Article published in:
EUROSLA Yearbook: Volume 14 (2014)
Edited by Leah Roberts, Ineke Vedder and Jan H. Hulstijn
[EUROSLA Yearbook 14] 2014
► pp. 173–200

Interfaces in the interpretation of mood alternation in L2 Spanish

Morpho-phonology, semantics and pragmatics

| Universidad Complutense de Madrid
| Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, UNED, Spain
| Universidad de las Islas Baleares, Spain
In this paper, we present the results of one written task testing the interpretation of mood choice in if-conditional constructions in L2 Spanish: a linguistic task of conditional utterances containing both regular and irregular indicative and subjunctive forms was completed by 48 L1 French and 40 L1 English speakers, and by an L1 Spanish control group (n = 35). Results show a similar pattern in the answers of both experimental groups despite the varying degree of similarity and disparity among the languages. We adopt a cognitive pragmatic perspective for the analysis of the results in connection with the various kinds of effects created by mood alternation in the constructions studied. Furthermore, in relation to current SLA debates (Lardiere 2008, 2009), our findings demonstrate that feature re-assembly in L2 Spanish is not trouble-free, as simple current feature accounts would advocate, even if those features exist in the learners’ L1.
Published online: 05 August 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/eurosla.14.07ahe
References

References

Ahern, A.
2004 El subjuntivo: significado e inferencia. Un estudio basado en la Teoría de la Relevancia. Ph.D. Dissertation, Madrid: UNED.Google Scholar
2006 “Spanish mood, metarrepresentation and propositional attitudes.” In Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics, K. Turner and K. von Heusinger (eds), 445–471. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
2010 “Propositional attitudes in relevance theory: An overview.” In In the Mind and across Minds: A Relevance-Theoretic Perspective on Communication and Translation, E. Wałaszewska, M. Kisielewska-Krysiuk and A. Piskorska (eds), 147–167. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Amenos-Pons, J.
2010 Los tiempos de pasado del español y el francés: semántica, pragmática y aprendizaje de E/LE. Perspectivas desde la Teoría de la Relevancia. Ph.D. Dissertation, Madrid: UNED.Google Scholar
2014 “Spanish ‘Imperfecto’ vs. French ‘Imparfait’ in hypothetical clauses: A procedural account.” Cahiers Chronos 27: 243–271.Google Scholar
Andersen, R. and Shirai, Y.
1994 “Discourse motivations for some cognitive acquisition principles.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16: 133–156. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A., Bennati, E. and Sorace, A.
2007 “Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2: 657–689. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bergs, A. and Heine, L.
2010 “Mood in English.” In Mood in the Languages of Europe, 
B. Rothstein and R. Thieroff (eds), 103–116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borgonovo, C. and Prévost, P.
2003 “Knowledge of polarity subjunctive in L2 Spanish.” In Proceedings of the 27 Boston University Conference on Language Development, B. Beachley, A. Brown and F. Conlin (eds), 150–161, Boston: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Borgonovo, C.. et al.
2008 “Methodological issues in the L2 acquisition of syntax/semantics phenomenon: How to assess L2 knowledge of mood in Spanish Relative Clauses.” In Proceedings of the Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, J. Bruhn de Garavito and E. Valenzuela (eds), 13–24. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Bott, O.
2010 The Processing of Events. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bres, J.
2006 “Encore un peu, et l’imparfait était un mode. L’imparfait et la valeur modale de contrefactualité.” Cahiers de Praxématique 46: 149–176.Google Scholar
2007 “Et plus si affinités… Des liaisons entre les instructions du plus-que-parfait et les relations d’ordre.” Cahiers Chronos 18: 139–157.Google Scholar
2009 “Sans l’imparfait, les vendanges tardives ne rentraient pas dans la jupe rhénane… Sur l’imparfait contrefactuel, pour avancer”. Syntaxe et Sémantique 10: 33–50.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.
2007 “Of minds and language.” Biolinguistics 1: 9–27.Google Scholar
1995 The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. and Felser, C.
2006 “Grammatical processing in language learners.” Applied Psycholinguistics 27 (1): 3–42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Corminboeuf, G.
2009 L’expression de l’hypothèse en français. Entre hypotaxe et parataxe. 
Bruxelles: De Boeck-Duculot.Google Scholar
De Mulder, W.
2010 “Mood in French”. In Mood in the Languages of Europe, B. Rothstein & R. Thieroff (eds), 157–169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
De Saussure, L.
2003 Temps et pertinence. Éléments de pragmatique cognitive du temps. 
Bruxelles: De Boeck / Duculot.Google Scholar
2013 “Perspectival interpretation of tenses.” In Time, Language, Cognition and Reality, K.M. Jaszcolt and L. de Saussure (eds), 46–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Escandell-Vidal, V. and Leonetti, M.
2003 “On the quotative readings of Spanish imperfecto.” Cuadernos de Lingüística X: 135–154.Google Scholar
2011 “On the rigidity of procedural meaning.” In Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives, V. Escandell-Vidal, M. Leonetti and A. Ahern (eds), 81–103. Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
Escandell-Vidal, V., Leonetti, M. and Ahern, A.
(eds) 2011 Procedural Meaning: Problems and Perspectives. Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
Foster-Cohen, S.
2002 “The relevance of relevance theory to first and second language acquisition.” In Selected Papers on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics from the 14th International Symposium. Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics , M. Makri-Tsilipaku (ed.), 9–23. Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece.
Giorgi, A. and Pianesi, F.
1997 Tense and Aspect. From Semantics to Morphosyntax. New York / Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grevisse.M.
2011 Le bon usage de la langue française, 15th Edition. Bruxelles: De Boeck-Duculot.Google Scholar
Hambleton, R.K., Swaminathan, H., and Rogers, H.J.
1991 Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Press.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R.
1989 An Introduction to English Transformational Syntax. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Iverson, M., Kempchinsky, P. and Rothman, J.
2008 “Interface vulnerability and knowledge of the subjunctive/indicative distinction with negated epistemic predicates in L2 Spanish.” EUROSLA Yearbook 8: 135–163. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jary, M.
2009 “Relevance, assertion and possible worlds: A cognitive approach to the Spanish subjunctive.” In Utterance Interpretation and Cognitive Models, P. de Brabantier and M. Kissine (eds), 235–277. Bingley: Emerald. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lardiere, D.
2008 “Feature assembly in second language in second language acquisition.” In Features in Second Language Acquisition, J. Liceras et al. (eds), 106–140. New Jersey: 
Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
2009 “Some thoughts on a contrastive analysis of feature in second language acquisition.” Second Language Research 25 (2): 173–227. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moeschler, J.
1998 “Pragmatique de la référence temporelle.” In Le temps des événements, J. Moeschler (ed.), 157–180. Paris: Kimé.Google Scholar
Montolío, E.
1999 “Las construcciones condicionales.” In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española. Vol. 3. Entre la oración y el discurso, I. Bosque Morfología and V. Demonte (eds), 3643–3739. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. and Slabakova, R.
2002 “On aspectual shifts in L2 Spanish.” In BUCLD 26 Proceedings, B. Skarabela et al. (eds), 631–642. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
2003 “Competence similarities between natives and near-native speakers: An investigation of the preterit/imperfect contrast in Spanish.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 25: 351–398. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nicolle, S.
1997 “A relevance-theoretic account of be going to.” Journal of Linguistics 33: 355–377. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, F.R.
2001 Mood and Modality, 2nd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Perez-Leroux, A. et al.
2007 “Non-native recognition of the iterative and habitual meanings of Spanish preterite and imperfect tenses.” In The Role of Formal Features in Second Language Acquisition, J. Liceras, H. Zolb and H. Goodluck (eds), 432–451. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Real Academia Española and Asociación de Academias de la Lengua Española
2009 Nueva gramática de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Rothman, J.
2009 “Understanding the nature and outcomes of early bilingualism: Romance languages as heritage languages.” International Journal of Bilingualism 13 (2): 145–155Google Scholar
Rothman, J. and Slabakova, R.
2011 “The mind-context divide: On linguistic interfaces and language acquisition.” Lingua 121 (4): 568–576 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rouchota, V.
1994 “The subjunctive in modern Greek: Dividing the labour between semantics and pragmatics.” Journal of Modern Greek Studies 12: 185–201. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A. and Paoli, S.
2004 “Transfer at the syntax-pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in Italian-English bilingual and monolingual acquisition.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7: 183–205. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A.
2006 “Gradience and optionality in mature and developing grammars.” In Gradience in Grammars: Generative Perspectives, G. Fanselow et al. (eds), 106–123. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 “Pinning down the concept of ‘interface’ in bilingualism.” Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1: 1–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D. and Wilson, D.
1986/1995 Relevance. Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Terrell, T.D. and Hooper, J.
1974 “A semantically based analysis of mood in Spanish.” Hispania 57: 484–494. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tsimpli, I.M. and Sorace, A.
2006  “Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax-semantics and syntax-discourse phenomena.” In Proceedings of the 30th Boston University Conference on Language Development, D. Bamman, T. Magnitskaia and C. Zaller (eds), 653–664. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I.M., Sorace, A., Heycock, C. and Filiaci, F.
2004 “First language attrition and syntactic subjects: A study of Greek and Italian near-native speakers of English.” International Journal of Bilingualism 8: 257–277. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
White, L.
2003 Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 “Grammatical theory: Interfaces and L2 knowledge.” In Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, W. Ritchie and T.K. Bhatia (eds), 49–67. Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Ahern, Aoife K., José Amenós-Pons & Pedro Guijarro-Fuentes
2015. Metarepresentation and evidentiality in Spanish tense and mood. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 29 ► pp. 61 ff. Crossref logo
Ayoun, Dalila & Charlene Gilbert
2017.  In Tense-Aspect-Modality in a Second Language [Studies in Bilingualism, 50], ► pp. 183 ff. Crossref logo
Wang, Jia & Yuet Hung Cecilia Chan
2021. A feature-based approach to the acquisition of L2 Chinese negation by L1-English and L1-Korean learners. Lingua ► pp. 103018 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 january 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.