standard morph versus non-standard morph.