Article published in:
The Acquisition of Spanish in Understudied Language Pairings
Edited by Tiffany Judy and Silvia Perpiñán
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 3] 2015
► pp. 329–358

Typological proximity in L2 acquisition

The Spanish non-native grammar of French speakers

Typologically-close languages such as French and Spanish share many typological universals and macroparametric options but display different microparametric options as well as obvious and subtle morphological, syntactic and processing differences. This counterposed situation that we conceptualize as typological similarity versus typological proximity constitutes our first tool to investigate the specific characteristics of the Spanish interlanguage of L1 French (L2Sp-L1Fr) speakers. The other tool is the Competing Grammars Hypothesis (CGH) which we use as a framework to determine the optionality that results from the simultaneous availability of target-like, transferred and idiosyncratic L2Sp-L1Fr parametric options or feature combinations in the L2Sp-L1Fr interlanguage. Keywords: L1French-Spanish interlanguage; typological proximity; typological similarity; formal universals; implicational hierarchies; macroparameters; microparameters
Published online: 18 February 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.3.13lic
References
Adams, M.P
(1987) Old French, Null Subjects and Verb-second Phenomena. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. UCLA, Berkeley.
Adjémian, C
(1976) On the nature of interlanguage systems. Language Learning, 26, 297–320. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Adjémian, C., & Liceras, J.M
(1984) Universal grammar, the intake component and L1: Accounting for adult acquisition of relative clauses. In F. Eckman, L. Bell, & D. Nelson (Eds.), Universals of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 101–118). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Aissen, J
(2003) Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21, 435–483. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Alba de la Fuente, A
(2010). More on the clitic combination puzzle: Evidence from Spanish, Catalan and Romanian. In S. Colina, A. Olarrea, & A.M. Carvalho (Eds.), Romance Linguistics 2009. Selected papers from the 39th Linguistics Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Tuscon, Arizona, March 2009. (pp. 203–215). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Clitic Combinations in Spanish: Syntax, Processing and Acquisition. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Ottawa, Ottawa.
Alonso-Ovalle, L., Fernández-Solera, S. Frazier, L., & Clifton. C
(2002) Null vs. overt pronouns and the topic-focus articulation in Spanish. Journal of Italian Linguistics, 14,151–170.Google Scholar
Anderson, S.R
(1993) Wackernagel’s revenge: Clitics, morphology, and the syntax of second position. Language, 69(1), 68–98. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Androutsopoulou, A., Español-Echevarría, M., & Prévost, P.H
(2010) The syntax/morphology interface in Spanish L2 acquisition: Focus on quantified DPs. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 55(2), 149–180. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Authier, M
(1992) A parametric account of V-governed arbitrary null arguments. Natural Languages and Linguistic Theory, 10(3), 345–374. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baker, M.C
(1996) The Polysynthesis Parameter. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Belleti, A., Bennati, E., & Sorace, A
(2007) Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25, 657–689. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R
(1990) The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic Analysis, 20, 3–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bonet, E
(1991) Morphology after Syntax: Pronominal Clitics in Romance Languages. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. MIT.
(1994) The person-case constraint: A morphological approach. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 22. The Morphology-Syntax Connection (pp. 33–52).Google Scholar
(2008) The person-case constraint and repair strategies. In R. D’Alessandro, S. Fischer, & G. Hrafnbjargarson (Eds.), Agreement Restrictions (pp. 103–128). Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bruhn de Garavito, J
(1999) The Syntax of Spanish Multifunctional Clitics and Near-native Competence. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. McGill University, Montreal.
(2008) Acquisition of the Spanish plural by French L1 speakers: The role of transfer. In J.M. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), The Role of Formal Features in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 270–298). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Camacho Taboada, V
(2006) La arquitectura de la gramática. Los clíticos pronominales románicos y eslavos. Sevilla: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Sevilla.Google Scholar
Carminati, M.N
(2002) The Processing of Italian Subject Pronouns. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Chomsky, N
(1981) Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1986) Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York, NY: Praeger. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1995) The Minimalist Program. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. & Lasnik, H
(1977) Filters and control. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 425–504. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N., & Lasnik, H
(1993) Principles and parameters theory. In J. Jacobs, A. von Stechow, W. Sternefeld, & T. Vennemann (Eds.), Syntax: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Vol.1 (pp. 506–569). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Desrochers, A., Liceras, J.M., Spradlin, K.T., & Fernández, R
(2003) Can an on-line response latency task shed light on native and non-native competence in the deverbal compounds of Spanish? In J.M. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2002. Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (GASLA-6) Conference: L2 Links (pp. 64–70). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R
(1994) The Study of second language acquisition. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fontana, J
(1994) A variationist account of the development of the Spanish clitic system. In K. Beals (Ed.), Papers from the 13th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Vol. 2: The Parasession on Variation in Linguistic Theory (pp. 87–100). Chicago IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
(1997) On the integration of second position phenomena. In A. Kemenade & N. Vincent (Eds.), Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change (pp. 207–249). Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Goodluck, H
(1986) Language acquisition and linguistic theory. In P. Fletcher & M. Garman (Eds.), Language Acquisition (2nd ed.) (pp. 49–68). Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J
(1963) Universals of Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Guijarro-Fuentes, P
(2012) The acquisition of interpretable features in L2 Spanish: Personal a*. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15(4), 701–720. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Han, Z.-H
(2013) Forty years later: Updating the Fossilization Hypothesis. Language Teaching, 46, 133–171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, A
(2005) Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish. Linguistic Inquiry, 36, 533–64. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kayne, R
(1975) French Syntax. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1976) French relative que. In M. Luján & F. Hensey (Eds.), Current Studies in Romance Linguistics (pp. 255–299). Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, E., & Comrie, B
(1977) Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 63–99.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E
(1979) Transfer and non-transfer: Where we are now. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2, 37–57. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kroch, A
(1994) Morphosyntactic variation. In K. Beals (Ed.), Papers from the 30th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 180–201). Chicago IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
(2001) Syntactic change. In M. Baltin & C. Collins (Eds.), Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory (pp. 699–729). Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M.H
(1991) An Introduction to Second Language Research. London: Longman. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leonetti, M
(2004) Specificity and differential object marking in Spanish. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 3, 75–114.Google Scholar
Liceras, J.M
(1985) The value of clitics in non-native Spanish. Second Language Research, 1(2), 151–168.Google Scholar
(1986) Linguistic Theory and Second Language Acquisition: The Spanish Nonnative Grammar of English Speakers. Tubingen: Gunter Narr. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1989) On some properties of the pro-drop parameter: Looking for missing subjects in non-native Spanish. In S. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Language Acquisition: A Linguistic Approach (pp. 109–133). Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) The Multiple Grammars Theory and the nature of L2 grammars. Commentary to L. Amaral and T. Roeper’s Multiple Grammars and second language representation. Second Language Research, 30(1), 47–54. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Liceras, J.M., & Alba de la Fuente, A
Forthcoming). Native and non-native acceptability judgments on the anaphoric value of null and overt Spanish subject pronouns.
Liceras, J.M., & Fernández-Fuertes, R
(2013) Subject omission/production in child bilingual English and child bilingual Spanish: The view from linguistic theory. Workshop on Cross-linguistic influence in language contact. 19th International Congress of Linguistics (ICL 2013) – Geneva, July 2013.
Liceras, J.M., Mongeon, C., Cuza, A., Senn, C., & Spradlin, K.T
(2004) La adquisición en el aula sin input formal: Los compuestos exocéntricos de las interlenguas del español. Red-ELE, 0, 1–28.Google Scholar
Martínez-Sanz, C
(2011) Null and Overt Subjects in a Variable System: The Case of Dominican Spanish. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Ottawa, Ottawa.
Montrul, S., & Bowles, M
(2009) Back to basics: Incomplete knowledge of differential object marking in Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 363–383. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, F.J
(1990) Explaining language universals. Journal of Linguistics, 26, 203–222. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Perales, S., & Liceras, J.M
(2010) Looking for universals in the acquisition of L2 Spanish object clitics. In P. Guijarro-Fuentes & L. Dominguez (Eds.), New Directions in Language Acquisition: Romance Languages in the Generative Perspective (pp. 419–452). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A.T., & Liceras, J.M
(2002) The Acquisition of Spanish Morphosyntax: The L1/L2 Connection. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pomerleau, J
(2000) La adquisición del español en el aula: Los compuestos nominales de los franceses de Canadá. Unpublished Master thesis. Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona.
Rivero, M.L
(1986) Parameters in the typology of clitics in Romance and Old Spanish. Language, 62(4), 774–807. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1997) On two locations for complement clitic pronouns: Serbo-Croatian, Bulgarian and Old Spanish. In A. Kemenade & N. Vincent (Eds.), Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change (pp. 170–206). Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
(2004) Spanish quirky subjects, person restrictions and the person-case constraint. Linguistic Inquiry, 35(3), 494–502. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Oblique subjects and person restrictions in Spanish: A morphological approach. In R. D’Alessandro, S. Fischer, & G. Hrafnbjargarson (Eds.), Agreement Restrictions (pp. 215–250). Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roberge, Y
(1986) Subject doubling, free inversion and null argument languages. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 31(1), 54–79.Google Scholar
(1990) The Syntactic Recoverability of Null Arguments. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, I
(1993) Verbs and Diachronic Syntax: A Comparative History of English and French. Dorcrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J
(2011) L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: the typological primacy model. Second Language Research, 27(1), 107–217. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2013) Cognitive economy, non-redundancy and typological primacy in L3 acquisition: evidence from initial stages of L3 Romance. In S. Baauw, F.A.C. Drijkoningen, & M. Pinto (Eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory (pp. 217–247). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
In press). Linguistic and cognitive motivations for the typological primacy model of third language (L3) transfer: considering the role of timing of acquisition and proficiency in the previous languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. Crossref
Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R
(1994) L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12(1), 40–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L
(1972) Interlanguage. IRAL, 10(2), 209–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L., & Lamendella, J
(1978) Two perspectives on fossilization in interlanguage learning. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 3(2), 143–191. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sheehan, M
(2006) The EPP and Null Subjects in Romance. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Newcastle University, UK.
Slabakova, R
(2009) L2 fundamentals. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31(2), 155–173. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F
(2006) Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22(3), 339–368. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E
(1982) Systematicity and attention in interlanguage. Language Learning, 32(1), 69–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Torrego, E
(1998) Nominative subjects and pro-drop Infl. Syntax, 1(2), 206–219. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tremblay, A
(2006) On the second language acquisition of Spanish reflexive passives and reflexive impersonals by French- and English-speaking adults. Second Language Research, 22(1), 30–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Valenzuela, E., Liceras, J.M., & López-Morelos, L.P
(2011) Ambiguous anaphora in L2 English and L2 Spanish. Paper presented at the BUCLD 36.
Wackernagel, J
(1892) Uber ein Gesetz der indogermanischen Wortstellung. Indogermanische Forschungen, 1, 333–436.Google Scholar
White, L
(1985) The pro-drop parameter in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 35(1), 47–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yang, C
(2002) Knowledge and Learning in Natural Language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Zobl, H., & Liceras, J.M
(2006) Competing grammars and parametric shifts in second language acquisition and the history of English and Spanish. In D. Bamman, T. Magnitskaia, & C. Zaller (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD) (pp. 713–724). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Amenós-Pons, José, Aoife Ahern & Pedro Guijarro-Fuentes
2019. Feature reassembly across closely related languages: L1 French vs. L1 Portuguese learning of L2 Spanish Past Tenses. Language Acquisition 26:2 ► pp. 183 ff. Crossref logo
Diaubalick, Tim & Pedro Guijarro-Fuentes
2019. The strength of L1 effects on tense and aspect: How German learners of L2 Spanish deal with acquisitional problems. Language Acquisition 26:3 ► pp. 282 ff. Crossref logo
Poeste, Meike, Natascha Müller & Laia Arnaus Gil
2019. Code-mixing and language dominance: bilingual, trilingual and multilingual children compared. International Journal of Multilingualism 16:4 ► pp. 459 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 may 2022. 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.