Article published in:
Language Variation - European Perspectives V: Selected papers from the Seventh International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE 7), Trondheim, June 2013
Edited by Eivind Torgersen, Stian Hårstad, Brit Mæhlum and Unn Røyneland
[Studies in Language Variation 17] 2015
► pp. 55–68

The interplay between dialect and standard

Evidence from Italo-Romance

The paper is inspired by the theoretical framework provided by Auer’s (2005) typology of “dialect/standard constellations”, which aims to detect common dynamics in the current processes of dialect/standard convergence in Europe. Some adjustments to Auer’s proposal will be suggested to better suit it to a specific sociolinguistic situation: that involving Italian and Piedmontese in the north-western Italian Region of Piedmont. A set of linguistic features will be analyzed with the aim to depict dynamics of intralinguistic and interlinguistic convergence related to the ongoing standardization processes in Italian and Piedmontese.
Keywords: convergence, diaglossia, dialect, Italian, Piedmontese, standard
Published online: 09 April 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.17.05cer
References

References

Ammon, Ulrich
2004 “On the social forces that determine what is standard in a language and on conditions of successful implementation.” Sociolinguistica 17: 1–10.Google Scholar
Auer, Peter
2005 “Europe’s sociolinguistic unity, or: a typology of European dialect/standard constellations.” In Perspectives on variation. Sociolinguistic, historical, comparative, ed. by Nicole Delbecque, Johan van der Auwera and Dirk Geeraerts, 7–42. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter, and Frans Hinskens
1996 “The convergence and divergence of dialects in Europe. New and not so new developments in an old area.” Sociolinguistica 10: 1–30.Google Scholar
Bellmann, Günter
1998 “Between base dialect and standard language.” Folia Linguistica 32 (1–2): 23–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benincà, Paola, and Cecilia Poletto
2006 “Phrasal verbs in Venetan and Regional Italian.” In Language Variation – European Perspectives, ed. by Frans Hinskens, 9–22. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bernini, Giuliano
2010 “Word classes and the coding of spatial relations in motion events: A contrastive typological approach.” In Space in language: Proceedings of the Pisa International Conference, ed. by Giovanna Marotta, Alessandro Lenci, Linda Meini and Francesco Rovai, 29–52. Pisa: ETS.Google Scholar
Berruto, Gaetano
1987 Sociolinguistica dell’italiano contemporaneo. Roma: La Nuova Italia.Google Scholar
1989 “On the typology of linguistic repertoires.” In Status and function of languages and language varieties, ed. by Ulrich Ammon, 552–569. Berlin–New York: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 “Dialect/standard convergence, mixing, and models of language contact: the case of Italy.” In Dialect change. Convergence and divergence in European languages, ed. by Peter Auer, Frans Hinskens and Paul Kerswill, 81–97. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Canepari, Luciano
2005 MaPI. Manuale di pronuncia italiana. Bologna: Zanichelli.Google Scholar
Cerruti, Massimo
2009 Strutture dell’italiano regionale. Morfosintassi di una varietà diatopica in prospettiva sociolinguistica. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Google Scholar
Cerruti, Massimo, and Riccardo Regis
2014 “Standardization patterns and dialect/standard convergence: a north-western Italian perspective.” Language in Society 43 (1): 83–111. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J.K., and Peter Trudgill
1998 Dialectology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clivio, Gianrenzo P.
1972 “Language Contact in Piedmont: Aspects of Italian Interference in the Sound System of Piedmontese.” In Studies for Einar Haugen, ed. by Evelyn Scherabon Firchow, Kaaren Grimstad, Nils Hasselmo and Wayne A. O’Neil, 119–131. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Cordin, Patrizia
2001 “I pronomi riflessivi.” In Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione, ed. by Lorenzo Renzi, Giampaolo Salvi and Anna Cardinaletti, I, 607–617. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio
1980 “‘Historische Sprache’ und ‘Dialekt’.” In Dialekt und Dialektologie, ed. by Joachim Göschel, Pavle Ivić and Kurt Kehr, 106–122. Wiesbaden: Steiner.Google Scholar
1988 Sprachkompetenz. Grundzüge der Theorie des Sprechens. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Joseph, John Earl
1984 “The engineering of a standard language.” Multilingua 3 (2): 87–92. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Regis. Riccardo
2006 “Sulle realizzazioni dell’ibridismo.” Studi italiani di linguistica teorica e applicata 35 (3): 471–504.Google Scholar
Regis, Riccardo
2012 “Koinè dialettale, dialetto di koinè, processi di koinizzazione.” Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia 35: 7–36.Google Scholar
Tosco, Mauro
2011 “Between endangerment and Ausbau.” In Language contact and language decay. Socio-political and linguistic perspectives, ed. by Emanuele Miola and Paolo Ramat, 227–246. Pavia: IUSS Press.Google Scholar
Villena Ponsoda, Juan Andrés
1996 “Convergence and divergence in a standard-dialect continuum: networks and individuals in Malaga.” Sociolinguistica 10: 112–137.Google Scholar