Skip to main content

That-variation in German and Spanish L2 English*


In certain English finite complement clauses, inclusion of the complementizer that is optional. Previous research has identified various factors that influence when native speakers tend to produce or omit the complementizer, including syntactic weight, clause juncture constraints, and predicate frequency. The present study addresses the question to what extent German and Spanish learners of English as a second language (L2) produce and omit the complementizer under similar conditions. 3,622 instances of English adjectival, object, and subject complement constructions were retrieved from the International Corpus of English and the German and Spanish components of the International Corpus of Learner English. A logistic regression model suggests that L2 learners’ and natives’ production is largely governed by the same factors. However, in comparison with native speakers, L2 learners display a lower rate of complementizer omission. They are more impacted by processing-related factors such as complexity and clause juncture, and less sensitive to verb-construction cue validity.

Corresponding author
*Address for correspondence: Stefanie Wulff, University of Florida, Linguistics Department, Turlington Hall 4015, Gainesville, FL 32611-5454. e-mail:
Hide All
Real Academia Española (2005). Diccionario Panhispánico de Dudas, online: <>.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Leech, G. (2002). Longman student grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
Bolinger, D. (1972). That’s that. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.
Carrol, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 357386.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: an ESL/EFL teacher’s course, 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.
Dor, D. (2005). Toward a semantic account of that-deletion in English. Linguistics, 43 (2), 345382.
Durham, M. (2011). I think (that) something’s missing: complementizer deletion in nonnative e-mails. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1 (3), 421445.
Ellinger, J. (1933). Substantivsätze mit oder ohne that in der neueren englischen Literatur. Anglia, 57, 78109.
Ellis, N. C. (2007). The Associative-Cognitive CREED. In VanPatten, B., & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories of second language acquisition: an introduction (pp. 7795). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ellis, N. C. (2012). What can we count in language, and what counts in language acquisition, cognition, and use? In Gries, St. Th., & Divjak, D. S. (Eds.), Frequency effects in language learning and processing (pp. 734). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009a). Constructions and their acquisition: islands and the distinctiveness of their occupancy. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 188221.
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009b). Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. Modern Language Journal, 93, 370385.
Elsness, J. (1984). That or zero? A look at the choice of objective clause connective in a corpus of American English. English Studies, 65, 519533.
Fowler, H. (1965). A dictionary of modern English usage. Oxford: Clarendon.
Gilquin, G. (2007). To err is not all: what corpus and elicitation can reveal about the use of collocation by learners. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 55 (30), 273291.
Gries, , St., Th. (2003). Multifactorial analysis in corpus linguistics: a study of particle placement. London & New York: Continuum Press.
Hawkins, J. A. (2004). Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jaeger, T. F. (2010). Redundancy and reduction: speakers manage syntactic information density. Cognitive Psychology, 61, 2362.
Jespersen, O. H. (1954). A modern English grammar on historical principles: Part III: syntax (second volume). London: George Allen & Unwin.
Kirkby, J. (1971[1746]). A new English grammar (Reprint). Menston: Scolar Press.
Kroll, J. F., & Dussias, P. E. (2013). The comprehension of words and sentences in two languages. In Bhatia, T., & Ritchie, W. (Eds.), The handbook of bilingualism and multilingualism, 2nd ed. (pp. 216243). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell Publishers.
Kroll, J. F., & Gollan, T. H. (in press). Speech planning in two languages: what bilinguals tell us about language production. In Ferreira, V., Goldrick, M., & Miozzo, M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language production. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Montrul, S., & Rodríguez Louro, C. (2006). Beyond the syntax of the null subject parameter: a look at the discourse-pragmatic distribution of null and overt subjects by L2 learners of Spanish. In Escobar, L., & Torrens, V. (Eds.), The acquisition of syntax in Romance languages (pp. 401418). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: a research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417528.
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Richards, J., and Schmidt, R. (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191225). London: Longman.
Poutsma, H. (1929). A grammar of late modern English. Groningen: P. Noordhoff.
Rohdenburg, G. (2000). The complexity principle as a factor determining grammatical variation and change in English. In Plag, I., & Schneider, K. P. (Eds.), Language use, language acquisition and language history: (mostly) empirical studies in honour of Rüdiger Zimmermann (pp. 2544). Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.
Rothman, J. (2009). Pragmatic deficits with syntactic consequences: L2 pronominal subjects and the syntax−pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 951973.
Rothman, J., & Guijarro-Fuentes, P. (2010). Input quality matters: some comments on input type and age-effects in adult SLA. Applied Linguistics, 31 (2), 301306.
Saffran, J. R. (2003). Statistical language learning: mechanisms and constraints. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12 (4), 110114.
Storms, G. (1966). That-clauses in Modern English. English Studies, 47, 249270.
Tagliamonte, S., & Smith, J. (2005). No momentary fancy! The zero ‘complementizer’ in English dialects. English Language and Linguistics, 9 (2), 289309.
Thompson, S. A., & Mulac, A. J. (1991). The discourse conditions for the use of the complementizer that in conversational English. Journal of Pragmatics, 15, 237251.
Torres Cacoullos, R., & Walker, J. A. (2009). On the persistence of grammar in discourse formulas: a variationist study of that. Linguistics, 47, 143.
Wasow, T. (1997). Remarks on grammatical weight. Language Variation and Change, 9, 81105.
Wulff, S., & Gries, St. Th. (2011). Corpus-driven methods for assessing accuracy in learner production. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Second language task complexity: researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 6188). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Language and Cognition
  • ISSN: 1866-9808
  • EISSN: 1866-9859
  • URL: /core/journals/language-and-cognition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *



Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed