Cover not available
Part of
Language Variation and Contact-Induced Change: Spanish across space and time
Edited by Jeremy King and Sandro Sessarego
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 340] 2018
► pp. 299–333

Chapter 13
Espero estén todos

The distribution of the null subordinating complementizer in two varieties of Spanish

This study adopts a quantitative methodology to investigate variation between null and overt expressions of Spanish complementizer que. I focus on two varieties of Spanish from Mexico City and Los Angeles, California. This research uses a corpus linguistics–inspired methodology, relying on Twitter as a database to extract tokens and Rrbul (Johnson 2008) to perform the multivariate analysis. I extracted and analyzed 1,505 tokens and coded for 9 linguistic and 2 extra-linguistic factors. I showed the internal factors ‘verb modality’ and ‘embedded subject status’ to significantly affect the alternation, favoring the null option. Contrary to what was expected, the external factor ‘city’ did not have any significant effect on the distribution. I discuss the results in light of formal and sociolinguistic studies on the nature of subordinated constructions in Spanish (Brovetto 2002; Etxepare 1996; Subirats-Rüggeberg 1987), English (Tagliamonte & Smith 2005) and Spanish in contact with English (Silva-Corvalán 1993, 1994, 1998).

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Null complementizers in Spanish
  • 3.Subordinating complementizer that/∅ in English
  • 4.Goals, research questions, and hypotheses
  • 5. Methodology
  • 6.Results
  • 7.Discussion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 13 March 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.340.14ric
References
Antonelli, André L.
2013 “The Structure of Complementizerless Clauses in Classical Portuguese”. Romance Linguistics 2012: Selected Papers from the 42nd Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Cedar City, Utah, 20–22 April 2012, ed. by Jason Smith & Tabea Ihsane, 185–198. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bahtchevanova, Mariana
2007 “Mood, Modality, and Complementation: A Cross-Linguistic Study of the Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery”. Tempe, Ariz.: Ph.D. dissertation, Arizona State University.Google Scholar
Brovetto, Claudia
2002 “Spanish Clauses without Complementizers”. Current issues in Romance languages ed. by Teresa Satterfield, Christina Tortora & Diana Cresti, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory vol. 220, 19–43. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cattell, Ray
1978 “On the Source of Interrogative Adverbs”. Language 54.61–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christodulelis, Eleni
2014  The Importance of Clause Type in Portuguese (Un)Inflected Infinitives. Paper presented at New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV) 43, October 11, 2014. Chicago.Google Scholar
Elseness, Johan
1984 “That or Zero? A Look at Choice of Object Clause Connective in a Corpus of American English”. English Studies: A Journal of English Language 65.519–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
¿Es peligroso fumar en un Taxi?
(1977, Feb. 1), ABC. Retrieved from [URL].Google Scholar
Etxepare, Ricardo
1996 “On ∅ Complementizers in Spanish”. Anuario del Seminario de Filología Vasca Julio de Urquijo 30:2.469–496.Google Scholar
1998 “On the Structure of Declarative Clauses”. Romance Linguistics: Theoretical Perspectives ed. by Armin Schwegler, Bernard Tranel & Myriam Uribe Etxebarria, Current Issues in Linguistics Theory vol. 160, 53–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt
1995 “Functional Theory of Complementizers”. Modality in Grammar and Discourse ed. by Joan Bybee & Suzanne Fleischman, 473–502. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gonçalves, Bruno & David Sánchez
2014 “Crowdsourcing Dialect Characterization through Twitter”. PLOS One. Retrieved from [URL]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haddican, Bill & Daniel Ezra Johnson
2012 “Effects on the Particle Verb alternation across English Dialects”. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 18.2. Retrieved from [URL].Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth C. Traugott
1993 Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Husting, Patrick
2014 Plus One Social Insight. [URL].Google Scholar
Johnson, Daniel Ezra
2008 “Getting off the GoldVarb Standard: Introducing Rbrul for Mixed-Effects Variable Rule Analysis”. Language and Linguistics Compass 3:1.359–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kearns, Kate
2007 “Epistemic Verbs and Zero Complementizer”. English Language and Linguistics 11.475–505. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc
1998 “Modality”. Handbook of Pragmatics 4 ed. by Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert & Chris Bulcaen, 1–36. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kirkorian, Raffi
2013, August 16. New Tweets per Second Record, and How! Retrieved from [URL].Google Scholar
McCormick, Tyler, Hedwig Lee, Nina Cesare & Ali Shojaie
2013 “Using Twitter for Demographic and Social Science Research Tools for Data Collection”. CSSS Working Papers, 127. Seattle, Wash.: University of Washington Center for Statistics and the Social Sciences.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce
1985 Old English Syntax, vols. 1–2. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mosqueda, Alejandro & Paloma Moreda
2012 “SMILE: An Informality Classification Tool for Helping to Assess Quality and Credibility in Web 2.0 Texts”. AAAI Technical Report WS-12-02 Real-Time Analysis and Mining of Social Streams.Google Scholar
Murphy, Melissa
2008 The Role of Typological Drift in the Evolution of the Romance Subjunctive: A Study in Word-Order Change, Grammaticalization, and Synthesis. Austin, Tex.: Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Orozco, Rafael
2015 “Castilian in New York City: What Can We Learn From the Future?” New Perspectives on Hispanic Contact Linguistics in the Americas ed. by Sandro Sessarego & Melvin González-Rivera, 347–371. Madrid & Frankfurt: Iberoamericana/ Vervuert.Google Scholar
Palander-Collin, Minna
1997 “A Medieval Case of Grammaticalization, methinks ”. In Grammaticalization at Work (Studies of Long-Term Developments in English 24) ed. by Matti Rissanen, Merja Kytö & Kirsi Heikkonen, 371–403. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pang, Bo & Lillian Lee
2008 “Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis”. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval 2:1–2.1–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pons, Bordería, Salvador
2003 “ Que inicial átono como marca de modalidad”. Estudios de lingüística 17.531–545.Google Scholar
Porroche Ballesteros, Margarita
2000 “Algunos aspectos de que en el español conversacional”. Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación 3. [URL].Google Scholar
R Development Core Team
2008 R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [URL].
Rescher, Nicholas
1968 Topics in Philosophical Logic. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rissanen, Matti
1991 “On the History of that/zero as Object Clause Links in English”. English Corpus Linguistics: Studies in Honour of Jan Svartvik ed. by Karin Aijmer & Bengt Altenberg, 272–89. London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi
1997 “The Finite Structure of the Left Periphery”. Elements of Grammar ed. by Lillian Haegeman, 281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwe. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, Carmen
1993 “On the Permeability of Grammars: Evidence from Spanish and English Contact”. Linguistic Perspectives on Romance Languages ed. by William J. Ashby, Marianne Mithun & Giorgio Perissinotto, 19–43. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994 Language Contact and Change: Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
1998 “On Borrowing as a Mechanism of Syntactic Change”. Romance Linguistics: Theoretical Perspectives ed. by Armin Schwegler, Bernard Tranel & Myriam Uribe-Etxebarría, 225–247. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 “The Limits of Convergence on Language Contact”. Language Contact and the Dynamics of Language: Theory and Implications. Symposium conducted at the Max Planck InstituteLeipzig.Google Scholar
Subirats-Rüggeberg, Carlos
1987 “Sentential Complementation in Spanish: A Lexico-Grammatical Study of Three Classes of Verbs”. Lingvisticae Investigationes Supplementa: Études en Linguistique Française et Générale 14 ed. by Jean Claude Chevalier, Maurice Gross & Christian Leclère. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali & Jennifer Smith
2005 “No Momentary Fancy! The Zero ‘Complementizer’ in English Dialects”. English Language and Linguistics 9.289–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & Anthony J. Mulac
1991a “A Quantitative Perspective on the Grammaticization of Epistemic Parentheticals in English”. Grammaticalization II ed. by Elizabeth C. Traugott & Bernd Heine, 313–339. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
1991b “The Discourse Conditions for the Use of the Complementizer that in Conversational English”. Journal of Pragmatics 15.237–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth C.
2005 “Constructions in Grammaticalization”. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics ed. by Brian Joseph & Richard Janda, 624–647. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Torrego, Esther
1983 “More Effects of Successive Cyclic Movement”. Linguistic Inquiry 14.561–565.Google Scholar
Villa-García, Julio
2014  The Syntax of Multiple-Que Sentences in Spanish: Along the Left Periphery . Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Walker, James & Rena Torres Cacoullos
2003 How to Take a Complement in Canadian English. Paper presented at New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV) 32, October 2003. Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Warner, Anthony
1983 Complementation in Middle English and the Methodology of Historical Syntax. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
Zagona, Karen
2002 The Syntax of Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zappavigna, Michele
2011 “Ambient Affiliation: A Linguistic Perspective on Twitter”. New Media Society 13.788. DOI logoGoogle Scholar