Language Acquisition Beyond

Parameters Studies in honour of Juana

M Liceras 1st Edition Anahí Alba De La
Fuente
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/language-acquisition-beyond-parameters-studies-in-h
onour-of-juana-m-liceras-1st-edition-anahi-alba-de-la-fuente/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Minorities Free Speech and the Internet 1st Edition

Oscar Pérez De La Fuente

https://ebookmeta.com/product/minorities-free-speech-and-the-
internet-1st-edition-oscar-perez-de-la-fuente/

Usque ad Radices Indo European Studies in Honour of

Birgit Anette Olsen Bjarne Simmelkjær (Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/usque-ad-radices-indo-european-
studies-in-honour-of-birgit-anette-olsen-bjarne-simmelkjaer-
editor/

Studies in Formal Linguistics Universal Patterns and

Language Specific Parameters Anna Bloch-Rozmej

https://ebookmeta.com/product/studies-in-formal-linguistics-
universal-patterns-and-language-specific-parameters-anna-bloch-
rozmej/

Sor Juana Inde la Cruz and the Gender Politics of

Knowledge in Colonial Mexico 1st Edition Stephanie Kirk

https://ebookmeta.com/product/sor-juana-inde-la-cruz-and-the-
gender-politics-of-knowledge-in-colonial-mexico-1st-edition-
stephanie-kirk/
The Fables of La Fontaine 1st Edition Jean De La
Fontaine

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-fables-of-la-fontaine-1st-
edition-jean-de-la-fontaine/

Semantics in Language Acquisition 1st Edition Kristen

Syrett

https://ebookmeta.com/product/semantics-in-language-
acquisition-1st-edition-kristen-syrett/

The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition

and Writing 1st Edition Rosa M. Manchón

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-routledge-handbook-of-second-
language-acquisition-and-writing-1st-edition-rosa-m-manchon/

Researching Creativity in Second Language Acquisition

1st Edition Ashleigh Pipes

https://ebookmeta.com/product/researching-creativity-in-second-
language-acquisition-1st-edition-ashleigh-pipes/

Second Language Acquisition of Turkish 1st Edition Ay■e

Gürel

https://ebookmeta.com/product/second-language-acquisition-of-
turkish-1st-edition-ayse-gurel/
 Language Acquisition Beyond
Parameters

Studies in honour of Juana M.

Liceras

Anahí Alba de la Fuente

Université de Montréal

Cristina Martínez Sanz

Universidad Nebrija

Elena Valenzuela
University of Ottawa

doi: 10.1075/sibil.51
ISBN: 978 90 272 6626 2 (ebook)
Cataloging-in-Publication Data available from Library of
Congress:
LCCN 2016038789
© 2016 – John Benjamins B.V.
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print,
photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission
from the publisher.
John Benjamins Publishing Company · https://benjamins.com
John Benjamins Publishing Company
Amsterdam/Philadelphia
 Table of contents

Preface and acknowledgments 1

Introduction. L2 acquisition: links, crossroads, parameters and beyond
3
Anahí Alba de la Fuente and Cristina Martínez Sanz

Part I. Parameters and beyond

1. Pro drop then and now: Changing perspectives on null subjects in
second language acquisition 17
Lydia White
2. Reference comprehension and production in bilingual Spanish: The
view from null subject languages 37
Aurora Bel, Estela García Alcaraz and Elisa Rosado
Part II. Features and crossroads L1/L2
3. When masculine as default supercedes L1 transfer: Bilingual
speakers of languages with asymmetric gender systems 73
Rachel Klassen
4. L2 knowledge of gender and number agreement in Spanish noun
ellipsis 99
Joyce Bruhn de Garavito and Marcela Otálora
5. Not just algunos, but indeed unos L2ers can acquire scalar
implicatures in L2 Spanish 125
David Miller, David Giancaspro, Michael Iverson, Jason Rothman
and Roumyana Slabakova
Part III. Word order and complex structures
6. Comprehension of subject and object relative clauses by second
language learners of Spanish 149
Noelia Sánchez Walker and Silvina Montrul
7. On the production of differential object marking and wh-question
formation in native and non-native Spanish 187
Alejandro Cuza, Lauren Miller and Mariluz Ortíz
Part IV. Monolingual and bilingual first language acquisition
8. In search of the perfect tense 213
Joanne Markle LaMontagne and Ana Teresa Pérez-Leroux
9. The acquisition of grammatical gender in L1 bilingual Spanish
237
Raquel Fernández-Fuertes, Esther Álvarez de la Fuente and Sonja
Mujcinovic
10. Applying computing innovations to bilingual corpus analysis
281
Diana Carter, Mirjam Broersma and Kevin Donnelly
Index
 Preface and
acknowledgements

It is our great honour and privilege to present this collective volume,

which pays homage to Juana M. Liceras’ fundamental and enduring
contributions to the field of Spanish Second Language Acquisition
(SLA). In addition to her role as a pioneer in the field, Juana Liceras
has been a leading force in the area of graduate student supervision
and international collaboration both in North America and Europe. The
collection of articles in this volume is a reflection of her impact both as
a mentor and as a collaborative researcher, as they are all written by
leading scholars in the field who are also collaborators, colleagues or
former students of Juana’s.
Juana is a most impressive researcher, mentor and colleague, and
her passion, generosity and unfailing good spirits are both contagious
and inspiring beyond measure. This is what led us to embark on this
project and motivated us to carry it through regardless of the
difficulties and challenges that we faced in the process. Now that our
efforts have finally come to fruition, we are delighted to be able to
offer this outstanding collection of articles to the reader.
Of course, this volume would have been impossible without the
participation and help of a large number of people and we are very
appreciative and grateful to all of them. First, we are truly indebted to
the contributors to this volume for their incredible professionalism and
generosity, for sticking with us through thick and thin and, quite
simply, for making it possible.
 We would also like to express our gratitude to our wonderful
reviewers, whose expertise and insightful comments greatly improved
the quality of the volume. Listed in alphabetical order, we would like to
thank Christie Brien, Joyce Bruhn de Garavito, Barbara Bullock, José
Camacho, John Grinstead, Mª Pilar García Mayo, Jorge González
Alonso, Julia Herschensohn, Mike Iverson, Tiffany Judy, Paula
Kempchinsky, Mireia Llinàs Grau, Luis Ortiz López, Rocío Pérez-Tattam,
Silvia Perpiñán, Ana de Prada, Liliana Sánchez, Roumyana Slabakova
and Nikolay Slavkov.
We are very grateful to María Landa Buil, Kristina Borg, Joanne
Markle-LaMontagne, Maura Cruz, Hugues Lacroix and César Maloof for
their help and assistance in various stages of the process.
Last, but not least, we wish to express our deepest gratitude to
the series editors and everyone at John Benjamins for their patience
and support throughout the process. We are especially grateful to
Jason Rothman for his commitment to this project and for trusting that
we would see it through.
This is a volume in honour of Juana and, as such, we feel that, in
a way, it also pays homage to Vicente, Ivo and Marco. We would like to
dedicate it to the four of them.
 INTRODUCTION

L2 acquisition
links, crossroads, parameters and beyond
Anahí Alba de la Fuente &
Cristina Martínez Sanz
Université de Montréal | Universidad Nebrija

This volume pays homage to the pioneering work and lifetime

contributions of Juana M. Liceras to the field of generative Second
Language Acquisition (SLA). For over thirty years, Juana’s work has
helped shape the dialogue in SLA research, and her ideas continue to
inspire new and established researchers in the field. For this reason,
the volume is as much a tribute to her enormous contribution to SLA
studies as it is to the discipline of generative SLA and its development
in the last three decades.
Juana’s research stands at the crossroads of formal and
experimental linguistics, and her work has contributed to our
understanding of both the language faculty and language development
across the lifespan. In other words, while her implementation of
generative linguistic theories in the study of first and second language
acquisition has contributed to define and strengthen the field of
generative SLA, her research has also been instrumental in validating
proposals of theoretical linguistics as they relate to language
development.
The beginning of Juana’s career, which, in turn, sets the beginning
of generative Spanish SLA studies, is marked by her work on relative
clauses (Liceras, 1983, 1986) and on null subjects (Liceras, 1988,
1989). She has since then returned to both topics later in her career,
incorporating new, relevant venues in SLA research. In fact, as
acknowledged by the contributors to this volume the roots of some of
the lines of research that have developed in the last decade can be
found in Juana’s early work. A case in point is her above-mentioned
research on the null subject parameter in the 1980s (see White, this
volume), in which she already advances syntax-discourse interface
issues related to the distribution of null and overt subjects when she
discusses the connection between syntax and stylistics (Liceras, 1988).
The syntax-discourse interface is an issue that she has further explored
in recent years (Liceras, Alba de la Fuente, & Martínez Sanz, 2010;
Liceras & Alba de la Fuente, 2015).
Throughout her career, Juana has addressed a wide range of
topics and explored language acquisition processes in different
populations. With respect to bilingual and first language acquisition,
her work on null subjects (Liceras, Fernández-Fuertes, & Pérez-Tattam,
2008; Liceras, Fernández-Fuertes, & Alba de la Fuente, 2012) and
copula omission (Fernández-Fuertes & Liceras, 2010) are particularly
relevant. When it comes to L2 acquisition, Juana has explored the null
subject parameter (Liceras & Díaz, 1998; 1999; in addition to the
above-mentioned works), NN compounds (Liceras & Díaz, 2000;
Liceras, Díaz, & Salomaa-Robertson, 2002), deverbal compounds
(Desrochers, Liceras, Spradlin, & Fernández Fuertes, 2003), gender
concord and agreement (studied through code-switching in Liceras,
Fernández Fuertes, Perales, Pérez-Tattam, & Spradlin, 2008;
Fernández-Fuertes, Liceras, & Alba de la Fuente, 2016) and long-
distance dependencies (Liceras, Alba de la Fuente, & Walsh, 2011),
among other topics.
The idea of going “beyond parameters”, which serves as
inspiration for the title of this volume, is already present in Juana’s
work during the mid-1990s (Liceras, 1996; Liceras et al., 1997) and
well represents Juana’s drive and ability to pioneer new ideas and
establish connections between different linguistic approaches, as
exemplified by her work linking SLA research and diachronic research
(Zobl & Liceras, 2006; Liceras, 2007; Perales & Liceras, 2009, among
others) and the connection between SLA and creole language research
(Liceras, Martínez Sanz, Pérez-Tattam, Perales, & Fernández Fuertes,
2006; Liceras, 2007).
Along with her research partners, she has also contributed, with
great generosity, to the creation of corpora that constitute a source of
relevant data for SLA and bilingualism studies. Specifically, the
FerfuLice corpus, available in CHILDES (MacWhinney, 2000), emerged
from Juana’s fruitful long-term collaboration with Raquel Fernández
Fuertes, and the Liceras corpus, available in the SLABank section of the
TalkBank database (MacWhinney, 2007), stems from the Beyond
Parameters project that she developped in the 1990s (Liceras et al.,
1997). The FerFuLice corpus is a longitudinal corpus of English/Spanish
bilingual first language acquisition by two identical twins (1;01-6;11)
and the Liceras corpus includes data from 11 children learning Spanish
as an L2 in Ottawa.
The chapters in this volume, which can all be linked to Juana’s
work, are organized in four parts whose overarching themes are
directly related to Juana’s main lines of research: 1) Parameters and
Beyond, 2) Features and crossroads L1/L2, 3) Word order and complex
structures and 4) Monolingual and bilingual first language acquisition.
What follows is a brief presentation of each part, along with a short
summary of each chapter.

1. Parameters and beyond

The first part of this volume contains two chapters which focus on the
study of the null subject parameter. We find this topic to be an ideal
starting point for the volume, as the history of null subject research is
representative of the history of generative SLA and it also constitutes
an overarching element of Juana’s research, as discussed in the
previous section.
In the opening chapter of the volume, Pro drop then and now:
Changing perspectives on null subjects in second language
acquisition , White presents an insightful overview on how the study
of null subjects has developed and evolved through the years. As the
author indicates, the null subject or pro-drop parameter (NSP) was
probably the first parameter to be proposed in linguistic theory and
one of the earliest parameters to be investigated in the areas of first
and second language acquisition. Since it was first proposed in the
early 1980s (see Chomsky, 1981; Rizzi, 1982; and Jaeggli, 1982), the
study of this parameter has produced a large body of research, which
White breaks down into three phases: 1) The parameter, 2)
Morphological licensing of null subjects, and 3) Null subjects and
discourse.
 In the first phase, the focus was to investigate whether the NSP,
as well as other parameters of UG, can be reset in L2 acquisition. In
the second phase, we find research on the NSP which moves toward
the study of the connection between specific properties of null subjects
in relation and the properties of functional categories. In other words,
one of the main goals in this second phase is to explore the role and
status of functional categories and their associated features in
interlanguage grammars. Finally, in the third phase, we find
approaches which look into the interactions between syntactic
knowledge and other components of the grammar. In this phase,
researchers look beyond grammar itself and consider how the syntax-
discourse interface and related properties of null and overt subjects
play out in L2 acquisition and how this differs from L1 acquisition. As
White points out, even though the development and expansion of this
approach is relatively recent, Liceras (1988) was probably the first to
consider the relationship between discourse and the syntax of null
subjects.
To conclude, White argues for the importance of studying the
relationship between syntax and discourse and the consideration of
processing problems in order to properly account for L2 knowledge and
use of null and overt subjects. She further argues that the investigation
of null subjects remains a fruitful line of research which can still
provide new insight and which continues to inform us on the nature of
interlanguage grammars.
The second chapter, Reference comprehension and
production in bilingual Spanish: The view from null subject
languages , written by Bel, García Alcaraz and Rosado, takes the
syntax-discourse interface as a point of departure to explore the
distribution of null and overt subjects in the Spanish of Moroccan
Arabic (MA)/Spanish bilinguals. This language pairing, which has not
yet been widely studied, poses interesting questions with respect to
the issue of anaphora resolution as, according to the authors, both MA
and Spanish are null subject languages with a parallel distribution of
null and overt subjects.
In this chapter, Bel, García Alcaraz and Rosado examine the
production and comprehension of one group of Moroccan Arabic
(MA)/Spanish bilinguals and a control group of native speakers of
Spanish by means of an acceptability judgment task and a written
narrative task. The results of these tasks suggest native-like strategies
with respect to the comprehension and production of null pronouns,
but not to overt pronouns. In the case of null pronouns, both groups
showed a clear preference for antecedents in subject position, as
predicted by Carminati’s (2002) Position of Antecedent Strategy (PAS).
In contrast, and also in line with previous research, bilinguals showed
an overproduction/over acceptance of overt subjects. In light of this,
the authors argue that a potential positive cross-linguistic transfer
strategy does not seem to be working in this particular case and that
bilinguals seem to have become desensitized to certain pragmatic
constraints. In addition, they defend that these findings are compatible
with Sorace’s (2011) Interface Hypothesis in that, leaving
crosslinguistic influence aside, when dealing with the distribution of
null and overt subjects in Spanish – a phenomenon regulated at the
syntax-pragmatic interface –, challenges encountered by bilingual
speakers will stem from the processing demands and specific
constraints imposed by online production and comprehension.

2. Features and crossroads L1/L2

The second part of the volume contains three chapters that illustrate
mapping challenges that L2 learners of Spanish may confront
regarding a range of phenomena. Specifically, we are presented with a
study of the L2 acquisition of gender from a psycholinguistic
perspective (chapter 3), an analysis of noun ellipsis in order to
investigate L2 knowledge of the distinction between number and
gender features (chapter 4), and a return to interface phenomena, this
time with scalar implicatures, which are regulated at the interface
between semantics and pragmatics (chapter 5).
In the third chapter, When masculine as default supercedes
L1 transfer: Bilingual speakers of languages with asymmetric
gender systems , Klassen studies the strategies in the use of
grammatical gender by L2 speakers of German (a system with three
values, namely masculine, feminine and neuter) whose L1 is Spanish
(a system with two values: masculine and feminine). In order to study
this acquisition context, in which there is an asymmetry between the
gender system of the L1 and that of the L2, the author analyzes the
results of an online picture-naming task administered to a group of L1
Spanish speakers with an intermediate level of proficiency in German
and a group of monolingual German speakers, who served as control.
Previous research has identified an association between the use of
masculine as default in the L2 with speakers of L1s which do not have
gender, such as English, and transfer from the L1 with speakers of
languages which do have grammatical gender, as is the case in Spanish
of Italian. Klassen’s findings, however, stand in contrast with this
association, as she finds that, even though the results reveal a certain
level of surface transfer of gender information from the L1, L1
Spanish/L2 German bilinguals more often resort to the masculine as
default strategy. Klassen argues that this atypical finding can be
attributed to the asymmetry between the Spanish and German gender
systems, which significantly reduces the amount of transfer into the
L2.
In the fourth chapter, L2 knowledge of gender and number
agreement in Spanish noun ellipsis , Bruhn de Garavito and
Otálora take the phenomenon of noun ellipsis as a point of departure
to explore knowledge of the distinction between the features of
number and gender in L2 Spanish. Noun ellipsis occurs when the head
noun of a DP is dropped. In these contexts, the interpretation of the
omitted noun is recovered through an antecedent or by means of non-
linguistic context. Crucially, as first noticed by Masullo and Depiante
(2004), in Spanish, the elided noun and its antecedent must coincide in
gender, but this requirement does not apply to number. This contrast
allows the authors to investigate whether learners are able to
recognize the different behavior of gender features, which are inherent
to nouns and enter the derivation attached to it, and number features,
which enter as affixes and are added late in the derivation.
The authors present the results of two tasks, a grammaticality
judgment task and a production task in which participants were asked
to provide the antecedent of an ellided noun. Both tasks were
administered to an experimental group of adult L2 speakers of Spanish
and a control group of native speakers of Spanish. Although there
were some individual differences, the overall results show that both the
L2 group and the native control group behaved in a similar fashion. In
light of these results, the authors argue that the L2 speakers know the
distinction between the features of gender and number and that
problems observed in the production of gender are not due to any
underlying deficit.
In the fifth chapter, Not just algunos, but indeed unos L2ers
can acquire scalar implicatures in L2 Spanish , Miller, Giancaspro,
Iverson, Rothman and Slabakova study the interpretation of scalar
implicatures (SI) in L2 Spanish by exploring whether non-native
speakers are sensitive to the contrast between unos and algunos.
These two determiners, as explained by the authors, ostensibly map to
English some, but they differ in the distribution of the scalar
implicatures that they allow. Both unos and algunos share meanings
and overlap in terms of their semantic and pragmatic distribution but,
crucially, only algunos straighforwardly triggers the “some but not all”
interpretation, a distinction which becomes apparent in non-partitive
contexts (i.e. in contexts in which all possible agents are performing an
action, as opposed to contexts in which only a subset of the agents
performs the action). As such, the authors defend that SI are ideal to
further study external interfaces (in this case, the semantics-
pragmatics interface), thus adding another property to evaluate
Sorace’s (2011) Interface Hypothesis.
The authors presented a video acceptability judgment experiment
where the subset – whole set distinction was applied to the pair
unos/algunos to a group of advanced L2 speakers of Spanish and a
control group of native speakers of Spanish. The results of the task
reveal that both groups were able to make the relevant distinctions
between the interpretations of unos and algunos. This leads the
authors to argue that advanced L2 learners can acquire subtle context-
driven and language-particular linguistic properties and that the results
of this study challenge the predictions of the Interface Hypothesis.

3. Word order and complex structures

The two chapters that constitute the third part of the volume explore
complex structures, namely relative clauses (chapter 6) and embedded
wh-questions (chapter 7), and the effects of word order in the
acquisition of these structures. Chapter 6 also studies the impact of
aspects such as frequency, L1 influence and language proficiency in
the production and comprehension of relative clauses. In turn, chapter
7 presents a comparison between wh-questions and direct object
marking (DOM) in order to explore whether there is an asymmetry in
terms of the difficulties L2 learners experience when confronted with
these two structures.
In the sixth chapter of the volume, Comprehension of subject
and object relative clauses by second language learners of
Spanish , Sánchez-Walker and Montrul investigate the acquisition of
Spanish restrictive relative clauses by exploring the interaction between
the type of relative clause (subject or object) and the order of the
constituents in the clause (with and without subject-verb or verb-
object inversion).
 In line with Keenan and Comrie’s (1977) Relative Clause
Accessibility Hierarchy, and as predicted by Gass (1979), previous SLA
research has found that subject relative clauses (SRC) are easier to
produce and comprehend than object relative clauses (ORC). However,
according to previous research, in addition to the accessibility
hierarchy, there are other factors that play a role in the processing and
comprehension of these structures. In light of this, the authors set out
to investigate whether L2 speakers of Spanish are, indeed, more
accurate comprehending SRC than ORC, but also whether L1 influence,
construction frequency, and proficiency have an impact on learners’
accuracy rates. To do so, they administered an aural grammaticality
judgment task and an aural picture matching task with time constraints
to intermediate and advanced learners of Spanish who had English as
their L1 and to a group of native speakers of Spanish who acted as
controls.
Results showed that all learners performed well with SRC and ORC
sentences without inversion, which match the English word order, and
that the most problematic condition was SRC with inversion. In
addition, advanced learners showed greater comprehension of ORC
with inversion than intermediate speakers. In light of these results,
Sánchez-Walker and Montrul argue that the acquisition of SRC and
ORC is not necessarily affected by ease of relativization but is rather
guided by factors such as frequency, proficiency, and transfer from the
L1.
In the seventh chapter, On the production of differential
object marking and wh-question formation in native and non-
native Spanish , Cuza, Miller and Ortiz analyze the production of two
linguistic phenomena in Spanish: 1) subject-verb inversion in
interrogative sentences and 2) direct object marking (DOM), which
refers to the obligatory presence of the preposition a to introduce
direct objects that are animate and specific. In order to do so, the
authors administered an elicited production task to a group of native
speakers of English with an advanced level of proficiency in Spanish
and to a group of long-term Spanish immigrants to the United States,
who acted as control.
Considering previous research on interface vulnerability, the
authors hypothesize that, if there is an asymmetry between the two
structures, the more problematic one should be DOM, as subject-verb
inversion in wh-questions is a syntactic-driven operation and DOM is
regulated at the syntax-semantics interface.
The results reveal difficulties with inversion in embedded questions
and with inanimate objects in the case of DOM. Even though both
structures present challenges, speakers seem to present more overall
problems with inversion than with DOM which, as the authors explain,
is in contradiction with previous research on interface-related
phenomena. The authors further argue that structural complexity, inpu
quality and frequency, as well as transfer from English, are all factors
that explain the difficulties L2 learners encounter when it comes to
these two structures.

4. Monolingual and bilingual first language

acquisition
The last three chapters of the volume present studies that deal with
monolingual and bilingual first language acquisition. Chapters 8 and 9
both study child language acquisition and, whereas chapter 8
investigates the monolingual acquisition of the present perfect and the
preterite tense, chapter 9 explores the acquisition of gender by
Spanish/English bilinguals. In turn, chapter 10, which also deals with
bilingual populations, focuses on how to manage and analyze corpus
data through the use of innovative computing tools.
In the eighth chapter, In search of the perfect tense , Markle
LaMontagne and Pérez-Leroux study the acquisition of the present
perfect by Mexican children. In Mexican Spanish, this tense is highly
marked, in contrast with varieties such as Peninsular Spanish, where its
use is more widespread. In their study, the authors investigate whethe
Mexican preschool children can distinguish between the preterite and
the present perfect tenses, whether these children are able to use the
present perfect productively and whether they default to another tense
(simple present or preterite) before they acquire it.
In order to answer these questions, the authors analyzed both
spontaneous and experimental data. First, they analyzed corpus data
from three Mexican children, which showed that the present perfect is
not part of the early stages of syntactic development in these
speakers. In addition, they administered a contextualized sentence
repair task and a contextualized preference-based elicitation task to a
group of 17 monolingual Spanish-speaking children (age range 3;08-
6;06) living in Mexico City. Both tasks were used to elicit the present
perfect and the preterite tenses and the results indicate that Mexican
children produce the preterite robustly in the appropriate contexts. In
contrast, they rarely use the present perfect if unprimed, although they
do use it more productively if primed. The authors also found that, in
present perfect contexts, children most often revert to the present
tense rather than generalizing the preterite. This demonstrates that
children are sensitive to context but, according to the authors, the
selection of the present tense indicates that they focus on the
reference rather than the event time in order to avoid the complexity
of the perfect tense.
In the ninth chapter, The acquisition of grammatical gender
in L1 bilingual Spanish , Fernández Fuertes, Álvarez de la Fuente
and Mujcinovic investigate the emergence of the Spanish gender
system by two English/Spanish bilingual twins, Simon and Leo,
(FerFuLice corpus). More specifically, the authors set out to
investigate: 1) how grammatical gender incorporates into the Spanish
grammars of Spanish/English bilinguals; 2) how concord operates
within the determiner phrase (DP) and 3) whether monolinguals and
bilinguals pattern in the same way in this respect.
The authors present a very thorough review of the literature on
gender assignment and gender concord that covers theoretical
accounts, as well as previous research on the acquisition of gender by
monolingual and bilingual speakers. They follow with an analysis of
Simon and Leo’s production of DPs in Spanish between the ages of
1;01 and 5;09.
In line with previous research on monolingual children, the results
of their analysis reveal a high degree of accuracy and early acquisition
of grammatical gender for the bilingual children, which constitutes
evidence that both morphology and syntax are in place from the first
stage. Specifically, the authors explain that, even in the initial stages of
acquisition, the children do not automatically equate a specific gender
to a given noun ending. This indicates that, when nouns are selected
from the lexicon, their gender feature is already valued and,
consequently, morphology does not guide production. In view of these
results, the authors defend the independence between morphology
and syntax and argue in favour of the notion that grammatical gender
is an inherent property of nouns.
Finally, in the last chapter of the volume, Applying computing
innovations to bilingual corpus analysis , Carter, Broersma and
Donnelly discuss the use of modern, open-source computing tools to
analyze bilingual corpora. In order to illustrate the ways in which new
techniques can facilitate the preparation and analysis of large amounts
of corpus data, the authors discuss an ongoing study that investigates
cognate-triggered code-witching in bilingual speech. For this study,
they analyzed three different bilingual corpora (the Spanish-Welsh
Corpus from Patagonia, Argentina, the Spanish-English Corpus from
Miami, Florida, and the Welsh-English Siarad Corpus from Wales) using
a suite of tools called the Bangor Autoglosser and applied a mixed-
effects model for the statistical analysis of the data extracted.
Throughout the chapter, the authors provide detailed explanations
on how to use these tools and share insights on how to manage and
analyze corpus data. They conclude by encouraging researchers to
develop and make use of new computing tools and methods to handle
corpus text in light of its efficiency in terms of data preparation and
analysis as compared to the more labour-intensive and time-consuming
manual analysis.
References
Carminati, M.N. (2002.) The Processing of Italian Subject Pronouns (Unpublished PhD
dissertation). University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Chomsky, N. (1981.) Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
Desrochers, A., Liceras, J. M., Spradlin, K. T., & Fernández Fuertes, R. (2003.) Can an
on-line response latency task shed light on native and non-native competence in the
deverbal compounds of Spanish?” In J. M. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 6th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference
(GASLA 2002): L2 Links (pp. 64–70). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Fernández Fuertes, R., & Liceras, J. M. (dirs.) (2009.) The FerFuLice Corpus:
English/Spanish Bilingual Twins. [File data]. Available from
http://childes.psy.cmu.edu/data/Biling/
Fernández Fuertes, R., & Liceras, J. M. (2010.) Copula omission in the English developing
grammar of English/Spanish bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingual Education
and Bilingualism, 13 (5), 525–551. doi: 10.1080/13670050.2010.488285
Fernández-Fuertes, R., Liceras, J. M., & Alba de la Fuente, A. (2016.) Beyond the
subject DP versus the subject pronoun divide in agreement switches in Spanish. In C.
Tortora, M. den Dikken, I. L. Montoya, & T. O’Neill (Eds.), Romance Linguistics 2013:
Selected Papers from the 43rd Linguistics Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL),
New York, 17-19 April 2013. (pp. 79–98). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
doi: 10.1075/rllt.9.05fue
Gass, S. (1979.) Language transfer and universal grammatical relations. Language Learning,
29, 327–344. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1979.tb01073.x
Jaeggli, O. (1982.) Topics in Romance Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.
Keenan, E. L., & Comrie, B. (1977.) Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar.
Linguistic Inquiry, 8 (1), 63–99.
Liceras, J. M. (1983.) Markedness Contrastive Analysis and the Acquisition of Spanish Syntax
by English Speakers (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Toronto.
Liceras, J. M. (1986.) Linguistic Theory and Second Language Acquisition: The Spanish
Nonnative Grammar of English Speakers. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Liceras, J.M. (1988.) Syntax and stylistics: More on the pro-drop parameter. In J.
Pankhurst, M. Sharwood Smith, & P. Van Buren (Eds.), Learnability and Second
Languages: A Book of Readings (pp. 71–93). Dordrecht: Foris.
Liceras, J.M. (1989.) On some properties of the pro-drop parameter: Looking for missing
subjects in non-native Spanish. In S. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Language Acquisition: A
Linguistic Approach (pp. 109–133). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liceras, J.M. (1996.) La adquisición de lenguas segundas y la gramática universal. Madrid:
Síntesis.
Liceras, J. M. (2007.) La adquisición de lenguas segundas y la encrucijada Lengua-I(interna
/ Lengua-E(xterna) en la adquisición, el cambio diacrónico y la formación de las lenguas
 criollas: ‘Juntos pero no revueltos’. In R. Mairal et al. (Eds.) Actas del XXIV Congreso
Internacional de AESLA. Aprendizaje de lenguas, uso del lenguaje y modelación cognitiva:
perspectivas aplicadas entre disciplinas. Madrid: UNED.
Liceras, J. M., & Alba de la Fuente, A. (2015.) Typological proximity in L2 acquisition: The
non-native Spanish grammar of French speakers. In T. Judy & S. Perpiñán (Eds.), The
Acquisition of Spanish as a Second Language from Different L1s (pp. 329–358).
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Liceras, J.M., Alba de la Fuente, A., & Martínez Sanz, C. (2010.) The distribution of nul
subjects in non-native grammars: Syntactic markedness and interface vulnerability. In M.
Iverson, I. Ivanov, T. Judy, J. Rothman, R. Slabakova, & M. Tryzna (Eds.), Proceedings of
the 2009 Mind/Context Divide Workshop (pp. 84–95). Sommervile, MA: Cascadilla
Proceedings Project.
Liceras, J. M., Alba de la Fuente, A., & Walsh, L. (2011.) Complex wh-questions in non-
native Spanish and non-native German: does input matter? In L. A. Ortiz-López (Ed.),
Selected Proceedings of the 13th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 139–149).
Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Liceras, J. M., & Díaz, L. (1998.) On the nature of the relationship between morphology
and syntax: Inflectional typology, f-features and null/overt pronouns in Spanish
interlanguage. In M.-L. Beck (Ed.), Morphology and its Interfaces in Second Language
Knowledge (pp. 307–338). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lald.19.13lic
Liceras, J. M., & Díaz, L. (1999.) Topic-drop versus pro-drop: Null subjects and pronominal
subjects in the Spanish L2 of Chinese, English, French, German, Japanese and Korean
speakers. Second Language Research, 15, 1–40. doi: 10.1191/026765899678128123
Liceras, J. M., & Díaz, L. (2000.) Triggers in L2 acquisition: The case of Spanish N-N
Compounds. Studia Linguistica, 54 (2): 197–211. doi: 10.1111/1467‑9582.00060
Liceras, J. M., Díaz, L., & Salomaa-Robertson, T. (2002.) The Compounding Parameter
and the word marker hypothesis. In A. T. Pérez-Leroux & J. M. Liceras (Eds.), The
Acquisition of Spanish Morphosyntax (pp. 209–237). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
doi: 10.1007/978‑94‑010‑0291‑2_8
Liceras, J. M., Fernández Fuertes. R., & Alba de la Fuente, A. (2012.) Subject and
copula omission in the English grammar of English-Spanish bilinguals: On the issue of
directionality of interlinguistic influence. First Language, 31 (1-2), 88–115.
doi: 10.1177/0142723711403980
Liceras, J. M., Fernández Fuertes, R., Perales, S., Pérez-Tattam, R., & Spradlin, K. T.
(2008.) Gender and gender agreement in bilingual native and non-native grammar: A
view from child and adult functional-lexical mixings. Lingua, 118, 827–851.
doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2007.05.006
Liceras, J. M., Fernández Fuertes, R., & Pérez-Tattam, R. (2008.) Null and overt
subjects in the developing grammars (L1 English/L1 Spanish) of two bilingual twins. In C.
Pérez-Vidal, M. Juan-Garau & A. Bel (Eds.), A Portrait of the Young in the New Multilingua
Spain (pp. 111–134). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Liceras, J. M., Martínez Sanz, C., Pérez-Tattam, R., Perales, S., & Fernández Fuertes
R. (2006.) L2 acquisition as a process of creolization: Insights from child and adult code-
 mixing. In C. Lefebvre, L. White, & C. Jourdan (Eds.), L2 Acquisition and Creole Genesis:
Dialogues (pp. 113–144). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lald.42.08lic
Liceras, J. M., Maxwell, D., Laguardia, B., Fernández, Z., Fernández Fuertes, R., &
Díaz, L. (1997.) A longitudinal study of Spanish non-native grammars: Beyond
parameters. In A. T. Pérez-Leroux & W. R. Glass (Eds), Contemporary Perspectives on the
Acquisition of Spanish (pp. 99–132). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
MacWhinney, B. (2000.) The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
MacWhinney, B. (2007.) The TalkBank Project. In J. C. Beal, K. P. Corrigan, & H. L. Moisl
(Eds.), Creating and Digitizing Language Corpora: Synchronic Databases, (Vol. 1; pp. 163–
180). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Masullo, P. J., & Depiante, M. A. (2004.) Variable vs. intrinsec features in Spanish nomina
elipsis. Unpublished ms. University of Pittsburgh and Universidad de Comahue.
Perales, S. & Liceras, J. M. (2009.) Unexpected constructions in SLA a diachronic
approach. In M. Bowles, T. Ionin, S. Montrul, & A. Tremblay (Eds.), Proceedings of the
10th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2009)
(pp. 25–34). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Rizzi, L. (1982.) Issues in Italian Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris. doi: 10.1515/9783110883718
Sorace, A. (2011.) Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic
Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–33. doi: 10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor
Zobl, H., & Liceras, J. M. (2006.) Competing grammars and parametric shifts in second
language acquisition and the history of English and Spanish. In D. Bamman, T.
Magnitskaia, & C. Zaller (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University
Conference on Language Development (pp. 713–724). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
PA RT I .

Parameters and beyond

 Pro-drop then and now
Changing perspectives on null subjects in
second language acquisition
Lydia White
McGill University

Abstract

This paper provides an overview and analysis of changing perspectives on

null subjects in L2 research. Three phases of research are identified,
focusing on: (i) the issue of parameter resetting, conceived in terms of the
null subject parameter as originally formulated; (ii) the relationship of null
subjects to properties of functional features and associated morphology; (iii)
discourse constraints on the realization of null and overt subjects.
Conflicting data and theories are discussed, touching on the extent of
transfer of null subjects from the L1, whether a parameter is involved, and
what other properties might explain the distribution of null subjects in L2
grammars. Despite the lack of consensus, investigation of null subjects has
provided fruitful insights into the nature of interlanguage grammars.

Keywords

null subjects; pro-drop parameter; parameter resetting;

morphological uniformity; features; optional infinitives; root infinitives;
syntax-discourse interface

1. Introduction
Research conducted from within the generative second language (L2)
acquisition perspective is based on the assumption that linguistic
theory provides an appropriate framework to address issues relating to
the linguistic competence of L2 learners and speakers (henceforth
L2ers). Some of the earliest research in this tradition (e.g. Liceras,
1988; White, 1985a) investigated null subjects in L2 acquisition,
following proposals in the linguistic literature at that time for a pro-
drop or null subject parameter. In this paper, I give an overview of
perspectives on null subjects in L2 research, past and present. In this
context, it is important to consider the original ‘access to UG’ debate,
with opposing claims about the availability or non-availability of (UG) in
L2 acquisition (see White, 1989). On the whole, a consensus was
reached that principles of UG in fact remain operative, the debate
instead being formulated in terms of the possibility or impossibility of
parameter resetting.
I will address three phases in L2 research on null subjects: (i)
research which assumes the null subject parameter as originally
conceived and which focuses on the question of whether this
parameter can be reset in L2 acquisition; (ii) research which links
properties of null subjects to properties of features of functional
categories and associated morphology, investigating similarities and
differences between first language (L1) acquisition and L2 acquisition
in this domain; (iii) research which considers the syntax-discourse
interface and related properties of null and overt subjects and
investigates whether L2ers observe discourse constraints on realization
of subjects.
2. Phase I: The parameter

2.1 The null subject parameter

The null subject or pro-drop parameter was probably the first
parameter to be proposed in linguistic theory (Chomsky, 1981; Jaeggli,
1982; Rizzi, 1982). It was also one of the earliest parameters to be
investigated in the context of L1 acquisition (e.g. Hyams, 1986) and L2
acquisition (Hilles, 1986; Liceras, 1988, 1989; Phinney, 1987; White,
1985a, 1986). This parameter constituted what is now referred to as a
macroparameter (see Baker, 2008, and Camacho, 2013, for
discussion), the idea being to account for the crosslinguistic
distribution of null versus overt subjects, and associated syntactic
properties. A major attraction of parameter theory for researchers
working on L2 acquisition at that time was that it offered a potential
way to account both for language transfer and for eventual L2
‘success’, on the assumption that: (i) L2ers initially adopt L1 parameter
settings and (ii) parameters can be reset to appropriate L2 values (e.g.
White, 1985a, 1986), which was subsequently formulated as the Full
Transfer Full Access (FTFA) Hypothesis (Schwartz & Sprouse, 1996).
Even where evidence for parameter resetting was not robust, insight
was gained into the nature of the interlanguage grammar and
alternative linguistic analyses adopted by L2ers.
One of the original aims of early parameter theory was to account
for crosslinguistic variation by attributing clusters of superficially
unrelated syntactic phenomena to particular parameter settings, and to
show that that there was some underlying unifying reason for these
properties to cluster together. In the case of the null subject
parameter, languages were divided into two types, [+null subject] and
[−null subject]; in addition to the possibility or impossibility of null
subjects, other syntactic properties were linked to this phenomenon.
For example, Rizzi (1982) proposed the cluster in Table 1. 1 Other
properties were subsequently added to the list.

Table 1. Properties of null subject languages

[+null subject] [−null subject]

Null subjects in tensed clauses: Lexical subjects required:

e verrà *e will come
‘He/she will come’
Free subject inversion: No subject inversion:
e verrà Gianni *e will come Gianni
‘Gianni will come’
that-trace sequences permitted: that-trace effects:
Chii credi che e i verrà? *Whoi do you think that e i will come?
‘Who do you think (that) will come?’

From early on, it was assumed that richness of inflection in null subject
languages allows the null subject to be identified or recovered, this
idea being formalized in a variety of different ways (see Biberauer,
Holmberg, Roberts, & Sheehan, 2010, and Camacho, 2013, for recent
overviews). In other words, the presence or absence of rich inflection
was, at that time, an integral part of the explanation. Languages which
permitted null subjects but lacked rich inflection (e.g. East Asian
languages) could not be accommodated within the parameter as
originally formulated.
A distinction between licensing and identification of null subjects
was proposed (Rizzi, 1986). Licensing permits null subjects in principle;
it is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for null subjects. In
addition to being licensed, a null subject must be identified. In order to
interpret a missing argument, one must be able to establish what it
refers to; there must be some way of recovering the content of the nul
subject from other properties of the sentence. Various types of
identification have been proposed in the literature. Rich verbal
agreement allows null subjects to be identified in Romance languages
such as Italian and Spanish, while in languages lacking agreement,
such as Chinese, Japanese and Korean, a preceding NP or a topic in
the discourse provides the means to identify a null element (Huang,
1984).

2.2 Research on the null subject parameter in L2

Most L2 research on the null subject parameter in the 1980s
concentrated on its syntactic effects and the question of whether L2
learners can acquire new parameter values when the L1 and L2 differ
in their settings (e.g. Liceras, 1988; Phinney, 1987; White, 1985a,
1986). Much of this research was limited to the L2 acquisition of
English by speakers of Romance null subject languages, typically
Spanish (e.g. Hilles, 1986; White, 1985a, 1986). A notable exception
was the work of Liceras (1988) which looked at the opposite situation,
namely the acquisition of a null subject language (Spanish) by
speakers whose L1s were not null subject languages, such as English
or French. See Phinney (1987) for an early example of a bidirectional
approach involving a comparison of L2 English (L1 Spanish) and L2
Spanish (L1 English) and Montrul (2004) for an overview of research
on null subjects in L1 and L2 Spanish.
Investigating whether or not parameters of UG can be reset in L2
acquisition, research focused on situations where the L1 and L2
exemplified different parameter settings, looking for evidence of initial
transfer of the L1 setting, followed by resetting to the appropriate L2
value, and trying to determine whether all the syntactic effects
attributable to a particular setting would cluster together in the
interlanguage grammar (in other words, all of them initially transferring
and subsequently being reset at the same time). As we shall see,
evidence for clustering was not compelling as far as the null subject
parameter was concerned.
White (1985a) was probably the first to look for evidence of
transfer of L1 parameter settings in L2, as well as the question of
whether parameters could appropriately be reset, in other words
advancing a precursor to FTFA (Schwartz & Sprouse, 1996). White
reports on an experiment (replicated in White, 1986) comparing L2
learners of English with Spanish and French as L1s (the former being a
null subject language and the latter not), with respect to the three
properties identified by Rizzi as part of the cluster, namely null
subjects, subject inversion and that-trace effects. Results from a
grammaticality judgment task show that Spanish and French speakers
at several different proficiency levels behave differently from each
other in their assessment of the grammaticality of null subjects in L2
English. Spanish speakers, in contrast to French speakers, accept null
subjects, suggesting transfer of the L1 setting. However, there was an
absence of clustering effects: inversion was rejected by both groups
and both groups had considerable difficulties with that-trace
sequences. White concluded that the L1 setting of the parameter
transfers (hence the difference between Spanish and French speakers)
and that, with increasing L2 proficiency, there was some evidence for
parameter resetting, in that null subjects are no longer accepted by
learners at higher levels of proficiency; however, absence of clustering
effects remained problematic for the theory.
Liceras (1989) reports one of the original investigations of the L2
acquisition of a null subject language, namely Spanish, by native
speakers of French and English (both [−null subject] languages), at
different levels of proficiency. Liceras investigated the same three
properties as White (1985a, 1986), also using a grammaticality
judgment task, and also found an absence of clustering in L2 Spanish.
Null subjects were accepted by speakers of both L1s and overt
pronouns largely rejected, inversion was increasingly accepted but
never to the level of native speakers, while subjects generally
performed poorly on sentences testing for (absence of) that-trace
effects. Poorer performance on these two aspects is explained by her
in terms of their dependence on other properties of Spanish. In
contrast to White, Liceras concludes that L1 transfer is not implicated
in the L2 acquisition of this parameter, given the success of both
groups in recognizing that null subjects are required in the L2 despite
their absence in the L1.
 One debate at that time centered on the issue of the default value
of the parameter and what effect this might have in L2 acquisition.
White (1985b, 1989) argued, on learnability grounds, that [−null
subject] must be the default setting, since this could be disconfirmed
on the basis of positive evidence for the child learning an L1 with null
subjects, whereas if the child started out with [+null subject] as the
default, there would be no evidence to disconfirm this, given that null
subject languages allow both null and overt subjects. (For recent
similar claims, see Judy & Rothman, 2010.) White’s assumption for L2
was that initially learners would adopt the L1 parameter setting,
regardless of its markedness status: in consequence, Spanish-speaking
learners of English would transfer the [+null subject] setting into the
interlanguage grammar. English-speaking learners of Spanish would
transfer the [−null subject] setting but would get ample positive
evidence for null subjects. Liceras (1989), in contrast, assumed that
[+null subject] is the default, based on proposals by Hyams (1986) for
L1 acquisition, and that L2ers revert to the default setting regardless of
the L1 setting (see Phinney, 1987, for similar assumptions). According
to Liceras, this explains the success of the French and English speakers
in her study with respect to null subjects. In other words, at this time,
Liceras assumed parameter resetting to be possible in principle, based
on markedness considerations, without an initial stage of L1 transfer, a
position she later came to abandon in favour of the no parameter
resetting approach. As discussed by White (1985b, 1989), testing the
claims of transfer and markedness against each other requires a
situation where the L1 exemplifies the marked setting and the L2
requires the unmarked. This, of course, is what Liceras assumed with
respect to null subjects in L2 Spanish. But it is not, in fact, possible to
determine the effects of markedness versus transfer when there is
disagreement about which is the unmarked value of a parameter, as is
the case here. 2
Arguing against the possibility of parameter resetting in adult L2,
Clahsen and Hong (1995) adopt a later version of the null subject
parameter, whereby null subjects are identified by AGR with
pronominal properties. Clahsen and Hong look at adult L2 acquisition
of German, a [−null subject] language, by speakers of Korean, a [+nul
subject] language. Korean speakers have to reset the parameter that
determines how null subjects are identified, establishing that, while
German has agreement, AGR is nonpronominal, so null subjects are
not permitted. Clahsen and Hong expect these properties (presence of
agreement, nonpronominal AGR) to cluster together on the basis of
data from child L1 acquirers of German; they claim, based on a
sentence-matching task, that there is no such clustering in L2, hence
that their subjects were not able to reset the parameter. White (2003)
suggests that at least some of these learners had reset the parameter,
but to the Italian value rather than the German value.
Recently, Ortifelli and Grüter (2013) have claimed that adult L2
learners of English with Spanish L1 in fact show no evidence of
transfer of the [+null subject] setting, despite accepting null subjects
in a grammaticality judgment task (based on the task in White, 1986).
In two other tasks, one a production task and the other a modified
truth-value judgment task, null subjects were never produced and
sentences were not interpreted as if a null subject had been present.
Rather sentences without subjects were interpreted as imperatives.
Ortifelli and Grüter note that other researchers have found
discrepancies between production data (suggesting little or no
inappropriate production of null subjects in L2 English) and
grammaticality judgment data, suggesting considerable acceptance of
null subjects. They argue that acceptance of null subjects in judgment
tasks does not reflect underlying linguistic competence but rather
reflects processing problems which are task specific. If they are right,
this means that many of the conclusions drawn by researchers in the
past as to whether or not parameter settings transfer are now in
doubt. However, as they note, if their account is correct, it predicts
that L2ers will make incorrect judgments regardless of whether the L1
is a null subject language. But White (1985a, 1986) found that French-
speaking learners of English did not accept null subjects in the same
GJ task, in contrast to Spanish speakers.
In summary, investigation of the null subject parameter in L2 has
yielded mixed results, with disagreement as to whether transfer of the
L1 setting takes place and whether the parameter can be set to the L2
value. In part, the differences in interpretation of results reflect
problems relating to the original formulation of the parameter. We turn
now to subsequent developments in accounts of null subjects.

3. Phase II: Morphological licensing of null

subjects
As we have seen, the earliest phase of investigation of null subjects,
from both a theoretical and an acquisition perspective, focused on
languages with rich agreement, such as Spanish and Italian. Indeed,
the presence of rich agreement was implicated in the explanations of
the parameter itself. However, early on, Huang (1984, 1989) pointed
out that languages like Chinese also permit null arguments;
consequently, a different account was necessary. Huang proposed that
null subjects in languages with no agreement are identified by an NP
occurring in a higher clause or by a discourse topic.

3.1 Morphological Uniformity

One approach that took account of the fact that very different types of
languages allow null subjects was the Morphological Uniformity
Principle (MUP) proposed by Jaeggli and Hyams (1988) and Jaeggli
and Safir (1989) (see Speas, 2006, for a more recent development of
this proposal). On this account, emphasis is shifted from rich
agreement as such to uniformity in realization of agreement (either
fully present or fully absent). Null subjects are licensed in languages
with uniform morphological paradigms (which may involve rich
inflection for agreement, number and gender, as in Spanish and Italian
or no such inflection, as in Chinese or Japanese). Identification of null
subjects is achieved via properties of AGR or via discourse topics. 3
Lakshmanan (1991, 1994) investigated whether the MUP holds for
child L2 acquisition. She argued that, according to the MUP, one should
expect to see the following linguistic properties clustering together in
child L2 acquisition of English: assumption of morphological uniformity,
with consequent absence of inflection and presence of null subjects;
null subjects will be given up once learners work out that English is not
morphologically uniform. In fact, given those criteria, she found little
support for operation of MUP in child L2 English. Rather, in data from
four children learning English naturalistically, production from only one
child showed evidence of a correlation between development of verbal
inflection and loss of null subjects. This could be taken as evidence
against parameters in L2 or it could mean that there is something
wrong about the MUP proposal or with Lakshmanan’s assumptions
about how MUP operates (see Hyams & Safir, 1991, who suggest that
children may have knowledge of morphology which is not yet realized
in their production).
Another L2 study that assumes the MUP and investigates whether
this is operative in L2 is Hilles (1991). She examined spontaneous
production data from 6 native speakers of Spanish learning L2 English,
two children, two adolescents and two adults. Somewhat differently
from Lakshmanan, data from two child subjects and one adolescent
showed a correlation between the emergence of (non-uniform)
inflection and presence of overt pronominal subjects. For the other
adolescent and the two adults, there was no such relationship,
suggesting the possibility of resetting the MUP only in the case of
younger learners.
Finally, Davies (1996) studied a much larger group of learners of
English (n = 48), who were adults from a variety of null subject L1s,
with rich inflection (Spanish, Italian) or not (Chinese, Japanese,
Korean). Results from a grammaticality judgment task suggest that just
over half the subjects have grammars that are consistent with the MUP
(recognizing that English has non-uniform agreement and does not
permit null subjects or treating English as if it had no agreement and
allowing null subjects). Problematic for the MUP were almost half the
subjects whose scores on agreement and subjects did not fit the
expected pattern (agreement was much more accurate than
recognition of the impossibility of null subjects or vice versa). Davies
suggests that the MUP as a construct should be abandoned and that
further revisions to the null subject parameter are required. This
argument, of course, depends on the assumption that interlanguage
grammars are natural language grammars, subject to UG constraints,
and hence providing evidence in support of or against prevailing
linguistic theories. An alternative interpretation might be that the MUP
holds and that the results suggest that interlanguage grammars are
not UG-constrained.

3.2 Features
The MUP was a broad parameter (in the spirit of macroparameters).
Another way of dealing with the problems that arose with the original
conception of the null subject parameter (as well as other parameters)
involved a move towards expressing parametric differences in terms of
more localized features on lexical items, particularly heads of functiona
categories (e.g. Borer, 1984). Such parameters came, in due course, to
be known as microparameters. Investigation of L2 grammars turned to
a consideration of the role and status of functional categories and their
associated features in interlanguage grammars. Parameter setting and
resetting were reconceived in terms of the possibility or impossibility
for L2ers to acquire features not represented in the L1. The possibility
of parameter resetting was understood as claim that the full UG
inventory of features remains accessible in L2, while the no-parameter
resetting approach maintained that (adult) L2 learners are restricted to
certain categories and features represented in the L1 (e.g. Hawkins,
2001).
Initiating this kind of approach, Tsimpli and Roussou (1991)
argued that there is a functional module of UG which is subject to a
critical period, becoming inaccessible in adult L2 acquisition. In
consequence, parameters associated with features of functional
categories cannot be reset and transfer of L1 parameter settings is
expected, not just initially but permanently. In the case of null
subjects, the relevant category is AGR, which licenses pro. Tsimpli and
Roussou look at intermediate proficiency Greek-speaking learners of
English, Greek being a null subject language. In a grammaticality
judgment and correction task, these learners in fact recognized that
null subjects are impossible, with the exception of expletive contexts,
and they corrected the sentences by inserting lexical pronouns. On the
face of it, then, at least for referential pronouns, it looks as if the
parameter had been reset. However, Tsimpli and Roussou argue these
superficial English-like properties are misleading. According to them,
the L2ers were unable to lose the licensing properties of AGR, thus
permitting null subjects in principle, explaining the acceptance of null
expletives (as well as the acceptances of null subjects reported by
White, 1985a, 1986). Why, then, do the L2ers produce so many overt
subjects in their corrections? Tsimpli and Roussou argue that the L2ers
come up with a different – UG-constrained – analysis, whereby they
treat English subject pronouns as agreement markers, appearing in
AGR. Effectively, they are subject clitics, as argued for French by
Roberge (1990). Problematic for this account is the fact that it makes a
number of predictions for L2 English, such as for clitic doubling, which
do not appear to be borne out.

3.3 Null subjects and root infinitives

Other accounts of null subjects did not specifically address the
parameter but nevertheless had implications for the realization of null
subjects in L1 and L2 acquisition. These include proposals for an
optional infinitive (OI) (Wexler, 1994) or root infinitive (RI) (Rizzi,
1994) stage in L1 acquisition, a period during which the child’s main
(or root) clauses may contain a main verb which is nonfinite in form
rather than finite.
According to such accounts, abstract morphosyntactic features are
represented in the child’s grammar from the beginning. To account for
non-adult performance on morphology, abstract features such as Tense
(Wexler, 1994) or Number (Hoekstra, Hyams, & Becker, 1999) can be
underspecified in child grammars, such that they are not always
realized, with morphological and syntactic consequences. According to
Rizzi (1994), the child does not yet know that a root clause must be a
CP, instead truncating the structure, such that root VPs are sometimes
projected. A consequence of underspecified Tense or Number or of a
structure consisting only of a VP is that verbs will necessarily be non-
finite in the absence of AGR or T and that subjects will be accusative
(given the absence of nominative case assignment, a property of T).
Regardless of whether the OI or RI account is adopted, there is
general agreement that variation between finite and nonfinite main
clauses in young children’s speech is structurally determined: inflected
forms show properties and positions typical of finite verbs, while
uninflected forms show characteristics associated with nonfinite verbs.
Both the underspecification account and the truncation account allow
for null subjects at this stage (Hoekstra, Hyams, & Becker, 1997, 1999;
Rizzi, 1994).
Considerable L2 research has addressed the question of whether
or not L2ers, child or adult, go through an OI or RI stage. While such
proposals are not related directly to the null subject parameter and
have focused more on the issue of morphological variability, null
subjects are nevertheless relevant, given that these are observed in
the OI or RI stage in L1 acquisition.
Haznedar and Schwartz (1997) examined spontaneous production
from Erdem, a Turkish child learning English, over an 18 month period,
beginning at age 4. Assuming Wexler’s (1994) criteria for an OI stage,
they found no evidence for such a stage in Erdem’s early English.
While he did frequently omit inflection, he consistently produced overt
subjects and nominative pronoun subjects, regardless of the form of
the verb (inflected or uninflected), in contrast to child L1 acquirers of
English. Suppliance of overt subjects was high from the beginning,
even though the L1, Turkish, was a null subject language, whereas
suppliance of agreement and tense inflection on lexical verbs remained
variable. Other researchers who have found accurate production of
overt subjects in L2 English at the same time as variable performance
on inflectional morphology include Ionin and Wexler (2002) who report
on production data from 20 child L2 learners of English, with L1
Russian.
 Prévost and White (2000) examine production data from child and
adult L2 learners of French and German. In contrast to Haznedar and
Schwartz, they report evidence for an RI stage (based on the criteria
advanced by Rizzi, 1994), but only in the child data. Child learners
show behaviour consistent with truncation: the children’s null subject
stage coincided with their root infinitive stage and they rarely produced
null subjects in CPs, consistent with the claim that null subjects are nul
constants for these children, which disappear when the child
establishes that root clauses must be CPs. In contrast, the adults
showed no contingency between presence of null subjects and verb
form (finite versus nonfinite) or clause type.
Lardiere (1998) provides a detailed case-study of an adult
Chinese-speaker’s L2 English (L1s: Mandarin and Hokkien) and shows
that the dissociation between verb form and subject type continues
into the endstate. The subject, Patty, is a fluent user of English with a
number of non-native characteristics in her spoken language.
Incidence of tense and agreement morphology is low. At the same
time, Patty has full command of a variety of syntactic phenomena
implicating Tense and Agreement, including correct nominative case
assignment, and a negligible number of null subjects.
To summarize, there is considerable data on the L2 acquisition of
[−null subject] languages (such as English, French and German)
showing accuracy in the production of overt subjects along with
problems with inflectional morphology, suggesting that what is going
on in L2 differs from what is found in L1 acquisition. Such variability
has been interpreted as reflecting difficulties in identifying the
appropriate morphological realization of functional categories or
features (Haznedar & Schwartz, 1997; Lardiere, 1998, 2000; Prévost &
White, 2000) rather than an OI or RI stage. In other words, L2ers have
problems in mapping from abstract categories to their particular
surface morphological manifestations; features of L2ers’ functional
categories are fully specified. The problem, rather, is determining
which lexical items realize what.
Turning now to L2 Spanish, Liceras, Díaz and Maxwell (1999)
investigate whether there is an RI stage in L2 Spanish, with null
subjects being null constants, in the sense of Rizzi (1994), or whether
other things might be going on (such as topic drop instead of pro-
drop). Indeed, it would seem that null constants should not be
anticipated: (i) given the claim that RIs do not occur in the L1
acquisition of languages like Spanish (e.g. Hoekstra et al., 1999,
p. 258), one would not expect them even on the assumption that L1
and L2 acquisition are alike, with similar stages; 4 (ii) transfer of RIs
would not be a possibility given that this is a stage reported for L1
acquisition rather than for adult grammars (though with some adult
effects, such as so-called diary drop). A prediction of the null constant
account is that null subjects will only be found in root clauses when
these are not CPs; embedded clauses are necessarily CPs and hence
do not permit null constants. Liceras et al. report that, regardless of L1
(French, English, German, Chinese, Japanese, Korean), their subjects
used null subjects in main and embedded clauses, suggesting that null
constants were not implicated.
Liceras and Díaz (1998) pursue the implications of a number of
the accounts described above, including the underspecification account
of Hoekstra et al. (1999). They compare L2 learners of Spanish who
are speakers of null argument languages like Chinese with speakers of
[−null subject] languages like English. Following Hoekstra et al., they
divide languages into 3 types in terms of which functional heads
determine how finiteness is realized morphologically: Type A languages
(Spanish, Italian, etc.) use Person; Type B (English, Dutch, etc.) use
Number; Type C (Japanese, etc.) use Tense. According to Hoekstra, et
al., Number is the only functional head that can be left unspecified in
the child grammar. Consequently, only Type B languages show an OI
phenomenon. When the main verb is an infinitive, only subjects
unspecified for Number may occur; these include null subjects, as well
as bare Ns (unspecified for definiteness or Number); finite verbs occur
with full DP subjects as well as null subjects.
Liceras and Díaz suggest that L2 learners whose L1 is Type B (e.g.
English) or Type C (e.g. Japanese) will have to acquire the fact that
Spanish is Type A, in other words that Person rather than Number or
Tense is the crucial functional head. Looking at spontaneous
production data from a small group of adult learners of Spanish from
Type B and Type C L1s, they predict that the Type B learners should
not have null subjects initially, contrary to fact, since these learners
(n = 3) produced null subjects, mostly 3rd person. They also found
some instances of RIs, a result that is somewhat puzzling if these are
indeed RIs, rather than cases of missing surface inflection as argued
by Prévost and White (2000) for L2 French and German. Liceras and
Díaz report that there were agreement mismatches, particularly with
null subjects, which suggests to them that the crucial status of Person
had not been acquired. Beginners with Type C as their L1 produced
null subjects with all verbal forms and the authors claim that there is
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
within the same year. I was but eleven years old then, and although
so young, these fearful events made me desperate.
"The neighbors all looked upon me as a sort of outcast, and taught
their children to shun me as though I were a moral pest. This did not
help me much, and as I grew older, I was taunted and hooted at, for
my father's crime!
"But, as my muscles grew, they found this fast becoming a
dangerous sport, for I bitterly resented every insult, even from those
twice and thrice my own age. I had no relations, not even a friend to
lean upon, or to whom I could turn for aid or counsel. And thus I
grew up.
"I admit being wild and reckless; but I can honestly say that I never
once committed a mean or criminal deed. And yet I was often
accused in whispers, of being both a counterfeiter and a horse-thief!
Almost any one would have left the place in disgust; but I did not.
The only beings that I had ever loved were lying in the little yard
back of our house.
"I often, when my trials had been unusually bitter, have spent the
livelong night beside the graves of my parents, sobbing as if my
heart would break; and it is to those sacred influences alone that I
attribute my remaining clear of a life of crime—that I did not yield to
the temptations presented to me of living a wild, free life.
"Well, I was at length openly arrested, but as I managed to escape
before trial, I never learned who was my accuser. It would have been
almost certain death to remain there then, as I had no friends who
could assist me to clear myself, and so I fled.
"I went to Arkansas, near Merton, and for a time all went well. I
entered a homestead, and for several years I worked diligently on it;
and then sold it for a fair price, intending to open a store. But my
enemies followed me even there, and the same suspicions were
noised about. I was avoided by all respectable persons as though I
had the plague.
"In disgust I left the place, and from that time until I came here, I
wandered far and near, living an aimless life until I thought I had
once more eluded my pursuers. But you have seen how sadly I was
mistaken; and here, just as life was brightest, the same rumors were
whispered abroad, the old charges were brought up against me. I
was seized and flogged like a dog!"
"Poor Clay!" murmured Nora, through the tears called forth by the
sad history of her lover's life, as she clasped his hand in hers, as if to
still further testify her boundless faith in his truth and honesty.
"Yes, but I go no further. I have found you, and now I have an
additional incentive to clear myself, and baffle my secret enemy,
whoever he may be. But how?—that is the question."
After some further conversation, and an appointment being made for
another meeting, the lovers separated, Nora and Eunice returning to
the house, while Poynter walked rapidly away toward his own
building.
 CHAPTER VIII.
A DELECTABLE CONFAB.
After leaving Nora, Poynter walked swiftly in the direction of his own
house, that had been closed ever since aunt Eunice had been called
in to attend Nora during her sickness. But he kept a good look-out as
he proceeded, lest he should be discovered by some of those kind
friends whose hospitality he had abandoned so hastily, a few days
before. For he well knew that if seen and recognized, a hue and cry
would be raised that might end disastrously, as several hours yet
remained of daylight.
He had found a secure refuge with the outlaw band who had rescued
him from the power of the vigilance committee, where he resolved to
remain until his plans for the future were fully matured, at the urgent
request of the leader. This man had evinced a strong interest in
Poynter, and pledged his own as well as the assistance of the band,
if it should prove necessary, in any way.
Just as Poynter was about to cross the crest of a hill, he heard the
quick thud of a horse's hoofs coming at full speed upon the opposite
side of the rise, and darted at once into the thicket of bushes upon
the left side of the road. Cautiously parting the leafy screen, so that
he could observe the extreme summit of the rise, Poynter awaited
the horseman's approach.
Scarcely had he done so when the rider rose the crest, and drawing
rein, paused and glanced around him. With a half-surprised curse,
Poynter raised his heavy rifle, while the sharp click sounded clear
and distinct, as the hammer was sprung back; but then he lowered it.
"The lying dog! For a cent I'd plug him, if only to save 'Judge Lynch'
a job."
The horse and rider were standing out in bold relief against the clear
sky, but still the ambushed fugitive could tell that Polk Redlaw, the
half-breed, stood before him. Although strongly tempted to punish
his treacherous foe, Poynter withheld his hand, lest he should get
still further entangled in the wiles of his secret enemy.
Redlaw appeared to be expecting some one, as Clay judged from
his manner, and after a few minutes' waiting, he placed his fingers to
his mouth, and blew a shrill, piercing blast, that echoed from point to
point before dying down to nothing. Scarcely had the sounds
ceased, when a second peal came whistling along the ridge, as if in
answer; to which Polk replied, and then dismounted as if satisfied,
standing beside his noble-looking horse, idly smoothing the long,
flowing mane.
In a few moments a second man appeared upon foot, with his long
rifle carried at a trail, and the two men greeted each other as if
greatly pleased at the meeting. Again the steely glitter shone in
Poynter's eyes, while he bit his lips fiercely as if to repress his
emotions, when he recognized the new-comer.
"Ah!" he gritted, as he crouched forward. "Wesley Sprowl! There's
deviltry on foot when such men meet together, and by all that's good,
I'll scent it out!"
The two men now plunged into a little side-trail, Redlaw leading his
horse, and no sooner had they disappeared than Poynter retreated
until around the bend, where he glided across the road, and in a few
moments struck their trail; keeping just without the path, where, if by
any chance the men he was dogging should glance back, he would
be out of sight.
They proceeded leisurely enough, and he had no difficulty in keeping
within ear-shot of the horse's tread, while his own footsteps were
deadened upon the moist soil. After proceeding thus for nearly half a
mile, the two men paused, and slipping the bit from his horse's
mouth, Polk Redlaw allowed it to feed at will while he and Sprowl
seated themselves upon the greensward beneath a huge oak tree.
Poynter, by dint of cautious creeping, managed to gain a dense
clump of bushes at only a few yards in the rear of their position,
where he crouched down with his weapons ready for instant use, in
case he should be discovered. But they gave no sign of suspecting
an intruder, and conversed in an easy, careless style, very much to
Poynter's edification. The first of this he missed, owing to the task he
had to perform, but then he listened intently.
"Well," Polk Redlaw was saying, "they did not suspect any person
was following them, although I kept them in sight the entire distance.
And that was no slouch of a job either, for they were in a lope most
of the way, and I began to be pretty well blown before they gave any
signs of halting.
"But then they paused and a signal was sounded; and from the reply
I knew that I had dogged them home. And I was right, for in another
ten minutes the whole crowd was gathered in a huddle, unsaddling
their horses, while a dozen or so more were building fires as if the
entire country belonged to them.
"I lay low, taking notes, and I saw enough in the next hour to satisfy
me that I had really tracked them to the den of the horse-thieves; for
there were several tents and regular fireplaces fixed up, while the
ground was tramped hard and dry."
"And where was that?" inquired Sprowl, curiously.
"Well, you'll let it go no further, of course," added Redlaw, after a
slight pause. "You know where Han Hooker killed the big bear, last
fall? near the 'Turkey branch'? Just due west along the creek about a
quarter, is the spot.
"But as I was spying around, a cursed dog somehow got scent of
me, and as I saw him circling around, I lit out, for if they had found
me there, the d—l himself couldn't 'a' saved my hide. I cut sticks in a
hurry, as I got out of their hearing, but the brute took my trail, and in
a few moments I could hear him coming, hot foot, growling like a
painter.
"I was afraid to burn powder, so I just hunkered down behind a big
rock, and drew my butcher. As the imp turned the corner, I grabbed
his nose and twisted him down; then a cut or two and he was quiet
enough.
"But I'd seen enough, so I started for home, with the dog on my
shoulder—for I was afraid to leave him where the knife-cuts might 'a'
told tales—and carried him until at a safe distance, when I dropped
him over the bank into the creek. And there my infernal luck still
followed me, for his claw caught in my shirt and over I went, head-
first, plump onto the rocks.
"Luckily my head took the dog for a pillow, and only got a little
bruised and stunned like; but when I came to I found that my right
ankle was either broken or badly sprained. I managed to climb up to
the level, although every motion nearly made me yell out, but there I
was stuck!
"I knew that if my life depended upon it, I could not have got to the
town, as I was, and so I lay there, thinking what to do next. At last I
slid down the bank, cut off a hind quarter of the dog, and then
managed to drag myself to the "Hole-in-the-wall"—you remember?—
where I lay until this morning.
"The dog-meat kept me, and although toward the last it wasn't overly
sweet eating, raw at that, I managed to worry it down; for hunger is
just a little the best sauce I know of. The last bite I just shut my eyes
and thought it was a roasted wild turkey, and it tasted so natural that
I actually began to gobble!" declared Polk with an oath.
"Bah!"
"Fact. But this morning, two hours by sun, I saw a horse—that one
yonder, it was—straying along the branch, and as he was tame I
managed to catch him; rigged a halter from a piece of lime-bark, and
lit out for town, where I got, safe and sound, after giving you the hint
to meet me here."
"Well, what'd you want, anyhow?" asked Sprowl.
"In a moment. You see I told old Reeves about the hole I'd found,
and offered to guide him to it, after dark, to-night. So he sent out
messengers, and by this time the vigilantes are all up to snuff.
"You may be called on to help, but if so, I want you to play sick; have
a thundering shake, or something of the sort."
"Just what I'd 'a' done anyhow," dryly responded Sprowl. "I have no
notion of running my head into the hands of that cursed Poynter.
Meagreson didn't pay me for that."
"Well then, you'd just as lieve make a 'double sawbuck' as not, if by
doing so you spite Poynter and run no risks?"
"Twenty dollars?"
"Yes. And for half an hour's work."
"Wouldn't I? Why the old man only gave me a hundred for swearing
against Poynter—Hello! what's that?" he added, starting to his feet,
and looking toward the bushes where Poynter was concealed.
The latter had given a sudden start, as he caught the hint dropped
by Sprowl, that could only refer to the charge of murder that had
been brought against him. But who was this Meagreson, or the "old
man?"
"Bah!" grunted Polk, lazily turning his head, "don't get scart at your
own shadow. I heard it too, but it's only my horse."
"Sure?"
"Thunder! yes. Come. I'm in a hurry. Will you earn the money?"
"That depends," replied the other, as he reseated himself, "upon
what it is."
"Well, I know you'll never peach—"
"Of course not!"
"I know it," dryly added Redlaw; "it wouldn't be healthy. But I want
you to be sick when the crowd starts to-night, and then after about
two hours—say about midnight—you must get up and set the house
yonder, on fire."
"What!"
"Set the house of Clay Poynter on fire—isn't that plain enough?
Never you mind what for—that's my own affair. It's enough that I've
good reasons, and when I come back, I'll tell you. Will you do it?"
"Its a risky job—" hesitated Sprowl.
"No it isn't, either. But, yes or no, because if you won't, there's others
—"
"Enough! I'll do it. But cash down, you know," leered Sprowl.
"Do you doubt my honor?" exclaimed the villainous mongrel.
"Not in the least," coolly responded his colleague, "but it's my way of
doing business."
"Well, there's half of it. The rest I'll hand you in the morning."
"But supposing you should get rubbed out to-night?" suggested
Sprowl.
"Curse your croaking!" hotly exclaimed Redlaw, thrusting out another
bill. "There; will that do?"
"Yes; but say, isn't it a good joke upon old Meagreson that he has
been paying us all to prove this Poynter a counterfeiter and
murderer, while all the time he really belonged to the gang?"
chuckled Sprowl.
"Bet ye! But come now, old fellow," added Redlaw, insinuatingly,
"who is the old coon, anyhow? I know you can tell a fellow, if you
will."
"Maybe I will, when you tell me what for you want the house fired,"
significantly answered Sprowl.
"Well, give me an idee, anyhow," urged Polk. "I'll tell you to-morrow,
sure."
"Honest?"
"I said so, didn't I?" sharply.
"Well, don't get your back up about it and I will give you a hint,
anyhow. You see, I knew him in Kentucky, and again in Illinois,
where he helped run the business, after Sturdevant—"
"What!"
"Fact. I done a little in that line myself, on the sly, and we were
thrown together consid'able, as he furnished the "queer." But I got
the pull on him in a little scrape in which a certain man named
Duaber, was concerned.
"There was a love-affair mixed up with it, I believe, and while
Meagreson got the sack, Duaber got the girl. So a lot of charges
were trumped up, much as we've served this Poynter, you know,
only it ended in the poor devil's being lynched in earnest.
"He was taken from jail and hung by a gang spurred on by the old
man, although he was not present at the deed. I gained a cool
thousand in square money for it, and all went off smoothly. But I
thought he was dead until he came here, found me out, gave me
some money, and got me to play the same trick over again."
"I wonder what his reasons were, anyhow," mused Polk. "I'd give a
five-spot to know," he added, covertly glancing at Sprowl.
"You will?"
"If it's honest, I wouldn't mind."
"I know what you're up to," nodded the other, "but if you'll promise
me not to breathe a word or hint of who told you, to anybody, I'll tell
you!"
"You know—or should know by this time, that I never split on a
friend."
"That's so, Polk, and if you'll shell out, I'll tell you in a cat's whisper."
"Here you are; but no shenanigan, now," replied Polk, handing the
bill to his comrade.
"Honor bright! Well, then, this Clay Poynter, as he calls himself, is in
reality none other than Henry Duaber the son of James Duaber, who
was hung on a false charge by the vigilance committee!"
"Whew!" echoed Polk Redlaw, with a long-drawn breath of
astonishment. "I begin to see into it now. And the old man hates the
son for the father's sake!"
"Yes, that's just it. And as you've acted on the square, so far, I don't
mind telling that he is the same one who has hunted this young
fellow from pillar to post, ever since he was a little shaver," said
Sprowl, confidentially.
"I'd rather have his friendship than his hatred, then," laughed Polk.
"When's he coming back, do you know?"
"Not yet awhile. It'd spoil the whole thing, you see, if 'John Dement'
should come to life again before Poynter was nailed."
"But it seems to me that you'll be in a bad box, my friend, if it is found
out that you swore to a lie."
"Oh, that's easy patched up. Besides, the men will be so cut up and
ashamed at being greened so, that they'll be glad enough to let the
matter drop, and as for the law, I'd die of old age before that could or
would do anything here," sneered Sprowl.
"Well, that's your look-out, not mine. But we'd better be moving.
Catch my horse for me, won't you?—this cursed ankle is sore yet."
In a few moments the mongrel was mounted, and paused to add:
"Now mind you play your part. And not before eleven, anyhow, as if
the glow should be seen too soon, the men will turn back, thinking it
some of theirs."
"All right. But you send around for me; it'll look better. I'll go home
now and begin shaking," and with a loud laugh the two precious
scoundrels separated, each man going his own way.
Scarcely had they disappeared when Clay Poynter emerged from his
ambush, and stood for a moment, trembling with anger. His face pale
and stern-set, his eyes glittering with bluish sheen of polished steel;
his breath came hot and heavy from betwixt his tightly-clenched
teeth.
Truly, he had good cause for being wrathy, and for feeling thoughtful,
too, in the revelations so complacently made by Wesley Sprowl.
But he did not pause long; then throwing his rifle across his shoulder,
he struck through the woods at a rapid pace, heading his course
toward the rendezvous of "White Crees," the leader of the band who
had rescued him from the "Twin Sycamores."
 CHAPTER IX.
THE INCENDIARY.
It was some time after dark before Clay Poynter neared the
rendezvous of the border outlaws, despite the speed at which he
traveled. But he was in time, and after satisfying the sentinel of his
identity, he hastened at once to the presence of "White Crees," as
his aged friend was universally termed by his men and comrades.
He was lying at full length upon the ground, one elbow propping his
head as he gazed thoughtfully into the fire, crackling merrily before
him. There was a kind of half-frown upon his face and a fiery gleam
in his full black eyes, that told Poynter he was unusually excited
about something.
"Well, sir, what is it?" quickly asked Crees, as he raised his head at
the young man's approach.
"Bad news, I fear. This retreat is known—"
"The devil!"
"Yes; and you will be attacked to-night by the vigilance committee, in
full force," coolly rejoined Poynter.
"Bad enough, I must say. But are you certain?"
"If hearing the entire plan, detailed by the man that found you out, is
enough, I am."
"So—so!" muttered the outlaw chief.
"Well, your decision," impatiently said Clay, "what is it?"
"We must run for it. Not but that we are strong enough to stand our
ground, if such a course would be prudent, but we must tread lightly.
The country is hot enough now, and a collision, where blood would
be shed, must be avoided."
"Very well, then; I want one man for duty concerning myself, as a
sort of witness. Can I have him?"
"A dozen, if you say so," was the cordial reply. "Who is he?"
"Jack Fyffe."
"Hyar I be, square, an' mighty glad ef I kin help ye any."
"Then saddle our horses as quick as possible, please. If I had time,"
again turning to the outlaw leader, "I would explain, as I have much
to tell; but some other time must do. Things are working around a
little, and I may come out right side up after all."
"Good! and I, too, have done a good job to-day."
"So? Where'll we find you?"
"Tell Jack to lead you to the north side of "Bald Hill," where the
branch cuts through the "Wildcat Range." He knows it well."
"Well, I must be off, and the sooner you are, the better. It's nearly ten
o'clock now, and they'll be along by one, at the latest."
"So they may," laughed the outlaw, "but thanks to your warning,
they'll find little to satisfy their appetite. Remember, 'Bald Hill.'"
"All right!" and then the young man vaulted into the saddle as Fyffe
led up the horses, and the two men dashed rapidly along the road.
"Now Jack, old fellow," cried Poynter, "we must ride as if the
'gentleman in black' was at our horses' tails, or we'll be too late."
"Whar to?"
"My house. Do you know a path that we can go, so as to avoid
meeting our friends who'll take the main road?"
"Bet ye! It's rough ridin' though, but bein's it's shorter, 'twon't take no
longer. What's the biz?"
Thereupon Poynter succinctly stated what he had heard while
eavesdropping the two precious scoundrels, adding:
"It isn't that I care so much for the house, but we must take that
Sprowl a prisoner. He knows enough to clear me, and if he can
prove what he said, to bring this Dement or Meagreson to justice;
and that's just my hand, now."
"We'll do it! Ef not in the act, we'll nab him at his own shanty. Then a
taste o' the med'cin' 'at they gi'n you'll bring 'im to tarms, I reckon.
Leastwise we kin try it. Meagreson, ye said?"
"Yes; do you know him?"
"Oh no, I guess not! Lord, won't the ol' man be glad!"
"Crees, do you mean?"
"Look out! Hyar's the cut-off. Foller me cluss an' look out for yur
head."
They now diverged from the road, into a path just allowing one horse
to pass at a time, and the riders were forced to stoop low along their
horses' necks to keep from being struck by the low-hanging limbs.
This fact effectually put a stop to all conversation, for the time being.
Presently the ground grew more open, although they still continued
in single file, and as they rose the crest of a hill, Fyffe exclaimed, in a
glad tone:
"It's all hunky so fur, anyhow, square. Ef it stays so fer ten minutes
longer, we'll save 'em both."
"Are we so near, then?"
"Leetle better 'n a mile. See, thar's the branch."
"Good! I know where we are now. Spur along; we've no time to lose."
In less than the time named the horsemen drew rein at the western
fence of the yard, and speedily hitching the animals, they stealthily
advanced until the rear of the house was gained. After pausing for a
moment to listen, and hearing nothing suspicious, they made the
circuit of the building; thus satisfying themselves that the would-be
incendiary had not yet arrived.
"We're in good time, Jack," whispered Poynter, joyfully, "and 'll get
him yet. Do you hide here in front, and I'll do the same behind. If you
need help, whistle and I'll come."
"Help, ag'in' thet little or'nary cuss? Bah! I'd take him 'ith one finger."
"So much the better, then. But look sharp."
"Shall I nab 'im as soon as I see him?"
"No; I guess we'd better let him start a blaze first. Then he can't deny
but what that was his intention. Yes, that's the best way."
"All right then. Better lumber down, though, fer ef he shed cotch a
glimpse o' either on us, it's all played," cautioned Fyffe.
This advice was too good not to be followed, and in a moment more,
all was still and silent about the premises. Poynter's mind was
greatly excited, as well it might be, at the facts he had learned on
that day; and as the gloomy prospect that had spread over his future
began to lighten, a thousand air-castles were built, over all of which
the pleasing form of Nora McGuire, his little rosy Irish lass, reigned
as queen—need we state who was the king?
But he was suddenly aroused from his reverie, by the light tramp of a
man's feet, and glancing up, he saw a dim, shadow-like figure,
cautiously approaching the house, at a little to his left. From his
position, close beside the slightly elevated porch that stood in the
rear of the kitchen, the door of which led out upon it, Poynter was
perfectly hidden, while yet he could quite plainly note the intruder's
every movement.
This person lightly stepped upon the porch, and cautiously tried the
door, but it was fastened. Then he went to one of the rear windows,
and after a slight effort, raised it; then propping it up with a stick,
drew himself through the aperture.
Listening intently, Poynter heard him groping around the room, and
then after a few moments' silence, he saw a faint, flickering light
spring up. Gliding to the window, he peered through, and saw
Wesley Sprowl igniting a short piece of tallow-dip by the aid of a
match.
Poynter knew now that he had his game secure, and crept around
the building, where he was met by Jack Fyffe, who had been
alarmed by the slight noise, and was just coming around to
investigate it.
"Is it him?"
"Yes," whispered Poynter, "but we must let him start the fire first,
before we interrupt him. Then as I jump through the window, do you
burst in the back door and put out the blaze. I'll 'tend to him."
"Jest as you say, square; on'y I'd like to gi'n the varmint a squoze,
like, jest for beans," grunted Fyffe, as he followed Poynter around
the building.
They could still see the light, and hear an increased rattling in the
room, and cautiously peering in at one corner of the window, the two
men saw the incendiary splitting fine kindlings with the knife he had
drawn from his belt. Poynter could scarcely restrain his passion, at
noting how coolly and deliberately the dastardly scoundrel set about
his work; but the pressure of Jack Fyffe's hand upon his arm,
recalled his presence of mind.
When a little pile of the shavings were made Sprowl piled over them
some splinters of wood that lay beside the kitchen-stove, and then
applied the lighted candle to the heap. It instantly ignited, the tiny
blaze creeping along, thrusting out its forked tongue like a serpent;
at which the incendiary gave a chuckle of delight, and rising,
dropped a chair over the fire.
He next grasped the table, with the same intention, but Poynter had
seen enough, and drawing himself up by the arms, he dropped
lightly through the window—the noise made by Sprowl in dragging
the table effectually drowning his footsteps. One stride, and the
large, muscular right hand of Clay Poynter tightly clasped the villain
by the neck, compressing it as if in a vice.
Jack Fyffe was in no wise behindhand, but speedily followed his
leader through the open window, thinking that better than to
demolish the door, especially as there was no particularly urgent call
for haste; and with a few shoves of his huge foot, kicked the brands
into the capacious fireplace, it having done no damage, save slightly
scorching the chairs and floor.
"It may be fun to you, square, da'say 'tis, but ef you 'xpects to git any
'fessions outen thet critter, you'd do well to let up a little,"
admonished Jack, as he bent forward to peer into the face of the
prisoner.
And there was ample foundation for his warning, for in his rage at the
cowardly miscreant's action, Poynter threw the whole power of his
arm into the grasp, and Sprowl was already senseless. His eyes
were widely protruding, and his open mouth and lolling tongue,
together with his rapidly-blackening, distorted features, rendered him
a horrible, repulsive sight.
"You're right, Jack," said Poynter, as he relaxed his grip and suffered
Sprowl to drop upon the floor, then bending over him, he poured a
little brandy down his throat, although Jack grumbled at the
sacrilege.
In a few moments Sprowl had recovered sufficiently to sit up,
thoroughly bewildered at the sudden reverse he had experienced.
But his captors did not give him time to ponder over it, or ask
questions, as it was growing late, and for obvious reasons they did
not care to remain longer than was absolutely necessary in the
neighborhood.
So, after securely binding the incendiary's hands behind his back,
the two men, highly elated at their complete success, led the way to
where the horses were hitched.
"You're the lightest, Jack," said Poynter; "better take him up behind
you on the horse."
"Durn the thief!" growled Fyffe, "let 'im tramp it; 't'll do him good."
"So he might; but there's no telling whom we may meet, and I won't
lose him now. But if you object, he can ride with me."
"I didn't think o' that, square. Jest you hyste him up arter I mount."
This was speedily done, and Sprowl secured to the body of his
captor, thus effectually preventing all hopes of an escape. Then
leaving the premises they entered the road, proceeding at a
moderate pace, as they were not desirous of arousing any of the
neighbors who might chance to be at home.
For a couple of hours they rode on without halting, when they both
drew rein simultaneously, bending forward in the saddles, and
listening eagerly. It was a sharp, clear report, followed by what
appeared an irregular volley of small-arms, resounding all about
them as if an entire army was engaged in battle.
But the two men were far too well versed in the peculiarities of that
portion of the country not to know that it was but the multiplied
reverberations of the one first shot.
"Listen!" exclaimed Poynter, guardedly, "don't you hear the click of
shoes upon the stones?"
"Y'ur right, by the 'tarnal! It's the vigilantys, I reckon. Better kiver."
"To the left," muttered Poynter, leading the way. "Hold the reins while
I keep the horses from neighing. And mark you, Sprowl, those are
your friends, but if you utter so much as a whisper, by the God above
me, I will shoot you like a dog! You know I keep my word. They may
hunt us, but it would be too late to do you any good!" hissed the
young man as he passed by the prisoner.
They were scarcely a dozen feet from the road, upon a little lower
ground, from whence they could have a clear view of anybody
passing by. There was no moon, and the dense growth of
underbrush close behind them, added to the dark color of their
horses, rendered discovery very improbable, if not impossible.
Poynter stood by the animals' heads, one hand upon the muzzle of
each, to check any inclination they might feel for whickering during
the passage of the horsemen. They had not long to wait.
Scarcely had these precautions been taken, when the foremost man
came in sight, and then the main body. Their oaths and curses, if
nothing else, would have identified them as the band of vigilantes,
returning from an unsuccessful search for the outlaws, thanks to
Poynter's timely warning.
After waiting a few minutes, until satisfied that the entire band had
passed, the ambushed men again entered the road, proceeding for
some little distance in silence. Then Clay spoke:
"Those fellows weren't in the best of humor, eh, Jack?"
"Not overly much. Wal, it shows 'at the boys got cl'ar, anyhow. But
see, hyar's the cut-off."
"Leading to Bald Hill?"
"Yas," and Fyffe led the way along a narrow, irregular path.
 CHAPTER X.
SPROWL TOES THE MARK.
In less than half an hour the tall, rocky crest of "Bald Hill" reared its
gray head before the men, and Poynter gave vent to a sigh of relief
as he saw that the tiresome ride was nearly at an end. Having
traveled the distance four times, twice upon foot, and once on a
dead run, he was greatly exhausted, and so sleepy that he could
scarcely keep his eyes open.
The outlaws were upon the alert, as the quick, sharp challenge
testified when the outer lines were reached. Dismounting with a half-
groan, Poynter relieved Fyffe of his "backload," and after securely
binding the man, dropped him upon the ground, asking the sentry to
keep an eye upon him. Then Poynter threw himself beneath a tree,
and almost ere his limbs were still, a fast-increasing rumbling, as of
very distant thunder, told how sound was his slumber.
The sun was an hour above the horizon when Poynter again opened
his eyes, although he declared he hadn't five winks of sleep. But
after a cool bath at the creek close at hand, he felt greatly refreshed,
and joined White Crees, who was sitting near one of the fires,
smoking a pipe.
"Up for all day, Poynter?"
"Well, I hardly know, to tell the truth," laughed Clay. "I can tell you
better after I have some grub."
"There's part of a cold turkey, or here's venison; take your choice."
"Hot meat for me, even if I do have to turn cook to get it," said
Poynter, cutting several generous slices from the prime saddle that
hung suspended from a tree near at hand. "But, hello, I forgot! What