Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-rxg44 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-17T18:12:15.123Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Child L2 development of syntactic and discourse properties of Spanish subjects*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2009

ELISABET PLADEVALL BALLESTER
ELISABET PLADEVALL BALLESTER*
Affiliation:
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
*
Address for correspondence: Departament de Filologia Anglesa i Germanística, Facultat de Filosofia i Lletres, Edifici B, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), (Barcelona), SPAINelisabet.pladevall@uab.cat
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The apparent optionality in the use of null and overt pronominal subjects and the apparently free word order or distribution of preverbal and postverbal subjects in Spanish obey a number of discourse–pragmatic constraints which play an important role in Spanish L2 subject development. Although research on subject properties at the syntax–discourse interface has been conducted in adult L2A and bilingual L1A, child L2A has not been extensively explored in this respect. This paper explores the L2 development of syntactic and discourse properties of subjects by British child L2 learners of Spanish in the context of a Spanish immersion school and in three different age groups, namely five-, ten- and seventeen-year-old children whose age of first exposure was at four years old, and in three corresponding control groups. Research is carried out by means of grammaticality and preference judgment experimental tasks and results suggest that children can indeed acquire the syntactic properties of Spanish subjects, although not fully in the case of the first two age groups, while the acquisition of discourse properties seems to be delayed and remains problematic even for the older/more advanced group, as has been suggested for adult L2 learners.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 185 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

I would like to thank Colegio Español Vicente Cañada Blanch (London, UK), Col·legi Santíssima Trinitat (Badalona, Spain) and Col·legi Mare de Déu del Carme (Terrassa, Spain) for their participation in the experimental tasks of this study.

References

Alexiadou, A. & Anagnostopoulou, E. (1998). Parametrizing AGR: Word order, V-movement and EPP checking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 16, 491–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Kasey, T. & Pérez-Leroux, A. T. (1998). Second language acquisition of Spanish null subjects. In Flynn, S., Martohardjono, G. and O'Neil, W. (eds.), The generative study of second language acquisition, pp. 161–185. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Belletti, A. (2000). ‘Inversion’ as focalization. In Hulk, A. and Pollock, J.-Y. (eds.), Subject inversion in Romance and the theory of Universal Grammar, pp. 60–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Belletti, A. (2003). Aspects of the lower IP area. In Rizzi, L. (ed.), The structure of CP and IP. The cartography of syntactic structures, Vol. 2, pp. 16–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Belletti, A., Bennati, E. & Sorace, A. (2005). Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Unpublished manuscript, University of Siena and University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Belletti, 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
Blom, E. (2008). Testing the domain-by-age model: Inflection and placement of Dutch verbs. In Haznedar, B. and Gavruseva, H. (eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition. A generative perspective, pp. 271–300. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burzio, L. (1986). Italian syntax: A government-binding approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. (1994). Subject positions, GenGenP 2 (1), 64–78.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. (1997). Subjects and clause structure. In Haegeman, L. (ed.), The new comparative syntax, pp. 33–63. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. (2004). Toward a cartography of subject positions. In Rizzi, L. (ed.), The structure of CP and IP: The cartography of syntactic structures, Vol. 2, pp. 115–165. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carminati, M. N. (2002). The processing of Italian subject pronouns. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts Amherst.Google Scholar
Carminati, M. N. (2005). Processing reflexes of the feature hierarchy (Person>Number>Gender) and implications for linguistic theory. Lingua, 115, 259–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin and use. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. & Felser, C. (2006) Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contreras, H. (1991). On the position of subjects. Syntax and Semantics, 25, 63–79.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eubank, L. (1996). Negation in early German–English interlanguage: More valueless features in the L2 initial state. Second Language Research, 12 (1), 73–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández Soriano, O. (1999). El pronombre personal. Formas y distribuciones. pronombres átonos y tónicos. In Bosque, I. and Demonte, V. (eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua Española, pp. 1209–1273. Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Filiaci, F. (2003). The acquisition of the properties of Italian null and overt subjects by English native speakers. MSc dissertation, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Guasti, M. T. (2002). Language acquisition. The growth of grammar. Cambridge, MA & London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Haznedar, B. & Gavruseva, H. (2008) Recent perspectives in child second language acquisition. In Haznedar, B. and Gavruseva, H. (eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition. A generative perspective, pp. 3–15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herschesohn, J. (2000). The second time around. Minimalism and L2 acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hertel, T. J. (2003). Lexical and discourse factors in the second language acquisition of Spanish word order. Second Language Research, 19 (4), 273–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kato, M. A. (1999). Strong and weak pronominals in the null subject parameter. Probus 11, 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakshmanan, U. (1995). Child second language acquisition of syntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 301–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, B. & Rappaport-Hovav, M. (1995). Unaccusativity at the syntax–lexical semantic interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Liceras, J. M. (1989). On some properties of the “pro-drop” parameter: Looking for missing subjects in non-native Spanish. In Gass, S. M. and Schachter, J. (eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition, pp. 109–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liceras, J. M. & Díaz, L. (1999) Topic-drop versus pro-drop. Null subjects and pronominal subjects in the Spanish L2 of Chinese, English, French, German and Japanese speakers. Second Language Research, 15 (1), 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liceras, J. M., Fernández-Fuertes, R. & Pérez-Tattam, R. (2008). Null and overt subjects in the developing grammars (L1 English/L1 Spanish) of two bilingual twins. In Pérez, C., Bel, A. and Juan, M. (eds.), A portrait of the young in the new multilingual Spain, pp. 111–134. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Lozano, C. (2002). The interpretation of overt and null pronouns in non-native Spanish. Durham Working Papers in Linguistics, 8, 53–66.Google Scholar
Lozano, C. (2006). Focus and split intransitivity: The acquisition of word order alternations in non-native Spanish. Second Language Research, 22 (2), 145–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luján, M. (1999). Expresión y omisión del pronombre personal. In Bosque, I. and Demonte, V. (eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua Española, pp. 1275–1316. Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Manzini, M. R. & Roussou, A. (2000). A minimalist theory of A-movement and control. Lingua 110 (6), 409–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manzini, R. & Savoia, L. (2002) Parameters of subject inflection in Italian dialects. In Svenonius, P. (ed.), Subjects, expletives and the EPP, pp. 157–200. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meisel, J. (2007) Age of onset in successive acquisition of bilingualism: Effects on grammatical development. Working Papers in Multilingualism, 80, University of Hamburg.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. (2008). Child second language acquisition or successive first language acquisition? In Haznedar, B. and Gavruseva, H. (eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition. A generative perspective, pp. 55–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montalbetti, M. (1984). After binding. PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. A. (2004a). The acquisition of Spanish. Morphosyntactic development in monolingual and bilingual L1 acquisition and adult L2 acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. A. (2004b). Psycholinguistic evidence for split intransitivity in Spanish second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 239–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. A. & Rodríguez Louro, C. (2006). Beyond the syntax of the null subject parameter. In Torrens, V. and Escobar, L. (eds.), The acquisition of syntax in Romance languages, pp. 401–418. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ordóñez, F. & Treviño, E. (1999). Left dislocated subjects and the pro-drop parameter: A case study of Spanish. Lingua, 107, 39–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J. & Navarro, S. (2003). Subject realisation and crosslinguistic interference in the bilingual acquisition of Spanish and English: What is the role of the input? Journal of Child Language, 30, 371–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T. & Glass, W. R. (1997). OPC effects on the L2 acquisition of Spanish. In Pérez-Leroux, A. T. and Glass, W. R. (eds.), Contemporary perspectives on the acquisition of Spanish, Vol. 1, pp. 149–165. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T. & Glass, W. R. (1999). Null anaphora in Spanish second language acquisition: Probabilistic versus generative approaches. Second Language Research, 15 (2), 220–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Platzack, C. (2004). Agreement and the person phrase hypothesis. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax, 73, 83–112. Department of Scandinavian Languages, University of Lund.Google Scholar
Ritter, E. (1995). On the syntactic category of pronouns and agreement, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 13, 405–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1982). Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1986). Null objects in Italian and the theory of pro, Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 501–557.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1997a). A parametric approach to comparative syntax: Properties of the pronominal system. In Haegeman, L. (ed.), The new comparative syntax, pp. 268–285. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (2004). Locality and left periphery. In Belletti, A. (ed.), Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures, Vol. 3, pp. 223–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, L. (2005). Grammatically-based target-inconsistencies in child language. Ms, University of Siena.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. (1992). Testing between UG-based and problem-solving models of L2A: Developmental sequence data. Language Acquisition 2, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. (1998). The second language instinct. Lingua, 106, 133–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. (2003). Child L2 acquisition: Paving the way. In Beachley, B., Brown, A. and Conlin, F. (eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference of Language Development, pp. 26–50. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. (2004). Why child L2 acquisition? In van Kampen, J. and Baauw, S. (eds.), Proceedings of GALA 2003, Vol. 1, LOT Occasional Series 3, pp. 47–66. Utrecht: LOT Publications.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12 (1), 40–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A. & Paoli, S. (2004). Crosslinguistic influence at the syntax–pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in English–Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7 (3), 183–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. (2004). Native language attrition and developmental instability at the syntax–discourse interface: Data, interpretations and methods. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7, 143–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22 (3), 339–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unsworth, S. (2005a) Child L1, child L2 and adult L2 acquisition: Differences and similarities. In Brugos, A., Micciulla, L. and Smith, C. E. (eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, pp. 633–644. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Unsworth, S. (2005b). Child L2, adult L2, child L1: Differences and similarities. A study on the acquisition of direct object scrambling in Dutch. PhD thesis, Utrecht University.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L. (1998) Prosody, focus, and word order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar