1887
Volume 31, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0213-2028
  • E-ISSN: 2254-6774
GBP
Buy:£15.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

We examine variable past-time expression in urban Tucumán, Argentina, an understudied region representative of the set of Andean varieties included in Northwestern Argentinean Spanish. We analyze the present perfect (PP) and preterit in two contexts of data collection: a sociolinguistic interview and a contextualized preference task across a range of linguistic and social factors, such as temporal reference and speaker age. Oral results indicate that Tucumán has a higher frequency of use of the PP than has yet been documented in Latin American varieties and even Peninsular Spanish, previously argued to have the highest rate. Preference task results yielded somewhat lower PP rates, confirming that the PP is preferred in speech, whereas the preterit is more viable in written language. The current study documents the highest rate of use of the PP to date across a number of linguistic contexts, contributing to our knowledge of the processes of grammaticalization and task-related differences.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/resla.16013.ter
2018-12-27
2019-03-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amaral, P., & Howe, C.
    (2010) Detours along the perfect path. InS. Colina, A. Olarrea, & A. M. Carvalho (Eds.), Romance Linguistics 2009 (pp.387–404). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.315.23ama
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.315.23ama [Google Scholar]
  2. Arce-Arenales, M., Axelrod, M., & Fox, B. A.
    (1994) Active voice and middle diathesis: A cross-linguistic perspective. InB. A. Fox & P. J. Hopper (Eds.), Voice: form and function (pp.1–22). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.27.03arc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.27.03arc [Google Scholar]
  3. Bybee, J., & Hopper, P. J.
    (2001) Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Massachusetts: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.45
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.45 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bybee, J., Perkins, R., & Pagliuca, W.
    (1994) The evolution of grammar: The grammaticalization of tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Chambers, J. K.
    (2002) Patterns of variation including change. InJ.K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, & N. Schilling-Estes (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (297–324). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Comrie, B.
    (1976) Aspect: an introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Dahl, O.
    (1985) Tense and Aspect Systems. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Donni De Mirande, N.
    (1992) El español actual hablado en la Argentina. InC. H. Alonso (Ed.), Historia y presente del español de América (pp.383–411). Valladolid: Junta de Castilla y León.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Dumont, J.
    (2013) Another look at the present perfect in an Andean variety of Spanish: Grammaticalization and evidentiality in Quiteño Spanish. InJ. C. Amaro et al. (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 16th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp.279–291). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Escobar, A. M.
    (1997) Contrastive and innovative uses of the present perfect and the preterite in Spanish in contact with Quechua. Hispania, 80, 859–870. 10.2307/345107
    https://doi.org/10.2307/345107 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fløgstad, G. N.
    (2016) Preterit expansion and perfect demise in Porteño Spanish and beyond. A critical perspective on cognitive grammaticalization theory. Oslo: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. García, R., & Caracoche, M. R.
    (1977) Frecuencia de uso del pretérito simple y el pretérito compuesto en el habla de San Miguel de Tucumán. Estudio exploratorio y anotaciones sociolingüísticas.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Geeslin, K. L., & Gudmestad, A.
    (2008) Comparing interview and written elicitation tasks in native and non-native data: Do speakers do what we think they do?InJ. Bruhn de Garavito & E. Valenzuela (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 10th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp.64–77). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Harris, M.
    (1982) The “past simple” and “present perfect” in Romance. InM. Harris & N. Vincent (Eds.), Studies in the Romance verb (pp.42–70). London: Croom Helm.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hopper, P. J., & Traugott, E. C.
    (2003) Grammaticalization (2nd ed.). UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165525
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165525 [Google Scholar]
  16. Howe, C.
    (2006) Cross-dialectal features of the Spanish present perfect: A typological analysis of form and function. The Ohio State University: Ph.D. Dissertation.
  17. Howe, C., & Schwenter, S.
    (2003) Present perfect for preterit across Spanish dialects. PennWorking Papers in Linguistics, 9, 61–75.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Howe, C., & Schwenter, S. A.
    (2008) Variable constraints on past reference in dialects of Spanish. InM. Westmoreland & J. A. Thomas (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics (pp. 100–108). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Jara Yupanqui, I. M.
    (2006) The use of the preterite and the present perfect in the Spanish of Lima. University of Pittsburgh: PhD Dissertation.
  20. Johnson, D. E.
    (2009) Getting off the GoldVarb standard: Introducing Rbrul for mixed effects variable rule analysis. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3, 359–383. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2008.00108.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00108.x [Google Scholar]
  21. Kanwit, M., Geeslin, K. L., & Fafulas, S.
    (2015) Study abroad and the SLA of variable structures: A look at the present perfect, the copula contrast, and the present progressive in Mexico and Spain. Probus, 27(2), 307–348. 10.1515/probus‑2015‑0004
    https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2015-0004 [Google Scholar]
  22. Kempas, I.
    (2006) Estudio sobre el uso del pretérito perfecto prehodiernal en el español peninsular y en comparación con la variedad del español argentino hablada en Santiago del Estero. University of Helsinky: PhD Dissertation.
  23. Labov, W.
    (1981) What can be learned about change in progress from synchronic description?InD. Sankoff & H. Cedergren (Eds.), Variation Omnibus (pp.177–200). Edmonton: Linguistic Research, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. (1972) Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Legendre, G., & Sorace, A.
    (2010) Auxiliaries and intransitivity in French and in Romance. InD. Godard (Ed.), Fundamental issues in the Romance languages (pp.171–220). Stanford, Center for the Study of Language and Information.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Martorell de Laconi, S.
    (2001) Algunos aspectos sintácticos y morfosintácticos del español hablado culto de la ciudad de Salta. Departamento de publicaciones, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Universidad Nacional de Tucumán.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Martorell de Laconi, S., & Soto de Matulovich, E.
    (Eds.) (1995) Valores de los pretéritos perfectos en el español y en Salta en particular (pp.722–738). Proceedings fromThe Fourth International Conference on Latin American Spanish. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Piñero, G.
    (2000) Perfecto simple y perfecto compuesto en la norma culta de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria. Madrid-Frankfurt: Iberoamericana – Vervuert.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Poplack, S.
    (2011) Grammaticalization and linguistic variation. InH. Narrog and B. Heine (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization (pp.209–224). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Poplack, S., & Tagliamonte, S.
    (2000) The grammaticization of going to in (African American) English. Language Variation and Change, 11, 315–342.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Real Academia Española
    Real Academia Española (2010) Nueva gramática de la lengua española, ManualMadrid: Espasa-Calpe.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Rodríguez Louro, C.
    (2016) Indefinite past reference and the present perfect in Argentinian Spanish. Studies in Language, 40(3), 622–647. 10.1075/sl.40.3.05lou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.40.3.05lou [Google Scholar]
  33. (2009) Perfect evolution and change: A study of Preterit and Present Perfect usage in contemporary and earlier Argentina. The University of Melbourne: PhD dissertation.
  34. Sankoff, D., & Thibault, P.
    (1981) Weak complementarity: Tense and aspect in Montreal French. InB. B. Johns & D. R. Strong (Eds.), Syntactic change (pp.205–216). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Schwenter, S. A.
    (1994) The grammaticalization of anterior in progress: evidence from a Peninsular Spanish dialect. Studies in Language, 18, 71–111. 10.1075/sl.18.1.05sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.18.1.05sch [Google Scholar]
  36. Schwenter, S. A., & Torres Cacoullos, R.
    (2010) Grammaticalization paths as variable contexts in weak complementarity in Spanish. InJ. Walker (Ed.), Aspect in grammatical variation (pp.13–26). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/silv.6.02sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.6.02sch [Google Scholar]
  37. (2008) Defaults and indeterminacy in temporal grammaticalization: The “perfect” road to perfective. Language Variation and Change, 20, 1–39. 10.1017/S0954394508000057
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394508000057 [Google Scholar]
  38. Shirai, Y.
    (1991) Primacy of aspect in language acquisition: Simplified input and prototype. University of California: PhD dissertation.
  39. Squartini, M., & Bertinetto, P.
    (2000) The simple and compound past in Romance languages. InÖ. Dahl (ed.), Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe (pp.403–439). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Tagliamonte, S.
    (2012) Variationist sociolinguistics: Change, observation, interpretation. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Traugott, E. C.
    (1995) Subjectification and grammaticalization. InD. Stein & S. Wright (Eds.), Subjectivity and subjectivisation (pp.31–54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511554469.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511554469.003 [Google Scholar]
  42. Vendler, Z.
    (1967) Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Wardhaugh, R.
    (2010) An Introduction to sociolinguistics. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/resla.16013.ter
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.16013.ter
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error