Chapter 6
From dialect to standard: Facilitating and constraining factors
On some uses of the Italian negative particle mica
This paper deals with the selection of morphosyntactic features in Italo-Romance. Firstly, a brief overview will be provided of the language space between traditional dialects and the standard variety of Italian, with particular emphasis on how this space is shaped differently across Italo-Romance. Next, the main dynamics underlying the inclusion of dialect features within the standard will be considered through the analysis of a representative case, i.e. the behaviour of the Italian negative particle mica (< Latin MICAM ‘crumb’) in declarative clauses. Drawing on both previous literature and corpus-based data, the focus will fall on the reasons why some uses of mica are selected as standard and others are not. Special attention will be paid to the role of salience as both a facilitating and a constraining factor.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Dialect and standard in Italo-Romance: Some general issues
- 3.The selection of features in Italo-Romance: A case study
- 3.1Standard and sub-standard uses of the Italian negative particle mica
- 3.2Contact with Italo-Romance dialects
- 3.3Salience
- 4.Conclusions
-
Notes
-
References
References (75)
References
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2006). Grammars in contact: a cross-linguistic perspective. In A. Y. Aikhenvald, & R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.), Grammars in contact: a cross-linguistic typology (pp. 1–66). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Ammon, U. (2003). On the social forces that determine what is standard in a language and on conditions of successful implementation. Sociolinguistica, 17, 1–10.
Antonelli, G. (2011). Lingua. In A. Afribo, & E. Zinato (Eds.), Modernità italiana (pp. 15–52). Roma: Carocci.
Auer, P. (2017). The neo-standard of Italy and elsewhere in Europe. In M. Cerruti, C. Crocco, & S. Marzo (Eds.), Towards a new standard: Theoretical and empirical studies on the restandardization of Italian (pp. 365–374). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Auer, P., Barden, B., & Grosskopf, B. (1998). Saliency in long-term dialect accommodation. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 2(2), 163–187.
Ballarè, S. (2015). La negazione di frase nell’italiano contemporaneo: un’analisi sociolinguistica. Rivista italiana di dialettologia, 39, 37–61.
Battaglia, S., & Pernicone, V. (1962). Grammatica italiana: la metrica, la stilistica, esercizi e letture lessicali. Torino: Loescher.
Benincà, P., & Poletto, C. (2004). Topic, focus and V2: defining the CP sub-layers. In L. Rizzi (Ed.), The structure of IP and CP. The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. II (pp. 52–75). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Bernini, G., & Ramat, P. (1996). Negative sentences in the languages of Europe. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Berruto, G. (1987). L’italiano regionale bergamasco. In G. Sanga (Ed.), Lingua e dialetto di Bergamo e delle valli (pp. 499–591). Bergamo: Lubrina.
Berruto, G. (1989). On the typology of linguistic repertories. In U. Ammon (Ed.), Status and function of languages and language varieties (pp. 552–569). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Berruto, G. (1997). Code-switching and code-mixing. In M. Maiden, & M. Parry (Eds.), The dialects of Italy (pp. 394–400). London/New York: Routledge.
Berruto, G. (2005). Dialect/standard convergence, mixing, and models of language contact: The case of Italy. In P. Auer, F. Hinskens, & P. Kerswill (Eds.), Dialect change: Convergence and divergence in European languages (pp. 81–95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berruto, G. (2016). Su geometrie sociolinguistiche e modellizzazioni del contatto in ambito italo-romanzo. In R. Bombi, & V. Orioles (Eds.), Lingue in contatto/Contact linguistics (pp. 29–50). Roma: Bulzoni.
Berruto, G. (2017). What is changing in Italian today? Phenomena of restandardization in syntax and morphology: an overview. In M. Cerruti, C. Crocco, & S. Marzo (Eds.), Towards a new standard: Theoretical and empirical studies on the restandardization of Italian (pp. 31–60). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Birner, B. J. (2006). Semantic and pragmatic contributions to information status. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 38, 14–32.
Cerruti, M. (2009). Strutture dell’italiano regionale. Morfosintassi di una varietà diatopica in prospettiva sociolinguistica. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Cerruti, M. (2017). Morphosyntactic variation: individual grammar and group grammar in the ‘de-dialectalization’ of Italian. Sociolinguistic studies, 11(2-3-4), 313–339.
Cerruti, M., & Regis, R. (2014). Standardization patterns and dialect/standard convergence: a northwestern Italian perspective. Language in Society, 43(1), 83–111.
Chafe, W. (1982). Integration and involvement in speaking, writing and oral literature. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Spoken and written language: Exploring orality and literacy (pp. 35–53). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Cheshire, J. (1996). Syntactic variation and the concept of prominence. In K. Juhani, K. Merja, & M. Rissanen (Eds.), Speech past and present: studies in English dialectology (pp. 1–17). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Cheshire, J. (1997). Involvement in ‘standard’ and ‘nonstandard’ English. In J. Cheshire, & D. Stein (Eds.), Taming the vernacular. From dialect to written standard language (pp. 68–82). London: Longman.
Cheshire, J. (2009). Syntactic variation and beyond. In N. Coupland, & A. Jaworski (Eds.), The new sociolinguistics reader (pp. 119–135). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cinque, G. (1976). Mica. Annali della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia dell’Università di Padova, 1, 101–112.
Coupland, N., & Kristiansen, T. (2011). SLICE: Critical perspectives on language (de)standardization. In T. Kristiansen, & N. Coupland (Eds.), Standard languages and language standards in a changing Europe (pp. 11–35). Oslo: Novus.
Coseriu, E. (1980). “Historische Sprache” und “Dialekt”. In J. Göschel, P. Iviæ, & K. Kehr (Eds.), Dialekt und Dialektologie (pp. 106–22). Wiesbaden: Steiner.
Croft, W. (2003). Typology and universals, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dal Negro, S., & Vietti, A. (2011). Italian and Italo-Romance dialects. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 210, 71–92.
Dardano, M., & Trifone, P. (1995). Grammatica italiana. Con nozioni di linguistica. Zanichelli: Milano.
Dressler, W. U. (2000). Naturalness. In G. Booij, C. Lehmann, & J. Mugdam (Eds.), Morphology. An international handbook on inflection and word-formation, vol. I (pp. 288–296). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Falk, S. (2014). On the notion of salience in spoken discourse. Prominence cues shaping discourse structure and comprehension. Travaux interdisciplinaires sur la parole et le langage, 30, 1–23.
Farrar, K., & Jones, M. C. (2002). Introduction. In M. C. Jones, & E. Esch (Eds.), Language change. The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors (pp. 1–16). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Fischer, O. (2007). Morphosyntactic change. Functional and formal perspectives. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Fornaciari, R. (1974). Sintassi italiana dell’uso moderno. Firenze: Sansoni.
Garzonio, J. (2020). Not even a crumb of negation: on mica in Old Italian. In G. Bellucci, L. Franco, & P. Lorusso (Eds.), Linguistic variation: Structure and interpretation (pp. 273-292). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Hansen, M.-B. M. (2009). The grammaticalization of negative reinforcers in Old and Middle French: a discourse-functional approach. In M.-B. Mosegaard Hansen, & J. Visconti (Eds.), Current trends in diachronic semantics and pragmatics (pp. 227–251). Oxford: Emerald.
Hansen, M.-B. M., & Visconti, J. (2009). On the diachrony of reinforced negation in French and Italian. In C. Rossari, C. Ricci, & A. Spiridon (Eds.), Grammaticalization and pragmatics. Facts, approaches, theoretical issues (pp. 137–171). Bingley: Emerald.
Hansen, M. B. M. & Visconti, J. (2012). The evolution of negation in French and Italian: Similarities and differences. Folia Linguistica, 46, 453–482.
Haspelmath, M. (1997). Indefinite pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Hickey, R. (2014). Internally and externally motivated language change. In J. M. Hernández-Campoy, & J. C. Conde-Silvestre (Eds.), The handbook of historical sociolinguistics (pp. 401–421). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hinskens, F. (1986). Primaire en secundaire dialectkenmerken: een onderzoek naar de bruikbaarheid van een vergeten (?) onderscheid. In J. Creten, G. Geerts, & K. Jaspaert (Eds.), Werk-in-uitvoering: Momentopnamen van de sociolinguïstiek in België en Nederland (pp. 135–158). Leuven-Amersfoort: ACCO.
Hinskens, F. (1996). Dialect levelling in Limburg. Structural and sociolinguistic aspects. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Hinskens, F., Auer, P. & Kerswill, P. (2005). The study of dialect convergence and divergence: conceptual and methodological considerations. In P. Auer, F. Hinskens, & P. Kerswill (Eds.), Dialect change: Convergence and divergence in European languages (pp. 1–48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Iannàccaro, G., & Dell’Aquila, V. (2011). Historical linguistic minorities: suggestions for classification and typology. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 210, 29–45.
Kerswill, P., & A. Williams. (2002). “Salience” as an explanatory factor in language change: evidence from dialect levelling in urban England. In M. C. Jones, & E. Esch (Eds.), Language change. The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors (pp. 81–110). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Kühl, K., & Braunmüller, K. (2014). Linguistic stability and divergence: An extended perspective on language contact. In K. Braunmüller, S. Höder, & K. Kühl (Eds.), Stability and divergence in language contact. Factors and mechanisms (pp. 13–38). Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Ledgeway, A. L. (2009). Grammatica diacronica del napoletano. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Léglise, I., & Chamoreau, C. (2013). Variation and change in contact settings. In I. Léglise, & C. Chamoreau (Eds.), The interplay of variation and change in contact settings (pp. 1–20). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Longobardi, G. (2001). I quantificatori. In L. Renzi, G. Salvi, & A. Cardinaletti (Eds.), Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione, vol. I (pp. 645–696). Bologna: Il Mulino.
Manzini, M. R., & Savoia, L. M. (2005). I dialetti italiani e romanci. Morfosintassi generativa, vol. III. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.
Manzotti, E., & Rigamonti, A. (1991). La negazione. In L. Renzi, G. Salvi, & A. Cardinaletti (Eds.), Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione, vol. II (pp. 245–317). Bologna: Il Mulino.
Matras, Y. (2009). Language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Matras, Y. (2012). An activity-oriented approach to contact-induced language change. In I. Léglise, & C. Chamoreau (Eds.), Dynamics of contact-induced change (pp. 1–28). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Muljačić, Ž. (1997). The relationship between the dialects and the standard language. In M. Maiden, & M. Parry (Eds.), The dialects of Italy (pp. 387–393). London/New York: Routledge.
Parry, M. (2013). Negation in the history of Italo-Romance. In D. Willis, C. Lucas, & A. Breitbarth (Eds.), The history of negation in the languages of Europe and the Mediterranean, vol. I (pp. 77–118). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pescarini, D., & Penello, N. (2012). L’avverbio mica fra widening semantico e restrizioni sintattiche. In P. M. Bertinetto, V. Bambini, & I. Ricci (Eds.), Linguaggio e cervello / Semantica, vol. II (CD-ROM). Roma: Bulzoni.
Poletto, C. (2008). On negative doubling. Quaderni di Lavoro ASIt, 8, 57–84.
Ramat, P. (2006). Italian negatives from a typological/areal point of view. In N. Grandi, & G. Iannàccaro (Eds.), Zhì. Scritti in onore di Emanuele Banfi (pp. 355–370). Cesena-Roma: Caissa.
Regis, R. (2011). Koinè dialettale, dialetto di koinè, processi di koinizzazione. Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia, 35, 7–36.
Regis, R. (2017). How standard regional Italians set in: the case of standard Piedmontese Italian. In M. Cerruti, C. Crocco, & S. Marzo (Eds.), Towards a new standard: Theoretical and empirical studies on the restandardization of Italian (pp. 145–175). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Serianni, L. (1989). Grammatica italiana: italiano comune e lingua letteraria. Suoni, forme, costrutti. Torino: UTET.
Stein, D. (1997). Syntax and varieties. In J. Cheshire, & D. Stein (Eds.), Taming the vernacular: from dialect to written standard language (pp. 35–50). Harlow: Longman.
Tannen, D. (1989). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Telmon, T. (1993). Varietà regionali. In A. Sobrero (Ed.), Introduzione all’italiano contemporaneo, vol. II (pp. 93–149). Roma-Bari: Laterza.
Telmon, T. (2005). Una ricerca sulla percezione dei parlanti circa i rapporti tra italiano e dialetto. In F. Lo Piparo, & G. Ruffino (Eds.), Gli italiani e la lingua (pp. 229–267). Palermo: Sellerio.
Thomason, S., & Kaufman, T. (1988). Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Trumper, J., & Maddalon, M. (1988). Converging divergence and diverging convergence: the dialect language conflict and contrasting evolutionary trends in modern Italy. In P. Auer, & A. Di Luzio (Eds.), Variation and convergence (pp. 217–259). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
van der Auwera, J. (2009). The Jespersen Cycles. In E. Van Gelderen (Ed.), Cyclical change (pp. 35–71). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Vietti, A. (2017). Italian in Bozen/Bolzano: the formation of a ‘new dialect’. In M. Cerruti, C. Crocco, & S. Marzo (Eds.), Towards a new standard: Theoretical and empirical studies on the restandardization of Italian (pp. 176–212). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Visconti, J. (2009). From ‘textual’ to ‘interpersonal’: on the diachrony of the Italian particle mica. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 937–950.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Guerini, Federica
2023.
Negative structures in neo-standard Italian:
non è che
(‘it is not that’) + S and
mica
(‘a crumb’) in comparison.
Sociolinguistica 37:1
► pp. 115 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.