1887
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Variation in Second and Heritage Languages
  4. Chapter

Chapter 12. Differential object marking in heritage and homeland Italian

image of Chapter 12. Differential object marking in heritage and homeland Italian

We examine variable patterns of use of differential object marking (DOM) in conversational Italian recorded in Toronto, Canada, and Calabria, Italy. An exhaustive sample of 366 direct objects, produced by Homeland and three generations of Heritage speakers, shows retention of the DOM system. Successive generations have lower rates of DOM, but this is because they don’t produce enough tokens of certain syntactic and semantic types (e.g., left-dislocated or indefinite pronouns). Thus, they have less opportunity to use DOM: token distributions account for their lower rates. In contexts with sufficient tokens, significant contrasts emerge, indicating that all generations retain the conditioning of relevant factors (Definiteness, Referent of Object, Verb Type, Dislocation). No effects of social network or linguistic practices emerged.

  • Affiliations: 1: Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II; 2: University of Toronto

References

  1. Aalberse, Suzanne , Ad Backus , and Pieter Muysken
    2019 Heritage languages: A language contact approach. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.58
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.58 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aissen, Judith
    2003 Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural language and linguistic theory21. 435–483. 10.1023/A:1024109008573
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024109008573 [Google Scholar]
  3. Balasch, Sonia
    2011 Factors determining Spanish differential object marking within its domain of variation. In Jim Michnowicz & Robin Dodsworth (eds.), Selected proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics, 113–124. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Berretta, Monica
    1989 Sulla presenza dell’oggetto preposizionale in italiano: note tipologiche. Vox Romanica48. 13–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Berruto, Gaetano
    2006  Sociolinguistica dell’italiano contemporaneo . Rome: Carocci.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Boeddu, Daniela
    2017 Estudio diacrònico del acusativo preposicional sardo. Doctoral dissertation, Universidad del Paìs Vasco.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bossong, Georg
    1991 Differential object marking in Romance and beyond. In Georg Bossong , Dieter Wanner & Douglas Kibbee (eds.), New analyses in Romance linguistics, 143–171. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.69.14bos
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.69.14bos [Google Scholar]
  8. Comrie, Bernard
    1989 Language universals and linguistic typology, 2nd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Cortelazzo, Manlio
    1972  Avviamento critico allo studio della dialettologia italiana , Vol. III:Lineamenti di Italiano Popolare. Pisa: Pacini.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. D’Agostino, Mari
    2012 Sociolinguistica dell’Italia contemporanea. Bologna: Il Mulino.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. De Blasi, Nicola
    2014 Geografia e storia dell’italiano regionale. Bologna: Il Mulino.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Di Salvo, Margherita
    2017 L’oggetto preposizionale nell’italiano parlato in contesto dell’extraterritorialità. L’Italia Dialettale78. 93–124.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 2019 Repertori linguistici degli italiani all’estero. Pisa: Pacini.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Di Venanzio , Laura, Katrin Schmitz & Anna-Lena Rumpf
    2012 Objektrealisierungen und–auslassungen bei transitiven Verben im Spanischen von Herkunftssprechern in Deutschland. Linguistische Berichte232. 437–461.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Dufter, Andreas & Elisabeth Stark
    2008 Double indirect object marking in Spanish and Italian. In Elena Seoane & María José López-Couso (eds.), Theoretical and empirical issues in grammaticalization, 111–129. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.77.07duf
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.77.07duf [Google Scholar]
  16. Fiorentino, Giuliana
    (ed.) 2003a Romance objects. Transitività in Romance languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110919837
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110919837 [Google Scholar]
  17. Fiorentino. Giuliana
    2003b Prepositional objects in Neapolitan. In Giuliana Fiorentino (Ed.), Romance objects. Transitività in Romance languages, 117–151. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110919837.117
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110919837.117 [Google Scholar]
  18. Guardiano, Cristina
    2000 Note sull’oggetto diretto preposizionale in siciliano. L’Italia DialettaleLXI. 7–41.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 2010 L’oggetto diretto preposizionale in siciliano. Una breve rassegna e qualche domanda. In Jacopo Garzonio (Ed.), Quaderni di lavoro ASIt 2010. Studi sui dialetti della Sicilia, 95–115. Padova: Unipress.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Guijarro-Fuentes, Pedro & Theodoros Marinis
    2011 Voicing language dominance: Acquiring Spanish by British English/Spanish bilingual children. In Kim Potowski & Jason Rothman (ed.), Bilingual youth: Spanish in English-speaking societies, 227–248. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.42.14gui
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.42.14gui [Google Scholar]
  21. Hill, Virginia
    2015 Formal approaches to DPs in Old Romanian. Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV. 10.1163/9789004292550
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004292550 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hopper, Paul & Sandra Thompson
    1980 Transitivity in grammar and discourse: The transitivity hypothesis. Language56. 251–299. 10.1353/lan.1980.0017
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1980.0017 [Google Scholar]
  23. Iemmolo, Giorgio
    2009 La marcatura differenziale dell’oggetto in siciliano antico. Archivio Glottologico Italiano94(2). 185–225.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Irizarri van Suchtelen, Pablo
    2016 Spanish as a heritage language in the Netherlands: A cognitive linguistic exploration. Nijmegen, Netherlands: Radboud University dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Labov, William
    1984 Field methods of the Project on Linguistic Change and Variation. In John Baugh & Joel Sherzer (eds.), Language in use: Readings in sociolinguistics, 28–53. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Laca, Brenda
    2006 El objeto directo. InSintaxis historica del español. Vol 1: La frase verbal, edited byConcepción Company, 197–204. México City: Universidad Nacional de México.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Leonetti, Manuel
    2008 Specificity in Clitic Doubling and in Differential Object Marking. Probus20. 33–66. 10.1515/PROBUS.2008.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PROBUS.2008.002 [Google Scholar]
  28. Lopez, Luis
    2012 Indefinite objects: Scrambling, choice functions, and differential marking. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9165.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9165.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  29. Loporcaro, Michele
    2009 Profilo linguistico dei dialetti italiani. Rome-Bari: Laterza.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Maiden, Martin & Mair Parry
    1997 The dialects of Italy. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Marchese, Floriana
    2016 Il lessico del dialetto di Polia (VV). Doctoral dissertation, Università di Firenze.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Mardale, Alexandru
    2008 Microvariation within Differential Object Marking: Data from Romance. Revue Romaine de LinguistiqueLIII (4). 448–467.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Mardale, Alexandru-Daniel
    2009 Les prépositions fonctionnelles du roumain: études comparatives sur le marquage casuel. Paris: L’Harmattan.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Montrul, Silvina
    2004 Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morphosyntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition7 (2). 125–142. 10.1017/S1366728904001464
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728904001464 [Google Scholar]
  35. Montrul, Silvina , Rakesh Bhatt , & Roxana Girju
    2015 Differential Object Marking in Spanish, Hindi and Romanian as heritage languages. Language91. 564–610. 10.1353/lan.2015.0035
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0035 [Google Scholar]
  36. Montrul, Silvina , & Melissa Bowles
    2009 Back to basics: Incomplete knowledge of Differential Object Marking in Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition12(3). 363–383. 10.1017/S1366728909990071
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990071 [Google Scholar]
  37. Montrul, Silvina , & Noelia Sánchez-Walker
    2013 Differential Object Marking in child and adult Spanish heritage speakers. Language Acquisition20 (2). 109–132. 10.1080/10489223.2013.766741
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2013.766741 [Google Scholar]
  38. Nagy, Naomi
    2009 Heritage Language Variation and Change. ngn.artsci.utoronto.ca/HLVC/. Accessed 23 January 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. 2011 A multilingual corpus to explore geographic variation. Rassegna Italiana di Linguistica Applicata43 (1–2). 65–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. 2015 A sociolinguistic view of null subjects and VOT in Toronto heritage language. Lingua164B. 309–327. 10.1016/j.lingua.2014.04.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.04.012 [Google Scholar]
  41. Nagy, Naomi and Alexei Kochetov
    2013 VOT Across the generations: A cross-linguistic study of contact-induced change. In Peter Siemund , Ingrid Cogolin , Monika Schulz and Julia Davydova (eds.), Multilingualism and language contact in urban areas: Acquisition –development – teaching – communication, 19–38. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hsld.1.02nag
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsld.1.02nag [Google Scholar]
  42. Nagy, Naomi & Miriam Meyerhoff
    2015 Extending ELAN into variationist sociolinguistics. Linguistic Vanguard1 (1) 271–281. 10.1515/lingvan‑2015‑0012
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2015-0012 [Google Scholar]
  43. Nocentini, Alberto
    1985 Sulla genesi dell’oggetto preposizionale nelle lingue romanze. InStudi linguistici e filologici per Carlo Alberto Mastrelli, 299–311. Pisa: Pacini.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Nodari, Rosalba , Chiara Celata , and Naomi Nagy
    2019 Socio-indexical phonetic features in the heritage language context: Voiceless stop aspiration in the Calabrian community in Toronto. Journal of Phonetics73. 91–112. 10.1016/j.wocn.2018.12.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2018.12.005 [Google Scholar]
  45. Palermo, Massimo
    2015 Linguistica italiana. Il Mulino.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Pittau, Massimo
    1972 Grammatica del sardo-nuorese. Il più conservativo dei parlari neolatini. Bologna: Pàtron.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Pottier, Bernard
    1968 L’emploi de la préposition ‘a’ devant l’objet in espagnol. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris63: 63–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Renzi, Lorenzo
    1988 La grande grammatica di consultazione. Vol. 1: La frase. Sintagmi nominale e preposizionale. Bologna: Il Mulino.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, Miguel
    2008 The acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish. Probus20. 111–145. 10.1515/PROBUS.2008.004
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PROBUS.2008.004 [Google Scholar]
  50. Rohlfs, Gerard
    1966 Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei sui dialetti. Torino: Einaudi.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Schwenter, Scott. A.
    2014 Two kinds of differential object marking in Portuguese and Spanish. In Patricia Amaral & Ana María Caravalho (eds.), Portuguese-Spanish interfaces: Diachrony, synchrony, and contact, 237–260. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ihll.1.12sch
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.1.12sch [Google Scholar]
  52. Silverstein, Michael
    1976 Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Robert M. W. Dixon (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian Languages, 112–171. New Jersey: Humanities Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Sornicola, Rosanna
    1997 L’oggetto preposizionale in siciliano antico e in napoletano antico. Italienische Studien18. 66–80.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. 1998 Processi di convergenza nella formazione di un tipo sintattico: la genesi ibrida dell’oggetto preposizionale. In Annick Englebert (ed.), Les nouvelles ambitions de la linguistique diachronique, Actes du XXIIe Congrès International de Linguistique et de Philologie Romanes (Bruxelles 23–29 Juillet 1998)II, 419–427. Brussels: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Telmon, Tullio
    1993 Varietà regionali. In Alberto Sobrero (ed.), Introduzione all’italiano contemporaneo: La variazione e gli usi, 93–149. Rome-Bari: Laterza.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Ticio, Emma & Luisa Avram
    2015 The acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish and Romanian: Semantic scales or semantic features?Revue roumaine de linguistique4. 383–402.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Tippets, Ian Robert
    2010 Differential Object Marking in Spanish: A quantitative variationist study. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Von Heusinger, Klaus
    2008 Verbal semantics and the diachronic development of DOM in Spanish. Probus20 (1). 1–31. 10.1515/PROBUS.2008.001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PROBUS.2008.001 [Google Scholar]
  59. Wittenburg, Peter , Hennie Brugman , Albert Russel , Alex Klassmann , & Han Sloetjes
    2006 ELAN: A professional framework for multimodality research. In Nicoletta Calzolari , Khalid Choukri , Aldo Gangemi , Bente Maegaard , Joseph Mariani , Jan Odijk , & Daniel Tapias (eds.), Proceedings of LREC 2006, Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 1556–1559. Paris: European Language Resources Association.
     [Google Scholar]

References

  1. Aalberse, Suzanne , Ad Backus , and Pieter Muysken
    2019 Heritage languages: A language contact approach. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.58
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.58 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aissen, Judith
    2003 Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural language and linguistic theory21. 435–483. 10.1023/A:1024109008573
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024109008573 [Google Scholar]
  3. Balasch, Sonia
    2011 Factors determining Spanish differential object marking within its domain of variation. In Jim Michnowicz & Robin Dodsworth (eds.), Selected proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics, 113–124. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Berretta, Monica
    1989 Sulla presenza dell’oggetto preposizionale in italiano: note tipologiche. Vox Romanica48. 13–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Berruto, Gaetano
    2006  Sociolinguistica dell’italiano contemporaneo . Rome: Carocci.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Boeddu, Daniela
    2017 Estudio diacrònico del acusativo preposicional sardo. Doctoral dissertation, Universidad del Paìs Vasco.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bossong, Georg
    1991 Differential object marking in Romance and beyond. In Georg Bossong , Dieter Wanner & Douglas Kibbee (eds.), New analyses in Romance linguistics, 143–171. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.69.14bos
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.69.14bos [Google Scholar]
  8. Comrie, Bernard
    1989 Language universals and linguistic typology, 2nd edn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Cortelazzo, Manlio
    1972  Avviamento critico allo studio della dialettologia italiana , Vol. III:Lineamenti di Italiano Popolare. Pisa: Pacini.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. D’Agostino, Mari
    2012 Sociolinguistica dell’Italia contemporanea. Bologna: Il Mulino.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. De Blasi, Nicola
    2014 Geografia e storia dell’italiano regionale. Bologna: Il Mulino.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Di Salvo, Margherita
    2017 L’oggetto preposizionale nell’italiano parlato in contesto dell’extraterritorialità. L’Italia Dialettale78. 93–124.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 2019 Repertori linguistici degli italiani all’estero. Pisa: Pacini.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Di Venanzio , Laura, Katrin Schmitz & Anna-Lena Rumpf
    2012 Objektrealisierungen und–auslassungen bei transitiven Verben im Spanischen von Herkunftssprechern in Deutschland. Linguistische Berichte232. 437–461.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Dufter, Andreas & Elisabeth Stark
    2008 Double indirect object marking in Spanish and Italian. In Elena Seoane & María José López-Couso (eds.), Theoretical and empirical issues in grammaticalization, 111–129. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.77.07duf
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.77.07duf [Google Scholar]
  16. Fiorentino, Giuliana
    (ed.) 2003a Romance objects. Transitività in Romance languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110919837
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110919837 [Google Scholar]
  17. Fiorentino. Giuliana
    2003b Prepositional objects in Neapolitan. In Giuliana Fiorentino (Ed.), Romance objects. Transitività in Romance languages, 117–151. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110919837.117
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110919837.117 [Google Scholar]
  18. Guardiano, Cristina
    2000 Note sull’oggetto diretto preposizionale in siciliano. L’Italia DialettaleLXI. 7–41.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 2010 L’oggetto diretto preposizionale in siciliano. Una breve rassegna e qualche domanda. In Jacopo Garzonio (Ed.), Quaderni di lavoro ASIt 2010. Studi sui dialetti della Sicilia, 95–115. Padova: Unipress.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Guijarro-Fuentes, Pedro & Theodoros Marinis
    2011 Voicing language dominance: Acquiring Spanish by British English/Spanish bilingual children. In Kim Potowski & Jason Rothman (ed.), Bilingual youth: Spanish in English-speaking societies, 227–248. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.42.14gui
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.42.14gui [Google Scholar]
  21. Hill, Virginia
    2015 Formal approaches to DPs in Old Romanian. Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV. 10.1163/9789004292550
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004292550 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hopper, Paul & Sandra Thompson
    1980 Transitivity in grammar and discourse: The transitivity hypothesis. Language56. 251–299. 10.1353/lan.1980.0017
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1980.0017 [Google Scholar]
  23. Iemmolo, Giorgio
    2009 La marcatura differenziale dell’oggetto in siciliano antico. Archivio Glottologico Italiano94(2). 185–225.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Irizarri van Suchtelen, Pablo
    2016 Spanish as a heritage language in the Netherlands: A cognitive linguistic exploration. Nijmegen, Netherlands: Radboud University dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Labov, William
    1984 Field methods of the Project on Linguistic Change and Variation. In John Baugh & Joel Sherzer (eds.), Language in use: Readings in sociolinguistics, 28–53. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Laca, Brenda
    2006 El objeto directo. InSintaxis historica del español. Vol 1: La frase verbal, edited byConcepción Company, 197–204. México City: Universidad Nacional de México.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Leonetti, Manuel
    2008 Specificity in Clitic Doubling and in Differential Object Marking. Probus20. 33–66. 10.1515/PROBUS.2008.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PROBUS.2008.002 [Google Scholar]
  28. Lopez, Luis
    2012 Indefinite objects: Scrambling, choice functions, and differential marking. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9165.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9165.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  29. Loporcaro, Michele
    2009 Profilo linguistico dei dialetti italiani. Rome-Bari: Laterza.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Maiden, Martin & Mair Parry
    1997 The dialects of Italy. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Marchese, Floriana
    2016 Il lessico del dialetto di Polia (VV). Doctoral dissertation, Università di Firenze.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Mardale, Alexandru
    2008 Microvariation within Differential Object Marking: Data from Romance. Revue Romaine de LinguistiqueLIII (4). 448–467.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Mardale, Alexandru-Daniel
    2009 Les prépositions fonctionnelles du roumain: études comparatives sur le marquage casuel. Paris: L’Harmattan.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Montrul, Silvina
    2004 Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morphosyntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition7 (2). 125–142. 10.1017/S1366728904001464
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728904001464 [Google Scholar]
  35. Montrul, Silvina , Rakesh Bhatt , & Roxana Girju
    2015 Differential Object Marking in Spanish, Hindi and Romanian as heritage languages. Language91. 564–610. 10.1353/lan.2015.0035
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0035 [Google Scholar]
  36. Montrul, Silvina , & Melissa Bowles
    2009 Back to basics: Incomplete knowledge of Differential Object Marking in Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition12(3). 363–383. 10.1017/S1366728909990071
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990071 [Google Scholar]
  37. Montrul, Silvina , & Noelia Sánchez-Walker
    2013 Differential Object Marking in child and adult Spanish heritage speakers. Language Acquisition20 (2). 109–132. 10.1080/10489223.2013.766741
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2013.766741 [Google Scholar]
  38. Nagy, Naomi
    2009 Heritage Language Variation and Change. ngn.artsci.utoronto.ca/HLVC/. Accessed 23 January 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. 2011 A multilingual corpus to explore geographic variation. Rassegna Italiana di Linguistica Applicata43 (1–2). 65–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. 2015 A sociolinguistic view of null subjects and VOT in Toronto heritage language. Lingua164B. 309–327. 10.1016/j.lingua.2014.04.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.04.012 [Google Scholar]
  41. Nagy, Naomi and Alexei Kochetov
    2013 VOT Across the generations: A cross-linguistic study of contact-induced change. In Peter Siemund , Ingrid Cogolin , Monika Schulz and Julia Davydova (eds.), Multilingualism and language contact in urban areas: Acquisition –development – teaching – communication, 19–38. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hsld.1.02nag
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsld.1.02nag [Google Scholar]
  42. Nagy, Naomi & Miriam Meyerhoff
    2015 Extending ELAN into variationist sociolinguistics. Linguistic Vanguard1 (1) 271–281. 10.1515/lingvan‑2015‑0012
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2015-0012 [Google Scholar]
  43. Nocentini, Alberto
    1985 Sulla genesi dell’oggetto preposizionale nelle lingue romanze. InStudi linguistici e filologici per Carlo Alberto Mastrelli, 299–311. Pisa: Pacini.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Nodari, Rosalba , Chiara Celata , and Naomi Nagy
    2019 Socio-indexical phonetic features in the heritage language context: Voiceless stop aspiration in the Calabrian community in Toronto. Journal of Phonetics73. 91–112. 10.1016/j.wocn.2018.12.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2018.12.005 [Google Scholar]
  45. Palermo, Massimo
    2015 Linguistica italiana. Il Mulino.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Pittau, Massimo
    1972 Grammatica del sardo-nuorese. Il più conservativo dei parlari neolatini. Bologna: Pàtron.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Pottier, Bernard
    1968 L’emploi de la préposition ‘a’ devant l’objet in espagnol. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris63: 63–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Renzi, Lorenzo
    1988 La grande grammatica di consultazione. Vol. 1: La frase. Sintagmi nominale e preposizionale. Bologna: Il Mulino.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, Miguel
    2008 The acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish. Probus20. 111–145. 10.1515/PROBUS.2008.004
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PROBUS.2008.004 [Google Scholar]
  50. Rohlfs, Gerard
    1966 Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei sui dialetti. Torino: Einaudi.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Schwenter, Scott. A.
    2014 Two kinds of differential object marking in Portuguese and Spanish. In Patricia Amaral & Ana María Caravalho (eds.), Portuguese-Spanish interfaces: Diachrony, synchrony, and contact, 237–260. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ihll.1.12sch
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.1.12sch [Google Scholar]
  52. Silverstein, Michael
    1976 Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In Robert M. W. Dixon (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian Languages, 112–171. New Jersey: Humanities Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Sornicola, Rosanna
    1997 L’oggetto preposizionale in siciliano antico e in napoletano antico. Italienische Studien18. 66–80.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. 1998 Processi di convergenza nella formazione di un tipo sintattico: la genesi ibrida dell’oggetto preposizionale. In Annick Englebert (ed.), Les nouvelles ambitions de la linguistique diachronique, Actes du XXIIe Congrès International de Linguistique et de Philologie Romanes (Bruxelles 23–29 Juillet 1998)II, 419–427. Brussels: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Telmon, Tullio
    1993 Varietà regionali. In Alberto Sobrero (ed.), Introduzione all’italiano contemporaneo: La variazione e gli usi, 93–149. Rome-Bari: Laterza.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Ticio, Emma & Luisa Avram
    2015 The acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish and Romanian: Semantic scales or semantic features?Revue roumaine de linguistique4. 383–402.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Tippets, Ian Robert
    2010 Differential Object Marking in Spanish: A quantitative variationist study. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Von Heusinger, Klaus
    2008 Verbal semantics and the diachronic development of DOM in Spanish. Probus20 (1). 1–31. 10.1515/PROBUS.2008.001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PROBUS.2008.001 [Google Scholar]
  59. Wittenburg, Peter , Hennie Brugman , Albert Russel , Alex Klassmann , & Han Sloetjes
    2006 ELAN: A professional framework for multimodality research. In Nicoletta Calzolari , Khalid Choukri , Aldo Gangemi , Bente Maegaard , Joseph Mariani , Jan Odijk , & Daniel Tapias (eds.), Proceedings of LREC 2006, Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 1556–1559. Paris: European Language Resources Association.
     [Google Scholar]

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9789027257727-silv.28.12dis
    dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal
    10
    5
/content/books/9789027257727-silv.28.12dis
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027257727
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error