Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T19:54:21.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The syntax/morphology interface in Spanish L2 acquisition: Focus on quantified DPs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Antonia Androutsopoulou ,
Manuel Español-Echevarría  and
Philippe Prévost
Antonia Androutsopoulou
Affiliation:
Université Laval
Manuel Español-Echevarría
Affiliation:
Université Laval
Philippe Prévost
Affiliation:
Université François-Rabelais de Tours
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines whether L2 acquisition of morphology and syntax develops independently (the Separation Hypothesis) or not (the Rich Agreement Hypothesis), focusing on the acquisition of Number specification on certain Spanish quantifiers by French speakers. In Spanish, some quantifiers are specified for Number and directly precede the head noun, in contrast to their French counterparts where a dummy preposition de must appear inside the DP. Results from a grammaticality judgement task and a production task show that intermediate and advanced learners perform poorly on plural inflection with some quantifiers, and reject the use of de. This suggests that they have acquired Number specification on these quantifiers, which allows Case marking on the following noun, but do not produce the appropriate morphology. These results support the Separation Hypothesis, but not the Rich Agreement Hypothesis.

Résumé

Résumé

L’objectif de cet article est de déterminer si la morphologie et la syntaxe se développent indépendamment en acquisition L2 (Hypothèse de la séparation) ou non (Hypothèse de l’accord riche) en examinant l’acquisition de la spécification du Nombre sur certains quantificateurs espagnols par des francophones. En espagnol, certains quantificateurs sont spécifiés pour le Nombre et précèdent directement la tête nominale, contrairement à leurs homologues français où la préposition de doit apparaître au sein du DP. Les résultats d’une tâche de jugement de grammaticalité et d’une tâche de production montrent que les apprenants intermédiaires et avancés affichent une performance mediocre en ce qui a trait à l’apparition de la flexion pluriel sur certains quantificateurs et qu’en même temps ils rejettent l’utilisation de de. Cela suggère qu’ils ont acquis la spécification en Nombre sur ces quantificateurs, ce qui permet au nom qui suit d’être marqué pour le Cas, sans produire la morphologie appropriée. Ces résultats appuient l’Hypothèse de la séparation mais non l’Hypothèse de l’accord riche.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , July 2010 , pp. 149 - 180
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2010 

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.)

References

Abney, Steven. 1987. The English Noun Phrase in its sentential aspect. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Androutsopoulou, Antonia and Espafiol-Echevarría, Manuel. 2005. Degree modifiers and DP-internal agreement. Ms., Université Laval.Google Scholar
Beard, Robert. 1987. Morpheme order in a lexeme-morpheme base morphology. Lingua 72:1–44.Google Scholar
Beard, Robert. 1995. Lexeme-morpheme base morphology. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan. 2002. Realizing German inflection: Why morphology does not drive syntax. Journal of Comparative Germanic Syntax 6:129–167.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit and Rohrbacher, Bernhard. 1997. Features and projections: Arguments for the Full Competence Hypothesis. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, ed. Hughes, Elizabeth, Hughes, Mary and Greenhill, Annabel, 24–35. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Bovee, B. 1995. Une analyse unificatrice des différentes occurrences du de non argumental. Master’s thesis, Leiden University.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna and Giusti, Giuliana. 1989. Partitive ne and the QP-hypothesis. University of Venice working papers in linguistics 4:321–325.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquires. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. Martin, Roger, Michaels, David, and Uriagereka, Juan, 89–156. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Beyond explanatory adequacy. MIT working papers in linguistics 20:1–28.Google Scholar
Clahsen, Harald. 1988. Parameterized grammatical theory and language acquisition: A study of the acquisition of verb placement and inflection by children and adults. In Linguistic Theory in Second Language Acquisition, ed. Flynn, Suzanne and O’Neil, Wayne, 47–75. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Clahsen, Harald and Penke, Martina. 1992. The acquisition of agreement morphology and its syntactic consequences: New evidence on German child language from the Simone-corpus. In The acquisition of verb placement, ed. Meisel, Jürgen, 181–223. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Corver, Norbert. 2001. Predicate displacement within the adjectival system. Evidence from degree modification in Rumanian. In Adverbial modification: Selected papers from the Fifth Colloquium on Romance Linguistics, ed. Bok-Bennema, Reineke, de Jonge, Bob, Kampers-Mahne, Brigitte, and Molendijk, Arie, 139–156. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Doetjes, Jenny. 1997. Quantifiers and selection. Doctoral dissertation, Leiden University.Google Scholar
Epstein, Samuel, Flynn, Suzanne, and Martohardjono, Gita. 1996. Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavorial and Brain Sciences 19:677–714.Google Scholar
Eubank, Lynn. 1993/1994. On the transfer of parametric values in L2 development. Language Acquisition 3:183–208.Google Scholar
Franceschina, Florencia. 2001. Morphological or syntactic deficits in near-native speakers? An assessment of some current proposals. Second Language Research 17:213–247.Google Scholar
Gess, Randall and Herschensohn, Julia. 2001. Shifting the DP parameter: A study of anglophone French L2ers. In Romance syntax, semantics and their L2 acquisition, ed. Camps, Joaquim and Wiltshire, Caroline R., 105–119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Halle, Morris and Marantz, Alec. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. Hale, Kenneth and Keyser, Samuel Jay, 111–176. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Roger and Franceschina, Florencia. 2004. Explaining the acquisition and non-acquisition of determiner-noun gender concord in French and Spanish. In The Acquisition of French in different contexts: Focus on functional categories, ed. Prévost, Philipp and Paradis, Johanne, 175–206. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Roger and Liszka, Sarah. 2003. Locating the source of defective past tense marking in advanced L2 English speakers. In The lexicon-syntax interface in second language acquisition, ed. van Hout, Roeland, Hulk, Aafke, Kuiken, Folkert and Towell, Richard, 21–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Haznedar, Belma. 2001. The acquisition of the IP system in child L2 English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23:1–39.Google Scholar
Haznedar, Belma and Schwartz, Bonnie. 1997. Are there optional infinitives in child L2 acquisition? In Proceedings of the 21st annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, ed. Hughes, Elizabeth, Hughes, Mary, and Greenhill, Annabel, 257–268. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Ionin, Tania and Wexler, Kenneth. 2002. Why is ‘is’ easier than ‘-s’?: Acquisition of tense/agreement morphology by child second language learners of English. Second Language Research 18:95–136.Google Scholar
Jones, Michael. 1996. Foundations of French syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kester, Ellen Petra. 1996. The nature of adjectival inflection. Doctoral dissertation, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics OTS.Google Scholar
Lardiere, Donna. 1998a. Dissociating syntax from morphology in a divergent L2 end-state grammar. Second Language Research 14:359–375.Google Scholar
Lardiere, Donna. 1998b. Case and tense in the ‘fossilized’ steady state. Second Language Research 14:1–26.Google Scholar
Lardiere, Donna. 2000. Mapping syntactic features to forms in second language acquisition. In Second language acquisition and linguistic theory, ed. Archibald, John, 102–129. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lardiere, Donna. 2005. On morphological competence. In Proceedings of the 7th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2004), ed. Dekydtspotter, Laurent, 178–192. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Lobeck, Anne. 1995. Ellipsis: Functional heads, licensing and identification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Martí, Núria. 1995. De in Catalan elliptical nominals: A partitive Case marker. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 4:243–65.Google Scholar
Meisel, Jiirgen. 1991. Principles of UG and strategies of language use: On some similarities and differences between first and second language acquisition. In Point-Counterpoint, ed. Eubank, Lynn, 231–276. Amsterdam: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Meisel, Jürgen. 1997. The acquisition of the syntax of negation in French and German: Contrasting first and second language development. Second Language Research 13:227–263.Google Scholar
Pato, Enrique and Heap, David. 2005. The lexical-syntactic process of recategorization: The case of Spanish medio. In Proceedings of the 2005 Canadian Linguistics Association Annual Conference, ed. Gurski, Claire, 1–9. London: University of Western Ontario.Google Scholar
Poeppel, David and Wexler, Kenneth. 1993. The Full Competence Hypothesis of clause structure in early German. Language 69:1–33.Google Scholar
Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. Verb movement, Universal Grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20:365–424.Google Scholar
Prévost, Philippe and White, Lydia. 2000. Missing surface inflection or impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research 16:103–134.Google Scholar
Ritter, Elisabeth. 1991. Two functional categories in Noun Phrases: Evidence from Modern Hebrew. In Perspectives on phrase structure: Heads and licensing, ed. Rothstein, Susan, 37–62. San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
Roberge, Yves. 1999. Quaint agreement and the theory of spell-out. In Semantic issues in Romance syntax, ed. Treviño, Esthela and Lema, José, 213–244. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rohrbacher, Bernhard. 1999. Morphology-driven syntax: A theory of V to I raising and prodrop. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 1991. Quantifiers as functional heads: A study of quantifier float in Hebrew. Lingua 84:159–80.Google Scholar
Sleeman, Petra. 1996. Licensing empty nouns in French. The Hague: HIL.Google Scholar
Snyder, William, Senghas, Ann, and Inman, Kelly. 2001. Agreement morphology and the acquisition of noun-drop in Spanish. Language Acquisition 9:157–173.Google Scholar
Sprouse, Rex. 1998. Some notes on the relationship between inflectional morphology and parameter setting in first and second language acquisition. In Morphology and the interfaces in second language knowledge, ed. Beck, Maria-Luise, 41–67. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna. 1987. Functional categories in the Noun Phrase. In Approaches to Hungarian, Vol. 2: Theories and analyses, ed. Kenesei, István, 167–190. Szeged: Jate.Google Scholar
Trévise, Anne and Noyau, Colette. 1984. Adult native speakers and the acquisition of French negation forms: Individual variation and linguistic awareness. In Second languages: A cross-linguistic perspective, ed. Andersen, Roger, 165–190. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Vainikka, Anna and Young-Scholten, Martha. 1996. Gradual development of L2 phrase structure. Second Language Research 12:7–39.Google Scholar
Verrips, Maaike and Weissenborn, Jiirgen. 1992. Routes to verb-placement in early French and German: The independence of finiteness and agreement. In The acquisition of verb placement, ed. Meisel, Jürgen, 283–331. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Veselovská, Ludmilla. 2001. Agreement patterns of Czech group nouns and quantifiers. In Semi-lexical categories, ed. Corver, Norbert and van Riemsdijk, Henk C., 273–320. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Vikner, Sten. 1997. V-to-I movement and inflection for person in all tenses. In The new comparative syntax, ed. Haegeman, Liliane, 189–213. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
White, Lydia. 2003a. Second language acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
White, Lydia. 2003b. Fossilization in steady state L2 grammars: Persistent problems with inflectional morphology. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 6:129–141.Google Scholar
White, Lydia, Valenzuela, Elena, Kozlowska-MacGregor, Martyna, and Ingrid Leung, Yan-Kit. 2004. Gender and number agreement in nonnative Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics 25:105–133.Google Scholar