450 Italienisch, Rumänisch, Rätoromanisch
Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
Institute
- Neuere Philologien (3) (remove)
This contribution focuses on indefinite arguments in object position. We address this topic from the point of view of the crosslinguistic variation within the Romance continuum, especially looking at Northern Italian Dialects (NIDs). The target is to describe the distribution of the different possible realizations of this kind of arguments in this area by means of an in-depth analysis of the data coming from the ASIt database and from three new fieldwork sessions. We show that the microvariation attested in this area reflects and refines the “macro” variation attested among the major Romance languages. The fine-grained picture that can be drawn from a closer look to a set of minimally varying languages helps crosslinguistic comparison and, consequently, the modeling of more precise analyses.
We aim to understand whether Greek and Italian, two null subject languages, differ in the use and interpretation of null subjects, based on evidence from both a production and a comprehension experiment. The results of the two experiments show that the two languages differ in the extent to which they comply with the Position of Antecedent Strategy as formulated by Carminati (2002). In order to account for this difference, we introduce a principle which defines prominence of sentence constituents in terms of hierarchical height, elaborating on a recent proposal by Rizzi (2018). Then we show that the prominence of subject and object constituents in Greek and Italian reflects word-order differences between the two languages (Roussou & Tsimpli 2006). In more general terms, this paper argues in favour of a multi-factorial approach to reference interpretation, in that syntactic factors interact with discourse factors, leading to a gradient variety of reference possibilities.