Assessing the Use of Multiple Forms in Variable Contexts: The Relationship between Linguistic Factors and Future-Time Reference in Spanish

Abstract

The current study represents a detailed examination of the linguistic variables that are significantly related to verb-form use in contexts of future-time reference for advanced learners and native speakers of Spanish. The results show that the factors lexical temporal indicator, clause type and temporal distance are related to the verb forms that both groups use to express the function of futurity and that (un)certainty and grammatical person and number are only important for native speakers, thus demonstrating that the learners have not yet reached native-like use of this variable structure. In addition to providing more information on the variable use of futuretime reference for native and non-native speakers, the investigation makes methodological advancements in the study of morphosyntactic variation by defining a token by the function it performs in communication and by examining the full range of verb forms speakers use to fulfill this function.

What We Gain by Combining Variationist and Concept‐Oriented Approaches: The Case of Acquiring Spanish Future‐Time Expression

“…Despite an increase at Level 5, MF use was still lower than the NS level (22.6%). High PI use at lower levels is consistent with L2 French findings (Moses, ), and the PF increase with proficiency aligns with recent work on L2 Spanish (Gudmestad & Geeslin, ; Solon & Kanwit, ). Taken together, these results indicate a lack of morphological options for lower‐level learners who have not yet acquired multiple forms and are still highly limited to the use of one form inflected for futurity.…”

“…Most investigations of Spanish future expression have focused on MF and PF forms in Latin America (e.g., Orozco, ; Sedano, ) and Spain (e.g., Blas Arroyo, ). The PF is preferred over the MF for speech communities in Peru (Escobar, ), central Venezuela (Sedano, ), and the southwestern United States (Gutiérrez, ) and for speakers from numerous Spanish‐speaking countries (Gudmestad & Geeslin, ). Although the PF is generally the dominant form in monolingual Spanish, there is evidence of frequent MF use in the Valencian Community of Spain, and the MF is generally more frequent in Spain than Latin America (Blas Arroyo, ; Kanwit & Solon, ).…”

“…In spite of the contributions of relatively recent work on L2 future‐time expression in Spanish (Gudmestad & Geeslin, , ; Kanwit & Solon, ; Solon & Kanwit, ), four important gaps remain, which are best explored through a combination of variationist and concept‐oriented approaches. First, because future expression has received much less attention than past‐time expression in both L2 Spanish and in SLA more generally (e.g., Bardovi‐Harlig, ), the current study included empirical analysis of the emergence of L2 future expression, which is largely absent for languages other than English and French (e.g., Bardovi‐Harlig, ; Moses, ).…”

“…First, because future expression has received much less attention than past‐time expression in both L2 Spanish and in SLA more generally (e.g., Bardovi‐Harlig, ), the current study included empirical analysis of the emergence of L2 future expression, which is largely absent for languages other than English and French (e.g., Bardovi‐Harlig, ; Moses, ). Furthermore, for lower‐level learners, a variationist study of production is also lacking, as only Gudmestad and Geeslin () have analyzed variable future‐time production, and their participants were near‐native speakers of Spanish.…”

Variation in L2 Spanish: The State of the Discipline

“…Bardovi-Harlig 2002, 2004a, 2004b, but work in L2 Spanish has focused instead on incidental acquisition (Lee 2002 andRossomondo 2007) and reading comprehension (Lee & Binkowski 2002) of the morphological future. To fill this hole in the literature, Gudmestad & Geeslin (2011) coded interview data from 16 NSs and 16 highly advanced NNSs of Spanish for several factors found to constrain variation between the morphological (hablaré 'I will speak') and periphrastic (voy a hablar 'I am Brought to you by | University of California Authenticated Download Date | 6/6/15 12:10 AM going to speak') forms in sociolinguistic research. These included presence of a lexical temporal indicator, temporal distance (time until the event), clause type (subordinate or other), certainty (presence of certainty marker, presence of uncertainty marker, absence of marker), contingency (main clause of conditional statement), negation, and person and number of the verb (Almeida & Díaz 1998, Blas Arroyo 2008, Díaz Peralta & Almeida 2000, Orozco 2005, 2007a, 2007band Sedano 1994.…”