Advertisement

Abstract

The pronominal system of Piedmontese, as that of most NIDs, involves two series of subject pronouns: the strong series which is syntactically autonomous and behaves like free morphemes, and the clitic series, i.e. SCLs. Both paradigm from Turinese and Astigiano are illustrated in Table 1. This book is concerned exclusively with SCLs:
 

Strong Subject Pronouns

Turinese SCLs

Astigiano SCLs

1sg

mi

i

a

2sg

ti

it/’t

at;’t

3sg masc

chiel (masc.)

a

a; al; el; ’l; ir; o

3sg fem

chila (fem.)

a

1pl

noi/noiautri

i

a

2pl

voi/voiautri

i

a

3pl

lor

a

a

Keywords

Linear Order Word Order Subordinate Clause Grammatical Relation Imperative Verb 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    See Parry (1991; 1995) on the enclisis of complement clitics to non-finite forms in Piedmontese.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    The label Piedmontese is used in this book to refer to literary Piedmontese and Turinese. It is be used when it is not relevant to make a distinction between different varieties of this dialect. If, however, it becomes necessary to make such a distinction the variety will be specified.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    I have examined a contemporary unpublished version of Gironi edited by Renzo Arato. In this version, the editor (Renzo Arato p.c.) aimed at keeping as close as possible to the spoken language.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Throughout the book, the label Astigiano refers to Marettese and Roattese, unless otherwise specified.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    See Parry (1999) for an extensive discussion on this construction in Piedmontese.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Notice that the Precedence Hierarchy appears as the exact mirror of the Grammatical Relation hierarchy (GR) (Keenan and Comrie 1977): Subject < Object < Oblique < others. “[...], one observes that the GR hierarchy [...] is directly manifested in the linear order of the arguments of the clause.” (Croft 1990:108). In other words, subjects generally precede objects, objects generally precede obliques, and so on. “[...] the conceptual ranking of arguments as described by the GR hierarchy is directly mirrored in the physical sequence of arguments in the phrase.” (ibid). The Precedence Hierarchy is a word order hierarchy, and despite appearing as the reverse of the GR hierarchy, the word order that results from it is the one expected. In fact, the linear order of the clitics is the same as the linear order of the arguments predicted by the GR hierarch. That is, subject clitic precedes the others. Notice that the position of CL-1‘/j’ is irrelevant with respect to the GR hierarchy, since the CLl‘/j’ differ from the other clitics in that they do not mark any relation between the arguments and the predicate.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    The relevant preverbal negative marker is what Zanuttini (1997) calls strong negation and exemplifies with Italian non. Not all preverbal markers are strong: those which need to be accompanied by postverbal negation are weak and syntactically different from the strong ones (see chapter 3 and 5).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cairese is a dialect spoken in the upper Val Bormida area of the Ligurian hinterland. As Parry points out: “the syntax of [the dialects spoken in this area] is basically of the Piedmontese type, as is the morphology, but they exhibit many Ligurian phonetic features” (Parry 1997a:244 fn. 4).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    In some varieties, ICLs may be found in other contexts which involve verb movement to the CP field, i.e. exclamatives, counterfactual, hypothethical, disjunctive (Poletto 2000b). In the varieties examined here I have found no instances of the use of ICLs in these contexts.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Interrogative structures in the NIDs are dealt with in chapter 6. For further discussions, I direct the reader to Benincà and Poletto (1997), Goria (2000, 2002), Hulk and Pollock (2001), Parry (1998a), Poletto (1998, 2000b), Munaro (2001), among many others.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    See chapter 6 for a discussion of the same lack of difference between direct questions with ICLs and those without.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    See Benincà and Cinque (1993) for a detailed discussion of different coordination types.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Note that there is another version of the same nursery rime in which the expletive SCLa is used with the verb pieuv. In my opinion this corroborates the free variation typical of these SCLs.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cecilia Goria
    • 1
  1. 1.University of NottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations