Tis is a contribution from Experience, Variation and Generalization.

Learning a frst language.

Edited by Inbal Arnon and Eve V. Clark.
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
Tis electronic fle may not be altered in any way.
Te author(s) of this article is/are permitted to use this PDF fle to generate printed copies to
be used by way of ofprints, for their personal use only.
Permission is granted by the publishers to post this fle on a closed server which is accessible
to members (students and staf) only of the authors/s institute, it is not permitted to post
this PDF on the open internet.
For any other use of this material prior written permission should be obtained from the
publishers or through the Copyright Clearance Center (for USA: www.copyright.com).
Please contact rights@benjamins.nl or consult our website: www.benjamins.com
Tables of Contents, abstracts and guidelines are available at www.benjamins.com
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Developing nrst contrasts
in Spanish verb inection
Usage and interaction
Cecilia Rojas Nieto
Instituto de Investigaciones Filolgicas, Universidad Nacional
Autnoma de Mxico
Tis paper ofers evidence of the strong parallelism between mother and child
usage for exemplars of verb forms. Both mother and child usage reveal little
infectional productivity, a highly skewed distribution of infection forms, and
item-based frequency for specifc infectional forms. Te contrasting forms of
a verb depend on how that verb is modeled in maternal speech. Mother and
child uses of infected forms show small clusters of verbs marked by the same
infectional contrasts. Tis emergent organization does not necessarily point
to depend on abstract guiding principles or on the underlying semantics of
verbs. Rather they direct attention to the pragmatic functions and syntactic
constructions where particular verb-infection combinations occur.
Keywords: Exemplars; Verb infection contrasts; Spanish acquisition
:. Introduction
Studies of morphological development have included as one topic how children
acquire infectional verb forms. Competing theories have produced various
questions and predicted diferent developmental trajectories. Although these
questions have been motivated by diferent theories of acquisition, most share
a common assumption: they expect and look for a uniform and verb-general
developmental trajectory.
In the frst generation of questions, morphological development was
explained by the abstract organization of the morphological system with base
forms, and/or more transparent patterning. Verbs were expected to frst take an
unmarked (basic infected or uninfected) form (Bittner, Dressler & Kilani-Schoch
2003: xxii). And, despite obvious cross-linguistic diferences, the default was con-
sidered to be an infnitival form (Wexler 1994, 1998). Questions posed by the
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
,| Cecilia Rojas Nieto
second generation were more attentive to verb semantics and cognitive elabora-
tion. In one infuential view, verbs and infectional categories were acknowledged
to form diferent semantic groups, and to select each other in terms of a proto-
type account. Predictions about early infections on verbs were based on Aktion-
sart: Perfective infections were expected with telic verbs (achievements and
accomplishments); nonperfective infections, like present or progressive forms,
were expected with atelic verbs (activities and states) (Jackson-Maldonado &
Maldonado 2001; Li & Bowerman 1998; Shirai & Andersen 1995).
A third generation of questions, informed by usage-based views of language,
has opened up the debate still further. Usage-based research in both adult and
child language has shown that the overall regularities that abstract grammar attri-
butes to language difer from the skewed and biased selections of actual language
use (Bybee & Hopper 2001). Te supposition that infection is optimally produc-
tive and that every lexical verb combines with every available verb infection is
far from realistic (Stump 1998: 42). Verbs selectively combine with particular
infections only under particular conditions of use. Lexical semantics, syntactic
constructions, and discourse organization all have an impact on verb + infection
combinations. Tis results in highly selective, skewed, even idiosyncratic combi-
nations of verbs and infectional forms (Bybee 1985, 1988; Clark 1996; Moreno de
Alba 1978; Shirai & Andersen 1995).
Childrens experience of verb infection in parental usage appears to be
equally, or maybe even more skewed. Specifc patterns of sumxation and infec-
tion are related, even restricted, to subclasses of verbs (Aksu Ko 1998; Clark
1996, 1998; Kntay & Slobin 1996). Lexical semantics biases verb-infection
combinations in adult usage, and hence in the exemplars children have access to
(Aguirre 2002; Aksu Ko 1998; Jackson-Maldonado & Maldonado 2001; Jackson-
Maldonado 2004; Shirai 1998; Shirai & Andersen 1995; Stoll 1998). Experimen-
tal testing has shown childrens conservative learning of modeled exemplars
(Brooks & Tomasello 1999; Li & Bowerman 1998; Stoll 1998; Tomasello 2003;
Teakston, Lieven & Tomasello 2003). We would expect similar sensitivity to the
selective and skewed combinations of verb infection found in parental usage.
Usagebased research on language development does not predict a unique
developmental trajectory for verb infections, but instead assumes the emergence
of morphology will be item-based, dependent on the concrete exemplars of verb
forms children have heard used (Tomasello 2000, 2003). From this view, both
idiosyncratic verb-infection pairings, and even regular combination if any, appar-
ently due to abstract guiding principles (e.g. the proposed Aktionsart-infection
solidarities, or unmarked form selections), should refect the prominence of adult
exemplars of verb-infection pairs, which instantiate and model both general and
particular uses of verb forms.
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
Verb infection in Spanish ,,
Usage predicts that morphological development will not follow a particular
course; rather, one should fnd particular verb-infection pairings and emer-
gent regularities, but not any general trajectory for infectional forms. It also
predicts that combinatorial regularities and idiosyncratic forms will be related
to childrens experience. In short, verb infection learning is lexically based
(Lieven, Pine & Baldwin 1997). Infectional forms are experienced in concrete
exemplars with specifc verbs, so those particular infected forms are learned
with those particular verbs, and there is no initial default nor a generalized
trajectory for all verbs. Te adults combinatorial options and modeled regu-
larities will emerge in the childs uses in a piecemeal fashion. Tese provide
the building blocks for latter schematizations (Bowerman 1985; Elman 1990;
Pine, Lieven & Rowland 1998; Pizzuto & Caselli 1992, 1994; Stemberger &
MacWhinney 1988; Tomasello 2003).
i. Method
i.: Focus and scope
Given the variable conditions that may afect the learning of verbal infections
from skewed parental usage, this study focuses on the emergence of contrasting
infected forms for early verbs in a child learning Mexican Spanish. I adopt a
usage-based perspective (Bybee 1988; Bybee & Hopper 2001; Lieven, Pine & Bald-
win 1997; Tomasello 2000, 2003), with the goal of describing the frst contrast-
ing infections that appear with specifc verbs, and identifying any preferences in
particular verbs for specifc infectional forms. I also examine the possible impact
of concrete exemplars of verb infection for the early development of a verb para-
digm. Te research questions I address are the following:
1. What are the frst contrasting infectional forms for a verb? How do early
verbs develop a paradigm? Do all verbs follow a common trajectory or do
they display lexically-specifc patterns of morphological development?
2. How are earlier contrasting infections for child verbs related to the same verb
forms in maternal uses?
i.i Te data
Te data consist of the longitudinal records of verbs produced spontaneously by
one child, an urban middle class Mexican Spanish monolingual girl, aged 19 to
26 months (MLU 1;2 2;5), and all the maternal verbs addressed to this child.
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
,o Cecilia Rojas Nieto
Te verbs were obtained from ETAL: Etapas tempranas en la adquisicin del len-
guaje (Rojas-Nieto 2007).
1
All the lexical verbs and infection forms produced by the child have been
identifed (122 lexical verb types, 3666 tokens). Tese data come from 20 two-hour
recording sessions, made at 7-to-10-day intervals, for some 68 hours of sampling
per month. Tis sampling corresponds to about 2 to 3% of the childs estimated
production (Tomasello & Stahl 2004: 105). Studies of sampling have shown that
for at least some phenomena, 4-hour samples per month have a close ft to inten-
sive diary data (Rowland, Fletcher & Freudenthal 2008: 19). I consider 68 hours
per month to be adequate for testing lexical specifcity in early verb infection
combinations. At the same time, the documentation for particular verbs and verb
infection combinations presents some dimculty. High frequency verbs are amply
documented; low frequency verbs are not. Te fact is that some verbs occur in
only one session, with a reduced number of tokens, maybe just one, and no infec-
tional change. Other verbs are very frequent and display a variety of infections
(e.g. ir go). Some frequent verbs reveal no infectional diversity, and are used
exclusively in a single form (e.g. mirar look). Infectional diversity, then, does
not depend directly on verb frequency. Nevertheless, since my aim here is to
track the emergence of infectional contrasts, I have set criteria so as to include
particular verbs in tracing the emergence of infected forms. By defnition, no
one token-one sample, or one sample-one single infection verb is appropriate in
such an analysis. Tis by itself eliminates from consideration some 30 verbs, out
of the total 122 types. Te remaining 92 verbs provide the material for the overall
analyses. A more stringent criterion pertains to the infectional development of
specifc verbs. I set a minimal Freq(uency) + Req(uired) criterion, where Freq
requires at least 5 tokens of each verb. Req requires that each verb be used in three
diferent sessions. Together, these two criteria (Freq + Req) select 62 verb types
from the childs lexical inventory. Tese represent half (51%) the total verb types
used by the child (n = 122), and 3,526 tokens, or 96% of the total 3666 occur-
rences of verbs. Tese 62 verbs, then, should yield a clear picture of the way verbs
develop, and the infectional forms that emerge over time.
To test the possible efect of maternal verbs in childs early infected forms, I
identifed all verbs the mother addressed to the child (202 verb types), but consid-
ered only the 92 verbs matched to the childs verbs for overall counts. In addition,
to see if the childs infectional patterns with a particular verb relate to the mothers
usage, I focus on the 62 verbs that meet the Freq + Req criteria for the child. When
:. ETAL is a longitudinal database from the Instituto de Investigaciones Filolgicas, Univer-
sidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico, supported by Conacyt (Project 30798-H).
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
Verb infection in Spanish ,
the mothers verbs present a variable but uneven number of forms, I set Freq (n > 5),
to highlight the main infectional contrasts for that verb.
i. Infectional forms in Spanish
Spanish is a richly infected fusional language. Verbs may have as many as 44
infections in Mexican Spanish, which has lost 2v forms across all paradigms. Verb
infections are mainly fused: a morphological form can simultaneously code tense,
aspect, mode, person and number. Tere are three verb classes, each identifed
by its theme vowel: -a, -e, -i. Tere is no unmarked verb form, unless the radical
(root + vowel theme) is so considered. For regular verbs, the radical form displays
both imperative and indicative present 3sc forms (come t imv you eat; l come
he eats). Te infnitive is marked with a fnal -r (cantar sing, temer fear, partir
depart). Te only imperative form in Mexican Spanish is a 2sc form. For negative
imperative functions, the subjunctive forms are used: no comas (eat-sUv,.2sc dont
eat), with subjunctive 3v forms for plural addressees (coman eat-sUv,.3vi you.2vi
eat). Te loss of 2v infections in Mexican Spanish (cantis, sing-vvis.2vi, cantad
sing-imv.2vi) has led 3v forms to be used instead (cantan you sing.vvis.3vi =
2vi; canten sing-sUv,.vvis.3vi = 2vi). Te most frequent verbs in maternal and
child speech (ser to be, ir to go, hacer to do, to make, estar to be [locative]) are
irregular and contain some suppletive forms.
. Analysis
.: Infectional inventory
Infectional forms in child usage. During the period under study, the infectional
categories the child uses attain 16 diferent infection types. Te most prominent
forms are imperatives, infnitives and 1sc, 2sc, and 3sc present tense forms; but
subjunctives and past indicative forms also occur (Rojas-Nieto 2003a). Infection
distribution among lexical items is severely skewed. Te verb infection inven-
tory includes verbs with a single infected form across some (or even all) samples
and verbs with a relatively large number of diferent infected forms. Te data in
Figure 1 does not include the 30 verbs characterized as one token-one sample, or
one sample-one infectional form verbs. Otherwise there would be a misleading
apparent increase of the verb group with just one infection form.
On a closer view of how particular lexical items ft into this fgure, we fnd that
verbs with two-infectional forms by themselves constitute the more robust group
(20 types, 22%). By the end of the period, half the verbs have reached between 3
and 6 infectional forms (46 types, 50%), and 16 verbs (18%) still have only one
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
,8 Cecilia Rojas Nieto
single infectional form. Only the irregular, suppletive, and highly frequent verb ir
go reached 12 infection forms. Some highly frequent verbs (9 types, 10%) have
appeared with between 7 and 9 forms: e.g. poner put, quitar take/move of, ver
see, dormir sleep, pasar cross, comer eat.
V
e
r
b

t
y
p
e
s
25
20
15
10
5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 12
Childs Inflection diversity
Figure 1. Infectional diversity in the childs verbs (n = 92)
Infectional diversity in maternal verbs. Te overall infectional variety of lex-
ical verbs is much the same in the mothers speech as in the childs. Although
the mothers verbs display more infections, they still fall short of the 44 possible
infections a Spanish verb can take. Te lexical distribution of verb infections in
maternal usage is as varied as in the child.
Te mothers lexical verbs may be used with diferent numbers of infectional
forms, from 1 to 20. Half the verbs occur with 1 to 4 infected forms (n = 41, 50%).
Te rest take between 5 and 12 infections. Tere are just three verbs with a still
wider variety of forms: poner put (n = 14), ir go (n = 15), and hacer make, do
(n = 20).
15 20
V
e
r
b

t
y
p
e
s
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0
Mothers Inflection diversity
Figure 2. Infection diversity in maternal verbs (n = 92)
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
Verb infection in Spanish ,
Tis high infectional diversity disguises the fact that many verb + infection
pairs are rare. What is most common in maternal usage is adherence to one, two
or three main infected forms, the rest being very infrequent. So, on a closer Req +
Freq (n > 5) constrained view, then, infectional diversity is reduced: regardless of
the number of infected forms for a specifc verb, only a handful among them is
used frequently: the most diverse of the 62 matched verbs reduces to just 8, and
20 verbs (32%) have just one dominant infected form (Figure 3).
To get a better idea of how this reduction in infectional diversity occurs,
consider the three most highly infected verbs: among the 20 infected forms of
hacer make, do, only 8 are used more than fve times each: hacer (ii = 33); hace
(vvis.3sc = 26), haces (vvis.2sc = 11); hizo (v.s1.3sc = 9); hacen (vvis.3vi = 8),
hiciste (v.s1.2sc = 6), hacemos (vvis.1vi = 6), hago (vvis.1sc = 6). Only eight
infected forms out of 15 used with ir go appear in more than fve tokens: vamos
(vvis.1vi = 121), va (vvis.3sc = 40), vas (vvis.2sc = 31), ir (ii = 11), (se) fue
(v.s1.3sc = 7). For the verb poner put, only fve forms out of the 14 used are
common: poner (ii = 41); pon(lo) (imv = 22), pongo (vvis.1sc = 15) ponemos
(vvis.1vi = 13), ponga (sUv,.3sc = 7).
15
25
10
20
5
L
e
x
i
c
a
l

v
e
r
b
s
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0
Mothers signifcant inflectional diversity (n > 5)
Figure 3. Signifcant infectional diversity in mothers verbs (n > 5)
Although comparative data are not really available, this may be the normal
case in maternal speech, even if the language has highly infected verbs. Kntay &
Slobin (1996: 274) made similar observations for the Turkish verb koy put, with 18
infected forms and 126 tokens. Only four infected forms had fve or more tokens:
(i) koy put (n = 53); (ii) koy-ma, put-ic dont put (n = 20); (iii) koy-alm, put-
ov1.1vi lets put (n = 18); (iv) koy- acag-m, put-iU1.1sc I will put (n = 5). Te
forms koy-acag-iz put-iU1.1vi well put and koy-acak-sin put-iU1.2sc youll put
were used only 4 times, and the 12 remaining infected forms had just one or two
tokens each.
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
oo Cecilia Rojas Nieto
Data like this make clear that the childs experience with infectional forms
for particular verbs is quite diverse. It is seldom the case that every verb appears
with the same infected forms. Frequently used verbs rarely present a wide num-
ber of infected forms. And verbs with a wide number of infected forms do not
make equivalent use of each one of them. Te child experiences verb infection
combinations in adult usage that are skewed on a variety of dimensions.
.i Developing a verb paradigm
Te overall infectional variety in child verbs only gradually attains the point rep-
resented in Figure 1. Almost every verb is used frst with a single infected form
(Aguado 2004; Aguirre 2002; Ezeizabarrena 1996; Gathercole, Sebastin & Soto
1999; Rojas 2003a; Serrat & Serra 1996), and progressively adds contrasting forms
to develop what may count as a miniparadigm (Aguirre 2003; Bittner, Dressler, &
Kilani-Schoch 2003; Gathercole, Sebastin & Soto 2003).
Table 1. Gradual emergence of contrasting infected forms in the 62 verbs
ftting Req + Freq criteria by age
IFs per verb item 19m 20m 21m 22m 23m 24m 25m 26m
IFs = 1 7 12 23 18 14 6 4 3
IFs = 2 1 3 10 12 10 11 6
IFs = 3 4 9 17 11 9
IFs = 4 1 4 14 7 12
IFs = 5 1 1 5 8 8
IFs = 6 1 3 9 14
IFs = 7 0 3 2
IFs = 8 1 2 4
IFs = 9 0 2
IFs = 10 1 0
IFs = 12 1
Table 1 illustrates this: verbs ascending move from lef to right, with a grad-
ual non-monotonic and asynchronous displacement of a lexical verb from a sin-
gle infected form to a varied set of contrasting infectional forms. Tis move is
dependent on each particular verb, with no specifc rhythm or targeted move-
ment towards particular infectional forms. Even highly frequent verbs do not
necessarily lose the one-infectional form per verb profle. Nevertheless, around
2223 months of age there is a change. While at 22 months most verbs have a
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
Verb infection in Spanish o:
single infected form, by 23 months most verbs already have two or more con-
trasting forms. When the child reaches 24 months, she also produces some new
verbs, verbs possibly learned from the start with two infectional forms, although
most verbs are still learned initially with one infected form only.
Te movement observed is this: Te child learns a verb together with a single
infection; then she adds a new form of the same verb, with a focused infectional
contrast. Tis step is then repeated. Tis process is what underlies the numbers
in Table 1. So, a verb with n infected forms in a given cell has probably advanced
from an n 1 cell, and then moves on into the cell of verbs with n + 1 infections
(Rojas-Nieto 2003a).
Te next section of this paper focuses on the 2223 month period, when infec-
tional contrasts start to emerge in increasing numbers. Trough this small but sig-
nifcant window in time, it is possible to identify what could bias early infection
selection and fnd those contrasting infections that are adopted frst.
. Ways to develop a paradigm: First infectional contrasts
Te child learns every verb together with one infectional form. Tere is no evi-
dence of bare root adoption. But the frst infection for a given verb may difer
from verb to verb, with no one form used as a default. Even when the lexical inven-
tory reaches 26 verbs, and most verbs display a single infectional form (except ir
go, caer fall, and tener have), the infectional range covers a range of morpholog-
ical forms and infectional categories (imv, ii, vvis.1sc/2sc/3sc, v.s1.1sc/3sc,
sUv,.2sc). From this diversifed start, paradigm formation necessarily follows
diferent developmental trajectories for diferent verbs.
Verbs add diferent infectional contrasts and reach a variable number
of infectional forms depending on the particular verb. Verbs that kept a single
infected form with highly formulaic uses across all seven months under scrutiny
included mirar look, andar go on, fjarse pay attention, mandar command; others
early on added additional infected forms, like the irregular and suppletive ir go,
instantiated by three diferent forms: voy, vvis.1sc I go, vamos vvis.1vi Lets go,
(no) vayas sUv,.2sc (dont) go. Ir was the only verb to attain 12 diferent mostly
suppletive infectional forms.
Not just readiness to add a contrasting verb form, but also the way infec-
tional paradigms emerge is item-based, unpredictable, and diversifed. Te con-
trasts among verb infections for a single verb may result in an elaborate mosaic
of verb infection pairs. Tis diversity complements evidence for verb-infectional
splits related to the semantic properties of verbs, such as the relation between
telic verbs and past infection, or between present participles and atelic activity
verbs. Te morphological splits attested here reveal how lexical verbs are used,
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
oi Cecilia Rojas Nieto
and so highlight the childs sensitivity to functional and constructional factors in
verb infections. In what follows we will see how diferent verbs add contrasting
infectional forms.
Person contrasts. Te most frequent trajectory to add an infectional form cor-
responds to verbs that take contrasts referring to diferent persons (Gathercole,
Sebastin & Soto 2003). Even in the earlier point of verb-infection diversifcation,
verbs with two or three infected forms focused on diferent personal forms out-
number all other verb groups. Depending on the verb, the person contrast may be
in a present tense (1a) or past tense form (1b).
(1) a. tiene tienes tengo have-vvis.3sc/2sc/1sc
juegas jugamos juego play-vvis.2sc/1vi/1sc
it has/you have/I have
you play/we play/I play
b. pegaste pegu hit-vvis.2sc/v.s1.1sc you hit (vvis)/I hit (v.s1)
hice hiciste make-v.s1.1sc/2sc I made/you made
Although most verbs in this group add diferent person forms (mainly 1sc, 2sc,
and 3sc, or 1vi, not the late 3vi forms), some verbs reduce the contrast space to
1sc and 2sc infectional forms. Tey focus the speech participants, with no direc-
tional default: a given verb may present frst an infected form referring to a 1sc
and then add one referring to a 2sc (2a); or the opposite: the frst verb form may
be a 2sc one, and the next form a 1sc one (2b).
(2) a. quiero/quieres? want-vvis.1sc/2sc I want/do you want?
(no) puedo/puedes? can-vvis.1sc/2sc I can (not)/can you?
b. ayudas?/ayudo? help-vvis.2sc/1sc
acompaas?/acompao? go with-vvis.2sc/1sc
do you help (x)?/do I help (x)?
do you go with (x)?/do I go with (x)?
Verbs that add a person contrast in the present tend to include an infnitive (ii)
among their three frst infectional forms, as in (3). However ii can also be the
frst infectional form for some verbs (9/62) and then form a mini-paradigm in
contrast with other present forms.
(3) juegas jugamos (a) jugar play-vvis.2sc/vvis.1vi/ii
bajo bajas bajar go.down-vvis.1sc/vvis.2sc/ii
you/we play/to play
I/you go down/to go down.
Contrasting number. Another group of verbs always refers to a 3rd person,
but shows an infectional contrast in number by using 3sc vs. 3vi forms, as in (4):
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
Verb infection in Spanish o
(4) es son 'be.permanent.vvis.3sc/3vi it is/they are
est estn be.transient-vvis.3sc/3vi it is (located)/they are (located)
pica pican irritate-vvis.3sc/3vi it irritates/they irritate
Contrasting tense. Some verbs may be anchored on a person form (generally
3sc), and then add a tense contrast. Tis trajectory may start from a v.s1.3sc, and
then add a vvis.3sc (5a). Alternatively, the child may add a v.s1.3sc verb form to
a verb formerly used only in a vvis.3sc form (5b).
(5) a. cay cae fall-v.s1.3sc/vvis.3sc it fell/it falls
sali sale go out-v.s1-3sc/vvis.3sc it ran out/it runs out
b. hay haba exist.vvis.3sc/imvi.3sc there is/there was
gusta gust please-vvis.3sc/v.s1.3sc it please/it pleased.
Contrasting mood. Expressing a mood contrast is another way for a verb
to develop a mini-paradigm. Tese cases typically involve various 2sc person
forms: imperative, vvis.2sc, and sUv,.2sc forms. Tese infectional forms all
have in common the fact that they are used as directives: a plain imperative, a
mild directive vvis.2sc as in (6a), and a subjunctive-prohibitive form, in (6b).
(6) a. sintate (te)sientas? sit-imv = 2sc.viii/vvis.2sc?
dame me das? give-imv = IO.1sc/vvis.2sc?
sit down/will you sit?
give me/will you give me?
b. pasa no pases cross-imv/sUv,.2sc cross/dont cross
agarra no agarres take in hands-imv/sUv,.2sc take/dont take.
Contrasting transitivity and polysemy splits. Other issues come into play when
infectional contrasts refect transitivity changes. One notable contrast involves
the opposition between 3sc middle forms with an unintentional reading, and
agent-responsible constructions with 1sc or 2sc infectional forms (Melis 2010).
Tis contrast goes together with a construction marker that the child adopts
early (Jackson-Maldonado, Maldonado, & Tal 1998): the clitic se miu.3sc/vi,
as shown in (7).
(7) se rompi/romp 3sc.miu = break-v.s1.3sc/break-v.s1-1sc
se acab/acab 3sc.miu = fnish-v.s1.3sc/fnish-v.s1-1sc
It broke/I broke
It ran out/I fnished
Some infectional contrasts related to diferent transitivity uses for the same verb
are also found without a specifc marker. Verbs with both transitive-causative and
intransitive readings rely on diferent infectional forms for each constructional
frame (8ab).
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
o| Cecilia Rojas Nieto
(8) a. abrir open transitive-causative:
abres? abro brela open-vvis.2sc?/1sc/imv=uo.3sc.f
will you open?/I open/open-it
b. abrir open intransitive:
no abre ic.open.3sc/vi It/they do(es) not open
Finally, polysemous verbs may adopt diferent infections for each reading. Tey
develop diferent contrasts and diferent syntactic constructions for each meaning
(cf. Teakston, Lieven, Pine & Rowland 2002). For example, with pasar cross vs.
happen, the activity reading of cross develops a mood contrast (9a), while the
stative sense of happen develops a tense contrast (9b).
(9) pasar cross vs. happen
a. pasa no pases cross-imv/ic.cross.sUv,.2sc
b. qu pasa ? qu pas? Happen-vvis.3sc/v.s1.3sc
cross/dont cross
what happens?/happened?
.| Emergent verb classes
Te diversity of early-infected verb forms, together with the fact that particular
forms are linked to specifc verbs, is congruent with the supposition underlying
this research. Infectional forms are item-based. Tere is no set of foundational
properties that predict which contrast a particular verb will adopt frst. Assign-
ing a verb to a semantic class does not predict which infectional contrast will be
added next.
What is more revealing is to consider post hoc which verbs adopt the same
infectional contrasts. Tis allows us to look at subsets of verbs grouped by the
contrasts they display, and so focus on what they have in common. Part of this
story at age 24 months is told in Table 2, where verbs are grouped by develop-
mental infectional trajectory.
Table 2. Verb clustering around particular infectional contrasts at 2224 months
vvnsoN () moou () 1vNsv () Ncmnvn () 1nnNs:1:v:1v () N-u:mvNs:oNs ()
Tener
have,
possess
Pegarse
hurt self
Sentarse
sit
Caer
fall
Ser
be
Romperse/romper
get broken/brake
Ir
go
Hacer
make,
do
Comprar
buy
Cerrar
close
Gustar
please
Estar
be located
Abrir
open/get open
Ver
see
(Continued)
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
Verb infection in Spanish o,
Table 2. (Continued)
vvnsoN () moou () 1vNsv () Ncmnvn () 1nnNs:1:v:1v () N-u:mvNs:oNs ()
Poner
put
Saltar
jump
Dar
give
Salir
run out
Faltar
be lacking
Acabar/acabarse
fnish/ran out
Cargar
hold in arms
Jugar
play
Llevar
take with
Contar
narrate, tell
Guardar
keep
Servir
be useful
Meter
put/go into
Quitar
remove
Llegar
arrive
Querer
want
Buscar
look for
Haber
exist
Picar
irritate, itch
Poder/se puede
be able/be possible
Acabar
fnish
Poder
be able, can
Agarrar
hold, grasp
Mojarse
get wet
Romperse
get broken
Bajar
put
down
Ayudar
help
Llevar
take
Traer
bring
Caber
ft
Acompaar
go with
Or
listen
Pasar
happens
Quitar
Take
out
Comprar
buy
Pasar
cross, pass
One generalization here is that there is no single developmental trajec-
tory, not even a dominant one. Although verbs that develop a mini-paradigm
around person inflectional contrasts form a robust group, the verbs that do
not display a person contrast but instead a mood, tense, number, or transitivity
contrast, together outnumber the person-contrast group. At 24 months, four
verbs have developed contrasts on different fronts. In these data, the tense
contrast appears in telic verbs like caer fall traer bring, salir go out, but
not exclusively so, since pasar happen, a state verb, also adopts an early tense
contrast. All the same, no previous stipulation can be adduced to explain, on
the basis of verb semantics or morphological markedness, the fact that some
verbs first contrast inflected forms on number, always with a 3P form (ser: es/
son it is/they are; faltar: falta/faltan it lacks/they lack, etc.). Nor is there any
morphological or semantic reason why some verbs display a mood contrast,
associated with the 2P form, and dependent on the pragmatic functions of the
pertinent verbs. As for person-inflected forms adopted early by some verbs,
these are not exclusive to agentive activity verbs, though they are quite numer-
ous in this cell, as are lexical activity verbs in general (Clark 1996). Some
stative and non-agentive verbs first contrast forms on person (caber fit, querer
want, tener have, possess).
In summary, the present data show that: (1) the diversity of infectional con-
trasts for this childs verbs appear similar to uses in parental speech; (2) the par-
ticular infectional options for a verb point towards the discourse and syntactic
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
oo Cecilia Rojas Nieto
environments for uses of that verb; they do not simply result from a local afair
between a lexical item and an infected form.
., Verb infection models in maternal usage
Infectional selections in mother and child verbs. Te comparison between the
childs contrasting verb forms, and matched verb exemplars in maternal usage,
shows that the childs frst infected forms for a particular verb refect the most
frequent use of that verb in the mothers speech. Tis starts early, with the frst
infected form of each verb that is adopted by the child.
On the basis of my analysis of the childs set of 62 verbs, and the matched
verbs from the mother, we can see that when the child learns a verb, she nor-
mally frst picks up either the most frequent form of that verb in parental speech
( = 27, or 44%), or one of the two or three most frequent forms of that verb
( = 19, or 31%). Occasionally, the frst form of a verb is based on some frequent
infected form (fourth, ffh) in the samples of maternal speech ( = 8, or 13%).
And, in a handful of cases, there are too few tokens to identify any model for
an infected form (e.g. quedar stay, pintar paint agarrar take in hands). Two
verbs, though, were probably learned in exchanges with other interlocutors
(e.g. with the father for painting pintar paint), and with the grand-parents
for gardening regar water).
Te parallel between mother and child verb-infection pairs continues with
the emergence of contrasting forms. But at this point, comparing childs verb forms
with the corresponding maternal verbs is not always easy. I applied the Freq crite-
rion (n > 5) to particular verb-infection pairs in order to detect the most prom-
inent verb infection combinations in maternal usage. Te infectional contrasts
frst adopted by the child for a particular verb typically match frequent contrasts in
maternal usage for the same verb. In general, the contrasting infections found in
the childs verbs mirror those in the mothers usage. Tense contrasts are prominent,
mainly anchored to 3P forms, for example, in haber exist, salir go out, gustar like,
pasar happen. Number contrasts are prominent in maternal speech, again, with
the same verbs with a 3sc/3vi infectional contrast in the child for ser, estar be
permanent/be transient, picar irritate, faltar lack (Ponce 2009). Mood contrasts
anchored to a 2sc form involve the verbs dar give, abrir open, oir listen, ver see,
tomar take, in both mother and child. Person-based infectional contrasts, again,
point to the same verbs for both, namely tener have, possess, caber ft, pasar cross,
llevar take with, querer want, poder can, be able, ayudar help.
However, there are some notable gaps in the infected forms used. For
instance, there are no uses of the imperative form of ir go ve(te) , despite the
high frequency of this verb, and the high frequency of the imperative in other
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
Verb infection in Spanish o
verbs. But the imperative form ve(te) is considered rude and not used by either
mother or child (see also Ochs & Schiefelin 1995).
Also notable are certain asymmetries of use, with maternal but no child
usage of such infected forms as the 3vi of certain verbs: salieron they went out,
caben they ft, pasan they cross, tienen they have; the 3sc and 3vi subjunctive
forms: caiga, (may not) fall, or subjunctive forms with a directive function: oiga
you ( = vous) listen, sbase you ( = vous) go up. Tese forms tend to be low
frequency forms for these verbs, below the level of the Freq criterion (n > 5).
Which underlying commonality lexical, semantic, or syntactic governs the
childs uptake of verbs forms is ofen unclear. But the sets of verbs attested in adult
and child speech suggest that linguistic practice, how verb-infection pairs are put
to use, plays a major role.
In sum, if we consider the elaborate net of verb infection forms in the
mothers speech by projecting on them the forms the child shares, we unveil the
forms that most attract the child. Te frst two or three infectional forms for
a lexical verb that the child learns are clearly based on the mothers dominant
uses of that verb.
Verb morphology, syntactic constructions and pragmatic function. Adding
infectional contrasts involves more than a local morphological change, or a local
relation between a lexical item and an infectional form. Rather it is the result of
learning verbs with particular infections in specifc constructional frames. Tis is
evident both in the kind of contrasts verbs display and in the presence of particles
and other elements that index particular constructional frames. Te most clear-
cut evidence that this is so comes from the emergence of constructional cues on
a par with infectional contrasts. Some contrasting infected forms occur only in
particular syntactic frames, e.g. qu pasa?/qu pas? whats happening?, what
happened?. More telling still, verb forms tend to retain some elements of the con-
structions they belong in, such as argument clitics, negative forms and the like, dis-
played initially in fxed place-holder forms (Peters & Menn 1993). Take the middle
voice marker se, used with both present and past 3sc verb forms. Use of se shows
that infection learning goes hand in hand with the learning of constructional
options for the verb. Tis is also clear in transitive imperatives frames, which tend
to keep the object and/or indirect object clitics in recurring prosodic frames, e.g.
bjalo put it down, dmelo give it to me, sintate sit down (yourself) (see Gallo
1994). In much the same way, infnitives may retain a directional preposition, a
to, as in a ver (lets) see, a (dor)mir (lets go) to sleep, thus showing that they have
been extracted from the frequent goal-directed construction with ir a + infnitive
(Aguirre 2003; Ezeizabarrena 2001; Rojas-Nieto 2009), or taken directly from the
preposition + infnitive frame used with directive force (Aguirre 2003: 7). When a
child learns a new verb form, she may keep some elements of the construction in
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
o8 Cecilia Rojas Nieto
which this verb form occurs, including the function of that construction or some
constructional markers, together with the specifc infected form.
As for pragmatic function related to infectional contrasts, the maintenance
of intonation patterns with vvis.2sc forms indexes their directive interpretation.
Tis shows that the child learns infected verb forms along with the pragmatic
functions they serve, a characteristic of early verb uses (Tomasello 1995). Te con-
trast between an imperative and a present tense 2sc interrogative form both
directives, the second a milder one (Rojas 2003b) reveals how children learn to
ask. Subjunctive 2sc verb forms are learned from the maternal prohibitive con-
struction frame (no pegues do not hurt; no pases dont cross; no hagas (x) dont
do that). Te child in turn learns to prohibit acts by adopting a maternal model
that includes as pieces of the constructional frame a subjunctive 2sc verb infec-
tion and the negative particle no. Tese data suggest that the sources of contrasting
verb infections are the constructions in which each verb form is put to use. Te
constructional markers hint at the relevance and association of constructions with
pragmatic functions and particular infectional forms. But more detailed research
remains to be done on these connections.
|. Final considerations
In a nutshell, this study adds to the evidence that childrens frst infections rely on
concrete exemplars of verb use. Morphological development is not simply a matter
of learning successive target forms. How the individual cells of the paradigm for a
specifc verb are flled depends on the lexical item and the functions they encode
in the constructions each verb occurs in.
Tis overview of infected verb forms, in both mother and child usage, reveals
relatively little infectional productivity, a highly skewed distribution of infected
forms, and item-based frequency of specifc infected forms. Te contrasting
forms of a verb depend on how that verb is modeled in maternal speech. Mother
and child uses of infected forms show small clusters of verbs marked by the same
infectional contrasts. Tis emergent organization does not depend on either the
graded semantics or the formal complexity of infected forms. Groupings of verb
infections do not necessarily point to dependence on any abstract guiding prin-
ciples nor on the underlying semantics of the verbs. Rather they direct attention to
the pragmatic functions and syntactic constructions where particular verb infec-
tion combinations occur: children extract and adopt verb infection pairs one at
a time from their discursive-constructional niches. From those constructional
frames, verbs retain in addition to the same infected form a clitic marker, say,
as a formal trace of other verb exemplars adopted with a similar use.
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
Verb infection in Spanish o
Te parallels between mother and child usage for exemplars of verb forms in
this study adds positive evidence for the constructivist view that the child learns
language on the basis of experience with parental usage. In language learning, as
in historical or sociolinguistic change, the replication of language is supported by
the exemplars to which the child has access (Crof 2000; this volume).
Abbreviations
imv imperative
ii infnitive
imvi imperfect past
miu middle voice clitic
v person
v.s1 indefnite past
vvis present
sUv, subjunctive
uo direct object
1sc frst person singular
isc second person singular
sc third person singular
1vi frst person plural
vi third person plural
iv second person + respect
(= vous)
References
Aguado-Orea, J. 2004. Te Acquisition of morphosyntax in Spanish: Implications for Current
Teories of Development. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nottingham.
Aguirre, C. 2002. Te acquisition of tense and aspect morphology: A key for semantic interpre-
tation. In Pre- and Protomorphology: Early Phases of Morphological Development in Nouns
and Verbs, M.D. Voeikova & W.U. Dressler (eds), 163176. Mnchen: Lincom.
Aguirre, C. 2003. Early verb development in one Spanish speaking child. In Development of
Verb Infection in First Language Acquisition: A Cross-linguistic Perspective, D. Bittner,
W. Dressler & M. Kilani-Schoch (eds), 126. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Aksu Ko, A. 1998. Te role of input vs. universal predispositions in the emergence of tense-
aspect morphology: Evidence from Turkish. First Language 18: 255280.
Bittner, D., Dressler, W.U. & Kilani-Schoch, M. (eds), 2003. Development of Verb Infection in
First Language Acquisition: A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bowerman, M. 1985. Beyond communicative adequacy: From piecemeal knowledge to an
integrated system in the childs acquisition of language. In Childrens Language, Vol. 5,
K.E. Nelson (ed.), 369398. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brooks. P. & Tomasello, M. 1999. Young children learn to produce passives with nonce verbs.
Developmental Psychology 25: 2944.
Bybee, J. 1985. Morphology: A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form [Typological
Studies in Language 9]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bybee, J. 1988. Morphology as lexical organization. In Teoretical Morphology: Approaches in
Modern Linguistics, M. Hammond & M. Noonan (eds), 191241. San Diego CA: Academic
Press.
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
o Cecilia Rojas Nieto
Bybee, J. & Hopper, P.M. 2001. Introduction to frequency and the emergence of linguistic
structure. In Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure [Typological Studies in
Language 45], J. Bybee (ed.), 124. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Clark, E.V. 1996. Early verbs, event-types and infections. In Childrens Language, Vol. 9,
C.E. Johnson & E.J. Gilbert (eds), 6193. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Clark, E.V. 1998. Morphology in language acquisition. In Te Handbook of Morphology,
A. Spencer & A.M. Zwuicky (eds), 374390. Oxford: Blackwell.
Crof, W. 2000. Explaining Language Change: An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow: Longman.
Elman, J. 1990. Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science 14: 179211.
Ezeizabarrena, M.J. 1996. Adquisicin de la morfologa verbal en Euskera y Castellano por nios
bilinges. Bilbao: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad del Pas Vasco.
Ezeizabarrena, M.J. 2001. Dos tipos de morfologa verbal, dos tipo de adquisicin en bilinges
vasco-espaoles. In La adquisicin de la lengua materna: Espaol, lenguas Mayas y Euskera,
C. Rojas & L. de Len (eds), 237263. Mxico DF: UNAM-CIESAS.
Gallo, P. 1994. Adquisiciones gramaticales en torno al imperativo: Lo que se aprende dando
rdenes. In La adquisicin de la lengua Espaola, S. Lpez Ornat, A. Fernndez, P. Gallo &
S. Mariscal (eds), 4758. Madrid: Siglo XXI.
Gathercole, V., Sebastin, E. & Soto, P. 1999. Te early acquisition of Spanish verbal morphology:
Across-the-board or piecemeal knowledge? International Journal of Bilingualism 3: 133182.
Gathercole, V., Sebastin E. & Soto, P. 2003. Te emergence of linguistic person in Spanish-
speaking children. Language Learning 52: 679722.
Jackson-Maldonado, D. 2004. Verbal morphology and vocabulary in emergent bilinguals. In
Bilingual Language Development and Disorders in Spanish-English Speakers, B. Goldstein
(ed.), 131161. Baltimore MD: Brookes.
Jackson-Maldonado, D. & Maldonado, R. 2001. Determinaciones semnticas de la fexin verbal
en la adquisicin temprana del espaol. In La adquisicin de la lengua materna: Espaol, len-
guas Mayas y Euskera, C. Rojas & L. de Len (eds), 165200. Mxico DF: UNAM-CIESAS.
Jackson-Maldonado, D., Maldonado, R. & Tal, D. 1998. Refexive and middle markers in early
child language acquisition: Evidence from Mexican Spanish. First Language 18: 403429.
Kntay A. & D.I. Slobin. 1996. Listening to a Turkish mother. Some puzzles for acquisition. In
Social Interaction, Social Context, and Language: Essays in Honor of Susan Ervin-Tripp,
D.I. Slobin, J. Gerhardt, J. Guo & A. Kyratzis (eds), 266286. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Li, P. & Bowerman, M. 1998. Te acquisition of lexical and grammatical aspect in Chinese. First
Language 18: 311350.
Lieven, E., Pine, J. & Baldwin, G. 1997. Lexically based learning and early grammatical develop-
ment. Journal of Child Language 24: 187220.
Melis, Ch. 2010, February. Distinciones lingsticas entre la intencin, la responsabilidad y
el accidente. Seminario Multidisciplinario, Presentacin, Instituto de Investigaciones
Filosfcas, UNAM.
Moreno de Alba, J.G. 1978. Valores de las Formas Verbales en el Espaol de Mxico. Mxico DF:
Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico.
Ochs, E. & Schiefelin, B. 1995. Te impact of language socialization on grammatical develop-
ment. In Te Handbook on Child Language, P. Fletcher & B. MacWhinney (eds), 7394.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Peters A. & Menn L. 1993. False starts and fller syllables: Ways to learn grammatical mor-
phemes. Language 69: 742777.
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
Verb infection in Spanish :
Pine, J.M., Lieven, E. & Rowland, C.F. 1998. Comparing diferent models of the development of
the English verb category. Linguistics 34: 807830.
Pizzuto E. & Caselli, M.C. 1992. Te acquisition of Italian morphology: Implications for models
of language development. Journal of Child Language 19: 491557.
Pizzuto E. & Caselli, M.C. 1994. Te acquisition of Italian verb morphology in a cross-linguistic
perspective. In Other Children, Other Languages: Issues in the Teory of Language Acquisi-
tion, Y. Levy (ed.), 137188. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ponce, X. 2009. La adquisicin temprana de los verbos copulativos ser y estar en espaol. MA
thesis, Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico.
Rojas-Nieto, C. 2003a. Early acquisition of Spanish verb infexion: A usage-based account,
Psychology of Language & Communication 7: 1736.
Rojas-Nieto, C. 2003b. Efectos del uso lingstico en la construccin temprana de peticiones.
Variantes de fexin en los verbos directivos. Lingstica 13: 179215.
Rojas-Nieto, C. 2007. La base de datos ETAL. Etapas tempranas en la adquisicin del lenguaje.
Jornadas Filolgicas 2005, 575599. Mxico DF: Instituto de Investigaciones Filolgicas-
Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico.
Rojas-Nieto, C. 2009. Before grammar. Cut and paste in early complex sentences. In Hispanic
Child Languages: Typical and Impaired Development [Language Acquisition and Language
Disorders 50], J. Grinstead (ed.), 143174. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Rowland, C.F., Fletcher, S.L. & Freudenthal, D. 2008. How big is big enough? Assessing the reli-
ability of data from naturalistic samples. In Corpora in Language Acquisition Research: His-
tory, Methods, Perspectives [Trends in Language Acquisition Research 6], H. Behrens (ed.),
124. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Serrat, E. & Serra. M. 1996. La adquisicin de la sintaxis. Formacin de la categora verbal. In
Estudios sobre la adquisicin del Castellano, Cataln, Eusquera y Gallego. M. Prez Pereira
(ed.), 157164. Santiago de Compostela: Universidad de Santiago de Compostela.
Shirai, Y. 1998. Te emergence of tense-aspect morphology in Japanese: Universal predisposi-
tion? First Language 18: 281309.
Shirai, Y. & Andersen, R.W. 1995. Te acquisition of tense-aspect morphology: A prototype
account. Language 71: 743762.
Stemberger, J.P. & MacWhinney, B. 1988. Are lexical forms stored in the lexicon? In Teo-
retical Morphology: Approaches in Modern Linguistics, M. Hammond & M. Noonan (eds),
101116. London: Academic Press.
Stoll, S. 1998. Te role of Aktionsart in the acquisition of Russian aspect. First Language 18:
351379.
Stump, G. 1998. Infection. In Te Handbook of Morphology, A. Spencer & A.M. Zwicky (eds),
1344. Oxford: Blackwell.
Teakston, A.L., Lieven, E.V., Pine, J.M. & Rowland, C.F. 2002. Going, going, gone: Te
acquisition of the verb go. Journal of Child Language 29: 783811.
Teakston, A.L., Lieven, E.V. & Tomasello, M. 2003. Te role of the input in the acquisition of
third person singular verbs in English. Journal of Speech, Language, & Hearing Research
46: 863877.
Tomasello, M. 1995. Pragmatic contexts for early verb learning. In Beyond Names for Tings:
Young Childrens Acquisition of Verbs, M. Tomasello & W.E. Merriman (eds), 115146.
Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tomasello, M. 2000. First steps in a usage based theory of language acquisition. Cognitive
Linguistics 11: 6182.
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved
i Cecilia Rojas Nieto
Tomasello, M. 2003. Constructing a Language. A Usage-based Teory of Language Acquisition.
Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Tomasello, M. & Stahl, D. 2004. Sampling childrens spontaneous speech: How much is enough?
Journal of Child Language 31: 101121.
Wexler, K. 1994. Optional infnitives, head movement and the economy of derivations. In Verb
Movement, D. Lightfoot & N. Hornstein (eds), 305350. Cambridge: CUP.
Wexler, K. 1998. Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: A new
explanation of the optional infnitive stage. Lingua 106: 2379.
2011. John Benjamins Publishing Company
All rights reserved