Keywords
dative clitics
clitic doubling
argument structure
animacy
How to Cite
Number of views: 472
Number of downloads: 346
Abstract
This article examines the second language acquisition (SLA) of Spanish dative clitics in clitic doubling (CLD) structures that are closely related to the double object construction (DOC) in English and Dutch. It also addresses the question of how adult English and Dutch speakers learning L2 Spanish in a formal setting develop knowledge and use of the animacy constraint in the target language, which is different from the first language (L1) counterparts. The role of transfer in acquiring new syntactic structures has been taken into account, where dative clitics appear and animate objects are marked by the dative preposition ‘to.’ New findings are obtained on CLD and the Spanish animacy constraint from a grammaticality judgement task (GJT), completed by English and Dutch learners at B1 and B2 CEFR levels. The difficulties learners experienced were not always due to negative L1 transfer, but also related to the complexity of the argument structure where the clitic is inserted. This has clear implications for the teaching of pronominal elements which are closely related to different syntactic configurations in Spanish.
References
Benati, A., & Angelovska, T. (2016). Second language acquisition. A theoretical introduction to real world applications. London: Bloomsbury.
Boneh, N., & Nash, L. (2011). High and higher applicatives: The case of non-core datives. In M. B. Washburn, K. McKinney-Bock, E. Varis, A. Sawyer, & B. Tomaszewicz (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp. 60-68). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Bresnan, J., Cueni, A., Nikitina, T., & Baayen, R. J. (2007). Predicting the dative alternation. In G. Bouma, I. Kraemer, & J. Zwarts (Eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation (pp. 69-94). Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science.
Bruhn de Garavito, J. (2000). The syntax of Spanish multifunctional clitics and near native competence (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cuervo, M. C. (2003). Datives at large (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Cuervo, M. C. (2007). Double object in Spanish as a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 583-615.
Ellis, R. (2004). The definition and measurement of L2 explicit knowledge. Language Learning, 54, 227-275.
Ellis, R. (2009). Implicit and explicit learning, knowledge and instruction. In R.
Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philip, & H. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 3-25). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Escobar, L., & Teomiro, I. (2016). The gradual acquisition of clitic se in Spanish L2. Topics in Linguistics, 17(1), 17-29. doi: 10.1515/2016-0002
Farley, A. P., & McCollam, K. (2004). Learner readiness and L2 production in Spanish: Processability theory on trial. Estudios de Linguistica Aplicada, 22(4), 47-69.
Guijarro-Fuentes, P. (2012). The acquisition of interpretable features in L2 Spanish: Personal a. Bilingualism, Language and Cognition, 15(4), 701-720.
Guijarro-Fuentes, P., & Marinis, T. (2007). Acquiring the syntax/semantic interface in L2 Spanish: The personal preposition “a”. Eurosla Yearbook 2007, 7, 67-87.
Gutiérrez, X. (2013). The construct validity of grammaticality judgment tests as measures of implicit and explicit knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(3), 423-449.
Hawkins, R. (2001). Second language syntax: A generative introduction. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Imaz Agirre, A. (2015). The acquisition of dative alternation in English by Spanish learners. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12, 63-90.
Jäschke, K., & Plag, I. (2016). The dative alternation in German-English interlanguage. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 485-521.
Lardiere, D. (2008). Feature assembly in second language in second language acquisition. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), Features in second language acquisition (pp. 106-140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Laughren, M., & Eisenchlas, S. (2006). The role of animacy and definiteness in the clitic-DP nexus. In K. Allan (Ed.), Selected papers from the Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society (pp. 28-30). Retrieved from http://www.als.asn.au
Martoccio. A. M. (2012). The acquisition of differential object marking in L2 Spanish learners (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Montrul, S., & Bowles, M. (2009). Back to basics: Differential Object Marking under incomplete acquisition in Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(4), 363-383.
Perpiñan, S., & Montrul, S. (2006). On binding asymmetries in dative alternation construction in L2 Spanish. 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. 135-148). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. Retrieved from http://www.lingref.com/cpp/casp/7/index.html
Pylkkänen, L. (2008). Introducing arguments. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Sikorska, M. (2009). Low applicative datives in spanish as a second language: Acquisition of semantics and morphosyntax. RESLA, 22, 327-350.
Teomiro, I. (2013). Low applicatives and optional “se” in Spanish non-anticausative intransitive verbs. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas, 8, 248-270.
Torrego, E. (2010). Variability in the case patterns of causative formation in Romance and its implications. Linguistic Inquiry, 41(3), 445-470.
VanPatten, B. (2011). Stubborn syntax: How it resists explicit teaching and learning. In C. Sanz & R. Leow (Eds.), Implicit and explicit language learning: Conditions, processing, and knowledge (pp. 9-21). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
License
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.