The Dialects of Italy

Dr Martin Maiden, Martin Maiden, Mair Parry, Dr Martin Maiden, Martin Maiden, Mair Parry

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2006
• ISBN:
  9781134834365
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Lingue e linguistica
• Subtopic: Linguistica

This book makes accessible the major structural features of the dialects of Italy and emphasises the importance of a detailed understanding of the dialects for issues in general linguistic theory. Selected contents include:
* Phonology
* Morphology
* Syntax
* Lexis
* The Dialect Areas * Sociolinguistics of Dialects
Contributors: Paola Benica; Gaetano Berruto; Guglielmo Cinque; Michela Cennamo; Patrizia Cordin; Thamas Cravens; Marie-Jose Dalbera Stefanaggi; Franco Fanciullo; Werner Forner; Luciano Giannelli; John Hajek; Hermann Haller; Robert Hastings; Michael Jones; Michele Loporcaro; Martin Maiden; Marco Mazzoleni; Zarko Miljacic; Mair Parry; Cecilia Poletto; Lorenzo Renzi; Lori Repetti; Giovanni Ruffino; Giampaolo Salvi; Glauco Sanga; Leonardo Savoia; Alberto Sobrero; Rosanna Sornicola; Tullio Telmon; John Trumper; Edward Tuttle; Alberto Valvaro; Laura Vanelli; Ugo Vignuzzi; Nigel Vincent; Irene Vogel.

Part I

Structures

Chapter 1

Vowel systems

Martin Maiden

1 REANALYSIS OF LENGTH DISTINCTIONS

Virtually all dialects display vowel systems derivable from one of two historically underlying patterns, often labelled ‘Sardinian’ and ‘Western’ (cf. Vincent (1988a: 30–4)). These continue a Latin system comprising five vowels, each of which could be distinctively long or short. The opposition A vs. A: (‘:’ indicates length) was everywhere neutralized; in the ‘Sardinian’ system (Sardinia, far south of Corsica), all length distinctions were neutralized, the original qualities remaining intact; in the ‘Western’, length distinctions were reanalysed as aperture distinctions, short E and o opening to [ε] and [ɔ], short I and U merging with E: and O: to yield [e] and [o]. A new, allophonic, rule of vowel length emerged such that all vowels were long in stressed open syllables, but were short elsewhere.

Table

Latin	Sardinian	Western (Tuscan)
I: UI:NU(M) ‘wine’I NIUE(M) ‘snow’	i 'viːnui 'niːve	i 'viino
		e 'neːve
E: ME:NSE(M) ‘month’E SEPTE(M) ‘seven’	ε mεːzeε 'sεtte	e ‘meːse
		ε 'sεtte
A: CA:RU(M) ‘dear’A CAPUT ‘head’	a 'kaːrua 'kaːpu	a 'kaːroa 'kaːpo
O MORTUA(M) ‘dead’O: SO:LA(M) ‘alone’	ɔ 'mɔrtaɔ 'sɔːla	ɔ 'mɔrta
		o 'soːla
U SURDU(M) ‘deaf ’U: MU:RU(M) ‘wall’	u 'surduu 'muːru	o 'sordo
		u 'muːro

The ‘Sicilian’ system (probably a secondary development of the ‘Western’ system (cf. Fanciullo (1994: 183)) is characteristic of Sicily, S. Calabria and Salento (cf. Chs 40, 42, 43), where [e] and [o] raised to [i] and [u]: ['viːnu ‘niːvi ‘miːsi; ‘suːla ‘surdu, ‘muːru]. Since Lausberg (1939) it has been believed that the ‘Sardinian’ system appears in part of S. Basilicata and N. Calabria bounded by San Chirico Raparo, Maratea, Verbicaro, Oriolo. But Fanciullo (1988: 676–80) argues that this mainland system is historically intermediate between the ‘Sardinian’ and the ‘Western’ since, although the original length distinction between mid vowels has been neutralized, the evidence of metaphony (see Ch. 2) is that, originally, high and low mid vowels were distinct, unlike Sardinian: Senise sg. ['mesə] ‘month’, metaphonic pl. ['misə] vs. sg. ['perə] ‘foot’ metaphonic pl. ['pierə], presupposing original *['mese], *['mesi] vs. *['pεde], *['pεdi] (parallel examples exist for back vowels). In the relevant mainland area neutralization of length distinctions apparently affected only [i] and [u], whilst the mid vowels evolved as in the ‘Western’ system (although occasional influence from the neighbouring ‘Sicilian’ pattern is detectable).

Claims that the vowel system historically underlying Rumanian – in which the front vowels follow the ‘Western’ pattern (e.g., Castelmezzano NIUE(M) > ['nevə]), and the back vowels the ‘Sardinian’ (SURDU(M) > ['surdə]) – also exists in pockets north of the supposed ‘Sardinian’ area, and S.E. of Potenza (see Ch. 40), are open to similar qualification where the back vowels are concerned. Dalbera-Stefanaggi (see Ch. 36) identifies in the Taravo region of Corsica yet another system, where reflexes of Latin short [i] and [u] have remained distinct from other vowels.

The ‘Western’ distinctions between close and open mid vowels have been extensively neutralized. In S.E. Italy (S. Marche, N. Abruzzo, Puglia S.E. of Palagiano and Cisternino, N. and E. Basilicata and parts of Cilento), stressed [e] and [o] have merged, often by lowering, respectively with [ε] and [ɔ]: Avetrana (Taranto) [ka'tεna] ‘chain’, ['sεtte] ‘seven’, ['sɔli] ‘sun’, ['kɔri] ‘heart’ (< *[ka'tena], *['sεtte], *['sole], *['kɔre]). In some localities, original aperture distinctions between mid vowels are neutralized (for front and back vowels respectively), principally in closed syllables: Canosa di Puglia ['verdə] ‘green’, [sett] ‘seven’, ['fɔrtə] ‘strong’, [rɔss] ‘red’ (< *[Verde], *['sεtte], *['fɔrte], *['rossa]) but [ka'tainə] ‘chain’ vs. ['fεlə] ‘gall’, ['saulə] ‘alone’ vs. ['kɔrə] ‘heart’ (< *[ka'tena] *['fεle], *['sole], *['kɔre]). See further Chs 41 and 42. Merger of high and low mid front vowels in closed syllables is especially widespread in the N. (except the Veneto): Lombard [vεrt] ‘green’, ['vεskuf] ‘bishop’ (< *[Verde], *['veskovo]); rarer, but found in Alpine dialects and parts of Romagna, is opening of [o] to [ɔ] in closed syllables (e.g., Bellinzona ['mɔʃka] ‘fly’).

Of the three Latin diphthongs, Œ [oi̯] and Æ [ai̯] yielded front vowel monophthongs, usually [e] and [ε], throughout Romance; AU [au̯], in contrast, survives in S. Italy from Abruzzo and N. Campania southward, and in parts of Friuli: e.g., Camp, ['tau̯rə] ‘bull’ < *TAURU(M). Elsewhere it has yielded a monophthong, [a] in Sard, (['taru]), and [ɔ] in the Western system (['tɔro]). Unlike [ɔ] from Latin short [o], this monophthongization apparently postdates the diphthongizing effects of metaphony. In the north, the original presence of the diphthong [au̯] is apparent in systematic blocking of otherwise general processes of intervocalic voicing: Venetan ['fogo] ‘fire’ vs. ['poko] ‘little’, ['kosa] ‘thing’ < *['fɔko], *['pau̯ko], *[kau̯sa].

2 STRESS DISTINCTIONS

The range of unstressed vowels is never greater, and usually smaller, than that of stressed vowels. In the ‘Western’ system there are five unstressed vowels, Lat. short E and O merging with long E: and O: to yield a five-vowel system lacking [ε] and [ɔ]. There has been extensive neutralization of these five, through two principal mechanisms: merger and harmony. In merger, previously distinct unstressed vowels become identical (usually as [ə] or zero); in harmony, non-final unstressed vowels assume features of an immediately following vowel. Virtually all mainland Italy, with Sicily, displays one or the other type of neutralization (cf. Maiden (1988a)). In Tuscany, central Italy and central and southern Veneto the five-vowel system is well preserved, although the distinction between post-tonic [o] and [u] is limited to a territory comprising S. Marche, S. Umbria, the province of Aquila, and Lazio to the S. of Rome (see Ch. 37), being neutralized elsewhere (as [o]). Merger has occurred throughout the area of Sicilian vocalism (as far N. in Calabria as Cetraro and Cirὸ), [e] and [o] being raised to [i] and [u] (leaving three unstressed vowels) (see Ch. 42). For discussion of a possible early tendency to neutralize unstressed vowels in Tuscan, see Maiden (1995a: 44–6). A more extreme form of merger appears in most of S. Italy, extending into S. Lazio and N. Abruzzo to the N. and bounded by a line between Cetraro, Bisignano and Melissa in the S.W. and Taranto-Brindisi in the S.E. (see Ch. 40). Here, unstressed vowels, except pretonic [a], merge as [ə], itself frequently subject to deletion in word-final position: Canosa di Puglia [a'vai̯nə] ‘oats’ < *[a'vena], [ka'piddə] ‘hair’ < *[ka'pellu], [mətə'taur] ‘reaper’ < *[meti'tore]. In most northern dialects (excepting Ligurian and central and southern Venetan), unstressed vowels other than [a] are extensively deleted, save where the result would violate constraints on syllable structure. In Emilia–Romagna such deletion may be extreme: Bolognese ['dmaŋga] ‘Sunday’ < *[do'menika], [zbdεl] ‘hospital’ < *[ospi'tale]. The consonant clusters produced have frequently been subject to introduction of epenthetic vowels: Bolognese [a'liger] < *[a'ligr] < *[al'lεgru] and ['neruv] ‘nerve’ < *[nerv] < *['nεrvu] (see Ch. 6).

There are two major varieties of harmony. ‘Complete’ harmony (regressive assimilation such that an unstressed vowel becomes identical to a following vowel) is encountered in the S. Marche, S. Tuscany around Cortona, parts of Umbria, and N. and cent. Lazio. In the Val di Chiana and N. Lazio, complete harmony is most consistently triggered by following high vowels [i] or [u] (e.g., Santa Francesca di Veroli, Lazio, Msg. ['asunu] ~ Mpl. ['asini] ~ Fpl. ['asena] ‘ass’, ['vituvu] ‘widower’ ~ ['veteva] ‘widow’); a more widespread constraint on complete harmony, in N. Lazio and adjoining parts of Tuscany and Umbria, is its restriction to the environment of an intervening liquid (e.g., Umbertide: sg. ['fragwala] ‘strawberry’ ~ pl. ['fragwele], [ko'kommoro] ‘watermelon’ [ko'kommiri], but ['sabbito] ‘Saturday’, [do'mennika] ‘Sunday’). Complete harmony reappears in the far S. of Calabria, N.E. Sicily and Salento, to the S. of Brindisi and Taranto. In many of these dialects, complete harmony is triggered principally by [u]. Thus Caronia (Sicily): ['sabbutu] < *['sabatu] ‘Saturday’, ['stefunu] < *['stεfanu] ‘Stephen’, ['sɔdʤuru] < *['sɔʧeru] ‘father-in-law’ vs. ['sɔdʤira] < *['sɔʧera] ‘mother-in-law’, ['fimmina] ‘woman’.

‘Vertical’ harmony involves raising of an unstressed mid vowel before following [i] or [u]. It occurs in S. Umbria around Spoleto, parts of N.W. Lazio and an area E. of Rome: from Cervara in the Aniene valley: F [porʧel'letta] ~ M [purʧil'littu] ‘piglet’, F ['urdema], M ['urdimu] ‘last’, M ['iduu] ‘widower’, F ['edoa] ‘widow’. Vertical harmony is also detectable in Garfagnana (where, in post-tonic syllables, harmony apparently operates only where the intervening consonant is liquid), in the S. Veneto around Padua, and on the island of Grado (cf. Venturelli (1979); Trumper (1972)). For the possibility that its geographical domain was once wider, see Maiden (1988a: 132–4).

Right–left asymmetries in unstressed vowels

The extent of neutralization is never greater to the left of the stressed vowel than to its right. Thus, in Sant'Oreste (Lazio, Elwert 1958: 147), post-tonic non-final vowels merge (as [i] or [e]) or are harmonized to a following vowel where the intervening consonant is liquid: ['ʃtεfine] < *[stεfanu] ‘Stephen’; ['ʤakimu] < *['ʤakomo] ‘James’; [biʃ'ʃɔkala], [biʃ'ʃɔkele] < *[bes'tjɔkkola -e] ‘lizard’, ‘lizards’. In pretonic position the vowels remain intact: [affila'rati] < *[affila'rati] ‘in a row’; [peku'raru] < *[peko'raru] ‘shepherd’.

In much of S. Italy, all unstressed vowels are liable to reduction to [ə] in post-tonic position, but [a] is not usually reduced to the left of the stressed vowel. Thus in Agnone (Molise): [marga'rojtə] < *[marga'rita] ‘daisy’; ['prehənə] < *['prεgano] ‘they pray’; [ka'rɔfana] < [ka'rɔfanu] ‘carnation’; [kata'f...