Cover not available
Article published In:
Spanish in Context
Vol. 16:1 (2019) ► pp.22–50

An experimental investigation of differential object marking in Mexican Spanish

| Universidad Autónoma del Carmen
| University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Differential Object Marking (DOM) is a phenomenon widely attested in Spanish. In two experimental studies using production and acceptability judgments we examined the extent to which Mexican Spanish presents some variation among monolingual speakers with respect to expansion of DOM. We tested whether DOM with animate and specific objects is categorical in this variety, and whether DOM is expanding to inanimate definite and indefinite objects as observed by diachronic studies of Mexican and other Latin American varieties. We also tested DOM with other constructions: bare plurals, the verbs like tener and haber, small clauses and causative and perception verbs. Our study contributes new data documenting linguistic variation in native speakers and confirms synchronic and diachronic analyses of DOM in Spanish.
Keywords: Spanish, Mexican Spanish, Differential Object Marking, oral production, acceptability judgments, animacy, definiteness, direct objects
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Differential object marking in Spanish
  • 3.DOM in different varieties of Spanish
  • 4.Study of DOM in Mexican Spanish
    • 4.1Experiment 1: Oral production
      • Participants
      • Instrument
      • Procedure
      • Results
    • 4.2Experiment 2
      • Participants
      • Instrument
      • Results
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 27 February 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.00025.bau
References (47)
References
Aissen, Judith. 2003. “Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21 (3): 435–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alfaraz, Gabriela. 2011. “Accusative object marking. A change in progress in Cuban Spanish?” Spanish in Context 8 (2): 213–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bader, Markus and Häussler, Jana. 2010. “Toward a model of grammaticality judgments.” Journal of Linguistics 461: 273–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Balasch, Sonia. 2011. “Factors determining Spanish Differential Object Marking within its domain of variation.” In Selected Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Spanish sociolinguistics ed. by J. Michnowicz and R. Dodsworth, 113–124. Sommerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Belloro, Valeria. 2007. Spanish clitic doubling: A study of the syntax semantics interface. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo.Google Scholar
Bossong, Georg. 1985. Empirische Universalienforschung. Differentielle Objecktmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
. 1991. “Differential object marking in Romance and beyond.” In New Analyses in Romance Linguistics. Selected Papers from the XVIII Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages ed. by Dieter Wanner and Douglas Kibbee, 143–170. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Brugé, Laura and Brugger, Gerhad. 1996. “On the accusative a in Spanish.” Probus 81: 1–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Company Company, Concepción. 2001. “Multiple dative marking grammaticalization: Spanish as a special kind of primary object language.” Studies in Language 251: 1–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. “El avance diacrónico de la marcación prepositiva en objetos directos inanimados.” In Presente y futuro de la lingüística en España, Vol. II1 ed. by Alberto Bernabé, José Antonio Berenguer, Margarita Cantarero, José Carlos de Torres, 146–154. Madrid: SEL.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 1988. “Agreement vs. Case marking and direct objects.” In Agreement in Natural Languages. Approaches, Theories, descriptions ed. by M. Barlow and C. A. Ferguson, 159–179. Stanford: Center for the Study of language and Information.Google Scholar
Dumitrescu, Domnita. 1997. “El parámetro discursivo en la expresión del objeto directo lexical: Español madrileño vs. español porteño.” Signo y Seña 71: 305–354.Google Scholar
Fábregas, Antonio. 2013. “Differential Object Marking in Spanish: State of the Art.” Borealis. An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics 21: 1–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García García, Marco. 2007. “Differential Object Marking with Inanimate Objects.” In Proceedings of the Workshop Definiteness, Specificity and Animacy in Ibero Romance Languages ed. by G. A. Kaiser & M. Leonetti, 63–84. Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft: Universität Konstanz.Google Scholar
Hoff, Mark. 2018. “Are Argentines a-blind? Acceptability of a-marked inanimate direct objects.” In Contemporary Trends in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics: Selected papers from the Hispanic Linguistic Symposium ed. by J. MacDonald, 121–142. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jaeger, Florian. 2008. “Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformational or not) and toward logit mixed models.” Journal of Memory and Language 59 (4): 434–446. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jaeggli, Osvaldo. 1982. Topics in Romance Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1975. French Syntax: The Transformational Cycle. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Laca, Brenda. 2002. “Gramaticalización y variabilidad: propiedades inherentes y factores contextuales en la evolución del acusativo preposicional en español.” In Sprachgeschichte als Varietätengeschichte ed. by Andreas Wesch, Waltraud Weidenbusch, Rolf Kailuweit, Brenda Laca, 195–203. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
. 2006. “El objeto directo: La marcación preposicional”. In Sintaxis histórica de la lengua española. Primera parte: La frase verbal, vol. 11 ed. by Concepción Company Company, 421–475. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica/UNAM.Google Scholar
Leonetti, Manuel. 2004. “Specificity and differential object marking in Spanish. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 31: 75–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. “Specificity in Clitic Doubling and in Differential Object Marking” Probus, 201: 35–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
López, Luis. 2012. Indefinite Objects. Diferential Object Marking, Scrambling and Choice Function. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lunn, Patricia. 2002. “Tout se tient in Dominican Spanish.” In Structure, Meaning and Acquisition in Spanish ed. by James Lee, Kimberly Geelin and Clancy Clements, 65–72. Sommerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Montrul, Silvina. 2004. “Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morpho-syntactic convergenc.” Bilingualism, Language and Cognition 71: 125–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Differential Object Marking in Argentine Spanish. An experimental study.” In The Handbook of Argentine Spanish ed. by Laura Colantoni and Celeste Rodríguez Louro, 207–228. Frankfurt: Vervuert Iberoamericana.Google Scholar
. 2014. “Searching for the roots of structural changes in the Spanish of the United States.” Lingua 1511: 177–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, Silvina and Bowles, Melissa. 2009. “Back to basics: Differential Object Marking under incomplete acquisition in Spanish heritage speakers.” Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 121, 363–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, Silvina and Sánchez-Walker, Noelia. 2013. “Differential object marking in child and adult Spanish heritage speakers.” Language Acquisition 201: 109–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, Silvina, Bhatt, Rakesh and Girju, Roxana. 2015. “Differential Object Marking in Spanish, Hindi and Romanian as heritage languages.” Language 91 (3): 564–610. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pensado, Carmen. 1985. “La creación del objeto directo preposicional y la flexión de los pronombres personales en las lenguas románicas” Revue Roumaine de Linguistique 30 (2): 123–158.Google Scholar
. 1995. El complemento directo preposicional. Madrid: Visor.Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2013. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [URL]
Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, Miguel. 2007. The syntax of objects. Agree and Differential Object Marking. Doctoral dissertation. University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. 1976. “Hierarchy of features sand ergativity.” In Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages ed. by Robert M. W. Dixon, 121–171. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Suñer, Margarita. 1988. “The role of agreement in clitic-doubled constructions” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 61: 391–434. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Swart, Peter, and Helen de Hoop. 2007. “Semantic Aspects of Differential Object Marking.” In Proceedings of SuB11 ed. by E. Puig-Waldmüller, 568–581. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.Google Scholar
Ticio, Emma and Avram, Larisa. 2015. “The acquisition of differential object marking in Spanish and Romanian: Semantic scales or semantic features?.” Revue Roumane de Linguistique RRL, LX, 4: 383–402.Google Scholar
Tippets, Ian. 2010. Differential Object Marking in Spanish: A Quantitative Variationist Study. Doctoral dissertation. The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Torrego, Esther. 1998. The dependency of objects. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Von Heusinger, Klaus and Kaiser, Georg. 2005. “The evolution of Differential Object Marking in Spanish.” In Proceedings of the Workshop on Specificity and the Evolution/Emergence of Nominal Determination in Romance ed. by Klaus von Heusinger, Georg Kaiser, Elisabeth Stark, 33–69. Konstanz: Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft der Universitaet Konstanz (Arbeitspapier, 119).Google Scholar
Weissenrieder, Maureen. 1985. “Exceptional uses of the accusative A.” Hispania 681: 393–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1990. “Variable uses of the direct-object marker A.” Hispania 731: 223–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woolford, Ellen. 1999. “Animacy Hierarchy effects in Object Agreement.” In New Dimensions in African Linguistics and Languages ed. by Paul Kote. Trends in African Linguistics 31: 203–216.Google Scholar
Zagona, Karen. 2002. The syntax of Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, M. L. 1998. Prosody, Focus and Word Order. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Iranzo, Vicente
2024. The Differential Object Marker in Valencian: Another Failure of Prescriptivism. Languages 9:3 ► pp. 101 ff. DOI logo
Shin, Naomi, Alejandro Cuza & Liliana Sánchez
2023. Structured variation, language experience, and crosslinguistic influence shape child heritage speakers’ Spanish direct objects. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 26:2 ► pp. 317 ff. DOI logo
Callen, M. Cole & Karen Miller
2022. Linguistic Variation in the Acquisition of Morphosyntax: Variable Object Marking in the Speech of Mexican Children and Their Caregivers. Language Learning and Development 18:3 ► pp. 310 ff. DOI logo
Arechabaleta Regulez, Begoña & Silvina Montrul
2021. Psycholinguistic Evidence for Incipient Language Change in Mexican Spanish: The Extension of Differential Object Marking. Languages 6:3 ► pp. 131 ff. DOI logo
Montrul, Silvina & Nicoleta Bateman
2020. Vulnerability and stability of Differential Object Marking in Romanian heritage speakers. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 5:1 DOI logo
Montrul, Silvina
2019. The acquisition of differential object marking in Spanish by Romanian speakers. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 32:1 ► pp. 185 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.