Abstract

The emergence of autonomous interlanguage constructions is widely recognised in the literature on L2 Italian. These constructions involve the overgeneralisation of functional forms learners are in the process of acquiring, e.g., siamo in siamo mangiare ‘be:1PL eat:INF’ (target Italian: mangiamo ‘eat:1PL’); facciamo in facciamo cucinare ‘do:1PL cook:INF’ (target Italian: cuciniamo ‘cook:1PL’); per in piaciare per uscire fuori ‘like:INF for go:INF out’ (target Italian: mi piace uscire fuori ‘to.me like:3SG go:INF out’. ‘Be’/‘do’ forms are assigned a morphosyntactic function to convey temporal/aspectual/person information instead of inflecting the verb, while per ‘for’ is a generic subordinating marker. Based on new corpus data, I claim that such constructions may correlate with a learners’ degree of first language (L1) literacy. In detail, and consistent with, both literate and non-literate learners overgeneralise functional forms while working on the newly acquired morphosyntax; this shows that the non-literates are perfectly able to subconsciously identify functional forms in the input. Non-literates, however, show a stronger tendency than literates to select lexical-syntactic sub-patterns.

Highlights

  • Literacy in New Migration and the Status of the ResearchLow literacy represents an important factor among adults in the recent migration towards Italy

  • Between 2017 and 2018, the researchers at the School of Italian language for Foreigners (ItaStra) of Palermo developed a literacy test, which has been administered to a sample of 774 migrants, both middle-term residents and the newly arrived, from North Africa, Sub-Saharan

  • A language test administered in parallel to the literacy test revealed that 58.5% of the entire sample and 49.22% of medium-length residents had proficiency in L2 Italian at A1 of the CEFR

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Low literacy represents an important factor among adults in the recent migration towards Italy (and Europe in general). The existence of ICs (at least, those in (1) and (3)) has been observed in L2 Italian research (Andorno et al 2003; Banfi and Bernini 2003), and in L2 Dutch (Julien et al 2016) and L2 English (Vainikka et al 2017) and it has been interpreted as a temporary strategy to make up for the lack of the target morphosyntactic means The analysis of this Italian LESLLA corpus will take the steps from this tradition of studies, but the results will be interpreted taking into account learners’ degree of literacy.

LESLLA Studies
Non-Target Analytical Constructions
Non-Target Subordinating Markers
The Italian LESLLA Corpus
Sessions 1 and 2
Session 3
Session 4
Session 5
Findings
Discussion and Conclusions
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