The Acquisition of the Copula Contrast in Second Language Spanish

Geeslin, Kimberly L.

doi:10.1002/9781118584347.ch13

Cited by 17 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A precise linguistic analysis of the distribution of the two copulas has been elusive because their use is governed by an intricate set of semantic and pragmatic factors involving large discourse contexts (Brown & Torres-Cortés, 2012; Luján, 1981; Maienborn, 2005; Schmitt, 1996, 2005; Schmitt, Holtheuer, & Miller, 2004). Despite being the focus of much linguistic research across various frameworks and perspectives (e.g., Clements, 1988, 2005; Delbecque, 1997; Gallego & Uriagereka, 2011; Geeslin, 2005; Geeslin & Guijarro-Fuentes, 2008; González-Vilbazo & Remberger, 2005; Luján, 1981; Maienborn, 2005), the lack of a clear consensus on the most appropriate treatment for ser and estar can be evidenced in the large number of articles published on the subject and by ongoing debates in different scholarly venues that have been dedicated solely to the discussion of the two copulas. It is not surprising, then, that traditional textbook descriptions normally offer ‘rule-of-thumb’ explanations that do not capture the nuanced distributions of the two copulas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Correct use of ser and estar in this context requires knowledge of how syntactic, semantic and discourse factors interact with one another to determine copular selection; therefore, it poses interesting challenges for learners (Holtheuer, 2009; Maienborn, 2005). Also, adjectival predicates allow for the greatest co-occurrence of ser and estar , making the structure an ideal tool for linguists to test and refine different theoretical approaches to explain the mechanisms underlying copula selection (e.g., Clements, 1988, 2005; Cortés-Torres, 2004; Delbecque, 1997; Fernández Leborans, 1999; Geeslin, 2005; Geeslin & Guijaro-Fuentes, 2008; Leonetti, 1994; Luján, 1981; Salazar, 2007). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Processingserandestarto locate objects and events

Dussias

Contemori²,

Román³

2014

RESLA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Spanish locative constructions, a different form of the copula is selected in relation to the semantic properties of the grammatical subject: sentences that locate objects require estar while those that locate events require ser (both translated in English as ‘to be’). In an ERP study, we examined whether second language (L2) speakers of Spanish are sensitive to the selectional restrictions that the different types of subjects impose on the choice of the two copulas. Twenty-four native speakers of Spanish and two groups of L2 Spanish speakers (24 beginners and 18 advanced speakers) were recruited to investigate the processing of ‘object/event + estar/ser’ permutations. Participants provided grammaticality judgments on correct (object + estar; event + ser) and incorrect (object + ser; event + estar) sentences while their brain activity was recorded. In line with previous studies (Leone-Fernández, Molinaro, Carreiras, & Barber, 2012; Sera, Gathje, & Pintado, 1999), the results of the grammaticality judgment for the native speakers showed that participants correctly accepted object + estar and event + ser constructions. In addition, while ‘object + ser’ constructions were considered grossly ungrammatical, ‘event + estar’ combinations were perceived as unacceptable to a lesser degree. For these same participants, ERP recording time-locked to the onset of the critical word ‘en’ showed a larger P600 for the ser predicates when the subject was an object than when it was an event (*La silla es en la cocina vs. La fiesta es en la cocina). This P600 effect is consistent with syntactic repair of the defining predicate when it does not fit with the adequate semantic properties of the subject. For estar predicates (La silla está en la cocina vs. *La fiesta está en la cocina), the findings showed a central-frontal negativity between 500–700 ms. Grammaticality judgment data for the L2 speakers of Spanish showed that beginners were significantly less accurate than native speakers in all conditions, while the advanced speakers only differed from the natives in the event+ser and event+estar conditions. For the ERPs, the beginning learners did not show any effects in the time-windows under analysis. The advanced speakers showed a pattern similar to that of native speakers: (1) a P600 response to ‘object + ser’ violation more central and frontally distributed, and (2) a central-frontal negativity between 500–700 ms for ‘event + estar’ violation. Findings for the advanced speakers suggest that behavioral methods commonly used to assess grammatical knowledge in the L2 may be underestimating what L2 speakers have actually learned.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Processingserandestarto locate objects and events

Dussias

Contemori²,

Román³

2014

RESLA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The type of sociolinguistic variation found in the use of subjunctive forms by NSs, known as Type II or horizontal variation (i.e., variation between two nativelike forms; Adamson & Regan, 1991; Rehner, 2002), 2 has been the object of study in a variety of L2s and for a range of grammatical structures (Bayley & Langman, 2004; Bayley & Preston, 1996; Geeslin, 2003, 2005, 2006; Geeslin & Gudmestad, 2008; Geeslin & Guijarro-Fuentes, 2006; Gudmestad, 2006, 2008; Mougeon & Dewaele, 2004; Preston, 2000; Regan, 2004; Rehner, Mougeon, & Nadasdi, 2003; Tarone, 2007). As a result of this research, it is known that learner language varies according to characteristics of the speaker, the interlocutor, the grammatical structure, and the context in which the interaction takes place, just as native speech would.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Interpretation of Spanish Subjunctive and Indicative Forms in Adverbial Clauses

Kanwit

Geeslin

2014

Stud Second Lang Acquis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study fi lls a need for investigations of learner and native speaker (NS) interpretation of the Spanish subjunctive in contexts that allow variation. The analysis compares responses by NSs and three levels of learners on a written interpretation task in which each item contained a temporal indicator ( cuando "when", después de que "after", or hasta que "until") and in which verbal mood, verbal morphological regularity, the order of clauses, and the temporal indicator were manipulated. Participants indicated their interpretation of each item by selecting that the event happened habitually or had not yet occurred, or that both were possible. Results show that NSs' and highly advanced learners' interpretations corresponded with verbal mood, whereas intermediate learners patterned separately. Using models generated with binomial regressions, the current study proposes stages of development for the interpretation of adverbial clauses that are essential for the growing number of theoretical approaches to language variation.The second language (L2) acquisition of the contrast between the subjunctive and indicative moods has received quite a bit of attention

show abstract

“…A clear example is the case of Spanish copular verbs, ser and estar (to be), either of which can combine with the majority of adjectives, depending on the context and the speaker's intended meaning. Geeslin and Guijarro-Fuentes (2008) used a preference task to determine which variables are good predictors of copula choice among Spanish native speakers (studies on copula choice with L2 learners have used the same methodology: see Geeslin, 2003, 2005). An example from the preference task in Geeslin and Guijarro-Fuentes is given in (2).…”

Section: Preference Tasksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judgment and Interpretation Tasks in Second Language Research

Ionin¹,

Zyzik²

2014

Ann Rev Appl Linguist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides an overview of recent studies in second language acquisition that use tasks that elicit learners' judgments about the grammaticality of language or learners' interpretation of language. We discuss acceptability judgment tasks, preference tasks, truth-value judgment tasks, and other types of interpretation tasks. For each task type, recent studies that use that task are briefly summarized, with a focus on advantages and disadvantages of the methodology in relation to the study's objectives. A variety of topics related to task administration are covered, including (but not limited to) different types of rating scales; presentation of target sentences in isolation versus in the context of other sentences, stories, and/or pictures; visual versus auditory modality of presentation; and timed versus untimed tasks.

show abstract

The Acquisition of the Copula Contrast in Second Language Spanish

Cited by 17 publications

References 28 publications

Processingserandestarto locate objects and events

Processingserandestarto locate objects and events

The Interpretation of Spanish Subjunctive and Indicative Forms in Adverbial Clauses

Judgment and Interpretation Tasks in Second Language Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About