Sardo e lingue romanze a confronto. Nuove prospettive per la genesi dell’accusativo preposizionale

Ferrer, Eduardo Blasco; Ingrassia, Giorgia

doi:10.1515/9783110231922.7-143

Cited by 3 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A est optionnel avec : Bossong (1985), Blasco Ferrer (1986, c.p. ), Jones (1993), Floricic (2003), Mensching (1994Mensching ( , 2005, Blasco Ferrer & Ingrassia (2007) Les données examinées précédemment confirment les prédictions des échelles faites au début de la section. C'est-à-dire que le marquage différentiel est obligatoire dans les trois langues pour les objets qui occupent une position haute dans la hiérarchie des paramètres locaux.…”

Section: Les Quantifieurs Nus [+ Humain]unclassified

Éléments d'analyse du marquage différentiel de l'objet dans les langues romanes

Mardale¹

2010

Faits Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

pour certains dialectes de l'italien). Pour parler de ce même phénomène dans les langues romanes, d'autres auteurs parlent d'accusatif prépositionnel ou encore d'objet direct prépositionnel (voir, entre autres, Niculescu (1959, 1965)). (1) L-am întâlnit *(pe) Ion. (roumain) le CL.Acc-ai rencontré PE Acc Jean « J'ai rencontré Jean. » (2) Vi *(a) Juan. (espagnol) vis A Acc Jean « J'ai vu Jean. » (3) An furatu *(a) Ercole. (sarde) ont volé A Acc Hercule « Ils / elles ont enlevé Hercule. » Dans ces exemples, le MDO est obligatoire, mais dans d'autres cas il peut aussi être optionnel ou exclu, en fonction de différents paramètres. Les paramètres qui déterminent le MDO en général, et l'accusatif prépositionnel dans les langues romanes en particulier, peuvent être organisés dans une hiérarchie comportant les trois paramètres suivants (cf.

show abstract

Section: Les Quantifieurs Nus [+ Humain]unclassified

Éléments d'analyse du marquage différentiel de l'objet dans les langues romanes

Mardale¹

2010

Faits Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…examples (3b) and (3a) respectively. On the contrary, Logudorian and Campidanian show a wider use of the prepositional accusative with the same type of NP; see, for this question, Putzu (2005), Blasco Ferrer and Ingrassia (2010).…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(4) a. Campidanian (Blasco Ferrer and Ingrassia, 2010: 147, ex. 5 In order to partially explain the strong inter-dialectal and intra-dialectal variation, Putzu (2008) and Blasco Ferrer and Ingrassia (2010) appeal to Italian influence on Sardinian. In particular, Putzu (2008: 409) suggests that oscillations in the use of prepositional accusative are probably due, among other causes, to the lack of a Standard Sardinian and to interferences of Standard Italian.…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this case we could consider it as an hanging topic and it would not be expected any sort of case-marking on the topic (cf. Blasco Ingrassia 2010 andJones 1993: 314-316).…”

Section: A ø Totalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, I will observe inter-dialectal and infra-dialectal variation by comparing the distribution of the dom as it is observed in the oral corpus with that of other Sardinian varieties, as well as with the results of a larger diachronic corpus in which the Sardinian dom is analyzed from the beginning of the historical records of this language up to the present moment. I use the results of this investigation in order to discuss a problem associated with the interpretation of Putzu (2005) and Blasco Ferrer and Ingrassia (2010), who suggest that the variability of dom in Modern Sardinian reflects the influence of Sardinian -Italian contact setting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Differential Object Marking of The Arborense Dialect of Sardinian in Language Contact Setting

Boeddu

2020

J. Lang. Contact

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the Arborense Differential Object Marking (dom) system, which in line with the typical Sardinian dom system marks the object noun phrases characterized by a high degree of animacy and specificity with the preposition a. This is why the Sardinian dom is also called prepositional accusative. Authors dealing with other Sardinian dialects agree in identifying three domains of distribution of the phenomenon: with personal pronouns and personal names the use of the preposition is mandatory; with inanimate common nouns it is excluded; with common nouns referring animate beings, strong variability occurs. On the basis of an oral corpus of contemporary Arborense, it can be stated that the area of mandatory use of dom is restricted in this dialect and that the optionality area turns out to be more extensive than assumed in traditional descriptions of this Sardinian phenomenon. Since all the Arborense speakers of the oral corpus are bilingual (Sardinian-Italian), the data reflect the situation of dom in a contact setting scenario where Sardinian and both Standard and Regional Italian interact. According to Putzu (2005) and Blasco Ferrer and Ingrassia (2010), the extensive area of optionality for the use of the Sardinian dom should be the result of the influence of Standard Italian. However, two facts must be considered that make this idea questionable: first, in the language contact scenario of Modern Sardinian not only Standard Italian but also Regional Italian (with a widespread use of the dom) play a role; second, the synchronic variation observed in contemporary Arborense replicates the same variation which characterizes historical data from texts of the 12th–19th centuries.

show abstract