Abstract

This paper explores two peripheral Northern Italian dialects (NIDs), namely Lamonat and Frignanese, with respect to their genealogical linguistic classification. The two NIDs exhibit morpho-phonological and morpho-syntactic features that do not fall neatly into the Gallo-Italic sub-classification of Northern Italo-Romance, but resemble some of the core characteristics of the putative Rhaeto-Romance language family. This analysis of Lamonat and Frignanese reveals that their conservative traits more closely relate to Rhaeto-Romance. The synchronic evidence from the two peripheral NIDs hence supports the argument against the unity and autonomy of Rhaeto-Romance as a language family, whereby the linguistic traits that distinguish Rhaeto-Romance within Northern Italo-Romance consist of shared retentions rather than shared innovations, which were once common to virtually all NIDs. In this light, Rhaeto-Romance can be regarded as an array of conservative Gallo-Italic varieties. The paper concludes with a discussion of the geo-sociolinguistic properties of the two peripheral dialect areas under investigation that lead to a conservative linguistic behaviour within the Lamonat and Frignanese speech communities. Given the relatively similar historical and geo-political background of these speech communities, we attempt the formulation of a geo-sociolinguistic model of linguistic innovation diffusion that captures the conservative behaviour of Lamonat and Frignanese. We propose that those dialect areas that, in Bartoli’s (1945) geo-spatial linguistic typology, are both “lateral” and “isolated” deflect linguistic innovations. This proposal must be interpreted within a more general “gravity” and “wave” sociolinguistic model of diffusion of linguistic innovations, whereby “lateral” and “isolated” dialect areas give rise to a mechanism that we call “the pond rock effect” and that renders such dialect areas resistant to language change. Publisher's Note: A corrigendum relating to this article hass been published at http://doi.org/10.3828/mlo.v0i0.358 .

Highlights

  • In Italian dialectology, an ongoing debate concerns the status of the putative Rhaeto-Romance language family

  • Rhaeto-Romance has received considerable attention, culminating with the pivotal work of Heiman and Benincà in 1992. These scholars argue that Friulian, Ladin and Romansh lack a real basis for unity and autonomy, concluding that Rhaeto-Romance is more of a scholarly invention than an actual fully fledged language family

  • Data from Frignanese and Lamonat supports the view that Ladin, Friulian, Romansh and their peripheral dialect areas are conservative or ‘crystallized’ Northern Italian dialects (NIDs): they offer precious insights into the full array of the frozen developmental stages of Gallo-Italic

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In Italian dialectology, an ongoing debate concerns the status of the putative Rhaeto-Romance language family. Rhaeto-Romance has received considerable attention, culminating with the pivotal work of Heiman and Benincà in 1992 These scholars argue that Friulian, Ladin and Romansh lack a real basis for unity and autonomy, concluding that Rhaeto-Romance is more of a scholarly invention than an actual fully fledged language family. The varieties of Frignanese spoken in the Province of Modena exhibit some distinctive characteristics within the Emilian Gallo-Italic sub-classification that resemble Rhaeto-Romance; this is rather peculiar considering the geographical location of these varieties with respect to the location of the bulk of Rhaeto-Romance dialects. These facts must be accounted for by reconsidering the notion of Rhaeto-Romance and by describing the socio-geographical status of the dialects under investigation

Setting the Problem
Frignanese and Lamonat
Frignanese
Lamonat
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call