Abstract
This chapter argues that generative linguistics is in a position to make available to second language teaching professionals a large body of evidence that can be fruitfully applied in many areas such as curriculum and textbook design. As an example, the chapter focuses on the acquisition of Spanish weak pronouns (clitics), showing how the current approach to teaching these elements, at least in many textbooks, is at odds with results from research that show consistently that the position of the pronoun is dependent on several factors, and as a result, the different positions are acquired in developmental stages. It is suggested that perhaps language pedagogy would be more effective if pronoun positions were not all taught at the same time, as is currently the practice.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
English is said to have clitics at the phonological level, for example, when we say ‘I saw’em’. However, unlike Spanish, in English this process does not affect the syntax.
- 2.
I will not even touch on imperatives, which add more complications.
- 3.
The clitic is usually spelled as a separate word when it precedes the verb and as attached to the verb when it follows. This is simply an arbitrary convention.
- 4.
The position of both conjugated and non-finite verbs in different languages is also very important, but it is beyond the scope of this chapter.
- 5.
We will be reporting here only the results that are relevant for this chapter. Bruhn de Garavito and Montrul (1996) also looked at adverb placement and infinitives in indirect questions.
- 6.
Many of these learners were actually learners of Spanish as a third language, but at the time this research was conducted, this was not seen as a concern.
References
Alarcos Llorach, E. 1994. Gramática de la lengua española. Madrid: Espasa Calpe.
Andersen, R.W. 1983. Transfer to somewhere. In Language transfer in language learning, ed. S. Gass and L. Selinker. Rowley: Newbury House Publishers.
Bialystok, E., and K. Hakuta. 1999. Confounded age: Linguistic and cognitive factors in age Âdifferences for second language acquisition. In Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis, ed. D. Birdsong, 161–181. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Birdsong, D. 1999. Introduction: Whys and why nots of the critical period hypothesis for second language acquisition. In Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis, ed. D. Birdsong, 1–22. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Blanco, J.A., and P. Redwine Donley. 2005. Vistas. Introducción a la lengua española. Boston: Vista Higher Learning.
Bleam, T.M. 1999. LeÃsta Spanish and the syntax of clitic doubling. PhD dissertation. Newark: University of Delaware.
Bley-Vroman, R. 1989. What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition, ed. S. Gass and J. Schachter, 41–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bruhn de Garavito, J. 2006. Knowledge of clitic doubling in Spanish: A comparison of early and late bilinguals. In Inquiries in linguistic development. In honour of Lydia White, ed. S. Montrul, P. Prévost, and R. Slabakova, 305–333. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bruhn de Garavito, J., and S. Montrul. 1996. Verb movement and clitic placement in French and Spanish as a second language. In Proceedings of the 20th annual Boston University conference on language development, ed. A. Stringfellow, D. Cahana-Amitay, E. Hughes, and A. Zukowski, 123–134. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
Campos, H. 1986. Indefinite object drop. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 354–359.
Canale, M. 1983. From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In Language and communication, ed. J.C. Richards and R.W. Schmidt, 2–27. London: Longman.
Canale, M., and M. Swain. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics 1: 1–47.
Cuervo, M.C. 2002. Spanish clitics: Three of a perfect pair. PhD Dissertation. MIT.
DeKeyser, R.M. 1998. Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practising second language grammar. In Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, ed. C. Doughty and J. Williams, 42–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Doughty, C., and E. Varela. 1998. Communicative focus on form. In Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, ed. C. Doughty and J. Williams, 114–138. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Duffield, N., and L. White. 1999. Assessing L2 knowledge of Spanish clitic placement: Convergent methodologies. Second Language Research 15: 133–160.
Eubank, L., and K. Gregg. 1999. Critical periods and (second) language acquisition: Divide et impera. In Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis, ed. D. Birdsong, 65–99. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gregg, K.R. 2000. A theory for every occasion: Postmodernism and SLA. Second Language Research 16: 383–399.
Gregg, K.R. 2002. A garden ripe for weeding: A reply to Lantofl. Second Language Research 18: 79–81.
Gregg, K.R. 2006. Taking a social turn for the worse: The language socialization paradigm for second language acquisition. Second Language Research 22: 413–442.
Heap, D. 1996. Optimalizing Iberian clitic sequences. In Theoretical analyses on Romance languages: Selected papers from the 26th linguistic symposium on Romance languages, ed. J. Lema and E. Treviño, 227–248. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Heap, D. 2000. Morphological complexity and Spanish object clitic variation. In Romance syntax, semantics and L2 acquisition: Selected papers from the 30th linguistic symposium on Romance languages, Gainesville, Florida, Feb 2000, ed. C.R. Wiltshire and J. Camps, 55–67. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hymes, D. 1972. On communicative competence. In Sociolinguistics, ed. J.B. Pride and J. Holmes, 269–293. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Jarvis, A.C., R. Lebredo, F. Mena-Ayllón, M. Rowinsky-Geurts, and R.L. Stewart. 2012. Hola Amigos (2nd Canadian edn.). Toronto: Nelson Education.
Johnson, J., and E. Newport. 1989. Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology 21: 60–99.
Kayne, R.S. 1991. Romance clitics, verb movement, and PRO. Linguistic Inquiry 22: 647–686.
Krashen, S. 1977. Some issues relating to the monitor model. In On Tesol ‘77, ed. H.D. Brown, C.A. Yorio, and R.H. Crymes, 144–158. Washington, DC: TESOL.
Lantolf, J.P. 1996. SLA theory building: Letting all the flowers bloom! Language Learning 46: 713–749.
Lantolf, J.P. 2000. Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lantolf, J.P. 2002. Commentary from the flower garden: Responding to Gregg, 2000. Second Language Research 18: 72–78.
Lenneberg, E. 1967. Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.
Lightbown, P. 1985. Great expectations: Second-language acquisition research and classroom teaching. Applied Linguistics 6: 173–189.
Lightbown, P., and N. Spada. 1990. Focus on form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12: 429–448.
Long, M.H. 1991. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective, ed. K. de Bot, R.B. Ginsberg, and C. Kramsch, 39–52. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Masullo, P.J. 1992. Incorporation and case theory in Spanish. A crosslinguistic perspective. PhD dissertation. University of Washington.
Roberge, Y. 1990. The syntactic recoverability of null arguments. Kingston/Montreal: McGill-ÂQueen’s University Press.
Savignon, S. 1983. Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Schwartz, B. 1993. On explicit and negative data affecting and effecting competence and linguistic behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20: 147–163.
Schwartz, B.D., and R.A. Sprouse. 1997. Transfer: A tradition in transition. Talk presented at American Association of Applied Linguistics, 9 Mar 1997.
Schwartz, B.D., and R.A. Sprouse. 1996. L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research 12: 40–72.
Selinker, L. 1972. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 10: 209–231.
Sheen, R. 2002. ‘Focus on form’ and ‘focus on forms’. ELT Journal 56: 303–305.
Suñer, M. 1988. The role of agreement in clitic doubled constructions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6: 391–434.
Uriagereka, J. 1995. Aspects of the syntax of clitic placement in Western Romance. Linguistic Inquiry 26: 79–124.
Watson-Gegeo, K.A. 2004. Mind, language and epistemology: Toward a language socialization paradigm for SLA. Modern Language Journal 88: 331–350.
Weinreich, U. 1953. Languages in contact: Findings and problems. The Hague: Mouton.
Zobl, H. 1980. The formal and developmental selectivity of L1 influence on L2 acquisition. Language Learning 30: 43–57.
Zyzik, E. 2008. Null objects in second language acquisition: Grammatical vs. performance models. Second Language Research 24: 65–11.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
de Garavito, J.B. (2013). What Research Can Tell Us About Teaching: The Case of Pronouns and Clitics. In: Whong, M., Gil, KH., Marsden, H. (eds) Universal Grammar and the Second Language Classroom. Educational Linguistics, vol 16. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6362-3_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6362-3_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-6361-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6362-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)