Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T08:35:19.378Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

AN EXPLORATION OF THE RANGE AND FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF FORMS IN POTENTIALLY VARIABLE STRUCTURES IN SECOND-LANGUAGE SPANISH

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2010

Kimberly L. Geeslin  and
Aarnes Gudmestad
Kimberly L. Geeslin*
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Aarnes Gudmestad
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
*
*Address correspondence to: Kimberly L. Geeslin, Department of Spanish & Portuguese, Ballantine Hall 844, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405; e-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article adds to the growing body of research focused on second-language (L2) variation and constitutes the first large-scale study of the production of potentially variable grammatical structures in Spanish by English-speaking learners. The overarching goal of the project is to assess the range of forms used and the degree to which native and L2 speakers of Spanish differ in several independently defined syntactic or discourse-based contexts. The contexts examined in the current study have been the object of sociolinguistic research in monolingual environments and include the following: copula contrast, mood distinction, past-time reference, future-time reference, and subject expression. Interview data from 16 English-speaking learners and 16 native speakers of Spanish from a variety of countries, all of whom are part of a single speech community in the United States, are examined. The analysis focuses on the range of forms used in each of the contexts investigated and the frequency with which these forms appear. A possible relation of individual characteristics, such as country of origin, years of language study, and time spent abroad, to this frequency of use is also considered.

Type
Research Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 32 , Issue 3 , September 2010 , pp. 433 - 463
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Adamson, H. D., & Regan, V. (1991). The acquisition of community speech norms by Asian immigrants learning English as a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 1–22.Google Scholar
Andersen, R. W. (1991). Developmental sequences: The emergence of aspect marking in second language acquisition. In Huebner, T. & Ferguson, C. A. (Eds.), Crosscurrents in second language acquisition and linguistic theories (pp. 305–324). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, R. W., & Shirai, Y. (1994). Discourse motivations for some cognitive acquisition principles. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 133–156.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Tense and aspect in second language acquisition: Form, meaning, and use. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2004). Monopolizing the future: How the go-future breaks into will’s territory and what it tells us about SLA. EUROSLA Yearbook, 4, 177–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bayerová, M. (1994). Alternancia indicativo × subjuntivo en oraciones independientes [Subjunctive and indicative alternation in independent sentences]. Etudes Romanes de Brno, 24, 61–71.Google Scholar
Bayley, R. (1996). Competing constraints on variation in the speech of adult Chinese learners of English. In Bayley, R. & Preston, D. (Eds.), Second language acquisition and linguistic variation (pp. 97–130). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bayley, R., & Langman, J. (2004). Variation in the group and the individual: Evidence from second language acquisition. IRAL, 42, 303–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bayley, R., & Pease-Álvarez, L. (1997). Null pronoun variation in Mexican-descent children’s narrative discourse. Language Variation and Change, 9, 349–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blas Arroyo, J. L. (2008). The variable expression of future tense in Peninsular Spanish: The present (and future) of inflectional forms in Spanish spoken in a bilingual region. Language Variation and Change, 20, 85–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blas Arroyo, J. L., & Porcar Miralles, M. (1997). Aproximación sociolingüística al fenómeno de la neutralización modal en las comunidades de habla castellonenses (análisis de algunos contornos sintácticos) [Sociolinguistic approximation of the phenomenon of modal neutralization in Spanish-speaking communities (analysis of some syntactic contexts)]. Sintagma, 9, 27–45.Google Scholar
Brugger, G. (2001). Temporal modification, the 24-hour rule and the location of reference time. In Gutiérrez-Rexach, J. & Silva-Villar, L. (Eds.), Current issues in Spanish syntax and semantics (pp. 243–270). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butt, J., & Benjamin, C. (2004). A new reference grammar of modern Spanish (4th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Cadierno, T. (2000). The acquisition of Spanish grammatical aspect by Danish advanced language learners. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 4, 1–53.Google Scholar
Cameron, R. (1994). Switch reference, verb class and priming in a variable syntax. In Beals, K., Denton, J., Knippen, R., Melnar, L., Suzuki, H., & Zeinfeld, E. (Eds.), Papers from the 30th regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society: Vol. 2. The parasession on variation in linguistic theory (pp. 27–45). Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Cameron, R., & Flores-Ferrán, N. (2004). Perseverance of subject expression across regional dialects. Spanish in Context, 1, 41–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–47.Google Scholar
Cheshire, J. (1987). Syntactic variation, the linguistic variable, and sociolinguistic theory. Linguistics, 25, 257–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clements, J. C. (2005). ‘Ser’ and ‘estar’ in the predicate adjective construction. In Clements, J. C. & Yoon, J. (Eds.), Functional approaches to Spanish syntax: Lexical semantics, discourse, and transitivity (pp. 161–202). London: Palgrave-Macmillan.Google Scholar
Collentine, J. (2003). The development of the subjunctive and complex-syntactic abilities among foreign language learners of Spanish. In Lafford, B. A. & Salaberry, M. R. (Eds.), Spanish second language acquisition: State of the science (pp. 74–97). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Cortés-Torres, M. (2004). ¿Ser o estar? La variación lingüística y social de estar más adjetivo en el español de Cuernavaca, Mexico [Ser or estar? Linguistic and social variation of estar plus adjective in the Spanish of Cuernavaca, Mexico]. Hispania, 87, 788–795.Google Scholar
Díaz-Campos, M., & Geeslin, K. L. (in press). Copula use in the Spanish of Venezuela: Social and linguistic sources of variation. Spanish in Context.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (1999). Item versus system learning: Explaining free variation. Applied Linguistics, 20, 460–480.Google Scholar
Fernández Leborans, M. J. (1999). La predicación: Las oraciones copulativas [Predication: Copular sentences]. In Bosque, I. & Demonte, V. (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (pp. 2354–2460). Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K. L. (2003). A comparison of copula choice in advanced and native Spanish. Language Learning, 53, 703–764.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K. L. (2005). Crossing disciplinary boundaries to improve the analysis of second language data. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K. L., & Gudmestad, A. (2008). Comparing interview and written elicitation tasks in native and non-native data: Do speakers do what we think they do? In Bruhn de Garavito, J. & Valenzuela, E. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 10th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 64–77). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K. L., & Guijarro-Fuentes, P. (2006). The second language acquisition of variable structures in Spanish by Portuguese speakers. Language Learning, 56, 53–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geeslin, K. L., & Guijarro-Fuentes, P. (2008). Variation in contemporary Spanish: Linguistic predictors of estar in four cases of language contact. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 365–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gudmestad, A. (2006). L2 variation and the Spanish subjunctive: Linguistic features predicting use. In Klee, C. A. & Face, T. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 7th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as First and Second Languages (pp. 170–184). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Gudmestad, A. (2008). Acquiring a variable structure: An interlanguage analysis of second-language mood use in Spanish (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 2008). Dissertation Abstracts International, 69, 8.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, M. (1995). On the future of the future tense in the Spanish of the Southwest. In Silva-Corvalán, C. (Ed.), Spanish in four continents: Studies in language contact and bilingualism (pp. 214–226). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, M. (2003). Simplification and innovation in US Spanish. Multilingua, 22, 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haverkate, H. (2002). The syntax, semantics and pragmatics of Spanish mood. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Isabelli, C. A. (2004). The acquisition of the null subject parameter properties in SLA: Some effects of positive evidence in a naturalistic learning context. Hispania, 87, 150–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klee, C. A., & Ocampo, A. M. (1995). The expression of past tense referent in Spanish narratives of Spanish-Quechua bilingual speakers. In Silva-Corvalán, C. (Ed.), Spanish in four continents: Studies in language contact and bilingualism (pp. 52–70). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1978). Where does the linguistic variable stop? A response to Beatriz Lavandera. (Working Papers In Sociolinguistics 44). Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.Google Scholar
Lafond, L., Hayes, R., & Bhat, R. (2000). Constraint demotion and null-subjects in Spanish L2 acquisition. In Camps, J. & Wiltshire, C. (Eds.), Romance syntax, semantics and L2 acquisition: Selected papers from the 30th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (pp. 121–135). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Lee, J. F. (2002). The incidental acquisition of Spanish: Future tense morphology through reading in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 55–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liskin-Gasparro, J. (2000). The use of tense-aspect morphology in Spanish oral narratives: Exploring the perceptions of advanced learners. Hispania, 83, 830–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López Ortega, N. (2003). The development of discourse competence in study abroad learners: A study of subject expression in Spanish as a second language. (Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, 2003). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 9.Google Scholar
Lozano, C. (2002). Knowledge of expletive and pronominal subjects by learners of Spanish. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics, 135, 37–60.Google Scholar
Lynch, A. (2000). The subjunctive in Miami Cuban Spanish: Bilingualism, contact, and language variability (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, 2000). Dissertation Abstracts International, 60, 8.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, I. (1995). The supposed imperfectivity of the Latin American present perfect. Hispanic Linguistics, 6, 29–60.Google Scholar
Mesa Alonso, M., Domínguez Herrera, M., Padrón Sánchez, E., & Morales Aguilera, N. (1993). Ser y estar: Consideraciones sobre su uso en español [Ser and estar: Considerations of use in Spanish]. Islas, 104, 150–156.Google Scholar
Murillo Medrano, J. (1999). Subjuntivo e indicativo en las oraciones circunstanciales [Subjunctive and indicative in circumstantial sentences]. Kanina, 23, 143–156.Google Scholar
Nadasdi, T., Mougeon, R., & Rehner, K. (2003). The use of the “future tense” in the spoken French of French immersion students. Journal of French Language Studies, 13, 195–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orozco, R. (2005). Distribution of future time forms in Northern Colombia Spanish. In Eddington, D. (Ed.), Selected proceedings of the 7th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 56–65). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Otheguy, R., & Zentella, A. (2007). Apuntes preliminares sobre el contacto lingüístico y dialectal en el uso pronominal del español en Nueva York [Preliminary notes on linguistic and dialect contact on pronoun use in Spanish in New York]. In Potowski, K. & Cameron, R. (Eds.), Spanish in contact: Policy, social and linguistic inquiries (pp. 275–298). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, D. (2000). Three kinds of sociolinguistics and SLA: A psycholinguistic perspective. In Swerzbin, B., Morris, F., Anderson, M., Klee, C., & Tarone, E. (Eds.), Social and cognitive factors in SLA (pp. 3–30). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Regan, V. (1996). Variation in French interlanguage: A longitudinal study of sociolinguistic competence. In Bayley, R. & Preston, D. (Eds.), Second language acquisition and linguistic variation (pp. 177–201). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehner, K. (2002). The development of aspects of linguistic and discourse competence by advanced second language learners of French. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, 2002). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 12.Google Scholar
Rehner, K., Mougeon, R., & Nadasdi, T. (2003). The learning of sociolinguistic variation by advanced FSL learners: The case of nous versus on in immersion French. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 127–156.Google Scholar
Romaine, S. (1984). On the problem of syntactic variation and pragmatic meaning in sociolinguistic theory. Folia Lingüística, 18, 409–437.Google Scholar
Rossomondo, A. E. (2007). The role of lexical temporal indicators and text interaction format in the incidental acquisition of the Spanish future tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 39–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, J., & Lafford, B. A. (1992). The acquisition of lexical meaning in a study abroad environment: Ser + estar and the Granada experience. Hispania, 75, 714–722.Google Scholar
Salaberry, M. R. (2008). Marking past tense in second language morphology: A theoretical model. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Salaberry, M. R., & Shirai, Y. (Eds.). (2002). The L2 acquisition of tense-aspect morphology. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, D. (1988). Sociolinguistics and syntactic variation. In Newmeyer, F. J. (Ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge survey (Vol. 4, pp. 140–161). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sankoff, G., & Vincent, D. (1977). L’emploi productif de ‘ne’ dans le français parlé de Montréal [The productive use of ‘ne’ in the spoken French of Montreal]. Le Français Moderne, 45, 243–256.Google Scholar
Schwenter, A., & Torres Cacoullos, R. (2008). Defaults and interdeterminacy in temporal grammaticalization: The ‘perfect’ road to perfective. Language Variation and Change, 20, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C. (1982). Subject expression and placement in Mexican-American Spanish. In Amastae, J. & Olivares, E. (Eds.), Spanish in the United States: Sociolinguistic aspects (pp. 93–120). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C. (1994a). The gradual loss of mood distinctions in Los Angeles Spanish. Language Variation and Change, 6, 255–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C. (1994b). Language contact and change: Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C., & Terrell, T. (1989). Notas sobre la expresión de futuridad en el español del Caribe [Notes on the expression of futurity in Caribbean Spanish]. Hispanic Linguistics, 2, 191–208.Google Scholar
Tarone, E. (2007). Sociolinguistic approaches to second language acquisition research: 1997–2007. Modern Language Journal, 91, 837–848.Google Scholar
Vañó-Cerdá, A. (1982). Ser y estar + adjetivos [Ser and estar + adjectives]. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1987). The acquisition of ser and estar: Accounting for developmental patterns. In VanPatten, B., Dvorak, T., & Lee, J. F. (Eds.), Foreign language learning: A research perspective (pp. 61–75). Rowles, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Weiner, J., & Labov, W. (1983). Constraints on agentless passive. Journal of Linguistics, 19, 29–58.Google Scholar
Winford, D. (1996). The problem of syntactic variation. In Arnold, J., Blake, R., Davidson, B., Schwenter, S., & Solomon, J. (Eds.), Sociolinguistic variation: Data, theory, and analysis—Selected papers from NWAV 23 at Stanford (pp. 177–192). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Wolfram, W. (1985). Variability in tense marking: A case for the obvious. Language Learning, 35, 229–253.Google Scholar
Young, R. (1991). Variation in interlanguage morphology. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar