Cover not available
Part of
Amazonian Spanish: Language Contact and Evolution
Edited by Stephen Fafulas
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 23] 2020
► pp. 35–56

Chapter 2
Bilingualism, second language acquisition, and language contact

Contrasts and shared processes

| Indiana University, United States
| Indiana University, United States
This chapter introduces the central issues and concepts in the fields of bilingualism, contact linguistics, and second language acquisition, with an eye to identifying generalizations and key distinctions. For example, although authors use terms like transfer, interference, bilinguals, etc., across fields, these sometimes have the same meaning and other times depend on the subfield of linguistics in which they are employed. While there is a good deal of overlap between these fields, the current chapter provides an overview of studies and findings related to these concepts in order to help orient the reader to the hypotheses, methodologies, and discussions contained in the present volume.
Keywords: second language acquisition, input, universal processes, variation, bilinguals
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Bilingualism: Definitions and scope of research
  • Bilingualism and languages in contact with Spanish
  • Second language acquisition
  • Language contact
  • Tracing linguistic phenomena across contexts
    • Case 1: Mood contrast
    • Case 2: Copula choice
    • Case 3: Direct object pronouns
  • Conclusion and future directions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 15 July 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.23.02gee
References (87)
References
Andersen, R. (1984). What’s gender good for, anyway? In R. Andersen (Ed.), Second languages: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 77–99). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Appel, R., & Muysken, P. (2006). Language contact and bilingualism. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Austin, J., Blume, M., & Sánchez, L. (Eds.). (2015). Bilingualism in the Spanish-speaking world: Linguistic and cognitive perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baily, S. (1983). The adjustment of Italian immigrants in Buenos Aires and New York, 1870–1914. The American Historical Review, 88(2), 281–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bayerová, M. (1994). Alternancia indicativo-subjuntivo en oraciones independientes. Etudes Romanes de Brno, 24, 61–71.Google Scholar
Bayley, R., & Tarone, E. (2012). Variationist perspectives. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 41–56). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Berdan, R. (1996). Disentangling language acquisition from language variation. In R. Bayley & D. Preston (Eds.), Second language acquisition and linguistic variation (pp. 203–244). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, D. (1984). The language bioprogram hypothesis. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7, 173–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blake, R. J. (1981). Some empirically based observations on adult usage of the subjunctive mood in Mexico City. In J. Lantolf & G. B. Stone (Eds.), Current research in Romance languages (pp. 13–22). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Blas Arroyo, J., & Porcar Miralles, M. (1997). Aproximación sociolingüística al fenómeno de la neutralización modal en las comunidades de habla castellonenses. Sintagma: Revista de lingüística, 9, 27–45.Google Scholar
Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
(2014). Social class in applied linguistics. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clements, J. C. (2009). Linguistic legacy of Spanish and Portuguese. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Collentine, J. (2003). The development of subjunctive and complex-syntactic abilities among FL Spanish learners. In B. Lafford & R. Salaberry (Eds.), Studies in Spanish second language acquisition: The state of the science (pp. 74–97). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
(2014). Subjunctive in second language Spanish. In K. L. Geeslin (Ed.), The handbook of Spanish second language acquisition (pp. 270–286). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2000). Explaining language change: An evolutionary approach. London: Longman.Google Scholar
de la Puente-Schubeck, E. B. (1992). La pérdida del modo subjuntivo en el español chicano de Nuevo Mexico (Doctoral dissertation). University of New Mexico Albuquerque. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(8).Google Scholar
Duff, P., & Li, D. (2009). Indigenous, minority, and heritage language education in Canada: Policies, contexts, and issues. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(1), 1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F. (1987). Markedness and the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis. In G. Ioup & S. Weinberger (Eds.), Interlanguage phonology (pp. 55–69). New York, NY: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Escobar, A. M. (2013). Bilingualism in Latin America. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), The handbook of bilingualism and multilingualism (2nd ed., pp. 725–744). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Fernández-Ordóñez, I. (2001). Hacia una dialectología histórica. Reflexiones sobre la historia del leísmo, el laísmo y el loísmo. Boletín de la Real Academia Española, 81, 389–464.Google Scholar
Flores Cervantes, M. (2002). Leísmo, laísmo y loísmo: Sus orígenes y evolución. México, DF: CONACULT-INAH, Universidad Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
García, M. E., & Terrell, T. (1977). Is the use of mood in Spanish subject to variable constraints? In M. P. Hagiwara (Ed.), Studies in Romance linguistics: Proceedings of the Fifth Linguistic Symposium on Romance Linguistics (pp. 214–226). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second-language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K. (2001). Linguistic simplification: Past, present and future links to SLA. In X. Bonch, W. Crawford, J. Hellerman, C. Higgins, & H. Nguyen (Eds.), Selected proceedings from SLRF 2000 (pp. 271–291). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
(2002). Semantic transparency as a predictor of copula choice in second language acquisition. Linguistics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences, 40(2), 439–468. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). A comparison of copula choice: Native Spanish speakers and advanced learners. Language Learning, 53(4), 703–764. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geeslin, K., & Guijarro-Fuentes, P. (2006). The second language acquisition of variable structures in Spanish by Portuguese speakers. Language Learning, 56(1), 53–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). Variation in contemporary Spanish: Linguistic predictors of estar in four cases of language contact. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(3), 365–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geeslin, K. L., García-Amaya, L., Hasler-Barker, M., Henriksen, N., & Killam, J. (2010). The SLA of direct object pronouns in a study abroad immersion environment where use is variable. In C. Borgonovo, M. Español-Echevarría, & P. Prévost (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 12th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 246–259). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K., & Long, A. Y. (2014). Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition: Learning to use language in context. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Geeslin, K. L., & Long, A. Y. (2015). The development and use of the Spanish copula with adjectives by Korean-speaking learners. In I. Pérez-Jiménez, M. Leonetti, & S. Gumiel Molina (Eds.), New perspectives on the study of ser and estar (pp. 293–323). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gómez Rendón, J. (2008). Typological and social constraints on language contact: Amerindian languages in contact with Spanish. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
González Salinas, A. (2003). The use of present subjunctive and modal variation in three socio-educational groups from Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico. A descriptive and comparative linguistic analysis (Doctoral dissertation). State University New York Albany. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 12.Google Scholar
Guardado, M. (2010). Heritage language development: Preserving a mythic past or envisioning the future of Canadian identity? Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 9, 329–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gurzynski-Weiss, L., Geeslin, K. L., Long, A. Y., & Daidone, D. (2017). Linguistic variation in instructor provision of oral input. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss (Ed.), Expanding individual difference research in the interaction approach: Investigating learners, instructors, and other interlocutors. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gurzynski-Weiss, L., Geeslin, K. L., Daidone, D., Linford, B., Long, A. Y., Michalski, I., & Solon, M. (2018). L2 classrooms as multifaceted sources of input: The synergy of variationist and usage-based approaches. In A. Tyler, L. Ortega, M. Uno, & H. I. Park (Eds.), Usage-inspired L2 instruction: Researched pedagogy. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez, M. J. (2003). Simplification and innovation in US Spanish. Multilingua, 22, 169–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, B., & Kuteva, T. (2005). Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, K. (1991). Tipología, diacronía, sincronía. Foro Hispánico, 2, 81–94.Google Scholar
Hidalgo, M. (1986). Language contact, language loyalty, and language prejudice on the Mexican border. Language in Society, 15(2), 193–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, P., & Thompson, S. (1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language, 45, 251–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isabelli, C. A. (2006). Mood selection: A look at northern Nevada Latinos. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10, 18–22.Google Scholar
Jarvis, S. (2000). Methodological rigor in the study of transfer: Identifying L1 influence in them interlanguage lexicon. Language learning, 50(2), 245–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kanwit, M., & Geeslin, K. (2014). The interpretation of the Spanish subjunctive in adverbial clauses: A cross-sectional study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36(3), 487–533. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kellerman, E. (1995). Cross-linguistic influence: Transfer to nowhere? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 125–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klee, C., & Lynch, A. (2009). El español en contacto con otras lenguas. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Klein-Andreu, Flora. (2000). Variación actual y evolución histórica: Los clíticos le/s, la/s, lo/s. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Langman, J., & Bayley, R. (2002). The acquisition of verbal morphology by Chinese learners of Hungarian. Language Variation and Change, 14(1), 55–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lipski, J. (2005). Code-switching or borrowing: No sé so no puedo decir, you know. In L. Sayahi & M. Westmoreland (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the Second Workshop of Spanish Sociolinguistics (pp. 1–15). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Lipski, J., & Schwegler, A. (1993). Creole Spanish and Afro-Hispanic. Trends in Romance Linguistics and Philology, 5, 407–432.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Abbuhl, R., & Gass, S. M. (2012). Interactionist approach. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 7–23). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Malovrh, P. (2008). A multifaceted analysis of the interlanguage development of Spanish direct-object clitic pronouns observed in L2-learner production (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana University, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Martínez, O. (1978). Border boom town: Cd. Juarez since 1848. Austin, TX: University of Texas.Google Scholar
Matras, Y. (2009). Language contact. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McWhorter, J. (1995). The scarcity of Spanish-based creoles explained. Language in Society, 24(2), 213–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, R., Myles, F., & Marsden, E. (2013). Second language learning theories. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moreno Fernández, F., & Otero-Roth, J. (2008). Atlas de la lengua española en el mundo (2nd ed.). Madrid: Fundación Telefónica & Ariel.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. S. (2001). The ecology of language evolution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murillo Medrano, J. (1999). Subjuntivo e indicativo en las oraciones circunstanciales. Kanina, 23, 143–156.Google Scholar
Nistal Rosique, G. (2007). El caso del español en Guinea Ecuatorial. In Enciclopedia del español en el mundo. Anuario del Instituto Cervantes 2006–2007 (pp. 73–76). Madrid: Instituto Cervantes.Google Scholar
Ortiz López, L. (2000). La extensión de estar en contextos de ser en el español de Puerto Rico: ¿Evolución interna o contacto de lenguas? Boletín de la Academia Puertorriqueña de la Lengua Española, 98–118.Google Scholar
Palacios Alcaine, A. (2013). Contact-induced change and internal evolution: Spanish in contact with Amerindian languages. In I. Léglise & C. Chamoreau (Eds.), The interplay of variation and change in contact settings (pp. 165–198). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavlenko, A., & Jarvis, S. (2002). Bidirectional transfer. Applied linguistics, 23(2), 190–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavlou, A. (2010). Linguistic habitus and language policy in the Iberian Peninsula. Debut: The Undergraduate Journal of Languages, Linguistics and Area Studies, 1(2), 56–67.Google Scholar
Rossomondo, A. (2005). 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.Google Scholar
Ryan, J., & Lafford, B. (1992). The acquisition of lexical meaning in a study abroad environment: Ser + estar and the Granada experience. Hispania, 75, 714–722. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salgado-Robles, F. (2014a). Variación dialectal por aprendientes de español en un context de inmersión en el extranjero: Un análisis cuantitativo del uso leísta en el discurso oral y escrito. Lenguas Modernas, 43, 97–112.Google Scholar
(2014b). Los efectos del aprendizaje-servicio en la adquisición de la variación regional por aprendices de español en un context de inmersión: El caso del leísmo vallisoletano. Revista Electronica de Linguistica Aplicada, 13(1), 233–258.Google Scholar
Sankoff, G. (2013). Linguistic outcomes of bilingualism. In J. K. Chambers & N. Schilling (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (2nd ed., pp. 501–518). Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siegel, J. (2008). The emergence of pidgin and creole languages. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C. (1986). Bilingualism and language change: The extension of estar in Los Angeles Spanish. Language, 62, 587–608. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1994). Language contact and change: Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Tarone, E. (2012). Interlanguage. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Malden, MA: Wiley & Sons. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E., & Liu, G. Q. (1995). Situational context, variation, and second language acquisition theory. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of HG Widdowson (pp. 107–124). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thomason, S. G., & Kaufman, T. (1992). Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. (2002). Sociolinguistic variation and change. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
(2009). Sociolinguistic typology and complexification. In G. Sampson, D. Gil, & P. Trudgill (Eds.), Language complexity as an evolving variable (pp. 98–109). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Turell, M. T. (Ed.). (2001). Multilingualism in Spain: Sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic aspects of linguistic minority groups. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Vann, R. (1999). Reversal of linguistic fortune: Dimensions of language conflict in autonomous Catalonia. Language & Communication, 19(4), 317–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1987). The acquisition of ser and estar: Accounting for developmental patterns. In B. VanPatten, T. Dvorak, & J. Lee (Eds.), Foreign language learning: A research perspective (pp. 61–75). New York, NY: Newbury House.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Williams, J. (Eds.). (2015). Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vigil, N. A., & Bills, G. D. (2014). Spanish language variation and ethnic identity in New Mexico: Internal and external borders. In D. Watt & C. Llamas (Eds.), Language, borders and identity (pp. 55–69). Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Vila, P. (2010). Crossing borders, reinforcing borders: Social categories, metaphors, and narrative identities on the US-Mexico frontier. Austin, TX: University of Texas.Google Scholar
Watt, D., & Llamas, C. (2014). Language, borders and identity. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Zyzik, E. (2006). Learners’ overgeneralization of dative clitics to accusative contexts: Evidence for prototype effects in SLA. In C. A. Klee & T. L. Face (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 7th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as First and Second Languages (pp. 122–134). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Geeslin, Kimberly L., Travis Evans-Sago, Stephen Fafulas & Tom Goebel-Mahrle
2024. Chapter 3. The second language acquisition of variation in adulthood and language change. In Lifespan Acquisition and Language Change [Advances in Historical Sociolinguistics, 14], ► pp. 64 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 july 2024. 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.