Bd. 85 (2024): Atti del convegno: I dialetti di Puglia e Salento: due diverse facce del Meridione
Articles

On the border between hypotaxis and parataxis: Assessing the status of pseudo-coordination in Apulian varieties

Zugang für Abonnent/innen oder durch Zahlung einer Gebühr PDF (Englisch) (EUR 6)
  • Luigi Andriani
Luigi Andriani
Universität Hamburg

Veröffentlicht 2024-09-11

Schlagwörter

  • aspectual periphrases,
  • pseudo-coordination,
  • hybrid periphrastic pattern,
  • Apulian varieties
Copyright-Vermerk

Zitationsvorschlag

On the border between hypotaxis and parataxis: Assessing the status of pseudo-coordination in Apulian varieties. (2024). L’Italia Dialettale, 85. https://doi.org/10.4454/qr678845

Abstract

This article provides an overview of the geographical distribution and morphosyntactic properties of two Apulian aspectual periphrases, formed by auxiliaries stand/go (V1) and the lexical verb (V2). In particular, the focus lies on the morphosyntactic expression of the Apulo-Barese ‘hybrid’ periphrastic paradigms, in which the infinitival V2 alternates with an inflected V2 only in certain grammatical persons of the present indicative and imperative stand/go-periphrases. Previous work has mostly concentrated on the Salentino-speaking area on account of the peculiar periphrastic structure involving exclusively (pseudo-)coordination/
parataxis: while stand/go remains largely invariable, only the lexical V2 carries person-agreement features and TAM-specifications. At the border with the Apulo-Barese speaking area, however, there is evidence of a transitional area where paratactic and hypotactic
structures meet and overlap, giving rise to such ‘hybrid’ periphrastic conjugations. To shed light on the nature and status of such ‘hybrid’ patterns, the distribution of infinitival-V2 vs inflected-V2 forms is tackled from a micro-diachronic and comparative perspective. More specifically, the ‘hybrid’ periphrastic pattern with the least inflected V2 paradigmatic cells (2sg-3sg of the present indicative), attested in central Apulo-Barese, appears more resistant to change than the pattern with the inflected V2 in the  1sg-2sg-3sg-3pl persons, found in part of southern Apulo-Barese varieties. This resistance could be ascribed to syncretism and analogical processes among the forms of the present indicative, infinitive, and imperative.

Zugang für Abonnent/innen oder durch Zahlung einer Gebühr PDF (Englisch) (EUR 6)

Downloads

Downloaddaten sind noch nicht verfügbar.

Literaturhinweise

  1. Abbatescianni, G., 1896: Fonologia del dialetto barese, Bari, Avellino.
  2. Amenta, L., E. Strudsholm, 2002: “‘Andare a + infinito’ in italiano. Parametri di variazione sincronici e diacronici”, Cuadernos de filología italiana 9, pp. 11-29.
  3. Andriani, L., 2017: The Syntax of the Dialect of Bari, PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.
  4. -----, 2023: “Differential object marking in Apulia: A descriptive overview”, Caplletra 74, pp. 213-258.
  5. -----, R. Perlin, D. Kaufman, forthcoming: “Dialetti in diaspora: Preservation and loss in Italian New York”, in J. Hajek, F. Goglia (eds), Italian(s) abroad: Italian language and migration in cities of the world, Berlin, Mouton De Gruyter.
  6. Aprile, M., R. Coluccia, F. Fanciullo, R. Gualdo, 2002: “La Puglia”, in M. Cortelazzo, C. Marcato, N. de Blasi, G.P. Clivio (eds), I dialetti italiani: storia, struttura e uso, Turin, UTET, pp. 679-756.
  7. Ascoli, G.I., 1896: “Un problema di sintassi comparata dialettale”, Archivio glottologico italiano 14, pp. 453-472.
  8. -----, 1901: “Appendice all’articolo ‘Un problema di sintassi comparata dialettale’”, Archivio glottologico italiano 15, pp. 221-225.
  9. Bentley, D., F.M. Ciconte, S. Cruschina (eds), 2014: I dialetti d’Italia: fiabe, favole e racconti, Manchester, University of Manchester Press.
  10. Bertinetto, P.M., M. Squartini, 2016: “Tense and aspect”, in Ledgeway, Maiden 2016, pp. 939-953.
  11. Brianti, G., 2000: “Diacronia delle perifrasi aspettuali dell’italiano. Il caso di stare gerundio, andare e venire + gerundio”, Lingua Nostra 61/1-2, pp. 35-52; 61/3-4, pp. 97-119.
  12. Cardinaletti, A., G. Giusti, 2001: “Semi-lexical motion verbs in Romance and Germanic”, in N. Corver, H. van Riemsdijk (eds), Semi-Lexical Categories, Berlin, De Gruyter, pp. 371-414.
  13. -----, 2003: “Motion verbs as functional heads”, in C. Tortora (ed.), The Syntax of Italian Dialects, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 31-49.
  14. -----, 2020: “Multiple agreement in Southern Italian dialects”, in L. Franco, P. Lorusso (eds), Linguistic Variation: Structure and Interpretation, Berlin, De Gruyter, pp. 125-148.
  15. Cardullo, S., 2023: “The ‘return’ of southern Italo-Romance tonna: From pseudocoordination to adverb. A case study in grammaticalization”, Quaderni di Linguistica e Studi Orientali 9, pp. 11-28.
  16. Cox, T.B., 1982: Aspects of the Phonology and Morphology of Molese, PhD dissertation, University of Victoria.
  17. Cruschina, S., 2013: “Beyond the stem and inflectional morphology: An irregular pattern at the level of periphrasis”, in S. Cruschina, M. Maiden, J.C. Smith (eds), The Boundaries of Pure Morphology, Oxford, Oxford University Press,
  18. pp. 262-283.
  19. -----, 2022a: “Gone unexpectedly: Pseudo-coordination and the expression of surprise in Sicilian”, in G. Giusti, V.N. Di Caro, D. Ross (eds), Pseudo-Coordination and Multiple Agreement Constructions, Amsterdam, Benjamins, pp. 130-148.
  20. -----, 2022b: “Periphrases and irregular paradigms in Italo-Romance”, in A. Ledgeway, J.C. Smith, N. Vincent (eds), Periphrasis and Inflexion in Diachrony. A View from Romance, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 169-189.
  21. Di Caro, V., 2019: “The inflected construction in the dialects of Sicily: Parameters of micro-variation”, in S. Cruschina, A. Ledgeway, E.-M. Remberger (eds), Italian Dialectology at the Interfaces, Amsterdam, Benjamins, pp. 63-78.
  22. Di Caro, V., G. Giusti, 2015: “A protocol for the inflected construction in the dialects of Sicily”, Annali Ca’ Foscari, Serie Occidentale 49, pp. 393-422.
  23. -----, -----, 2019: “Dimensions of variation: The inflected construction in the dialect of Delia (CL)”, in L. Repetti, F. Ordoñez (eds), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 14, Amsterdam, Benjamins, pp. 54-68.
  24. Dixon, R.W., 1977: A Grammar of Yidin, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  25. DLP: A.M. Melillo, Dialetti e lingue di Puglia: area barese occidentale, Bari, Adriatica, 1994.
  26. Fanciullo, F., 1976: “Il trattamento delle occlusive sonore latine nei dialetti salentini”, L’Italia dialettale 39, pp. 1-82.
  27. Ledgeway, A., 1997: “Asyndetic complementation in Neapolitan dialect”, Italianist 17, pp. 231-273.
  28. -----, 2000: A Comparative Syntax of the Dialects of Southern Italy, Oxford, Blackwell.
  29. -----, 2009: Grammatica diacronica del dialetto napoletano, Tübingen, Niemeyer.
  30. -----, 2016a: “Clausal complementation”, in Ledgeway, Maiden 2016, pp. 1013-1028.
  31. -----, 2016b: “From coordination to subordination: The grammaticalization of progressive
  32. and andative aspect in the dialects of Salento”, in F. Pratas, S. Pereira,
  33. C. Pinto (eds), Coordination and Subordination. Form and Meaning, Newcastle,
  34. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 157-184.
  35. -----, 2021: “Coming and going: Calabrian asyndetic complementation”, Revue roumaine
  36. de linguistique 66/1, pp. 3-35.
  37. -----, M. Maiden (eds), 2016: The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  38. -----, N. Schifano, G. Silvestri, 2018: “The expression of progressive aspect in Grico: Mapping morphosyntactic isoglosses in an endangered Italo-Greek variety”, Transactions of the Philological Society 116/2, pp. 179-217.
  39. Loporcaro, M., 1988: Grammatica storica del dialetto di Altamura, Pisa, Giardini.
  40. -----, 2021: La Puglia e il Salento, Bologna, il Mulino.
  41. Lorusso, P., 2019: “A person split analysis of the progressive forms in Barese”, in L. Franco, M. Marchis Moreno, M. Reeve (eds), Agreement, Case and Locality in the Nominal and Verbal Domains, Berlin, Language Science Press, pp. 179-210.
  42. Maiden, M., 2016: “Morphomes”, in Ledgeway, Maiden 2016, pp. 708-721.
  43. Manzini, M.R., P. Lorusso, L.M. Savoia, 2017: “a/bare finite complements in Southern Italian varieties: Monoclausal or biclausal syntax?”, Quaderni di Linguistica e Studi Orientali 3, pp. 11-59.
  44. Manzini, M.R., L.M. Savoia, 2005: I dialetti italiani e romanci. Morfosintassi generativa, 3 voll., Alessandria, Edizioni dell’Orso.
  45. Modena, F., 2010: “Costruzioni infinitive dei dialetti siciliani”, Quaderni di lavoro ASIt 11, pp. 103-110.
  46. Nocentini, A., 2010: “Il tipo sintattico ‘vattelappesca’”, AGI 95, pp. 22-47.
  47. Núñ ez Román, F., 2011: “Perifrasi verbali in siciliano antico”, Laboratorio sulle varietà romanze antiche 4/1, pp. 1-34.
  48. Pastore, L., 2002: Lessico capursese, Bari, Levante.
  49. Rohlfs, G., 1966-68-69: Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti, 3 vols, Turin, Einaudi.
  50. -----, 1980: Calabria e Salento. Saggi di storia linguistica, Ravenna, Longo.
  51. Sornicola, R., 1976: “Vado a dire, vaiu a ddicu: problema sintattico o problema semantico”, Lingua Nostra 37, pp. 65-74.
  52. Sorrisi, F., 2010: “Le costruzioni flesse con va + verbo lessicale in palermitano”, Quaderni di lavoro ASIt 11, pp. 111-120.
  53. Sorrenti, P. (ed.), 1994: Le Rime Baresi di F.S. Abbrescia, Bari, Levante.
  54. TTL: Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, Leipzig, Teubner, 1900 ff.
  55. Urgese, T., 2011: Studi sul dialetto salentino settentrionale: costrutti paratattici che continuano proposizioni latine unite con la congiunzione ac, Francavilla (BR), Montanaro.
  56. Valente, V., 1975: Puglia, Pisa, Pacini.
  57. VDG: F. Granatiero, Vocabolario dei dialetti garganici, Foggia, Grenzi, 2010.
  58. VDS: G. Rohlfs, Vocabolario dei dialetti salentini, Munich, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1956-66.