The value of clitics in non-native
Spanish
Juana M. Liceras University of Ottawa
One of the tasks of second language acquisition research is to determine the
‘linguistic’ nature of interlanguage systems. To achieve this goal it is mandatory
to formulate the properties of learners’ grammars in terms of the theoretical
constructs proposed by linguistic theory. I have proposed elsewhere (Liceras,
1985) that, permeability, one of those properties, is related to parameter
setting. In this paper, it is hypothesized that the location of a given process in
the different components of the grammar may also be relevant in the determination of permeability. In the light of donflicting evidence provided by the
Spanish interlanguage of French and English speakers with respect to the value
of clitics in the non-native grammar, it is suggested that, due to the nature of
‘intake’, L2 learners of Spanish may locate clitiu in the lexicon (as affix-like
elements) or postlexically (as words in the syntax) rather than giving them a
unidimensional value. I have also suggested that non-native clitics may not
share all the properties that are assigned to Modem Spanish clitic pronouns.
Determination of the properties of learners’ systems has been at the
core of L2 acquisition research ever since Selinker (1972) defined a
number of characteristics of interlanguage system (ILs). Adjemian’s
(1976) article ‘On the nature of interlanguage systems’ represented a
turning point in this research because, for the first time, what Selinker
(1972) called the ‘linguistic’ nature of ILs was the actual focus of
discussion. However, this discussion was not undertaken in an indepth manner until, in answer to critics such as Frauenfelder and
Porquier (1979) and Arditty and Perdue (1979)’ Adjemian wrote ‘La
specificit6 de I’interlangage et l’idialisation des langues secondes’. It
is in this paper that he clearly argued that in the determination of the
specific properties of ILs a clearcut distinction should be made
between grammatical competence and language behaviour.
This declaration of principles represents an important step towards
Address for correspondence: Department of Modem Languages, University of
Ottawa, 550 Cumberland Street, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada KIN 6N5.
152 The value of clitics in non-native Spanish
the analysis of ILs within the framework of modern linguistic theory,
mainly of generative grammar and specifically of Chomsky’s model of
acquisition. T h e subsequent step, however, is to reformulate the
properties of learners’ systems in terms of the theoretical constructs
proposed by linguistic theory.
To attempt such reformulation some inferences can be made from
studies where new developments in linguistic theory have been
applied to the investigation of transfer in L2 acquisition research
(some specific examples are contained in Gass and Selinker, 1983).
Further inferences can be drawn from studies which investigate the
acquisition of second languages in relation to specific theoretical
proposals such as the role of markedness (Mazurkevich, 1982; 1984;
Liceras, 1981; 1983; White, 1983), the role of positive and negative
evidence (White and Mazurkevich, 1982; Adjimian and Liceras,
1984), and the role of parameter-setting (Cook, 1985; Flynn, 1985;
White, 1985). There is an attempt to redefine the notion of permeability in Liceras (1981; 1983) and a specific proposal in Liceras
(1985a) which relates permeability to polydimensional parameter
set ti ng .
In this paper, I suggest that grammars may also be permeable with
respect to the location of a given process in their different
components. I argue, in addition, that non-native grammars (NNGs)
may differ from native grammars (NGs) in that the former do not
contain the same clustering of properties related to a given
parameter, as suggested in Liceras (1985b). I will first outline a
specific proposal concerning the so-called clitic parameter in Old and
Modern Spanish. Secondly, I will propose that due to the nature of
‘intake’, the value of clitics in the Spanish NNG may be different from
that in the Spanish NG. Finally, I will discuss the use of clitics in the
Spanish IL of a group of French and English speakers in an attempt to
determine the properties of the clitic parameter in the Spanish NNG
of these speakers.
I Clitics in Old and Modern Spanish
In Romance, non-tonic pronouns that cliticize to the verb - as shown
in (1) and (2) - are known in the literature as clitics.
1) Juan no me lo di6
Juan not-me it gave
‘Juan didn’t give it to me’
2) Juan no va a dirntelo
Jrrana M . Liceras 153
Juan not is going to give me it
‘Juan is not going to give it to me’
Traditional studies of Old and Modern Spanish clitic pronouns such
as Chenery (1905), Lapesa (1968) or Marcos Marin (1978) point out
the historical changes in ordering and case marking. However, the
main concern of recent works on clitic constructions in modem
Romance has been to determine the value of these elements in the
grammar. Rivero (1983) reviews various proposals and concludes
that, given the essential characteristics assigned to clitics in modem
Romance, ‘cliticization’ is seen as part of an extended word formation
component that feeds the syntax (Stowell, 1981). These
characteristics, Rivero (1983) argues, are not shared by Old Spanish
clitics because, in Old Spanish, ‘cliticization’ occurs
postsyntactically. This implies that Old and Modern Spanish clitics
present the following differences:
1) In Old Spanish, accusative clitics are NPs which are case marked
and receive a thematic role from the verb because they occupy an
argument position. In Modern Spanish, clitics are in a non-argument
position (i.e. they are not NPs in the syntax) but absorb the feature of
the verb which is assigned to the NP in argument position, as in (3)
below.
3) a) Old Spanishz
b) Modern Spanish’
NP
/s\w
NP
l
S
\
I
VP
I
ellos
I
ellos
NP
/ v’\
entendieron
V
V
I
lo
lo..+ entendieron
t ’
absorption
I
*i
I
e
4
2) Clitics are affix-like elements in Modern Spanish (as in (3b)), while
they are words in the syntax of Old Spanish (as in (3a)). Consequently,
clitics are subject to syntactic processes in Old but not in Modem
154 The value of clitics in normative Spanish
Spanish.4
3) In Modern Spanish clitics are linked to an empty category- (3b) -,
but they are not linked to such a category in Old Spanish because they
occupy an argument position.
The above points can be summarized by stating that in Modem
Spanish, as opposed to Old Spanish, clitics are different fromNPs and
PPs in their categorial characteristics. This statement about the value
of clitics has some implications for their acquisition. It is reasonable to
assume that L1 acquirers of Old and Modern Spanish arrived at these
different values for clitics because they were exposed to different
input. However, L1 and L2 acquires of Modern Spanish, in spite of
being exposed to essentially the same input, do not assign the same
value to clitics. This differences between the NG and NNG is
presumably due to the mechanisms that intervene at the level of
intake.
For instance, the NNG may not assign clitics the special status that
makes them different from N p s or PPs in Modem Spanish, the reason
being that the L1 in combination with the metalinguistic abilities of
learners may lead them to project a grammar in which, in spite of the
Spanish data, clitics play the same role as NPs. This does not imply,
however, that non-native clitics have to be analysed along the same
lines as Old Spanish clitics. In fact, it may be the case that there is a
particular value assigned to these elements in the NNG, such that
they may alternate between being words in the syntax and affix-like
elements. This may be the case both for French and English speakers,
even though English, unlike French, does not have these affix-like
elements.
I1 Clitics in Modern Spanish and the role of intake
L2 learners of Modem Spanish are exposed to constructions such as
(1) and (2) above, as well as (4)and (5) below.
4) Yo si que la necesito
1f: :phermana I
I yes that her need to her
1to my sister I
‘I really need her’
1my sister’t
5 ) No IP dieron el premio
Juana M. Liceras 155
not him (they) gave the prize to him
to Juan
1
1
‘They didn’t give the prize to him’
to Juan’l
1
In (4) [+ human] DO la is doubled by a PP with a substantive (mi
hermanu) or a tonic pronoun (ella); in (5) I 0 le is doubled by Juan and
61.-5
In Spanish, clitics do not occupy positions in which NP or PP
complements can occur, so that (6) but not (7) is grammatical.
6 ) Juan no va aver inmediitamente a Pedro
1nunca
1
Juan not is going to see neverlimmediately Peter
‘Juan is never going to see Peter’
‘Juan is not going to see Peter immediately’
7) *Juan no va a ver idmediitamente
1 nunca
Juan not is going to see never/immediately him
‘Juan is never going to see him’
‘Juan is not going to see him immediately’
However, clitics may be perceived by learners as occupying an
argument position in cases such as (8), perceivingme as the actualNP,
mainly if they are confronted by the ungrammaticality of (9).
8) Juan no va a darme (a mf) el libro
Juan not is going to give me (to me) the book
9) *Juan no va a dar a miel libro
Juan not is going to give to me the book
In fact, a mirather than me may be perceived as redundant, given the
peculiarities of Spanish clitic doubling.6
L2 learners of Spanish are consequently exposed to three main
pieces of information concerning the differences between clitics and
NPs or PPs: a) clitics may occupy a variety of positions within the
VP; b) clitics may co-occur with NP and PP complements which refer
t o the same entity; c) clitics do not necessarily occupy the same
positions within the VP as NPs or PPs. However, the data are not very
transparent due to the positions of clitics in (1) versus (2) and the lack
of reduplication in the case of [- human] DOs in most dialects of
156 The value of clitics in non-native Spanish.
Spanish.
If it is assumed (as in Liceras, 1985b) that the mechanisms which
may intervene at the level of intake are: previous linguistic
knowledge, metalinguistic abilities and some aspects of Universal
Grammar (UG) such as the notion of markedness, the following can
be said about French and English speakers learning Spanish clitics:
1) English does not have affixal clitic pronouns; consequently,
learners have to incorporate them into the NNG. In some respects,
clitics behave as English personal pronouns and in some others they
d o not. Therefore, learners get conflicting evidence from Spanish
concerning these elements and they may find it difficult to assign them
a value. French has clitic pronouns in non-argument position, as
does Modern Spanish. However, in French, clitics do not occur after
infinitives or gerunds. Therefore, when Spanish clitics occur in these
locations, French speakers might interpret them as NPs.
2) Reduplication has been considered a marked phenomenon within
the Romance group (see Jaeggli, 1982). In the case of English
speakers this fact of markedness is almost secondary to the task of
acquiring the whole new process of cliticization. In fact, reduplication
may be of help for the assimilation of this process because it is the
means by which argument positions are filled out in surface structure.
Reduplication does not occur in standard French and it may not be
easy for French speakers to incorporate this phenomenon into their
NNG because, when clitics occur, argument positions are not filled
out. Thus, the NNG of French and English speakers may differ with
respect to reduplication and the positioning of true clitics in
infinitives.'
I11 Clitics in the Spanish NNG
In this section of the paper, I will outline three possible approaches to
the status of clitics in the Spanish NNG of French and English
speakers. In the light of IL data obtained by analysing compositions
and/or dialogues written by French and English learners of Spanish, I
will indicate which approach or approaches seem to be favoured by
the NNG.
Given the input data from Modern Spanish, their L1 knowledge
and their metalinguist abilities, we can assume that L2 learners may
have the following options:
1) To assign clitics the value of pronouns which occupy an argument
position and are optionally moved to a non-argument position by
JuanaM. Liceras 157
Move-a. In this case the NNG would have the same phrase structure
rules as Old Spanish, as indicated in (3a) above. Under such an
analysis, where Move-a is possible, (1) and (2) above and also (lo),
(1 1) and (12) would occur in the NNG.
10) Juan no me lo va a dar
Juan not to me it is going to give
‘IL’ 11) Juan no didrnelo
Juan not gave to me it
‘IL‘12) Juan no va a me lo dar
Juan not is going to to me it give
If reduplicated elements occur, they would be base-generated
adjuncts, as indicated in (13).8
(a) mi
V
/\
V
to
me
NPi
I
vio
me
saw
me
2) To assign clitics the value of pronouns with phrase structure rules
as in (3a) above but in an unordered V’-schema. This implies that NPs
could also occur in the same position as clitics, so that the IL would
have instances of (14)-(18).
‘IL’ 14) Juan no me di6 el libro a mi/a miel libro
Juan not me gave the book to me/to me the book
/
1
’I
1
I
‘IL’ 15) Juan no va a dar el libro a mila mi el libro
Juan not is going to give the book to me/to me the book
1
I
libro/el libro a mi dio
the book/the book to me gave
1
1
158 The value of clitics in non-native Spanish
I
1
vaadr
I
'IL' 17) Juan no a mi el libro/el libro a m i
Juan not to me the booklthe book to me is going to give
1
1
'IL' 18) Juan no va el libro a mi/a mi el libro a dar
Juan not is going the book to melto me the book to give
1
I
If reduplication occurs, the reduplicated phrase would also be an
adjunct as in (13) above.
3) To assign clitics the value of affix-like elements which are related to
a n empty category in argument position, as in the case of Modem
Spanish and Modern French. The argument position may be filled
with an NP or PP complement when reduplication occurs. In this case,
if clitics are lexical, they cannot be subject to syntactic rules. Thus,
Move-a would not apply and sentences such as (lo), (11) and (12)
would be the result of a base-generation of clitics in the different
positions where they occur. If sentences such as (16), (17) and (18)
occur, the NPs and PPs could be mo,ved by Move-a because, unlike
clitics, they are subject to syntactic rules.
IV The interlanguage data
T h e IL data that is analysed in this study has been collected at the
University of Ottawa, Canada. The subjects are 30 French and 30
English speakers enrolled in various programmes of the Faculty of
Arts. They are taking Spanish courses and have been studying this
language for three to four years. They are all rated as intermediateadvanced students and have been divided into French and English
native language groups for the purpose of this study. They also
responded t o a questionnaire designed to assess whether their native
language was their dominant one and the one used most f r e q ~ e n t l y . ~
Only those subjects for whom either French or English was consistently the native, dominant and most used language were selected.
In order to elicit IL data, the subjects were asked to tell a story or
write a dialogue explaining images projected on a screen. Given that
the' same people, objects and types of situations recurred repeatedly
in the story, the subjects were asked to avoid repeating nouns and
encouraged to use pronouns.'O These instructions were printed on the
answer sheet and were further explained by the instructors, who also
gave examples. This elicitation technique was used in order to gather
spontaneous speech that was somewhat controlled, such that clitic
pronouns bould be produced by the subjects. The results can also be
compared with those obtained from structural exercises that were
Juana M. Liceras 159
given to the subjects as part of their placement test." W e had a
control group of five native Spanish speakers who were asked to
perform the same task.
In the 60 compositions and/or dialogues that have been analysed, I
have identified native-like Spanish sentences where clitics occupied
the same positions as in examples (l), (2), (5) and (10). I have also
identified those cases that have been marked as 'IL' in (11) and (12).
The specific examples are given in Chart I.
Chart1 Spanish and 'IL' sentences produced by subjects in dialogues and
compositions
French group
English group
1) Juan no m e lo dio (clitic before tensed verb)
-Ella l e da
-No lo tiene
She t o him gives
not it (he) has
-El senor no los quiere
-Ella le dice
the man not them want
she to him tells
2) Juan nova a d5rmelo (clitic after infinitive)
-Voy a verlo
-Despues de describirselas
After describing to him them
(1) am going to see it
-Voy a trakrselas
-Puedo ofrecerte
(I) am going to bring him them
(I) can offer you
10) Juan no m e l o va a dar (clitic before tensed verb when infinitive is present)
-Compra el periddico y l o comienza a leer
(he) buys the newspaper and it (he) begins
what to me (you) can serve? .
to read
-1e puedo traer
-Creo que lo voy a leer
(I)think that it (I) am going to read
to you (I)can bring
- i qu6 m e puede servir?
5) No l e dieron el premio a &/a Juan (Reduplication)
-Una mujer le pregunta a Juan
-Un senor le pregunta alotro
a man to him asks the other
a woman to him asks to Juan
-El le pregunta a ella
He to her asks to her
9) Juan no va a dar a m i el libro (Lack of obligatory reduplication when pronominal
occurs)
-Ella ofrece a 81
She offers to him
-Ella dice a el
She tells to him
'IL' 11) Juan no didmelo (clitic after tensed verb)
-Yo pongolo
-una azafata preguntales
I put it
a stewardess asks them
-la azafata preguntale
-el hombre preguntala
the stewardess asks him
the man asks her
'IL' 12) Juan nova a me lo dar (clitic between the tensed verb and the infinitive)
-Yo quiero /o leer
-Va a la divertir
Is going to her amuse
Iwant it to read
160 The value of clitics in non-native Spanish
T h e fact that instances of (10)-(12) occur is not necessarily evidence
of the phrasal value of clitics. According to Rivero (1983) one of the
most relevant pieces of evidence in favour of the phrasal status of
clitics in Old Spanish is the existence of a phenomenon known as
interpolation.’* The presence of this phenomenon in the IL could
provide evidence for the phrasal status of clitics in the NNG.
Interpolation refers to the presence of material between the clitic and
the verb as in (19) to (21).
19) Quiero que re algo diga
(I) want that you something (he) says
‘I want him to tell you something’
20) Trata de lo bien explicar
try (you) of it well explain
‘Tryto explain it well’
21) Dice que 10s no ayudarl
(he) says that them not will help
‘He says that he will not help them’
Algo (something), bien (well) and no intervene between the clitics
and the verbs in (19), (20) and (21) respectively. I have not found any
instance of this phenomenon in the dialogues and compositions.
Neither French nor English complements have the properties of Old
Spanish constructions in (19)-(21). To project this type of properties
without any positive evidence from the target language, their L1 or
their knowledge of other languages where this occurs, learners would
need access to UG plus some metalinguistic abilities that would lead
them to interpret the Spanish data in such a way that they would posit
such analysis for the ‘IL’.
T h e placement of clitics in postverbal position in sentences such as
(2) and ( l l ) , together with the.lack of reduplication in that type of
sentences, could indicate that IL clitics are phrasal. However, no
instance of (14) to (18) has been produced, which indicates that clitics
d o not seem to occur in the same positions as NPs or PPs. The fact that
clitics but not NPs and PPs occur in non-argument positions provides
evidence for an analysis of clitics as affix-like elements.
T h e only piece of evidence that would indicate that IL clitics are
words in the syntax rather than affix-like elements as in Modem
French or Modem Spanish is their presence after tensed verbs, as in
(11). IL speakers may consider to be an argument position where all
clitics are generated and further moved via Move-a. The reduplicated
JiranrfM. Licerm 161
phrases in (5) (see Chart I) would be base-generated adjuncts. In this
case, the value of clitics in the NNG would correspond to Option 1in
Section 111.
However, given the two different positions occupied by IL clitics,
one of which is neither possible in Spanish nor in French, these data
could also indicate that clitics are generated both in argument and
non-argument positions because they are either words in the syntax or
affix-like elements.
This second alternative would indicate that there is permeability
with respect to the location of the cliticization process in the Spanish
NNG of both French and English speakers. The fact that sentences
(19)-(21) do not occur would follow from the nature of NNGs which,
as I have suggested, may not contain the clustering of properties
related to a given parameter that NGs do.
It is obvious that although they represent a good point of
departure, these results do not offer a picture of the IL from which the
nature of the NNG can be accurately inferred. In order to do that
more spontaneous oral and written data produced in different
communicative situations should have to be analysed. Data obtained
through elicitation techniques such as translation, judgements of
grammaticality, object manipulation, etc. would provide further
support for any proposed value of clitics in the Spanish NNG.
It is interesting to compare the results that have been discussed
above with those of the placement test where, as indicated in
Appendix 111, the subjects were asked to change substantives into
pronouns. The same constructions that were produced freely in the
written stories were also produced in the structural task. There was,
however, a striking difference in the amount of ‘IL‘ (12) constructions
produced in the two tasks. While only two instances occurred in the
stories (one in each group), the structural exercise the French group
produced 10 instances and the English group 9.
There were no significant differences concerning the type and
number of sentences produced by French and English speakers in the
two tasks. As shown in Chart 11, the relationship between the groups
(including the control group) remains constant in all cases with
respect to the number of clitics that occurred in the stories. This may
be due to the fact that all the subjects are familiar with each other’s
language. Their degree of bilingualism has not been measured and,
consequently, we cannot elaborate further on this matter. It should
be pointed out, however, that the similarities in number and type of
constructions may have been triggered by the very nature of the task,
162 The value of clitics in non-native Spanish
since a similar pattern occurs in the case of the control group.
Chart II Overall production of clitics in the dialogues and compositions
French group
N 30
English group
Control group
N 30
N 5
58
DO
1.9
30
2.8
30
-
7.8
30
39
5
5
.1
5
30
7
.2
1.
122
4.
30
I0 + DO
30
84
I0
5
37
1.2
1
.2
5
There was an important difference between the control group and the
other two groups with respect to the number of sentences containing
clitic doubling. While the control group produced four instances of
reduplication, the French group produced only one and the English
group seven (though six were produced by the same subject). In fact,
this phenomenon does not seem to be established in the NNG.
V Conclusion
One of the most salient characteristics of NNGs is their proneness to
permeability. I have proposed elsewhere (Liceras, 1985a; 1985b)that
this property of grammars depends on constructs of the theory of
grammar such as parameter setting. While unidimensional parameter
setting is the general tendency of NGs, polydimensional parameter
setting determines the permeability of NNGs.
In this paper, I have suggested that another construct of the theory
of grammar which may be relevant in the determination of permeability is the location of a given process in the different
components of the grammar. Following Rivero’s proposal that the
different value of clitics in Old and Modem Spanish depends on the
component of the grammar where cliticization is located, I have
suggested that there may be more than one value for clitics in the
Spanish NNG of French and English speakers. This may be so
because, due to the nature of intake, L2 learners may not be sensitive
to the relevant information contained in the Spanish data that would
lead them to locate cliticization exclusively within the lexicon.
The IL data that has been analysed provides conflicting evidence
Juana M . Liceras 163
with respect to the value of clitics, which may suggest that in some
instances they are located in the lexicon (as affix-like elements) or
postlexically (as words in the syntax) if the IL speakers feel that these
particles have special properties as clitics. If they perceive them as
pronouns such as him,they could not be considered postlexical clitics
but simply tonic pronouns.
As we have mentioned before, more data and other elicitation
techniques should provide evidence to confirm or disconfirm the
hypothesis that clitics do not have a unidimensional value in the NNG
of French and English speakers. Furthermore, we could also determine in a precise way the specific properties shared by native and
non-native clitic constructions.
Acknowledgements
Research for this project was supported by a grant from the School of
Graduate Studies of the University of Ottawa. I wish to thank M.
Rivero and E. Schneiderman for their valuable comments. An earlier
version of this paper was presented at the Language Acquisition
Research Symposium (LARS), Utrecht, The Netherlands, August
1984.
VI Notes
Rivero (1983) states that in the T-model the process of
‘cliticization’ is located within the lexicon in Modem Spanish
while it is located in the PF branch of the grammar in Old Spanish,
as shown in (a). This implies that in Old Spanish tonic pronominals may cliticize on a preceding word once syntactic and
stylistic operations have taken place.
a>
Lexicon
‘cliticization’ in
Modern Spanish
‘cliticization’ in
Old Spanish
+
,
PSrules
Move-a
164 The value of clitics in non-native Spanish
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
The examples are taken from Rivero (1983).
See Jaeggli (1982), Borer (1981) and Aoun (1981) for different
treatments of modem Romance clitics. There is a comparison of
these three analyses in Rivero (1983), where the shared
characteristics assigned to modem clitics by all three analyses are
extracted.
This implies that previous analyses with movement of clitics are
problematic for Modem Spanish.
Reduplication by a pronominal is obligatory in the case of 10s and
human DOs. It is always possible via a substantive in the case of
10s but not in the case of DOs. According to Jaeggli (1982),
reduplication of [- human] DOs by a substantive is grammatical
in the River Plate dialect of Spanish.
See Jaeggli (1982) for an account of the restrictions on clitic
doubling in Spanish.
The lack of reduplication in the two languages (French and
English) may have a different reflection in the NNG than the lack
of the pro-drop rule that applies in the case of Spanish subject
pronouns. In the latter case, the obligatory presence of lexical
subjects in French and English may have a similar reflection in the
two Spanish NNGs.
This analysis is proposed by Rivero (1983) for Old Spanish
sentences such as Priso lo (11 conde (He took the count). This has
t o be so because the position occupied by the clitic is assigned the
only &role that can be assigned by a given verb, so that the second
NP must occupy a non-8 position. In the case of IOs, the dative
has intrinsic case marking and the reduplicated phrase is considered a prepositional phrase.
Given the bilingual nature of the community and of the University
of Ottawa, such an investigation was deemed necessary. See
Appendix I for the questionnaire.
See Appendix 11. The actual visual story belongs to the collection
that accompanies the Euling Course in Spanish. The one that was
used appears on pp. 72-73 of the 1967 edition, London:
Longman.
See Appendix 111.
See Rivero (1983) for a recent analysis of this phenomenon that
has been studied since neogrammarian times.
Juana M. Liceras 165
VII Appendix
Appendix I
Proyecto: El espaiiol no nativo (non-native Spanish)
(project) Departarnento de Lenguas Modernas (Department of Modern Languages)
Universidad de Ottawa (University of Ottawa)
Ciiestionario (Questionnaire)
Nombre:
(Name)
Secciod:
(section)
Fecha:
(date)
POR FAVOR, CONTESTE LAS SIGUIENTES PREGUNTAS:
(please answer the following questions)
1) i Cuil es su lengua materna?
What is your native language?
2) i E n quC partes de Canadi o del mundo vivi6 usted hasta 10s 18 afios?
Where have you lived till you were 18years old?
3) i QuC lengua utiliza con m5s frecuencia?
What language do you use most frequently?
4) i E n quC lengua se siente mas c6modo/a a todos 10s niveles?
In which language do you feel more comfortable at all levels?
5 ) i Cuinto tiempo lleva estudiando espafiol?
How long have you been studying Spanish?
166 The value of clitics in non-nativeSpanish
Appendix I1
Proyecto: El espriilol no nativo (tion-nativeSpattish)
(project) Departamento de Lenguas Modernas (Department of Modem Languages)
Universidad de Ottawa (University of Ottawa)
Test I (Clit.)
Nombre:
(Name)
Seccidn:
(section)
Fecha:
(date)
ESCRIBA UNA PEQUEEA HISTORIA o UNA SERIE DE FRASES EN QUE
DESCRIBA LO QUE OCURRE EN LA HISTORIETA VISUAL QUE HEMOS
PROYECTADO EN LA PANTALLA.
(Write a composition or a series of sentences describing the visual story that has been
projected on the screen,)
PROCURE UTILIZAR PRONOMBRES EN LUGAR DE REPETIR SISTEMATlCAMENTE LOS SUSTANTIVOS QUE CONSIDERE NECESARIOS
PARA LA CLARIDAD DE LA DESCRIPCION.
(Try to use pronouns instead of systematically repeating the nouns that in your
opinion are needed to provide a clear description of the images.)
Juana M . Liceras 167
Appendix I11
Test de clasificacion I
(Placement test I)
I1 2 Cambie 10s nombres subrayados por pronombres
(Change the underlined nouns into pronouns)
Ejemplo: Mi madre hace las camas
(example) My mother makes the beds
Mi madre [as hace
(my mother them makes)
a) Voy a escribir la carta
(I am going to write the letter)
b) La seiiora da la cuenta a trosotros
(The lady gives the bill to us)
c) Deseo llamar a Marisa
(I want to call (to) Marisa)
d) Juan compra las manzanas para mi
(Juan buys the apples for me)
e) Isabel, ipon el abrigo al niiio!
(Isabel, put the coat to the child!)
VII References
Adjimian, C. 1976: On the nature of interlanguage systems. Language Learning 26:
297-320.
1982: La sgcificit6 de I’interlangage et I’iddalisation des langues secondes. In
Gueron, J. and Sowley, S . , editors, Grammaire transformationelle:thiorie et
mkthodologies, Vincennes: Universit6 de Paris VIII.
Adj6mian, C. and Liceras, J. 1984: Accounting for adult acquisition of relative
clauses: universal grammar, L1 and structuring the intake. In Eckman, F.,
Bell, L. and Nelson, D., editors, Universalsofsecond Language Acqubition,
Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House.
Aoun, J. 1981: The formal nature of anaphoric relations. MIT, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, PhD dissertation.
Arditty, J. and Perdue, C. 1979: Variabilit6 et connaissance en langue itrangere.
Encrages, num6ro s$cial de linguistique appliqube, Vincennes: Universitd de
Paris VIII.
Borer, H. 1981: Parametric variation in clitic constructions. MIT, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, PhD dissertation.
Chenery, W. 1905: Object pronouns in dependent clauses: a study in Old-Spanish
word-order. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 20:
1-15 1.
Cook, V. 1985: Chomsky’s Universal Grammar and second language learning.
Applied Linguistics 6: 2-18.
Flynn, S. 1985: Similarities and differences between first and second language
acquisition: setting the parameters of universal grammar. In Rogers, D. R.
Sloboda, J. A., editors, Acquisition of Symbolic Skills, New York: Plenum.
168 The value of clitics in non-native Spanish
Frauenfelder, U. and Porquier, R. 1979: Les voies d‘apprentissage en langue
itrangkre. Working Papers on Bilingualism, Toronto: OISE, 17: 38-63.
Gas, S. and Selinker, L. 1983: Language tramfer in language learning. Rowley,
Massachusetts: Newbury House.
Jaeggli, 0.1982: Topics in Romancesyntar, Dordrecht: Foris.
Lapesa, R. Sobre 10s origenes y la evoluncidn del leismo, laismo y loismo. In
Fesfichrifr Walther von Wartburg, Tugingen.
Liceras, J. M. 1981: Markedness and permeability in interlanguage systems. Working
papers in linguistics, University of Toronto, 2: 123-50.
1983: Markedness, contrastive analysis and the acquisition of Spanish syntax by
English speakers. University of Toronto, Toronto, PhD dissertation.
1985a: Sobre el concept0 de permeabilidad. Revista EspaAolu de Lingiiistica
Aplicadu, Madrid: SGEL, forthcoming.
1985b: The role of intake in the determination of learners’competence. In Gass,
S. and Madden, C., editors, Input in secorzd language acquisition, Rowley,
Massachusetts: Newbury House.
Marcos Marin, F. 1978: Estudios sobre elpronombre. Madrid: Gredos.
Mazurkevich, I. 1982: Second language acquisition of the dative alternation and
markedness: the best theory. Universitk de MontrCal, PhD dissertation.
1984: Dative questions and markedness. In Eckman, F., Bell, L. and Nelson,
D., editors, UniversaLsofsecondlangitageacquisition,Rowley, Massachusetts:
Newbury House.
Rivero, M. 1983: Parameters in the typology of clitin in Romance, and Old Spanish.
University of Ottawa, manuscript.
Selinker, L. 1972: Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 10:
209-3 1.
Stowell, T. 1981: Origins of phrase-structure. MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, PhD
dissertation.
White, L. 1983: Markedness and parameter setting: some implications for a theory of
second language acquisition. In Eckrnan, F., Maravcsik, E. and Wirth, J.,
editors, Proceedings of the 12th Annual University of Milwaukee Symposium
on Markedness, New York: Plenum.
1985: The pro-drop parameter in adult second language acquisition. Lahguuge
Learning, March 1985.
White, L. and Mazurkevich, I. 1982: The acquisition of the dative alternation: is
indirect negative evidence necessary? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting
of the Canadian Linguistic Association, Ottawa, 1982.
Erratum
O n p. 84 of 1,1, 12 lines from the bottom, the sentence in The0
Bongaerts’s review should read:
‘The two papers are illustrative of two fundamentally different
approaches to learners’ strategies, the approach taken by the
cognitive psychologist who wishes to reconstruct the general
principles underlying both L1 and L2 acquisition and use . . .’