In:The Acquisition of Spanish in Understudied Language Pairings:
Edited by Tiffany Judy and Silvia Perpiñán
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 3] 2015
► pp. 281–308
The Acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish by Turkish speakers
Published online: 18 February 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.3.11mon
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.3.11mon
The obligatory use of the preposition ‘a’ with animate, specific direct objects in Spanish (Juan conoce a María ‘Juan knows Maria’) is a well-known instance of Differential Object Marking (DOM). This study investigates the acquisition of DOM in Spanish by native speakers of Turkish, a language that exemplifies DOM on the basis of case marking. Twenty native speakers of Spanish and 32 Turkish-speaking learners of Spanish completed a written production, a written comprehension, and a bimodal acceptability judgment task. Our results show that Turkish learners of Spanish are quite successful at acquiring feature specification and distribution of DOM even at low levels of proficiency. Keywords: Differential object marking; Turkish; Spanish, case; L2 acquisition
References (47)
Aissen, J. (2003). Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 213, 435–448.
Aygen, G. (2002). Finiteness, Case and Clausal Architecture. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.
. (2007). Specificity and subject-object positions/scope interactions in Turkish. Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi/Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 4(2), 56–87.
Bardel, C., & Falk, Y. (2007). The role of the second language in third language acquisition: The case of Germanic syntax. Second Language Research, 23, 459–484.
Bossong, G. (1991). Differential object marking in Romance and beyond. In D. Wanner & D. Kibbee (Eds.), New Analyses in Romance Linguistics. Selected Papers from the XVIII Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (pp.143–170). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bowles, M., & Montrul, S. (2009). Instructed L2 acquisition of differential object marking in Spanish. In R.P. Leow, H. Campos, & D. Lardiere (Eds.), Little Words. Their History, Phonology, Syntax, Semantics, Pragmatics and Acquisition (pp. 199–210). Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In K.L. Hale & M. Kenstowicz (Eds.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language (pp. 1–54). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Erguvanlı, E. (1984). The Function of Word Order in Turkish Grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Grosjean, F., & Py, B. (1991). La restructuration d’une première langue: L’intégration de variantes de contact dans la compétence de migrants bilingues. La Linguistique, 27, 35–60.
Girard, E. (1995). Intégration de variantes de contact dans la compétence de bilingues de deuxième génération. Master’s thesis, University of Neuchâtel, Switzerland.
Guijarro-Fuentes, P. (2011). Feature composition in differential object marking. In L. Roberts, G. Pallotti, & C. Bettoni (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook 11 (pp. 138–164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2012). The acquisition of interpretable features in L2 Spanish: Personal a. Bilingualism, Language and Cognition, 15(4), 701–720.
Guijarro-Fuentes, P., & Marinis, T. (2007). Acquiring the syntax/semantic interface in L2 Spanish: The personal preposition ‘a’. In L. Roberts, A. Gürel, S. Tatar, & L. Martı (Eds.), Eurosla Yearbook 7 (pp. 67–87). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2011). Voicing language dominance: The acquisition of interfaces by English/Spanish bilingual adolescents. In K. Potowski & J. Rothman (Eds.), Bilingual Youth: Spanish in English-speaking Societies (pp. 227–248). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Halloran, B., & Giancaspro, D. (2012, October). Examining L3 transfer models: The acquisition of differential object marking in L3 Brazilian Portuguese. Poster presented at GALANA, University of Kansas, Lawrence.
. (2003). Scrambling, subscrambling, and case in Turkish. In S. Karimi (Ed.), Word Order and Scrambling, (pp. 125–155). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Kural, M. (1997). Postverbal constituents in Turkish and the linear correspondence axiom. Linguistic Inquiry, 28, 498–519.
Laca, B. (2006). El objeto directo. In C. Company (Ed.) Sintaxis histórica del español. Vol I: La frase verbal. México: Universidad Autónoma de México.
Lardiere, D. (2008). Feature-assembly in second language acquisition. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), The Role of Formal Features in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 106–140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
. (2009). Some thoughts on the contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 173–227.
Leonetti, M. (2004). Specificity and differential object marking in Spanish. Catalan. Journal of Linguistics, 3, 75–114.
López, L. (2012). Indefinite Objects. Scrambling, Choice Functions and Differential Marking. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph, 63. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Montrul, S. (2004). Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morpho-syntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(2), 125–142.
. (2011). Interfaces and incomplete acquisition. Lingua, Special issue on Interfaces in Language Acquisition, 212(4,) 591–604.
Montrul, S., & Bowles, M. (2009). Back to basics: Differential object marking under incomplete acquisition in Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(3), 363–383.
. (2010). Is grammar instruction beneficial for heritage language learners? Dative case marking in Spanish. The Heritage Language Journal, 7(1), 47–73.
Montrul, S., & Sánchez-Walker, N. (2013). Differential object marking in child and adult Spanish heritage speakers. Language Acquisition, 20, 1–24.
Montrul, S., Dias, R., & Santos, H. (2011). Clitics and object expression in the L3 acquisition of Brazilian Portuguese. Structural similarity matters for transfer. Second Language Research, 27(1), 21–58.
Pensado, C. (1995). El complemento directo preposicional: Estado de la cuestión y bibliografía comentada. In C. Pensado (Ed.). El complemento directo preposicionalEl complemento directo preposicional (pp. 11–59). Madrid: Visor.
Perpiñán, S. (2013, April). Direct object expression and its semantic properties in Catalan-Spanish bilingualism. 43rd Linguistics Symposium on Romance Languages, City University of New York (CUNY Graduate Center, April 19).
Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, M. (2007). The Syntax of Objects: Agree and Differential Object Marking. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Connecticut.
Schwartz, B.D., & Sprouse, R.A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72.
Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1(1), 1–33.
Ticio. E. (in press). Differential object marking in Spanish-English early bilinguals. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism.
Von Heusinger, K. (2005). The evolution of Differential Object Marking in Spanish. In K. Von Heusinger, G. Kaiser, & E. Stark (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop Specificity and the Evolution/Emergence of Nominal Determination Systems in Romance. Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Konstanz, Arbeitspapier Nr. 119. (pp. 33–70). Konstanz: University of Konstanz.
Cited by (10)
Cited by ten other publications
López Otero, Julio César & Adina Camelia Bleotu
Puig-Mayenco, Eloi & Tiffany Judy
Wall, Albert, Senta Zeugin, Philipp Obrist, Patrick Santos Rebelo & Johannes Kabatek
Ponnet, Aaricia & Ludovic De Cuypere
Smeets, Liz
Judy, Tiffany & Michael Iverson
2020. The distribution of Differential Object Marking in L1 and L2 River Plate
Spanish. In The Acquisition of Differential Object Marking [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 26], ► pp. 133 ff.
Granena, Gisela & Yucel Yilmaz
Montrul, Silvina
2019. Heritage language development and the promise of Processability Theory. In Teachability and Learnability across Languages [Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching, 6], ► pp. 237 ff.
Park-Johnson, Sunny K.
Ponnet, Aaricia, Kristof Baten & Saartje Verbeke
2016. The acquisition of differential object marking in Hindi as a foreign language. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 5:2 ► pp. 101 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 december 2025. 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.
