Book contents
- Interfaces and Domains of Contact-Driven Restructuring
- Cambridge Studies in Linguistics
- Interfaces and Domains of Contact-Driven Restructuring
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Maps
- Tables
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Questioning a Long-Lasting Assumption in the Field
- 2 The African Diaspora to the Andes and Its Linguistic Consequences
- 3 Reconciling Formalism and Language Variation
- 4 Variable Phi-Agreement across the Determiner Phrase
- 5 Partial Pro-Drop Phenomena
- 6 Early-Peak Alignment and Duplication of Boundary Tone Configurations
- 7 Final Considerations
- References
- Index
- References
References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 October 2021
Book contents
- Interfaces and Domains of Contact-Driven Restructuring
- Cambridge Studies in Linguistics
- Interfaces and Domains of Contact-Driven Restructuring
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Maps
- Tables
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Questioning a Long-Lasting Assumption in the Field
- 2 The African Diaspora to the Andes and Its Linguistic Consequences
- 3 Reconciling Formalism and Language Variation
- 4 Variable Phi-Agreement across the Determiner Phrase
- 5 Partial Pro-Drop Phenomena
- 6 Early-Peak Alignment and Duplication of Boundary Tone Configurations
- 7 Final Considerations
- References
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Interfaces and Domains of Contact-Driven RestructuringAspects of Afro-Hispanic Linguistics, pp. 145 - 168Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Aboh, E. 2015. The Emergence of Hybrid Grammars. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Aboh, E. 2016. Creole distinctiveness: A dead end. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 31.2: 400–418.Google Scholar
Aboh, E., & DeGraff, M. 2016. A null theory of creole formation based on Universal Grammar. In Roberts, I. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Universal Grammar, 401–458. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Adger, D. 2007. Variability and modularity: A response to Hudson. Journal of Linguistics, 43, 695–700.Google Scholar
Adger, D. 2010. A minimalist theory of feature structure. In Kibort, A., & Corbett, G. (eds.), Features: Perspectives on a Key Notion in Linguistics, 185–218. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Adger, D., & Smith, J. 2005. Variation and the minimalist program. In Cornips, L., & Corrigan, K. P. (eds.), Syntax and Variation. Reconciling the Biological and the Social, 149–178. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Adger, D., & Smith, J. 2010. Variation in agreement: A lexical feature-based approach. Lingua, 120.5: 1109–1134.Google Scholar
Adger, D., & Svenonius, P. 2011. Features in minimalist syntax. In Boeckx, C. (ed.), Handbook of Linguistic Minimalism, 27–51. Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
Adger, D., & Trousdale, G. 2007. Variation in English syntax: Theoretical implications. English Language and Linguistics, 11.2: 261–278.Google Scholar
Aguilar, L., De-la-Mota, C. & Prieto, P. 2009. Sp_ToBI training materials. http://prosodia.upf.edu/sp_tobi.Google Scholar
Aguirre Beltrán, G. 1946. La población negra en México: Estudio etnohistórico. Mexico City: Ediciones Fuente cultural.Google Scholar
Aguirre, C. 1997. Peru. In Rodríguez, J. (ed.), The Historical Encyclopedia of World Slavery, 501–502. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
Alarcón, I. 2011. Spanish grammatical gender under complete and incomplete acquisition: Early and late bilinguals’ linguistic behavior within the noun phrase, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14.3: 332–350.Google Scholar
Alemán Bañón, J., & Rothman, J. 2016. The role of morphological markedness in the processing of number and gender agreement in Spanish: An event-related potential investigation. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31.10: 1273–1298.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, A. 2001. Adjective syntax and noun raising: Word order asymmetries in the DP as the result of adjective distribution. Studia Linguistica, 55.3: 217–248.Google Scholar
Alleyne, M. 1980. Comparative Afro-American: An Historical-Comparative Study of English-Based Afro-American Dialects of the New World. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.Google Scholar
Álvarez, A., & Obediente, E.. 1998. El español caribeño: Antecedentes sociohistóricos y lingüísticos. In Pearl, M., & Schwegler, A. (eds.), América negra: Panorámica actual de los estudios lingüísticos sobre variedades hispanas, portuguesas y criollas, 40–61. Madrid/Frankfurt: Iberoamericana/Vervuert.Google Scholar
Álvarez Nazario, M. 1974. El elemento afronegroide en el español de Puerto Rico. San Juan: Instituto de Cultura Puertorriqueña.Google Scholar
Andersen, R. 1980. Creolization as the acquisition of a second language as a first language. In Valdmann, A., & Highfield, A. (eds.), Theoretical Orientations in Creole Studies, 273–295. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Andersen, R. (ed.) 1983. Pidginization and Creolization as Language Acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Andrien, K. 1995. The Kingdom of Quito, 1690–1830: The State and Regional Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, M. 2008. The Syntax of Agreement and Concord. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, P., Levisen, C. & Sippola, E. (eds.) 2016. Phylogenetic Approaches to Creole Languages. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bakker, P., Daval-Markussen, A., Parkvall, M. & Plag, I. 2011. Creoles are typologically distinct from non-creoles. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 26.1: 5–42.Google Scholar
Barbiers, S. 2009. Locus and limits of syntactic microvariation. Lingua, 119.11: 1607–1623.Google Scholar
Barbiers, S., & Cornips, L. 2001. Introduction to syntactic microvariation. In Barbiers, S., Cornips, L. and van der Kleij, S. (eds.), Syntactic Microvariation, 1–11. Meertens Institute Electronic Publications in Linguistics. www.meertens.knaw.nl/projecten/sand/synmic/.Google Scholar
Barbosa, P., Kato, M. A. & Duarte, M. E. 2005. Null subjects in European and Brazilian Portuguese. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, 4: 11–52.Google Scholar
Barnes, H., & Michnowicz, J. 2013. Peak alignment in semi-spontaneous bilingual Chilipo Spanish. In Carvalho, A., & Beaudrie, S. (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics, 109–122. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Barrera-Tobón, C., & Raña-Risso, R. 2016. A corpus-based sociolinguistic study of contact-induced changes in subject placement in the Spanish of New York City bilinguals. In Sessarego, S., & Tejedo-Herrero, F. (eds.), Spanish Language and Sociolinguistic Analysis, 323–342. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battistella, E. 1990. Markedness: The Evaluative Superstructure of Language. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Baxter, A., Lucchesi, D. & Guimarães, M. 1997. Gender agreement as a “decreolizing” feature of an Afro-Brazilian dialect. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 12:1: 1–57.Google Scholar
Beckman, M., Díaz-Campos, M., McGory, J. & Morgan, T. 2002. Intonation across Spanish, in the Tones and Break Indices framework. Probus 14: 9–36.Google Scholar
Béjar, S. 2008. Conditions on phi-agree. In Harbour, D., Adger, D. & Béjar, S. (eds.), Phi Theory, 130–154. Oxford: Oxford University Press.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 & Linguistic Theory, 25: 657–689.Google Scholar
Bello, A. 1847[1988]. Gramática castellana destinada al uso de americanos. [edited by Trujillo, R.]. Madrid: Arco Libros.Google Scholar
Benincà, P. 1994. La variazione sintattica: Studi di dialettologia romanza. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Bentley, W. 1887. Dictionary and Grammar of the Kongo Language, as Spoken at San Salvador, the Ancient Capital of the Old Kongo Empire, West Africa. London: Baptist Missionary Society.Google Scholar
Bernstein, J. 1993. The syntactic role of word markers in null nominal constructions. Probus, 5: 5–38.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. 1992. Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68: 706–755.Google Scholar
Black, J., & Motapanyane, V. (eds.) 1996. Microparametric Syntax and Dialect Variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Blasi, D., Michaelis, S. & Haspelmath, M.. 2017. Grammars are robustly transmitted even during the emergence of creole languages. Nature Human Behaviour, 1: 723–729.Google Scholar
Bonet, E. 1995. The feature structure of Romance clitics. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 13: 607–617.Google Scholar
Borer, H. 1984. Parametric Syntax. Case Studies in Semitic and Romance Languages. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Bouisson, E. 1997. Esclavos de la tierra: Los capesinos negros del Chota-Mira, siglos XVII–XX. Procesos, Revista Ecuatoriana de Historia, 11: 45–67.Google Scholar
Bowser, F. 1974. The African Slave in Colonial Peru, 1524–1650. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bridikhina, E. 1995. El tráfico de esclavos negros a La Paz a fines del siglo XVIII. Estudios Bolivianos, 1: 183–191.Google Scholar
Brockington, L. 2006. Blacks, Indians, and Spaniards in the Eastern Andes. Lincoln, NE/London: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Brown, E., & Rivas, J.. 2011. Subject–verb word-order in Spanish interrogatives: A quantitative analysis of Puerto Rican Spanish. Spanish in Context, 8.1: 23–49.Google Scholar
Browne, R. 2017. Surviving Slavery in the British Caribbean. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Bruhn de Garavito, J., & White, L. 2002. The second language acquisition of Spanish DPs: The status of grammatical features. In Pérez-Leroux, A. T., & Liceras, J. M. (eds.), The Acquisition of Spanish Morphosyntax: The L1/L2 Connection, 153–178. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Bryant, K. 2005. Slavery and the context of ethnogenesis: African, Afro-Creoles, and the realities of bondage in the kingdom of Quito, 1600–1800. PhD Dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Burnard, T., & Garrigus, J. 2018. The Plantation Machine Atlantic Capitalism in French Saint-Domingue and British Jamaica. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Busdiecker, S. 2006. We are Bolivians too: The experience and meaning of blackness in Bolivia. PhD Dissertation, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Bustin, A., Fenton, E. & Muntendam, A. 2017. Controlled elicitation of Afro-Peruvian Spanish intonation of broad focus declaratives. Paper presented at the 11th International Symposium on Bilingualism, University of Limerick, Ireland (June 11–15).Google Scholar
Butera, B., Sessarego, S., Rao, S. & R.. 2019. Afro-Peruvian Spanish declarative intonation: Analysis and implications. In Campos, H., et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the Hispanic Linguistics Symposium 2016, 230–247. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Butera, B., Sessarego, S., 2020. Afro-Peruvian Spanish declarative intonation: Analysis and implications. In Morales-Font, A., Ferreira, M., Leow, R. & Sanz, C. (eds.), Hispanic Linguistics: Current Issues and New Directions, 229–248. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Camacho, J. 2008. Syntactic variation: The case of Spanish and Portuguese subjects. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 1.2: 415–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. 1997. Subjects and clause structure. In Haegeman, L. (ed.), The New Comparative Syntax, 33–63. New York, NY: Longman.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, A., & Starke, M.. 1999. The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of the three classes of pronouns. In van Riemsdijk, H. (ed.), Clitics in the Languages of Europe, 145–233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Carstens, V. 2001. Multiple agreement and case-deletion: Against Φ-incompleteness. Syntax, 4: 147–163.Google Scholar
Centurión Vallejo, H. 1954. Esclavitud y manumisión de negros en Trujillo. Trujillo: Imprenta de la Universidad de Trujillo.Google Scholar
Chambers, J. 2001. Vernacular universals. In Fontana, J. M., McNally, L., Turell, T. M. & Vallduví, E. (eds.), Proceedings of ICLaVE, the First International Conference on Language Variation in Europe, 52–60. Barcelona: Universitate Pompeu Fabra.Google Scholar
Chambers, J. 2003. Sociolinguistic Theory: Linguistic Variation and Its Social Significance. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
Chambers, J. 2004. Dynamic typology and vernacular universals. In Kortmann, B. (ed.), Dialectology Meets Typology: Dialect Grammar from a Cross Linguistic Perspective, 127–145. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1986. Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin and Use. New York, NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1988. Language and Problems of Knowledge: The Managua Lectures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Martin, R, Michaels, D. & Uriagereka, J. (eds.), Step by Step, 89–156. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Kenstowicz, M. (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 1–52, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N., & Lasnik, H.. 1993. The theory of principles and parameters. In Joachim, J., von Stechow, A., Sternefeld, W. & Vennemann, T. (eds.), Syntax: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Vol. 1, 506–569. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cinque, G. 1990. Ergative adjectives and the lexicalist hypothesis. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 8: 1–40.Google Scholar
Cinque, G. 1993. On the evidence for partial N-movement in the Romance DP. Venice Working Papers in Linguistics, 3.2: 21–40.Google Scholar
Cinque, G. 1994. On the evidence for partial N movement in the Romance DP. In Cinque, G., Koster, J., Pollock, J.-Y., Rizzi, L. & Zanuttini, R. (eds.), Paths towards Universal Grammar, 85–110. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Clementi, H. 1974. La abolición de la esclavitud en América Latina. Buenos Aires: Editorial La Pléyade.Google Scholar
Clements, C. 2009. The Linguistic Legacy of Spanish and Portuguese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Colantoni, L. 2011. Broad-focus declaratives in Argentine Spanish contact and non-contact varieties. In Gabriel, C., & Lleó, C. (eds.), Intonational Phrasing in Romance and Germanic: Cross-Linguistic and Bilingual Studies, 183–212. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Colantoni, L., & Gurlekian, J.. 2004. Convergence and intonation: Historical evidence from Buenos Aires Spanish. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(2): 107–119.Google Scholar
Colmenares, G. 1997. Historia Económica y Social de Colombia – II Popayán una Sociedad Esclavista 1680–1800. Cali: TM editores, Universidad del Valle, Banco de la República, Colciencias.Google Scholar
Contreras, H. 1991. On the position of subjects. In Rothstein, S. (ed.), Perspectives on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing, Syntax and Semantics 25, 63–80. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cornips, L., & Poletto, C. 2005. On standardising syntactic elicitation techniques (part 1). Lingua, 115: 939–957.Google Scholar
Coronel Feijóo, R. 1991. El valle sangriento de los indígenas de la coca y el algodón a la hacienda cañera jesuita, 1580–1700. Quito: ABYA-YALA.Google Scholar
Correa, J. A. 2012. La entonación del palenquero y del keteyano hablado en Palenque (Colombia). In Maglia, G., & Schwegler, A. (eds.), Palenque (Colombia): Oralidad, identidad y resistencia, 31–56. Bogotá: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana/Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Google Scholar
Cowper, E. 2005. The geometry of interpretable features: Infl in English and Spanish. Language, 81: 10–46.Google Scholar
Crespo, A. 1995. Esclavos negros en Bolivia. La Paz, Bolivia: Librería Editorial Juventud.Google Scholar
Cuba, M. 2002. El castellano hablado en Chincha. Lima: Talleres Gráficos de Angélica Tapia.Google Scholar
Cushner, N. 1980. Lords of the Land: Sugar, Wine, and the Jesuit Estates of Coastal Peru. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Cushner, N. 1982. Farm and Factory: The Jesuit and the Development of Agrarian Capitalism in Colonial Quito, 1600–1767. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Cuza, A., 2013. Crosslinguistic influence at the syntax proper: Interrogative subject–verb inversion in heritage Spanish. International Journal of Bilingualism, 17: 71–96.Google Scholar
Cuza, A., & Pérez-Tattam, R. 2016. Grammatical gender selection and phrasal word order in child heritage Spanish: A feature re-assembly approach. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19.1: 50–68.Google Scholar
Cyrino, S., & Espinal, M. T.. 2019. The syntax of number in Romance. Studia Linguistica, 1–39.Google Scholar
D’Imperio, M., Elordieta, G., Frota, S., Prieto, P. & Vigário, M. 2005. Intonational phrasing in Romance: The role of syntactic and prosodic structure. In Frota, S., Vigário, M. & Freitas, M. J. (eds.), Prosodies, 59–98. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
De Janvry, A., Sadoulet, E. & Wolford, W. 1998. The changing role of the state in Latin American land reforms. CUDARE Working Paper No. 852. Berkeley, CA: Department of Agriculture and Resource Economics and Policy.Google Scholar
De Vogelaer, G. 2006. Actuation, diffusion, and universals: Change in the pronominal system of Dutch dialects. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik, 3: 259–274.Google Scholar
DeCamp, D. 1971. Towards a generative analysis of a post-creole continuum. In Hymes, D. (ed.), Pidginization and Creolization of Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DeGraff, M. 2005. Linguists’ most dangerous myth: The fallacy of Creolist Exceptionalism. Language in Society, 34: 533–591.Google Scholar
Delicado-Cantero, M., & Sessarego, S. 2011. Variation and syntax in number expression in Afro-Bolivian Spanish. In Ortiz-López, L. (ed.), Selected Proceedings of the 13th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, 42–53. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Demonte, V. 2008. Meaning–form correlations and adjective position in Spanish. In Kennedy, C., & McNally, L. (eds.), The Semantics of Adjectives and Adverbs, 71–100. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Díaz-Campos, M., & Clements, C. 2005. Mainland Spanish colonies and Creole genesis: The Afro-Venezuelan area revisited. In Lotfi, S., & Westmoreland, M. (eds.), Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics, 41–53. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Díaz-Campos, M., & Clements, C. 2008. A Creole origin for Barlovento Spanish? A linguistic and sociohistorical inquiry. Language in Society, 37: 351–383.Google Scholar
Díaz Collazos, A. M., & Vásquez Hurtado, D. 2017. Gender agreement in online versus classroom students of first-semester Spanish. Open Linguistics, 3: 656–672.Google Scholar
Donaldson, B. 2011. Nativelike right-dislocations in near-native French. Second Language Research, 27: 361–390.Google Scholar
Duarte, M. E. 1995. A perda do princípio “Evite pronome” no português brasileiro. PhD Dissertation, UNICAMP.Google Scholar
Duarte, M. E. 2000. The loss of the ‘Avoid Pronoun’ principle in Brazilian Portuguese. In Kato, M., & Negrão, E. (eds.), Brazilian Portuguese and the Null Subject Parameter, 17–36. Madrid/Frankfurt: Iberoamericana/Vervuert.Google Scholar
Duarte, M. E., & Kato, M. 2002. A diachronic analysis of Brazilian Portuguese WH-questions. Santa Barbara Portuguese Studies, 6: 326–340.Google Scholar
D’Alessandro, R., & van Oostendorp, M. 2017. On the diversity of linguistic data and the integration of the language sciences. Frontiers in Psychology, 8: 1–4.Google Scholar
Eguren, L., Fernández-Soriano, O. & Mendikoetxea, A. (eds.) 2016. Rethinking Parameters. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Elordieta, G. 2003. The Spanish intonation of speakers of a Basque pitch-accent dialect. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 2: 67–95.Google Scholar
Elordieta, G., Frota, S., Prieto, P. & Vigário, M. 2003. Effects of constituent length and syntactic branching on intonational phrasing in Ibero-Romance. In Solé, M.-J., Recasens, D. & Romero, J. (eds.), Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 487–490. Barcelona: Futurgraphic.Google Scholar
Epstein, S., Flynn, S. & Martohardjono, G. 1996. Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19: 677–714.Google Scholar
Estebas-Vilaplana, E., & Prieto, P.. 2008. La notación prosódica del español: una revisión del Sp_ToBI. Estudios de Fonética Experimental, 17: 263–283.Google Scholar
Face, T. 2001. Intonational marking of contrastive focus in Madrid Spanish. PhD Dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Face, T. 2003. Intonation in Spanish declaratives: Differences between lab speech and spontaneous speech. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 2: 115–131.Google Scholar
Face, T., & Prieto, P. 2007. Rising accents in Castilian Spanish: A revision of Sp_ToBI. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, 6.1: 117–146.Google Scholar
Fernández-García, M. 1999. Patterns in gender agreement in the speech of second language learners. In Gutiérrez-Rexach, J., & Martínez-Gill, F. (eds.), Advances in Hispanic Linguistics, 25–39. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Fernández Ramírez, S. 1986. Gramática Española. 4. El verbo y la oración. Madrid: Arco Libros.Google Scholar
Flores Galindo, A. 1984. Aristocracia y plebe: Lima 1760–1830 (Estructura de clases y sociedad colonial). Lima: Mosca Azul.Google Scholar
Frampton, J., & Gutmann, S. 2000. Agreement is feature sharing. www.math.neu.edu/ling /pdffiles/agrisfs.pdf.Google Scholar
Franceschina, F. 2002. Case and φ-feature agreement in advanced L2 Spanish grammars. In Foster-Cohen, S., Ruthenberg, T. & Poschen, M. (eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook, 71–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Franceschina, F. 2005. Fossilized Second Language Grammars. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fuchs, Z., Polinsky, M. & Scontras, G.. 2014. The differential representation of number and gender in Spanish. Linguistic Review, 32: 703–737.Google Scholar
Gadet, F., & Pagel, S.. 2019. On the notion of ‘natural’ in ecological linguistics. In Ludwig, R., Mühlhäusler, P. & Pagel, S. (eds.), Linguistic Ecology and Language Contact, 43–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K. 2013 (ed). The Handbook of Spanish Second Language Acquisition. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
González-Rivera, M. 2018. Sobre el sujeto preverbal en oraciones exclamativas. Paper presented at Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX (October).Google Scholar
González-Rivera, M., & Sessarego, S.. 2020. La inversión del sujeto en el español caribeño: el caso de las oraciones exclamativas. Paper presented at Congreso Retorno al Español del Caribe 2020, Pontificia Universidad Católica Madre y Maestra, Santo Domingo (November 4–7).Google Scholar
Goodall, G. 2004. On the syntax and processing of Wh-questions in Spanish. In Schmeiser, B., Chand, V., Kelleher, A. & Rodriguez, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 237–250. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Granda, G. de. 1968. La tipología criolla de dos hablas del área lingüística hispánica. Thesaurus, 23: 193–205.Google Scholar
Granda, G. de. 1977. Estudios sobre un área dialectal hispanoamericana de población negra: las tierras bajas occidentales de Colombia. Bogotá: Publicaciones del Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Google Scholar
Granda, G. de. 1988a. Lingüística e historia: Temas afro-hispánicos. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid.Google Scholar
Granda, G. de. 1988b. Sociedad, historia y lengua en el Paraguay. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Greenberg, J. (ed.), Universals of Grammar, 73–113. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, J., & Samek-Lodovici, V. 1998. Optional subjects and subject universals. In Barbosa, P., Fox, D., Hagstom, P., McGinnis, M. & Pesetsky, D. (eds.), Is the Best Good Enough? Optimality and Competition in Syntax, 192–219. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Guamán Poma de Ayala, F. 1615[2006]. El primer nueva coránica y buen gobierno. Buenos Aires: Siglo Ventiuno.Google Scholar
Guerra Rivera, A., Coopmans, P., & Baauw, S. 2015. On the L2 acquisition of Spanish subject–verb inversion. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 173: 37–42.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez-Bravo, R. 2005. Structural Markedness and Syntactic Structure. New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez-Bravo, R. 2007. Prominence scales and unmarked word order in Spanish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25: 235–271.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez-Bravo, R. 2008. Topicalization and preverbal subjects in Spanish wh-interrogatives. In Bruhn de Garavito, J., & Valenzuela, E. (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 10th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 225–236.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez-Rexach, J., & Sessarego, S. 2014. Morphosyntactic variation in three Afro-Andean dialects: The evolution of gender agreement in DP. Lingua, 151.B: 142–161.Google Scholar
Guy, G. 1981. Linguistic variation in Brazilian Portuguese: Aspects of the phonology, syntax, and language history. PhD Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Guy, G. 2004. Muitas linguas: The linguistic impact of Africans in colonial Brazil. In Curto, J., & Lovejoy, P. (eds.), Enslaving Connections: Changing Cultures of Africa and Brazil During the Era of Slavery, 125–137. New York, NY: Humanity Books.Google Scholar
Guy, G. 2017. The African diaspora in Latin America. In Cutler, C., Vrzić, Z. & Angermeyer, P. (eds.), Language Contact in Africa and the African Diaspora in the Americas, 49–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Harley, H. 1994. Hug a tree: Deriving the morphosyntactic feature hierarchy. In Carnie, A., & Harley, H. (eds.), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 21, 289–320. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harley, H., & Ritter, E. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language, 78: 482–526.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. 2006. Against markedness (and what to replace it with). Journal of Linguistics, 42.1: 25–70.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. 2008. Parametric versus functional explanations of syntactic universals. In Biberauer, T., & Holmberg, A. (eds.), The Limits of Syntactic Variation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hassaurek, F. 1867. 1831–1885: Four Years among Spanish-Americans. New York, NY: Hurd and Houghton.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R. 1998. The inaccessibility of formal features of functional categories in second language acquisition. Paper presented at the Pacific Second Language Research Forum, Tokyo (March).Google Scholar
Helps, A. 1900. The Spanish Conquest in America and Its Relation to the History of Slavery and to the Government of Colonies, 1855–1861, 4 vols. London: John Lane.Google Scholar
Henry, A. 2005. Ideolectal variation and syntax theory. In Cornips, L., & Corrigan, K. (eds.), Syntax and Variation: Reconciling the Biological and the Social, 109–122. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hernández, T. 2013. Racial Subordination in Latin America: The Role of the State, Customary Law, and the New Civil Rights Response. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Herschensohn, J. 2000. The Second Time Around: Minimalism and L2 Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Holm, J. 1992. Popular Brazilian Portuguese: A semi-creole. In D’Andrade, E., & Kihm, A. (eds.), Actas do colóquio sobre crioulos de base lexical portuguesa, 37–66. Lisbon: Colibri.Google Scholar
Holm, J. A., & Patrick, P. L. (eds.) 2007. Comparative Creole Syntax. Parallel Outlines of 18 Creole Grammars. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
Holmberg, A. 2005. Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish. Linguistic Inquiry, 36: 533–564.Google Scholar
Hualde, J. I. 2002. Intonation in Spanish and the other Ibero-Romance languages. In Wiltshire, C., & Camps, J. (eds.), Romance Philology and Variation, 101–115. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hualde, J. I., & Schwegler, A. 2008. Intonation in Palenquero. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 23: 1–31.Google Scholar
Huang, Y. 1994. The Syntax and Pragmatics of Anaphora: A Study with Special Reference to Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ivanov, I. 2009. Second language acquisition of Bulgarian object clitics: A test case for the interface hypothesis. PhD Dissertation, University of Iowa.Google Scholar
Ivanov, I. 2012. L2 acquisition of Bulgarian clitic-doubling: A test case for the Interface Hypothesis. Second Language Research, 28.3: 345–368.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. 1997. The Architecture of the Language Faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. 2002. Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, O. 1986. Arbitrary plural pronouns. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 4: 43–76.Google Scholar
Jayaseelan, K. 1999. Empty pronoun in Dravidian. In Jayaseelan, K. (ed.), Parametric Studies in Malayalam Syntax, 14–25. New Delhi: Allied Publishers.Google Scholar
Johnson, J., & Newport, E. N.. 1989. Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21: 60–99.Google Scholar
Kato, M., & Negrão, E. (eds.) 2000. Brazilian Portuguese and the Null Subject Parameter. Frankfurt/Madrid: Vervuert/Iberoamericana.Google Scholar
Kato, M., & Ordóñez, F. (eds.) 2016. The Morphosyntax of Portuguese and Spanish in Latin America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kayne, R. 1996. Microparametric syntax: Some introductory remarks. In Black, J., & Motapanyane, V. (eds.), Microparametric Syntax and Dialect Variation, ix–xxviii. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kayne, R., & Pollock, J.-Y.. 2001. New thoughts on stylistic inversion. In Hulk, A. & Pollock, J.-Y. (eds.), Subject Inversion in Romance and the Theory of Universal Grammar, 107–162 Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kempen, G., & Hoenkamp, E.. 1987. An incremental procedural grammar for sentence formulation. Cognitive Science, 11: 201–258.Google Scholar
Kerstens, J. 1993. The Syntax of Number, Person and Gender. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
King, R. 2005. Morphosyntactic variation and theory: Subject–verb agreement in Acadian French. In Cornips, L., & Corrigan, K. (eds.), Syntax and Variation: Reconciling the Biological and the Social, 199–229. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P. 1973. “Elsewhere” in phonology. In Stephen, A., & Kiparsky, P. (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle, 93–106. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehait and Winston.Google Scholar
Klee, C. A., & Lynch, A. 2009. El español en contacto con otras lenguas. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Klein, H., & Vinson, B.. 2007. African Slavery in Latin America and the Caribbean. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Knaff, C., Rao, R. & Sessarego, S. 2018. Future directions in the field: A look at Afro-Hispanic prosody. Lingua, 202: 76–86.Google Scholar
Kroch, A. 1978. Toward a theory of social dialect variation. Language in Society, 7.1: 17–36.Google Scholar
Kroch, A. 1989. Function and grammar in the history of English: Periphrastic “do.” In Fasold, R., & Schiffrin, D. (eds.), Language Change and Variation, 133–172. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kroch, A. 1994. Morphosyntactic variation. In Beals, K. (ed.), Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, 2, 180–201. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Kroch, A. 2000. Syntactic change. In Baltin, M., & Collins, C. (eds.), The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory, 629–739. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Kouwenberg, S., & Patrick, P. (eds.) 2003. Reconsidering the Role of SLA in Pidginization and Creolization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. 1966. The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Labov, W. 1969. Contraction, deletion and inherent variability of the English copula. Language, 45: 715–762.Google Scholar
Labov, W. 1972a. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. 1972b. Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. 1974. Language change as a form of communication. In Silverstein, M. (ed.), Human Communication: Theoretical Explorations, 221–256. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. 1984. Field methods of the project on linguistic change and variation. In Baugh, J., & Sherzer, J. (eds.), Language in Use, 84–112. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. 1980. Constraints on interrogative word order in Puerto Rican Spanish. Bilingual Review, 7–8: 113–122.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. 2005. On morphological competence. In Dekydtspotter, L., Sprouse, R. A. & Liljestrand, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference, 178–192. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. 2007. Ultimate Attainment in Second Language Acquisition: A Case Study. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. 2000. Mapping features to forms in second language acquisition. In Archibald, J. (ed.), Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory, 102–129. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lavandera, B. 1988. The study of language in its socio-cultural context. In Newmeyer, F. (ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey IV. Language: The Socio-cultural Context, 1–13. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Leal, T., Rothman, J. & Slabakova, R.. 2014. A rare structure at the syntax–discourse interface: Heritage and Spanish-dominant native speakers weigh in. Language Acquisition, 21.4: 411–429.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, C. 1998. Creole Genesis and the Acquisition of Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, C., White, L. & Jourdan, C. (eds.) 2006. L2 Acquisition and Creole Genesis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. 1989. Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lipski, J. 1977. Preposed subjects in questions: Some considerations. Hispania, 60: 61–67.Google Scholar
Lipski, J. 1993. On the non-creole basis for Afro-Caribbean Spanish. www.personal.psu.edu/jml34/noncreol.pdf.Google Scholar
Lipski, J. 2005. A History of Afro-Hispanic Language. Five Centuries, Five Continents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lipski, J. 2006a. Morphosyntactic implications in Afro-Hispanic language: New data on creole pathways. www.personal.psu.edu/jml34/afmorph.pdf.Google Scholar
Lipski, J. 2006b. Afro-Bolivian Spanish and Helvécia Portuguese: Semi-creole parallels. PAPIA: Revista Brasileira de Estudos Crioulos e Similares, 16: 96–116.Google Scholar
Lipski, J. 2007. Castile and the hydra: The diversification of Spanish in Latin America. www.personal.psu.edu/jml34/hydra.pdf.Google Scholar
Lipski, J. 2009. Afro-Choteño speech: Towards the (re)creation of “Black Spanish”. Negritud, 2: 99–120.Google Scholar
Lockhart, J. 1968. Spanish Peru, 1532–1560: A Social History. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Luna Desola, D. 1978. Algunos aspectos ideológicos de la independencia latinoamericana. Anuario de Estudios Centroamericanos, 4.1: 79–92.Google Scholar
Macera, Pablo. 1966. Instrucciones para el Manejo de las Haciendas Jesuitas del Perú, ss. XVIIXVIII. Lima: Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos.Google Scholar
Martínez-Sanz, C. 2011. Null and overt subjects in a variable system: The case of Dominican Spanish. PhD Dissertation, University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
Martohardjono, G., & Gair, J. W.. 1993. Apparent UG inaccessibility in SLA: Misapplied principles or principled misapplications? In Eckman, F. R. (ed.), Conference: Linguistics, Second Language Acquisition and Speech Pathology, 79–103. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Mayén, N. 2007. Afro-Hispanic linguistic remnants in Mexico: The case of the Costa Chica region of Oaxaca. PhD Dissertation, Purdue University.Google Scholar
McCarthy, C. 2008. Morphological variability in the comprehension of agreement: An argument for representation over computation. Second Language Research, 24.4: 459–486.Google Scholar
McWhorter, J. 1998. Identifying the creole prototype: Vindicating a typological class. Language, 74: 788–818.Google Scholar
McWhorter, J. 2000. The Missing Spanish Creoles. Recovering the Birth of Plantation Contact Languages. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
McWhorter, J. 2001. The world’s simplest grammars are creole grammars. Language Typology, 5: 125–166.Google Scholar
McWhorter, J. 2014. A response to Mufwene. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 29.1: 172–176Google Scholar
McWhorter, J. 2018b. Why neither demographics nor feature pools can explain the missing Spanish plantation creoles. Lingua, 201: 4–12.Google Scholar
Megenney, W. 1993. Elementos criollo-portugueses en el español dominicano. Montalbán, 15: 3–56.Google Scholar
Megenney, W. 1999. Aspectos del lenguaje afronegroide en Venezuela. Madrid/Frankfurt: Iberoamericana/Vervuert.Google Scholar
Mellafe, R. 1984. La introducción de la esclavitud negra en Chile: Tráfico y rutas. Santiago: Editorial Universitaria.Google Scholar
Michnowicz, J., & Barnes, H.. 2013. A sociolinguistic analysis of pre-nuclear peak alignment in Yucatan Spanish. In Howe, C., Blackwell, S. & Lubbers Quesada, M. (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 15th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, 221–235. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Migge, B. 2003. Creole Formation as Language Contact: The Case of the Suriname Creoles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Mintz, S. 1971. The socio-historical background to pidginization and creolization. In Hymes, D. (ed.), Pidginization and Creolization of Languages, 481–498. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Modesto, M. 2000. Null subject without ‘rich’ agreement. In Kato, M., & Negrão, E. (eds.), Brazilian Portuguese and the Null Subject Parameter, 147–174. Madrid/Frankfurt: Iberoamericana/Vervuert.Google Scholar
Montalbetti, M. 1984. After binding: On the interpretation of pronouns. PhD Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. 2011. Multiple interfaces and incomplete acquisition. In Rothman, J., & Roumyana, R. (eds.), Acquisition at the Linguistic Interfaces [Lingua Special Issue, 121.4], 567–688. New York, NY: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Montrul, S., Prince, R. & Thomé-Williams, A. 2009. Subject expression in the non- native acquisition of Brazilian Portuguese. In Pires, A., & Rothman, J. (eds.), Minimalist Inquiries into Child and Adult Language Acquisition: Case Studies across Portuguese, 301–325. Berlin: Mouton DeGruyter.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. 1997. Jargons, pidgins creoles and koines: What are they? In Spears, A., & Winford, D. (eds.), The Structure and Status of Pidgins and Creoles, 35–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. 2001. The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. 2014. The case was never closed: McWhorter misinterprets the ecological approach to the emergence of creoles. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 29.1: 157–171.Google Scholar
Muysken, P. 1997. Media Lengua. In Thomason, S. (ed.), Contact Languages: A Wider Perspective, 365–426. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Nebrija, A. 1981[1492]. Gramática de la lengua castellana [edited by Quilis, A.]. Madrid: Editora Nacional.Google Scholar
Newmeyer, F. 2004. Against a parameter-setting approach to language variation. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 4: 181–234.Google Scholar
Newmeyer, F. 2017. Where, if anywhere, are parameters? A critical historical overview of parametric theory. In Bowern, C., Horn, L. & Zanuttini, R. (eds.), On Looking into Words (and Beyond), 547–569. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Nowak, M. 2002. Computational and evolutionary aspects of language. Nature, 417: 611–617.Google Scholar
Nowak, M., Komarova, N. & Niyogi, P. 2001. Evolution of Universal Grammar. Science, 291: 114–118.Google Scholar
Núñez Cedeño, R. 1983. Pérdida de trasposición de sujeto en interrogativas pronominales del español del Caribe. Thesaurus, 38: 35–57.Google Scholar
Olarrea, A. 1997. Pre- and postverbal subject positions in Spanish: A minimalist account. PhD Dissertation, University of Washington.Google Scholar
O’Rourke, E. 2004. Peak placement in two regional varieties of Peruvian Spanish intonation. In Auger, J., Clements, J. C. & Vance, B. (eds.), Contemporary Approaches to Romance Linguistics, 321–341. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
O’Rourke, E. 2005. Intonation and language contact: A case study of two varieties of Peruvian Spanish. PhD Dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Ordóñez, F., & Olarrea, A.. 2006. Microvariation in Caribbean/Non-Caribbean Spanish interrogatives. Probus, 18: 59–96.Google Scholar
Ordóñez, F., & Treviño, E.. 1999. Left dislocated subjects and the pro-drop parameter: A case study of Spanish. Lingua, 107: 38–68.Google Scholar
Ortega-Llebaria, M., & Prieto, P. 2010. Acoustic correlates of stress in Central Catalan and Castilian Spanish. Language and Speech, 54.1: 73–97.Google Scholar
Otheguy, R. 1973. The Spanish Caribbean: A creole perspective. In Bailey, C.-J., & Shuy, R. (eds.), New Ways of Analyzing Variation in English, 323–339. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Parrott, J. 2007. Distributed morphological mechanisms of Labovian variation in morphosyntax. PhD Dissertation, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Parrott, J. 2009. Danish vestigial case and the acquisition of vocabulary in distributed morphology. Biolinguistics, 3: 2–3, 270–304.Google Scholar
Penny, R. 2002. A History of the Spanish Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Peñaherrera de Costales, P., & Costales Samaniego, A. 1959. Coangue o historia cultural y social de los negros del Chota y Salinas. Quito: Llacta.Google Scholar
Perez, D. 2015. Traces of Portuguese in Afro-Yungueño Spanish? Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 30.2: 307–343.Google Scholar
Perez, D., Sessarego, S. & Sippola, E. 2017. Afro-Hispanic varieties in comparison: New light from phylogeny. In Bakker, P., Levisen, C. & Sippola, E. (eds.), Phylogenetic Approaches to Creole Languages, 269–292. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Perl, M. 1998. Introduction. In Perl, M., & Schwegler, A. (eds.), América negra: Panorámica actual de los estudios lingüísticos sobre variedades hispanas, portuguesas y criollas, 1–24. Madrid/Frankfurt: Iberoamericana-Vervuert.Google Scholar
Perl, M., & Schwegler, A. (eds.), 1998. América negra: Panorámica actual de los estudios lingüísticos sobre variedades hispanas, portuguesas y criollas. Madrid/Frankfurt: Iberoamericana-Vervuert.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D., & Torrego, E. 2001. T to C movement: Causes and consequences. In Kenstowicz, M. (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 355–426, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D., & Torrego, E. 2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In Karimi, S., Samiian, V. & Wilkins, W. K. (eds.), Phrasal and Clausal Architecture: Syntactic Derivation and Interpretation, 262–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Philippaki-Warburton, I. 1987. The theory of empty categories and the pro-drop parameter in Modern Greek. Journal of Linguistics, 23: 289–318.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. 1998. Language Processing and Second Language Development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. (ed.) 2000. Cross-Linguistic Aspects of Processability Theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. 1980. The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. PhD Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Pinker, S., & Jackendoff, R. 2005. The faculty of language: What’s special about it? Cognition, 95: 201–236.Google Scholar
Plag, I. 2008a. Creoles as interlanguages: Inflectional morphology. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 23.1: 109–130.Google Scholar
Plag, I. 2008b. Creoles as interlanguages: Syntactic structures. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 23.2: 307–328.Google Scholar
Plag, I. 2009a. Creoles as interlanguages: Phonology. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 24.1: 119–138.Google Scholar
Plag, I. 2009b. Creoles as interlanguages: Word-formation. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 24.2: 339–362.Google Scholar
Poletto, C. 2000. The Higher Functional Field: Evidence from Northern Italian Dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pollard, C., & Sag, I. 1994. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Pomino, N. 2012. Partial or complete lack of plural agreement. In Gaglia, S., & Hinzelin, M-O. (eds.), Inflection and Word Formation in Romance Languages, 201–229. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pomino, N. 2017. Gender and number. In Dufter, A., & Stark, E. (eds.), Manual of Romance Morphosyntax and Syntax, 691–725. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Poplack, S. 1980.The notion of the plural in Puerto Rican Spanish: Competing contrasts on (s) deletion. In Labov, W. (ed.), Locating Language in Time and Space, 55–67. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Portugal Ortiz, M. 1977. La esclavitud negra en las épocas colonial y nacional de Bolivia. Instituto Boliviano de Cultura, La Paz.Google Scholar
Prieto, P., & Roseano, P. (eds.), 2010. Transcription of Intonation of the Spanish Language. Munich: LINCOM.Google Scholar
Quirk, R. 1972. On the extent and origin of questions in the form ¿Qué tú tienes? Hispania, 55: 303–304.Google Scholar
R Core Team 2016. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
Rao, R. 2009. Deaccenting in spontaneous speech on Barcelona Spanish. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 2.1: 31–75.Google Scholar
Rao, R. 2010. Final lengthening and pause duration in three dialects of Spanish. In Ortega-Llebaria, M. (ed.), Selected Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Laboratory Approaches to Spanish Phonology, 69–82. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Rao, R., & Sessarego, S. 2016. On the intonation of Afro-Bolivian Spanish declaratives: Implications for a theory of Afro-Hispanic creole genesis. Lingua, 174: 45–64.Google Scholar
Rao, R., & Sessarego, S. 2018. The intonation of Chota Valley Spanish: Contact-induced phenomena at the discourse–phonology interface. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 11.1: 163–192.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. 2006. Interface Strategies: Reference-Set Computation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Restall, M. 2000. Black conquistadors: Armed Africans in early Spanish America. The Americas, 57.2: 171–205.Google Scholar
Řeźač, M. 2004. Elements of cyclic syntax: Agree and Merge. PhD Dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Ritter, E. 1991. Two functional categories in noun phrases: Evidence from Modern Hebrew. In Rothstein, S. (ed.), Perspectives on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing, 37–62. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. 1996. Residual verb second and the Wh-criterion. In Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (eds.), Parameters and Functional Heads, 63–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, I., & Holmberg, A.. 2010. Introduction: parameters in minimalist theory. In Biberauer, T., Holmberg, A., Roberts, I. & Sheehan, M. (eds.), Null Subjects: The Structure of Parametric Variation, 1–57. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rodríguez Tocarruncho, L. 2010. La marca de plural y otros aspectos morfológicos y sintácticos del español del Pacífico de Colombia. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas.Google Scholar
Romero, R., & Sessarego, S. (2018). Hard come, easy go: Linguistic interfaces in Istambul Judeo-Spanish and Afro-Ecuadorian Spanish. In King, J., & Sessarego, S. (eds.), Language Variation and Contact-Induced Change: The Spanish Language across Space and Time, 83–110. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rosenblat, A. 1954. La población indígena y el mestizaje en America. Buenos Aires: Editorial NOVA.Google Scholar
Rosemeyer, M. 2018. The pragmatics of Spanish postposed wh-interrogatives. Folia Linguistica, 52.2: 283–317.Google Scholar
Rostworowski Tovar de Díez Canseco, M. 1999. Historia de los Incas. Lima: Editorial Bruño.Google Scholar
Rothman, J. 2008. How pragmatically odd! Interface delays and pronominal subject distribution in L2 Spanish. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 1: 317–339.Google Scholar
Rothman, J. 2009 Pragmatic deficits with syntactic consequences: L2 pronominal subjects and the syntax–pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics, 41: 951–973.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., & Slabakova, R. 2011 (eds.), Acquisition at the Linguistic Interfaces [Lingua Special Issue, 121.4]. New York, NY: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Sagarra, N., & Herschensohn, J. 2011. Proficiency and animacy effects on L2 gender agreement processes during comprehension. Language Learning, 61.1: 80–116.Google Scholar
Saito, M. 2004. Ellipsis and pronominal reference in Japanese clefts. Studies in Modern Grammar, 36: 1–44.Google Scholar
Scherre, M. M. P. 1988. Reanálise da concordância nominal em português. PhD Dissertation, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro.Google Scholar
Scherre, M. M. P. 1991. A concordância de número nos predicativos e nos particípios passivos. Organon, 18: 52–70.Google Scholar
Schumann, J. 1978. The Pidginization Process: A Model for Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. 1996. Now for some facts, with a focus on development and an explicit role for L1. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19: 739–740.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R.. 1996. L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72.Google Scholar
Schwegler, A. 1991a. La doble negación dominicana y la génesis del español caribeño. Lingüística, 3: 31–88.Google Scholar
Schwegler, A. 1993. Rasgos (afro-)portugueses en el criollo del Palenque de San Basilio (Colombia). In Alayon, C. D. D. (ed.), Homenaje a José Pérez Vidal, 667–696. La Laguna, Tenerife: Litografía A. Romero S. A.Google Scholar
Schwegler, A. 1996. Chi ma nkongo: Lengua y rito ancestrales en El Palenque de San Basilio (Colombia). 2 vols. Frankfurt/Madrid: Vervuert Verlag.Google Scholar
Schwegler, A. 1999. Monogenesis revisited: The Spanish perspective. In Rickford, J., & Romaine, S. (eds.), Creole Genesis, Attitudes and Discourse, 235–262. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Schwegler, A. 2010. State of the Discipline. Pidgin and creole studies: Their interface with Hispanic and Lusophone linguistics. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 3.2: 431–481.Google Scholar
Schwegler, A. 2014. Portuguese remnants in the Afro-Hispanic diaspora. In Amaral, P., & Carvalho, A. M. (eds.), Portuguese-Spanish Interfaces: Diachrony, Synchrony, and Contact, 403–441. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Seiler, G. 2004. On three types of dialect variation, and their implications for linguistic theory: Evidence from verb clusters in Swiss German dialects. In Kortmann, B. (ed.), Dialectology Meets Typology. Dialect Grammar from a Cross-Linguistic Perspective, 367–399. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., Filiaci, F. & Baldo, M. 2009. Bilingual children’s sensitivity to specificity and genericity: Evidence from metalinguistic awareness. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12.2: 239–257.Google 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.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2011a. Introducción al idioma afroboliviano: Una conversación con el awicho Manuel Barra. Cochabamba/La Paz: Plural Editores.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2011b. On the status of Afro-Bolivian Spanish features: Decreolization or vernacular universals? In Michnowicz, J. (ed.), Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics, 125–141. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2012a. Non-creole features in the verb system of Afro-Hispanic languages: New insights from SLA studies. International Journal of Linguistics, 4.1: 146–157.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2012b. Vowel weakening in Yungueño Spanish: Linguistic and social considerations. PAPIA: Revista Brasileira de Estudos Crioulos e Similares. 22.2: 279–294.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2013b. Afro-Hispanic contact varieties as conventionalized advanced second languages. IBERIA, 5, 1: 96-122.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2013c. On the non-creole bases for Afro-Bolivian Spanish. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 28.2: 363–407.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2013d. Enhancing dialogue between quantitative sociolinguistics and minimalist syntax. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 5.2: 79–97.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2014a. The Afro-Bolivian Spanish Determiner Phrase: A Microparametric Account. Columbus, OH: Ohio State Press.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2014b. On Chota Valley Spanish origin: Linguistic and sociohistorical evidence. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 29.1: 86–133.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2014c. Afro-Peruvian Spanish in the context of Spanish creole genesis. Spanish in Context, 11.3: 381–401.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2015. Afro-Peruvian Spanish: Spanish Slavery and the Legacy of Spanish Creoles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2016a. On the Non-(de)creolization of Chocó Spanish: A linguistic and sociohistorical account. Lingua, 184: 122–133.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2017a. The legal hypothesis of Creole genesis: Presence/absence of legal personality, a new element to the Spanish creole debate. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 32.1: 1–47.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2017b. Extracts from ‘Solving the Spanish Creole puzzle: The legal hypothesis of creole genesis’, in Afro-Peruvian Spanish: Spanish Slavery and the Legacy of Spanish Creoles (Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2015), pp. 120–121, 139–145, 156–157. In Farquharson, J., & Migge, B. (eds.), Pidgins and Creoles. Vol. 1, 172–181. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2017c. A feature-geometry account for subject–verb agreement phenomena in Yungueño Spanish. In Colomina-Almiñana, J. (ed.), Contemporary Studies on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics of Spanish Variation, 265–282. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2017d. Chocó Spanish and the missing Spanish creole debate: Sociohistorical and linguistic considerations to solve the puzzle. Language Ecology, 1.2: 213–241.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2017e. Chocó Spanish double negation and the genesis of the Afro-Hispanic dialects of the Americas. Diachronica, 34.2: 219–252.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2018a. La schiavitù nera nell’America spagnola. Genova: Marietti Editore.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2018b. Enhancing dialogue in the field: Some remarks on the status of the Spanish creole debate. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 33.1: 197–203.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2018c. On the importance of legal history to Afro-Hispanic linguistics and creole studies. In Sessarego, S. (guest ed.), Current Trends in Afro-Hispanic Linguistics [Lingua Special Issue, 202], 13–23. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2019a. Language Contact and the Making of an Afro-Hispanic Vernacular: Variation and Change in the Colombian Chocó. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2019b. Universal processes in contact-induced syntactic change: Evidence from the Afro-Hispanic varieties. In Darquennes, J., Salmons, J. & Vandenbussche, W. (eds.), Language Contact. An International Handbook, 24–38. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2019c. Chocó Spanish: An Afro-Hispanic language on the Spanish frontier. In Ortiz-López, L. (ed.), Hispanic Contact Linguistics: Theoretical, Methodological and Empirical Perspectives, 219–252. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S. 2020. Not all grammatical features are robustly transmitted during the emergence of creoles. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 7.130: 1–8.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S., Butera, B. & Rao, R. 2019. Aspectos de la entonación afroperuana. Cuadernos de la Asociación de Lingüística y Filología de América Latina, 11.1: 199–215.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S., & Ferreira, L. 2016. Spanish and Portuguese parallels: Impoverished number agreement as a vernacular feature of two rural dialects. In Sessarego, S., & Tejedo-Herrero, F. (eds.), Spanish Language and Sociolinguistic Analysis, 283–304. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S., & Gutiérrez-Rexach, J. 2011. A minimalist approach to gender agreement in the Afro-Bolivian DP: Variation and the specification of uninterpretable features. In DeVogelaer, G., & Janse, M. (eds.), The Diachronic of Gender Marking [Special issue of Folia Linguistica, 45.2], 465–488. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S., & Gutiérrez-Rexach, J. 2012. Variation universals and contact induced change: Language evolution across generations and domains. In González-Rivera, M., & Sessarego, S. (eds.), Current Formal Aspects of Spanish Syntax and Semantics, 251–270. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S., & Gutiérrez-Rexach, J. 2017. Revisiting the Null Subject Parameter: New insights from Afro-Peruvian Spanish. Isogloss, 3.1: 43–68.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S., & Rao, R. 2016. On the simplification of a prosodic inventory: The Afro-Bolivian Spanish case. In Cuza, A., Czerwionka, L. & Olson, D. (eds.), Inquiries in Hispanic Linguistics, 171–190. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sessarego, S., & Rodríguez-Riccelli, A. 2018. Formal issues in Afro-Hispanic morpho-syntax: The Afro-Bolivian Spanish case. In Sessarego, S. (guest ed.), Current Trends in Afro-Hispanic Linguistics [Lingua Special Issue, 202], 58–75. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Seuren, P., & Wekker, H. 1986. Semantic transparency as a factor in Creole genesis. In Muysken, P., & Smith, N. (eds.), Substrata versus Universals in Creole Genesis, 57–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Siegel, J. 2008. Pidgin/Creoles and second language acquisition. In Kouwenberg, S., & Singler, J. V. (eds.), The Handbook of Pidgin and Creole Studies, 189–218. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Simioni, L. 2007. A concordância de número no DP: Propostas minimalistas. Estudos Lingüísticos, 36.1: 117–125.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. 2009. What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language? In Bowles, M., Ionin, T., Montrul, S. & Tremblay, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference, 280–294. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. 2013. What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language: A generative perspective. In García Mayo, M., Gutiérrez Mangado, M. J. & Martínez-Adrián, M. (eds.), Contemporary Approaches to Second Language Acquisition, 5–28. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. 2019. “L” stands for language. The Modern Language Journal, 103: 152–160.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R., & Ivanov, I. 2011. A more careful look at the syntax–discourse interface. Lingua, 121: 637–651.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. 2000. Syntactic optionality in non-native grammars. Second Language Research, 16: 93–102.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. 2003. Near-nativeness. In Doughty, C., & Long, M. (eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, 130–153. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. 2004. Native language attrition and developmental instability at the syntax–discourse interface. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7: 143–145.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. 2005. Selective optionality in language development. In Cornips, L., & Corrigan, K. (eds.), Syntax and Variation: Reconciling the Biological and the Social, 55–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. 2011. Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1.1: 1–33.Google Scholar
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. 2006. Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22.3: 339–368.Google Scholar
Sorace, A., & Serratrice, L. 2009. Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language development. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13.2: 195–210.Google Scholar
Sorace, A., Serratrice, L., Filiaci, F. & Baldo, M. 2009. Discourse conditions on subject pronoun realization: Testing the linguistic intuitions of bilingual children. Lingua, 119: 460–477.Google Scholar
Stark, E., & Pomino, N. 2009. Adnominal adjectives in Romance. Where morphology seemingly meets semantics. In Espinal, M. T., Leonetti, M. & McNally, L. (eds.), Proceedings of the IV Nereus International Workshop: Definiteness and DP Structure in Romance Languages, 113–135. Konstanz: Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Konstanz.Google Scholar
Suñer, M. 1994. V-movement and the licensing of argumental wh-phrases in Spanish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 12: 335–372.Google Scholar
Svenonius, P. 2002. Icelandic case and the structure of events. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics, 5: 197–225.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. 2006. Analyzing Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. 2012. Variationist Sociolinguistics: Change, Observation, Interpretation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. 2016. Quantitative analysis in language variation and change. In Sessarego, S., & Tejedo-Herrero, F. (eds.), Spanish Language and Sociolinguistic Analysis, 1–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Tardieu, J.-P. 2006. El negro en la Real Audiencia de Quito: Siglos XVI–XVIII. Quito: Abya-Yala.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. 1961. A note on some possible affinities between the creole dialects of the Old World and those of the New. In Le Page, R. B. (ed.), Creole Language Studies 2, 107–113. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Tomioka, S., 2003. The semantics of Japanese null pronouns and its cross-linguistic implications. In Schwabe, K., & Winkler, S. (eds.), The Interfaces: Deriving and Interpreting Omitted Structures, 321–340. Amsterdam, John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Toribio, A. J. 2000. Setting parametric limits on dialectal variation in Spanish. Lingua: International Review of General Linguistics, 110.5: 315–341.Google Scholar
Toribio, A. J. 1993a. Lexical subjects in finite and non-finite clauses. Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics, 11: 149–178.Google Scholar
Toribio, A. J. 1993b. Parametric variation in the licensing of nominals. PhD Dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Torrego, E. 1984. On inversion in Spanish and some of its effects. Linguistic Inquiry, 15.1: 102–129.Google Scholar
Torres Saldamando, E. 1900[1967]. Apuntes Históricos sobre las encomiendas en el Perú. Lima: UNMSM.Google Scholar
Tremblay, A. 2005. On the use of grammaticality judgments in linguistic theory: theoretical and methodological perspectives. Second Language Studies, 24: 129–167.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I., & Sorace, A.. 2006. Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax–semantics and syntax–discourse phenomena. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 653–664. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I., Sorace, A., Heycock, C. & Filiaci, F. 2004. First language attrition and syntactic subjects: A study of Greek and Italian near-native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8.3: 257–277.Google Scholar
Valenzuela, E., 2006. L2 end state grammars and incomplete acquisition of the Spanish CLLD constructions. In Slabakova, R., Montrul, S. & Prévost, P. (eds.), Inquiries in Linguistic Development: In Honor of Lydia White, 283–304. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Valkhoff, M. 1966. Studies in Portuguese and Creole. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.Google Scholar
Van Coetsem, F. 1988. Loan Phonology and the Two Transfer Types in Language Contact. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Villa-García, J. 2018. Properties of the extended verb phrase: Agreement, the structure of INFL, and subjects. In Geeslin, K. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Hispanic Linguistics, 329–350. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Villa-García, J., Snyder, W. & Riqueros-Morante, J. 2010. On the analysis of lexical subjects in Caribbean and Mainland Spanish: Evidence from L1 acquisition. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD 34), 2: 433–444.Google Scholar
Villa-García, J., & Suárez-Palma, I. 2016. Early null and overt subjects in the Spanish of simultaneous English–Spanish bilinguals and crosslinguistic influence. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 29.2: 250–395.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U., Labov, W. & Herzog, M. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Lehmann, W. P., & Malkiel, Y. (eds.), Directions for Historical Linguistics, 95–188. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Weiss, H. 2001. On two types of natural languages: Some consequences for linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics, 27: 87–103.Google Scholar
White, L. 1992. Subjacency violations and empty categories in L2 acquisition. In Goodluck, H., & Rochement, M. (eds.), Island Constraints, 445–464. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
White, L. 2003a. Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
White, L. 2003b. Fossilization in steady state L2 grammars: Persistent problems with inflectional morphology. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6.2: 129–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. 2011. Second language acquisition at the interfaces. Lingua, 121.4: 577–590.Google Scholar
White, L., & Juffs, A.. 1998. Constraints on wh-movement in two different contexts of non-native language acquisition: Competence and processing. In Flynn, S., Martohardjono, G. & O’Neil, W. (eds.), The Generative Study of Second Language Acquisition, 111–129. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
White, L., Valenzuela, E., Kozlowska-Macgregor, M. & Leung, Y.-K. 2004. Gender and number agreement in nonnative Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25.1: 105–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wills, D. 2006. Against N-raising and NP-raising analyses of Welsh noun phrases. Lingua, 116: 11: 1807–1839.Google Scholar
Winford, D. 1997. Property items and predication in Sranan. Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages, 12: 237–302.Google Scholar
Winford, D. 2000. “Intermediate” creoles and degrees of change in creole formation: The case of Bajan. In Neumann-Holzschuh, I., & Schneider, E. W. (eds.), In Degrees of Restructuring in Creole Languages, 215–246. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Winford, D. 2008. Atlantic creole syntax. In Kouwenberg, S., & Singler, J. (eds.), The Handbook of Pidgin and Creole Studies, 19–47. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Winford, D., & Migge, B. 2008. Surinamese creole: Morphology and syntax. In Schneider, E. W. (ed.), Varieties of English, Vol. 2: The Americas and the Caribbean, 693–731. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, C. 2002. Knowledge and Learning in Natural Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yang, C. 2004. Universal grammar, statistics, or both? Trends in Cognitive Science, 8.10: 451–456.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L. 2001. The constraints on preverbal subjects in Romance interrogatives. In Hulk, A., & Pollock, J.-Y. (eds.), Subject Inversion in Romance and the Theory of Universal Grammar, 183–204. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar