Cover not available
Part of
Italian Dialectology at the Interfaces
Edited by Silvio Cruschina, Adam Ledgeway and Eva-Maria Remberger
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 251] 2019
► pp. 1–39

The dialects of Italy at the interfaces

| University of Vienna
| University of Cambridge
| University of Vienna
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The syntax-phonology interface
    • 2.1Propagation of /u/
    • 2.2Metaphonetic diphthongization
    • 2.3Rafforzamento/Raddoppiamento fonosintattico (RF)
  • 3.The syntax-semantics interface
    • 3.1Negation
    • 3.2Verbal modality
    • 3.3Existential constructions
  • 4.The syntax-pragmatics interface
    • 4.1Invariable subject clitics and sentence particles
    • 4.2Postverbal subjects and subject-verb agreement
    • 4.3Focus fronting (FF)
  • Acknowledgement
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 5 February 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.251.01cru
References (149)
References
Archivi del Sud. 1996. Contami unu Contu. Racconti popolari della Sardegna, Vol. I: Logudoro. Alghero: Archivi del Sud.Google Scholar
Belletti, Adriana. 2004. Aspects of the low IP area. In The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 2, Luigi Rizzi (ed.), 16–51. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 2005. Extended doubling and the VP periphery. Probus 17: 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benincà, Paola. 1983. II clitico ‘a’ nel dialetto padovano. In Scritti linguistici in onore di Giovan Battista Pellegrini, Paola Benincà, Manlio Cortelazzo, Aldo Prosdocimi,Laura Vanelli & Alberto Zamboni (eds), 25–32. Pisa: Pacini. Reprinted in Paola Benincà. 1994. La variazione sintattica: Studi di dialettologia romanza. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
. 1988. L’ordine degli elementi della frase. Costruzioni con ordine marcato degli elementi. In Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione, Vol. 1: La frase. I sintagmi nominale e preposizionale, Lorenzo Renzi (ed.), 129–194. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
. 1996. La struttura della frase esclamativa alla luce del dialetto padovano. In Italiano e dialetti nel tempo: Saggi di grammatica per Giulio C. Lepschy, Paola Benincà, Guglielmo Cinque, Tullio De Mauro &Nigel Vincent (eds), 23–43. Rome: Bulzoni.Google Scholar
. 2017. A comparison of northern Romance and Occitan ‘subject’ clitic systems: The null subject parameter and the residues of V2 as V-to-C. Annali di Ca’ Foscari. Serie occidentale 51: 151–193.Google Scholar
Bentley, Delia & Cruschina, Silvio. 2018. The silent argument of broad focus: Typology and predictions. To appear in Glossa: a journal of general linguistics .
Bentley, Delia, Ciconte, Francesco Maria & Cruschina, Silvio. 2013. Micro-variation in subject agreement: The case of existential pivots with split focus in Romance. Italian Journal of Linguistics 25: 15–43.Google Scholar
. 2015. Existentials and Locatives in Romance Dialects of Italy. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bentley, Delia. 2004. Definiteness effects: Evidence from Sardinian. Transactions of the Philological Society 102(1): 57–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Subject canonicality and definiteness effects in Romance there sentences. Language 89(4): 675–712. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. Grammaticalization of subject agreement on evidence from Italo–Romance. To appear in Linguistics 56.Google Scholar
Bernini, Giuliano. 2012. Il clitico a nell’italo-romanzo settentrionale: Osservazioni metodologiche. In Per Roberto Gusmani: Linguistica storica e teorica, Vincenzo Orioles (ed.), 269–282. Udine: Forum.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina & Cruschina, Silvio. 2016. The derivation and interpretation of ‘nuclear’ yes-no questions. Lingua 170: 47–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina, Bocci, Giuliano & Cruschina, Silvio. 2015. Focus fronting and its implicatures. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2013: Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ Amsterdam 2013 [Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 8], Enoch O. Aboh, Jeannette C. Schaeffer & Petra Sleeman (eds), 1–20. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. Focus fronting, unexpectedness, and evaluative implicatures. Semantics & Pragmatics 9(3): 1–54.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina. 2013. On ‘focus movement’ in Italian. In Information Structure and Agreement [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 197], Victoria Camacho-Taboada, Ángel L. Jiménez-Fernández, Javier Martín-González & Mariano Reyes-Tejedor (eds), 193–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bonami, Olivier, Boyé, Gilles & Tseng, Jesse. 2014. An integrated approach to French liaison. In Proceedings of Formal Grammar 2004, Paola Monachesi, Gerhard Jäger, Gerald Penn & Shuly Wintner (eds), 29–45. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Brandi, Luciana & Cordin, Patrizia. 1989. Two Italian dialects and the null subject parameter. In The Null Subject Parameter, Osvaldo Jaeggli & Kenneth Safir (eds), 111–142. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Browne, Wayles & Vattuone, Bartolo. 1975. Theme–rheme structure and Zenéjyze clitics. Linguistic Inquiry 6(1): 136–40.Google Scholar
Burkhardt (Schumacher), Petra B. 2005. The Syntax-Discourse Interface: Representing and Interpreting Dependency [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 80]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burzio, Luigi. 1986. Italian Syntax: A Government–Binding Approach. Dordrecht: Kluwer.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna & Repetti, Lori. 2004. Clitics in northern Italian dialects: Phonology, syntax and microvariation. University of Venice Working Papers 14: 7–106.Google Scholar
. 2010. Proclitic vs enclitic pronouns in northern Italian dialects and the null-subject parameter. In Syntactic Variation: The Dialects of Italy, Roberta D’Alessandro, Adam Ledgeway & Ian Roberts (eds), 119–134. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna. 2002. Against optional and null clitics. Right dislocation vs. marginalization. Studia Linguistica 56 (1): 29–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Toward a cartography of subject positions. In The Structure of IP and CP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 2, Luigi Rizzi (ed.), 115–165. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Cecchetto, Carlo. 2000. Doubling structures and reconstruction. Probus 12: 93–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), 1–52. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2008. On phases. In Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory. Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, Robert Freidin, Carlos Otero & María Luisa Zubizarreta (eds), 133–166. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1976. Mica. Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia dell’Università di Padova 1: 101–112.Google Scholar
. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 2004. Issues in adverbial syntax. Lingua 114: 683–710. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cruschina, Silvio & Remberger, Eva-Maria. 2009. Focus fronting in Sardinian and Sicilian. In Proceedings of the XXXV Incontro di Grammatica Generativa (Siena 26–28 February 2009), Vincenzo Moscati & Emilio Servidio (eds), STiL-CISCL Working Papers 3: 118–30.Google Scholar
Cruschina, Silvio, Giurgea, Ion & Remberger, Eva-Maria. 2015. Focus fronting between declaratives and exclamatives. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique 60: 257–275.Google Scholar
Cruschina, Silvio. 2006. Informational focus in Sicilian and the left periphery. In Phases of Interpretation, Mara Frascarelli (ed.), 363–385. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Fronting as focalization in Sicilian. In Syntactic Variation: The Dialects of Italy, Roberta D’Alessandro, Adam Ledgeway & Ian Roberts (eds), 247–260. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
. 2012. Discourse-Related Features and Functional Projections. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. Information and discourse structure. In The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages, Adam Ledgeway & Martin Maiden (eds), 596–608. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
D’Alessandro, Roberta & Scheer, Tobias. 2015. Modular PIC. Linguistic Inquiry 46(4): 593–624. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
D’Imperio, Mariapaola, Elordieta, Gorka, Frota, Sonia, Prieto, Pilar, & Vigário, Marina. 2005. Intonational phrasing in Romance: The role of syntactic and prosodic structure. In Prosodies, Sonia Frota, Marina Vigário & Maria João Freitas (eds), 59–98. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Damonte, Federico. 2008. Modo e negazione nei dialetti calabresi meridionali. Quaderni di lavoro dell’ASIt 8: 85–100.Google Scholar
Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Durand, Jacques & Lychee, Chantal. 2008. Le projet ‘French liaison in the light of corpus data’. Journal of French Language Studies 18: 33–66.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elordieta, Gorka, Frota, Sonia, Prieto, Pilar & Vigário, Marina. 2003. Effects of constituent length and syntactic branching on intonational phrasing in Ibero-Romance. In Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Maria-Josep Solé, Daniel Recasens, Joaquín Romero (ed.), 487–490. Barcelona: Causal Productions.Google Scholar
Fanciullo, Franco. 1986. Syntactic reduplication and the Italian dialects of the centre-south. Journal of Italian Linguistics 8: 67–103.Google Scholar
. 1997. Raddoppiamento sintattico e ricostruzione linguistica nel sud italiano. Pisa: ETS.Google Scholar
Floricic, Frank. 2012. Opacity, defectiveness and reanalysis in north Italian subject clitics paradigms. Ms., Université de Paris III–Sorbonne Nouvelle & LPP (CNRS).
Folli, Raffaella & Ulbrich, Christiane (eds). 2010. Interfaces in Linguistics. New Research Perspectives. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Frege, Friedrich Ludwig Gottlob. 1892. Über Sinn und Bedeutung. Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik 100: 25–50.Google Scholar
Garzonio, Jacopo & Poletto, Cecilia. 2010a. Quantifiers as negative markers in Italian dialects. In Linguistics Variation Yearbook 2009, Jeroen van Craenenbroeck (ed.), 127–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010b. Alcuni fenomeni di negazione nei dialetti siciliani. Quaderni di Lavoro dell’ASIt 11: 69–82.Google Scholar
Garzonio, Jacopo. 2004. Interrogative types and left periphery: Some data from the Fiorentino dialect. In Quaderni di Lavoro ASIS 4, Barbara Patruno & Chiara Polo (eds), 1–19. Padua: Unipress.Google Scholar
. 2008a. A case of incomplete Jespersen’s cycle in Romance. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 33: 117–135.Google Scholar
. 2008b. Diacronia e sincronia della sintassi di punto in fiorentino. Quaderni di Lavoro dell’ASIt 8: 21–41.Google Scholar
Giurgea, Ion & Remberger, Eva-Maria. 2014. Polarity fronting in Romanian and Sardinian. In Variation within and Across Romance Languages. Selected Papers from the 41st Linguistic Symposium on Romance languages (LSRL), Ottawa 5–7 May 2011 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 333], Marie-Hélène Côté & Éric Mathieu (eds), 173–197. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goria, Cecilia. 2004. Subject Clitics in the Northern Italian Dialects: A Comparative Study Based on the Minimalist Program and Optimality Theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grohmann, Kleanthes (ed.) 2009. Interphases: Phase-theoretic Investigations of Linguistic Interfaces. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Haiman, John & Benincà, Paola. 1992. The Rhaeto-Romance Languages. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon & Zec, Draga. 1990. The Phonology-Syntax Connection. Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1917. Negation in English and Other Languages. Copenhagen: Høst.Google Scholar
Jimenez-Fernández, Ángel. 2015. Towards a typology of focus: Subject position and microvariation at the discourse-syntax interface. Ampersand 2: 49–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jones, Michael A. 1993. Sardinian Syntax. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
2013. Fronting, focus and illocutionary force in Sardinian. Lingua 134: 75–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaisse, Ellen. 1985. Connected Speech. The Interaction of Syntax and Phonology. Orlando FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
La Fauci, Nunzio & Loporcaro, Michele. 1997. Outline of a theory of existentials on evidence from Romance. Studi Italiani di Linguistica Teorica e Applicata 26: 5–55.Google Scholar
Ledgeway, Adam & Lombardi, Alessandra. 2005. Verb movement, adverbs and clitic positions in Romance. Probus 17: 79–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ledgeway, Adam. 2000. A Comparative Syntax of the Dialects of Southern Italy: A Minimalist Approach [Publications of the Philological Society]. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2009a. Grammatica diacronica del dialetto napoletano. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009b. Aspetti della sintassi della periferia sinistra del cosentino. In Studi sui dialetti della Calabria [Quaderni di Lavoro ASIt 9], Diego Pescarini (ed.), 3–24. Padua: Unipress.Google Scholar
. 2016a. Italian, Tuscan, and Corsican. In The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages, Adam Ledgeway & Martin Maiden (eds), 206–227. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
, 2016b. The dialects of southern Italy. In The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages, Adam Ledgeway & Martin Maiden (eds), 246–269. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. Marking presuppositional negation in the dialects of southern Italy. In Studies in Negation. Syntax, Semantics, and Variation, Silvio Cruschina, Katharina Hartmann & Eva-Maria Remberger (eds), 105–130. Göttingen: V&R Unipress / Vienna University Press.Google Scholar
. In press a. Phonological Correlates of Syntactic Structure: The Distribution of raddoppiamento fonosintattico in Calabrian. In Structuring Variation in Romance Linguistics and Beyond [Linguistik Aktuell / Linguistics Today], Mirko Grimaldi, Rosangela Lai, Ludovico Franco & Benedetta Baldis (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. In press b. The syntactic distribution of raddoppiamento fonosinttatico in Cosentino: A phase-theoretic account. In Romance Languages and Linguistics Theory, Adina Dragomirescu & Alexandru Nicolae (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. In press c. Parameters in the development of Romance perfective auxiliary selection. In Historical Linguistics 2015. Selected Papers from the 22nd International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Naples, 27–31 July 2015, Michela Cennamo & Claudia Fabrizio (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Leonetti, Manuel. 2008. Definiteness effects and the role of the coda in existential constructions. In Essays on Nominal Determination [Studies in Language Companion Series 99], Henrik Høeg Müller & Alex Klinge (eds), 131–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loporcaro, Michele. 1988. History and geography of raddoppiamento fonosintattico: Remarks on the evolution of a phonological rule. In Certamen Phonologicum, Pier Marco Bertinetto & Michele Loporcaro (eds), 341–387. Turin: Rosenberg & Sellier.Google Scholar
. 1997. Lengthening and raddoppiamento fonosintattico . In The Dialects of Italy, Martin Maiden & Mair Parry (eds), 41–51. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 1998. Sintassi comperata dell’accordo participiale romanzo. Torino: Rosenberg & Sellier.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 1995. A Linguistic History of Italian. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Manzini, Maria Rita & Savoia, Leonardo. 1998. The position of clitic and adverbial negation in Italian varieties. In Atti della terza giornata italo-americana di dialettologia: La negazione nelle lingue romanze, Paola Benincà & Cecilia Poletto (eds), Quaderni di Lavoro dell’ASIt 2: 39–61.Google Scholar
. 2002. Negative Adverbs are neither Adv nor Neg. In Proceedings of NELS 32, Masako Hirotani (ed.), 327–346. Amherst MA: University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
. 2005. I dialetti italiani e romanci: Morfosintassi generativa, Vol. 3. Alessandria: Edizioni Dell’Orso.Google Scholar
. 2011. Sentential negation in Piedmontese dialects. Quaderni di Lavoro dell’ASIt 13: 135–159.Google Scholar
. 2016a. Quale informazione sintattica viene interpretata dai fenomeni fonosintattici? Evidenza dalle varietà italiane meridionali. In Actes du XXVIIe Congrès international de linguistique et de philologie romanes (Nancy, 15–20 juillet 2013), Section 4: Syntaxe, Ledgeway Adam, Michela Cennamo & Guido Mensching (eds), 403–414. Nancy: ATILF. <[URL]>Google Scholar
. 2016b. Which syntactic information gets interpreted by phonosyntactic processes? Evidence from /u/ propagation in southern Italian dialects. In Approaches to Metaphony in the Languages of Italy, Francesc Torres-Tamarit, Kathrin Linke & Marc van Oostendorp (eds), 221–258. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Masutti, Vania. 2016. La liaison entre phonologie, morphologie et syntaxe. In Actes du XXVIIe Congrès international de linguistique et de philologie romanes (Nancy, 15–20 juillet 2013), Section 4: Syntaxe, Ledgeway Adam, Michela Cennamo & Guido Mensching (eds), 291–302. Nancy: ATILF. <[URL]>Google Scholar
Mensching, Guido & Remberger, Eva-Maria. 2010. Focus fronting and the left periphery in Sardinian. In Syntactic Variation: The Dialects of Italy, Roberta D’Alessandro, Adam Ledgeway & Ian Roberts (eds), 261–276. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Milsark, Gary. 1974. Existential sentences in English. PhD dissertation, MIT.
. 1977. Toward an explanation of certain peculiarities of the existential construction in English. Linguistic Analysis 3(1): 1–29.Google Scholar
Morin, Yves-Charles & Kaye, Jonathan. 1982. The syntactic bases for French liaison. Journal of Linguistics 18: 291–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Munaro, Nicola & Poletto, Cecilia. 2003. Sentential particles and clausal typing in the Veneto dialects. University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics 13: 127–154.Google Scholar
Nocentini, Alberto. 1999. Topical constraints on verbal agreement of spoken Italian (Tuscan variety). Italian Journal of Linguistics 11(2): 315–339.Google Scholar
Obenauer, Hans-Georg. 2004. Nonstandard wh-questions and alternative checkers in Pagotto. In Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery [Interface Explorations 9], Horst Lohnstein & Susanne Trissler (eds), 343–384. Berlin: De Gruyter.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paoli, Sandra. 2010. In focus: An investigation of information and contrastive constructions. In Syntactic Variation: The Dialects of Italy, Roberta D’Alessandro, Adam Ledgeway & Ian Roberts (eds), 277–291. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Parry, Mair. 1997. Preverbal negation and clitic ordering, with particular reference to a group of north-west Italian dialects. Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie 113: 244–270.Google Scholar
. 2013. Variation and change in the presentational constructions of north-western Italo-Romance varieties. In Argument Structure in Flux: The Naples/Capri Papers [Studies in Language Companion Series 131], Elly van Gelderen, Michela Cennamo & Jóhanna Barðdal (eds), 511–548. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Penello, Nicoletta & Pescarini, Diego. 2008. Osservazioni su mica in italiano e alcuni dialetti veneti. Quaderni di Lavoro dell’ASIt 8: 43–56.Google Scholar
Pescarini, Diego. 2005. Mica nell’area metropolitana di Verona. In Dialetti in città, Gianna Marcato (ed.), 283–288. Padua: Unipress.Google Scholar
Picallo, Carme M. 1990. Modal verbs in Catalan, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8: 285–312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinto, Manuela. 1997. Licensing and Interpretation of Inverted Subjects in Italian. Utrecht: UiL OTS Dissertation series.Google Scholar
Pittau, Massimo. 1991. Grammatica della lingua sarda. Varietà logudorese. Sassari: Carlo Delfino.Google Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia & Bocci, Giuliano. 2016. Syntactic and prosodic effects of information structure in Romance. In Handbook of Information Structure, Caroline Féry & Shin Ishihara (eds), 642–662: Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia & Tortora, Christina. 2016. Subject clitics: Syntax. In The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages, Adam Ledgeway & Martin Maiden (eds), 772–785. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poletto, Cecilia. 2000. The Higher Functional Field: Evidence from Northern Italian Dialects. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 2008. On negative doubling. Quaderni di Lavoro dell’ASIt 8: 57–84.Google Scholar
. 2009. I quantificatori e la negazione nei dialetti calabresi del progetto ASIt. Quaderni di Lavoro dell’ASIt 9: 25–36.Google Scholar
. 2010. The syntax of focus negation. Quaderni di Lavoro dell’ASIt 10: 39–62.Google Scholar
. 2017. Negative doubling. In favour of a “Big NegP” analysis. In Studies in Negation. Syntax, Semantics, and Variation, Silvio Cruschina, Katharina Hartmann & Eva-Maria Remberger (eds), 81–103. Göttingen: V&R Unipress / Vienna University Press.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian & Reiss, Charles (eds) 2013. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Rao, Rajiv. 2008. Observations on the roles of prosody and syntax in the phonological phrasing of Barcelona Spanish. The Linguistics Journal 3: 85–131.Google Scholar
Remberger, Eva-Maria. 2006. Hilfsverben. Eine minimalistische Analyse am Beispiel des Italienischen und Sardischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Null Subjects, expletives and locatives in Sardinian. In Null subjects, Expletives and Locatives in Romance [Konstanzer Arbeitspapiere des Fachbereichs Sprachwissenschaft 123], Georg Kaiser & Eva-Maria Remberger (eds), 231–261. Konstanz: University of Konstanz.Google Scholar
. 2010. Left peripheral interactions in Sardinian. Lingua 120: 555–581. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi & Savoia, Leonardo. 1993. Conditions on /u/ propagation in southern Italian dialects. In Syntactic Theory and the Dialects of Italy, Adriana Belletti (ed.), 252–318. Turin: Rosenberg & Sellier.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi, 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1982. Issues in Italian Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Ian 1993. Verbs and Diachronic Syntax. A Comparative History of English and French. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
. 1997. Restructuring, head movement, and locality. Linguistic Inquiry 28: 423–460.Google Scholar
. 2005. Principles and Parameters in VSO languages. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rohlfs, Gerhard. 1966. Grammatica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti. Fonetica, Vol. 1. Turin: Einaudi.Google Scholar
Rothman, Jason & Slabakova, Roumyana (eds). 2011. Acquisition at the Linguistic Interfaces. Special issue of Lingua 121(4): 567–688.Google Scholar
Saccon, Graziella. 1993. Post-verbal subjects: A study based on Italian and its dialects. PhD dissertation, Harvard University.
Samek-Lodovici, Vieri. 2002. Agreement impoverishment under subject inversion: A crosslinguistic analysis. In Resolving Conflicts in Grammars: Optimality Theory in Syntax, Morphology, and Phonology, Gisbert Fanselow & Caroline Féry (eds), 49–82. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Sampson, Rodney. 2016. Sandhi phenomena. In The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages, Adam Ledgeway & Martin Maiden (eds), 669–680. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Savoia, Leonardo M. & Baldi, Benedetta. 2016a. Propagation and preservation of rounded back vowels in Lucanian and Apulian varieties. Quaderni di Linguistica e Studi Orientali 2: 11–58.Google Scholar
Savoia, Leonardo M. 1987. Teoria generativa, modelli fonologici e dialettologia. La propagazione di u in una varietà lucana. Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia XI: 185–263.Google Scholar
2015. I dialetti italiani. Sistemi e processi fonologici nelle varietà di area italiana e romancia. Pisa: Pacini.Google Scholar
Scheer, Tobias. 2011. A Guide to Morphosyntax-Phonology Interface Theories: How Extra-Phonological Information is Treated in Phonology since Trubetzkoy’s Grenzsignale. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elizabeth & Tateishi, Koichi. 1988. Syntax and phonological phrasing in Japanese. In Interdisciplinary Approaches to Language. Essays in Honor of S. Y. Kuroda, Carol Georgopoulos & Roberta Ishihara (eds), 316–336. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elizabeth. 1974. French liaison and the X’ convention. Linguistic Inquiry 5: 573–590.Google Scholar
. 1984. Phonology and Syntax. The Relationship between Sound and Structure. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1986. On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook 3: 371–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silvestri, Giuseppina, 2009. La metafonia nel dialetto di Verbicaro (CS). Italia Dialettale 70: 169–226.Google Scholar
Späth, Andreas (ed.) 2007. Interfaces and Interface Conditions. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Torcolacci, Giuseppe. 2014a. Il raddoppiamento fonosintattico e la codifica di tratti morfosintattici. Il caso dei dialetti italiani meridionali. In Approcci diversi alla dialettologia italiana contemporanea. Special issue of L’Italia dialettale 75, Roberta D’Alessandro, Claudio Di Felice, Irene Franco & Adam Ledgeway (eds), 247–271.Google Scholar
. 2014b. Marking the Default. Auxiliary Selection in Southern Italian Dialects. Leiden: LOT.Google Scholar
Tortora, Christina. 1997. The syntax and semantics of the weak locative. PhD dissertation, University of Delaware.
. 2001. Evidence for a null locative in Italian. In Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds), 313–326. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
. 2014. A Comparative Grammar of Borgomanerese. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Truckenbrodt, Hubert. 1999. On the relation between syntactic phrases and phonological phrases. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 219–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vai, Massimo. 1996. Per una storia della negazione in milanese in comparazione con altre varietà altoitaliane. ACME 40: 57–98.Google Scholar
Vattuone, Bartolo. 1975. Notes on Genoese syntax: Kernel ‘VOS’ strings and theme–rheme structures. Studi italiani di linguistica teorica e applicata 4: 335–378.Google Scholar
Vincent, Nigel. 1988. Non-linear phonology in diachronic perspective: Stress and word-structure in Latin and Italian. In Certamen Phonologicum, Pier Marco Bertinetto & Michele Loporcaro (eds), 421–432. Turin: Rosenberg & Sellier.Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi. 2001. Infinitives: Restructuring and Clause Structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Zamparelli, Roberto. 2000. Layers in the Determiner Phrase. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar
Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1997. Negation and Clausal Structure: A Comparative Study of Romance Languages. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Zubizarreta, María Luisa, 1998. Prosody, Focus, and Word Order. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar