A more careful look at the syntax–discourse interface

In this article, we compare results from two recent comprehensive studies on syntax–discourse interface properties. Both Valenzuela (2005, 2006) and Ivanov (2009) investigate the L2 acquisition of clitic left dislocation (CLLD) as a marker of topicality in L2 Spanish and L2 Bulgarian. However, Valen...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Lingua Jg. 121; H. 4; S. 637 - 651
Hauptverfasser: Slabakova, Roumyana, Ivanov, Ivan
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: Elsevier B.V 01.03.2011
Schlagworte:
Bulgarian
Clitic left dislocation (CLLD)
Clitics
Language Acquisition
Second language acquisition
Second Language Learning
Spanish
Syntactic Analysis
Syntax Discourse Relationship
Syntax-discourse interface
Syntax-discourse interface
Bulgarian
Spanish
Clitic left dislocation (CLLD)
Second language acquisition
ISSN:0024-3841, 1872-6135
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In this article, we compare results from two recent comprehensive studies on syntax–discourse interface properties. Both Valenzuela (2005, 2006) and Ivanov (2009) investigate the L2 acquisition of clitic left dislocation (CLLD) as a marker of topicality in L2 Spanish and L2 Bulgarian. However, Valenzuela argues that near-native speakers of Spanish demonstrate residual optionality at the syntax–discourse interface while Ivanov claims that advanced learners of Bulgarian are ultimately successful at the interface. Assuming a syntactic analysis of the clitic-doubling phenomenon based on López (2009), Bulgarian and Spanish CLLD look very much alike. Displaced objects that have antecedents in the previous discourse, that is, topics, have to be doubled by a clitic to avoid (potential) confusion and infelicity. Valenzuela's near-native Spanish speakers are 100% accurate in accepting specific dislocated objects doubled by a clitic. We argue that their inferior accuracy on generic dislocates may be due to some participants’ heeding discourse cues over semantic cues in processing these sentences. Ivanov's advanced participants as a group display native-like choices. We suggest that when subjected to a more careful scrutiny, the external (syntax–discourse) interface does not look very different from the internal interfaces, after all.
Bibliographie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0024-3841
1872-6135
DOI:10.1016/j.lingua.2010.05.003