This paper presents the results of a study on cross-linguistic transfer in Andean Spanish word order. In Andean Spanish the object appears in preverbal position more frequently than in non-Andean Spanish, which has been attributed to an influence from Quechua (a Subject–Object–Verb language). The high frequency of preverbal objects could be explained by focus fronting. The main syntactic properties of focus fronting in Spanish are weak crossover and long distance movement. Two elicitation studies designed to test for these properties in non-Andean Spanish, Andean Spanish and Quechua show no evidence of syntactic transfer from Quechua into Andean Spanish. Rather, the analysis of naturalistic data and an elicitation study on question–answer pairs show that there is pragmatic transfer from Quechua into Andean Spanish. The study has implications for theories of syntax and language contact, and especially for the debate on the nature of cross-linguistic transfer.

This study examines the prosody of focus in the Spanish of 16 Quechua-Spanish bilinguals near Cusco, Peru. Data come from a dialogue game that involved noun phrases consisting of a noun and an adjective. The questions in the game elicited broad focus, contrastive focus on the noun (non-final position) and contrastive focus on the adjective (final position). The phonetic analysis in Praat included peak alignment, peak height, local range and duration of the stressed syllable and word. The study revealed that Cusco Spanish differs from other Spanish varieties. In other Spanish varieties, contrastive focus is marked by early peak alignment, whereas broad focus involves a late peak on the non-final word. Furthermore, in other Spanish varieties contrastive focus is indicated by a higher F0 maximum, a wider local range, post-focal pitch reduction and a longer duration of the stressed syllable/word. For Cusco Spanish no phonological contrast between early and late peak alignment was found. However, peak alignment on the adjective in contrastive focus was significantly earlier than in the two other contexts. For women, similar results were found for the noun in contrastive focus. An additional prominence-lending feature marking contrastive focus concerned duration of the final word. Furthermore, the results revealed a higher F0 maximum for broad focus than for contrastive focus. The findings suggest a prosodic change, which is possibly due to contact with Quechua. The study contributes to research on information structure, prosody and contact-induced language change

This paper reports the results of a study on the prosodic marking of broad and contrastive focus in three language varieties of which two are in contact: bilingual Peruvian Spanish, Quechua and Peninsular Spanish. An interactive communicative task revealed that the prosodic marking of contrastive focus was limited in all three language varieties. No systematic correspondence was observed between specific contour/accent types and focus, and the phonetic marking of contrastive focus was weak and restricted to phrase-final position. Interestingly, we identified two contours for bilingual Peruvian Spanish that were present in Quechua, but not in Peninsular Spanish, providing evidence for a prosodic transfer from Quechua to Spanish in Quechua-Spanish bilinguals.

We examined the effect of word stress position on bilingual auditory cognate processing. Turkish–Dutch early bilinguals who are dominant in their L2 (Dutch) performed an auditory lexical decision task in Turkish or Dutch. While Dutch has variable word stress, with a tendency for penultimate stress, stress in Turkish is mostly predictable and usually falls on the ultimate syllable. Our tasks included two-syllable cognates with penultimate stress in both languages, ultimate stress in both languages, or ultimate stress in Turkish and penultimate stress in Dutch. Some cognate facilitation effects arose in Dutch, while inhibition was found in Turkish. Cognates with ultimate stress were processed faster than cognates with penultimate stress, in both languages. This shows that in Turkish–Dutch early bilinguals, cognate processing depends on Turkish stress position, although Dutch is dominant. Together, the findings support the view that cognates have separate, though linked representations.

This study examines whether heritage speakers of Turkish in the Netherlands interpret focus in written Dutch sentences differently from L1 speakers of Dutch (controls). Where most previous studies examined effects from the dominant L2 on the heritage language, we investigated whether there are effects from the weaker heritage language on the dominant L2. Dutch and Turkish differ in focus marking. Dutch primarily uses prosody to encode focus, whereas Turkish uses prosody and syntax, with a preverbal area for focused information and a postverbal area for background information. In written sentences no explicit prosody is available, which possibly enhances the role of syntactic cues in interpreting focus. An eye-tracking experiment suggests that, unlike the controls, the bilinguals associate the preverbal area with focus and the postverbal area with background information. These findings are in line with transfer from the weaker L1 to the dominant L2 at the syntax-discourse interface.ARTICLE HISTORY

In this paper, I report the results of tests that I designed to show how Andean Spanish(AS) word order is affected by language contact with Quechua. In AS the object appears in preverbal position more frequently than in Standard Spanish(SS). The main syntactic properties of focus-fronting in SS are weak-crossover and long-distance movement. I constructed tests to check for these syntactic properties and the pragmatics of focus in AS and Quechua. The results show that AS and SS are syntactically identical, but that there is pragmatic transfer from Quechua into AS. The study has implications for language contact and syntax.

This paper examines the glottal stop in word-final position as a variant of /s/ in Puerto Rican Spanish. Previous research (Tellado González 2007; Valentín-Márquez 2006) generally focused on the glottal stop in word-final position between vowels (e.g., /las alas/ ‘the wings’). In this paper, we investigate the glottal stop not only in this context, but also in word-final position when preceded by a vowel and followed by a consonant (e.g., /los takos/ ‘the tacos’), and in word-final position when preceded by a vowel and followed by a pause (e.g., /los takos#/ ‘the tacos’). Specifically, the effects of following segment, stress of the following syllable, gender, age, and English use and proficiency on glottal stop production were investigated. The data came from sociolinguistic interviews with 19 participants (8 female, 11 male; Age range: 18–63 years) from San Juan, Carolina, and Guaynabo. The results showed that the glottal stop occurred not only between vowels, but also when followed by a consonant or a pause. Additionally, the glottal stop appeared significantly more before stressed syllables. There were no significant effects of age or gender. Although the effects of English use and proficiency were not significant, we discuss the potential role that contact with English may play in glottalization rates.

No abstract