Papers by Jordan Garrett
1 Which que is which?: A squib on reduplicative que complementizers in Iberian Spanish embedded clauses
This paper aims to analyze optional secondary complementizers in Spanish embedded clauses. These ... more This paper aims to analyze optional secondary complementizers in Spanish embedded clauses. These optional complementizers, dubbed recomplementation (Gupton, 2010; Villa-García, 2011; 2012a; 2012b; 2012c), are common in informal registers, are restricted to specific types of predicates (Rathmann, 2012) and are not unique to Spanish but also other Iberian languages (Fernández-Rubiera, 2009; Gupton, 2010; Kempchinsky, 2013). Using data from clitic positions and the behavior of topics, foci and other dislocates in Iberian languages, this analysis posits that the left-periphery of embedded clauses in Spanish contain three possible projections (ForceP>TopicP>FinitenessP) each containing a head with their own instantiation of que ‘that’. It will be shown that what is most commonly labeled recomplementation only refers to the optional reduplicated complementizer que in the head of TopicP while que a subordinating complementizer appears in the head of ForceP and, finally, que in the he...
Chapter 6. Me gohtaba ehta linguaji barranquenha
1 Which que is which?: A squib on reduplicative que complementizers in Iberian Spanish embedded clauses
This paper aims to analyze optional secondary complementizers in Spanish embedded clauses. These ... more This paper aims to analyze optional secondary complementizers in Spanish embedded clauses. These optional complementizers, dubbed recomplementation (Gupton, 2010; Villa-García, 2011; 2012a; 2012b; 2012c), are common in informal registers, are restricted to specific types of predicates (Rathmann, 2012) and are not unique to Spanish but also other Iberian languages (Fernández-Rubiera, 2009; Gupton, 2010; Kempchinsky, 2013). Using data from clitic positions and the behavior of topics, foci and other dislocates in Iberian languages, this analysis posits that the left-periphery of embedded clauses in Spanish contain three possible projections (ForceP>TopicP>FinitenessP) each containing a head with their own instantiation of que ‘that’. It will be shown that what is most commonly labeled recomplementation only refers to the optional reduplicated complementizer que in the head of TopicP while que a subordinating complementizer appears in the head of ForceP and, finally, que in the he...
Chapter 6. Me gohtaba ehta linguaji barranquenha
Teacher-initiated TBLT: A 16-week case study of design and implementation in a Spanish FL classroom" Avizia Long & Professor Laura Gurzynski-Weiss "TBLT instructional effects on L2 prosody: Spanish imperatives vs. declaratives
Social identity and the formation and development of Barranquenho
New Perspectives on Mixed Languages, 2021
Social identity and the formation and development of Barranquenho
New Perspectives on Mixed Languages, 2021
Which que is which?: A squib on reduplicative que complementizers in Iberian Spanish embedded clauses
This paper aims to analyze optional secondary complementizers in Spanish embedded clauses. These ... more This paper aims to analyze optional secondary complementizers in Spanish embedded clauses. These optional complementizers, dubbed recomplementation (Gupton, 2010; Villa-García, 2011; 2012a; 2012b; 2012c), are common in informal registers, are restricted to specific types of predicates (Rathmann, 2012) and are not unique to Spanish but also other Iberian languages (Fernández-Rubiera, 2009; Gupton, 2010; Kempchinsky, 2013). Using data from clitic positions and the behavior of topics, foci and other dislocates in Iberian languages, this analysis posits that the left-periphery of embedded clauses in Spanish contain three possible projections (ForceP >TopicP>FinitenessP) each containing a head with their own instantiation of que ‘that’. It will be shown that what is most commonly labeled recomplementation only refers to the optional reduplicated complementizer que in the head of TopicP while que a subordinating complementizer appears in the head of ForceP and, finally, que in the h...
Variationist Research Methods and the Analysis of Second Language Data in the Study Abroad Context
The Routledge Handbook of Study Abroad Research and Practice
Indiana University Linguistics Club Working Papers
This paper aims to analyze optional secondary complementizers in Spanish embedded clauses. These ... more This paper aims to analyze optional secondary complementizers in Spanish embedded clauses. These optional complementizers, dubbed recomplementation , are common in informal registers, are restricted to specific types of predicates (Rathmann, 2012) and are not unique to Spanish but also other Iberian languages . Using data from clitic positions and the behavior of topics, foci and other dislocates in Iberian languages, this analysis posits that the left-periphery of embedded clauses in Spanish contain three possible projections (ForceP >TopicP>FinitenessP) each containing a head with their own instantiation of que 'that'. It will be shown that what is most commonly labeled recomplementation only refers to the optional reduplicated complementizer que in the head of TopicP while que a subordinating complementizer appears in the head of ForceP and, finally, que in the head of FinP has an exhortative or polarity function. The points addressed here are new contributions to the study of recomplementation. Finally, this paper discusses the implications for a more economical leftperiphery in both embedded and matrix clauses and calls for more experimental research to be done as such phenomena are below the level of speaker consciousness and prescriptively avoided.
Conference Presentations by Jordan Garrett
In Spanish, the coordination of prepositional complements with the structure P[NP-&-NP] (e.g. par... more In Spanish, the coordination of prepositional complements with the structure P[NP-&-NP] (e.g. para flauta y quinteto de vientos ‘for flute and woodwind quintet’) stands in variation with the structure, [PP]-&-[PP], i.e. preposition doubling (e.g. para los obreros y para la gerencia ‘for the workers and for the management’). The present study provides a unified quantitative and formal analysis by combining the use of corpus and constructed data to account for the factors that condition the variation of these two structures.
While little to no prior research has been done with quantitative methods, formal analyses find various asymmetries attributed to the blocking of syntactic processes such as the (in-)availability of distributive readings or pronominal Case asymmetries in P[NP-&-NP] structures as in (1).
(1) Para ti y yo/*(para) mí
‘for you and (for) me’
In these generativist accounts, such asymmetries have previously been accounted for via last-resort mechanisms forcing a syntactic configuration to converge (Camacho, 2003; González-Vergara & Labré, 2010). In functional accounts of variation, Haspelmath (1999, 2007) proposes that individual prepositions’ lexical semantics and level of grammaticalization are the principal predictors of these structures in French meaning that more grammaticalized prepositions that also have a grammatical function such as Case marking (e.g. à ‘to’) are more likely to become routinized and, hence, favor preposition doubling. As last-resort mechanisms are more costly than adding more functional content, a quantitative analysis should support the notion that [PP]-&-[PP] is favored with more grammaticalized prepositions unless the speaker has a specific purpose such as forming a specific set in discourse. Furthermore, by adapting Keller’s (1994) Maxims of Action and constraints on merging syntactic constituents in a derivation (Citko, 2008), it is seen that notions of syntactic economy as well as frequency and grammaticalization work together in influencing speakers’ choice of one structure as opposed to another.
This study analyzes 1407 tokens of three Spanish prepositions in coordination, a ‘to’, para ‘for’ and entre ‘between’, taken from the Corpus del español (Davies, 2002- ) in both of the two structures ([PP]-&-[PP] and P[NP-&-NP]) and analyzes them in a binomial regression done via GOLDVARB X (Sankoff, Tagliamonte, & Smith, 2005). Significant independent variables were:
(1) the individual prepositions themselves, (2) semantic-relatedness (operationalized as a set-subset, possession and/or members of the same set) and (3) the structure of NP conjuncts (bare/full NP or pronoun). Results suggest that semantically related conjuncts favor the doubled structure while non-doubled structures are favored with semantically distinct conjuncts. Furthermore, the level of functional and lexical content of individual prepositions suggests a continuum in which more grammaticalized prepositions such as a favor the doubling while more ‘lexical’ prepositions like entre disfavor it.
Apart from the empirical contribution of presenting a variationist analysis of this phenomenon, this study underscores the importance of including quantitative data to support a formal analysis of variable phenomena. Overall, the results demonstrate that analyzing linguistic variation from one perspective may not fully explain the phenomenon at hand and that drawing from multiple perspectives may better account for variation.
Uploads
Papers by Jordan Garrett
Conference Presentations by Jordan Garrett
While little to no prior research has been done with quantitative methods, formal analyses find various asymmetries attributed to the blocking of syntactic processes such as the (in-)availability of distributive readings or pronominal Case asymmetries in P[NP-&-NP] structures as in (1).
(1) Para ti y yo/*(para) mí
‘for you and (for) me’
In these generativist accounts, such asymmetries have previously been accounted for via last-resort mechanisms forcing a syntactic configuration to converge (Camacho, 2003; González-Vergara & Labré, 2010). In functional accounts of variation, Haspelmath (1999, 2007) proposes that individual prepositions’ lexical semantics and level of grammaticalization are the principal predictors of these structures in French meaning that more grammaticalized prepositions that also have a grammatical function such as Case marking (e.g. à ‘to’) are more likely to become routinized and, hence, favor preposition doubling. As last-resort mechanisms are more costly than adding more functional content, a quantitative analysis should support the notion that [PP]-&-[PP] is favored with more grammaticalized prepositions unless the speaker has a specific purpose such as forming a specific set in discourse. Furthermore, by adapting Keller’s (1994) Maxims of Action and constraints on merging syntactic constituents in a derivation (Citko, 2008), it is seen that notions of syntactic economy as well as frequency and grammaticalization work together in influencing speakers’ choice of one structure as opposed to another.
This study analyzes 1407 tokens of three Spanish prepositions in coordination, a ‘to’, para ‘for’ and entre ‘between’, taken from the Corpus del español (Davies, 2002- ) in both of the two structures ([PP]-&-[PP] and P[NP-&-NP]) and analyzes them in a binomial regression done via GOLDVARB X (Sankoff, Tagliamonte, & Smith, 2005). Significant independent variables were:
(1) the individual prepositions themselves, (2) semantic-relatedness (operationalized as a set-subset, possession and/or members of the same set) and (3) the structure of NP conjuncts (bare/full NP or pronoun). Results suggest that semantically related conjuncts favor the doubled structure while non-doubled structures are favored with semantically distinct conjuncts. Furthermore, the level of functional and lexical content of individual prepositions suggests a continuum in which more grammaticalized prepositions such as a favor the doubling while more ‘lexical’ prepositions like entre disfavor it.
Apart from the empirical contribution of presenting a variationist analysis of this phenomenon, this study underscores the importance of including quantitative data to support a formal analysis of variable phenomena. Overall, the results demonstrate that analyzing linguistic variation from one perspective may not fully explain the phenomenon at hand and that drawing from multiple perspectives may better account for variation.
While little to no prior research has been done with quantitative methods, formal analyses find various asymmetries attributed to the blocking of syntactic processes such as the (in-)availability of distributive readings or pronominal Case asymmetries in P[NP-&-NP] structures as in (1).
(1) Para ti y yo/*(para) mí
‘for you and (for) me’
In these generativist accounts, such asymmetries have previously been accounted for via last-resort mechanisms forcing a syntactic configuration to converge (Camacho, 2003; González-Vergara & Labré, 2010). In functional accounts of variation, Haspelmath (1999, 2007) proposes that individual prepositions’ lexical semantics and level of grammaticalization are the principal predictors of these structures in French meaning that more grammaticalized prepositions that also have a grammatical function such as Case marking (e.g. à ‘to’) are more likely to become routinized and, hence, favor preposition doubling. As last-resort mechanisms are more costly than adding more functional content, a quantitative analysis should support the notion that [PP]-&-[PP] is favored with more grammaticalized prepositions unless the speaker has a specific purpose such as forming a specific set in discourse. Furthermore, by adapting Keller’s (1994) Maxims of Action and constraints on merging syntactic constituents in a derivation (Citko, 2008), it is seen that notions of syntactic economy as well as frequency and grammaticalization work together in influencing speakers’ choice of one structure as opposed to another.
This study analyzes 1407 tokens of three Spanish prepositions in coordination, a ‘to’, para ‘for’ and entre ‘between’, taken from the Corpus del español (Davies, 2002- ) in both of the two structures ([PP]-&-[PP] and P[NP-&-NP]) and analyzes them in a binomial regression done via GOLDVARB X (Sankoff, Tagliamonte, & Smith, 2005). Significant independent variables were:
(1) the individual prepositions themselves, (2) semantic-relatedness (operationalized as a set-subset, possession and/or members of the same set) and (3) the structure of NP conjuncts (bare/full NP or pronoun). Results suggest that semantically related conjuncts favor the doubled structure while non-doubled structures are favored with semantically distinct conjuncts. Furthermore, the level of functional and lexical content of individual prepositions suggests a continuum in which more grammaticalized prepositions such as a favor the doubling while more ‘lexical’ prepositions like entre disfavor it.
Apart from the empirical contribution of presenting a variationist analysis of this phenomenon, this study underscores the importance of including quantitative data to support a formal analysis of variable phenomena. Overall, the results demonstrate that analyzing linguistic variation from one perspective may not fully explain the phenomenon at hand and that drawing from multiple perspectives may better account for variation.