On the acceptability of multiple interrogatives in Italian
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25071/2564-2855.8Keywords:
experimental syntax, Italian, multiple interrogatives, A-bar phenomenaAbstract
Multiple interrogatives exhibit cross-linguistic variation from a typological point of view. Standard Italian, in particular, is considered to be a language disallowing these constructions, an analysis based on the interaction between whPs and focused constituents in this language. I argue that previous analyses of multiple wh-questions in Italian need to be integrated with novel data, and that these structures are at least marginally acceptable. Specifically, I illustrate data from a preliminary experiment involving acceptability judgements on a 5-point Likert scale that tested whether native Italian speakers consider multiple interrogatives acceptable. While this is still a preliminary investigation, the results indicate that younger native Italian speakers tend to accept these constructions. I suggest that the presence of two whPs within the same clause in Italian can be analyzed as a language contact phenomenon, with English being the source language, in line with the sociolinguistic literature on this topic.
References
Alboiu, G. (2004). Optionality at the interface: Triggering focus in Romanian. In A. Breitbarth, & H. van Riemsdijk (Eds.), Triggers (pp. 49-77). Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197433.49
Belletti, A. (2004). Aspects of the low IP area. In L. Rizzi (Ed.) The structure of CP and IP: The cartography of syntactic structures, vol. 2 (pp. 16-51). Oxford University Press.
Berruto, G. (1987). Sociolinguistica dell'italiano contemporaneo. Carocci.
Berruto, G. (2017). What is changing in Italian today? Phenomena of restandardization in syntax and morphology: An overview. In M. Cerruti, C. Crocco, & S. Marzo (Eds.), Towards a new standard: Theoretical and empirical studies on the restandardization of Italian (pp. 31-60). Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614518839-002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614518839-002
Calabrese, A. (1984). Multiple questions and focus in Italian. In W. de Geest, & Y. Putseys (Eds.), Sentential complementation (pp. 67-74). Foris. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110882698-007
Cinque, G., & Rizzi, L. (2008). The cartography of syntactic structures. CISCL Working Papers, 2, pp. 1-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0003
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. The MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21236/AD0616323
Chomsky, N. (1973). Conditions on transformations. In S. Anderson, & P. Kiparsky (Eds.) A festschrift for Morris Halle (pp. 232–286). Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Chomsky, N. (1977). On wh-movement. In P. W. Culicover, T. Wasow, & A. Akmajian (Eds.), Formal syntax. Academic Press.
D’Alessandro, R. (2020). Syntactic change in contact: Romance. Annual Review of Linguistics, 7(23), pp. 1- 23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011619-030311
Gibson, E., & Fedorenko, E. (2013). The need for quantitative methods in syntax and semantics research. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, pp. 88-124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.515080
Giorgi, A. (2015). Discourse and the syntax of the left periphery. In J. Bayer, R. Hinterhölzl, & Trotzke, A. (Eds.) Discourse-oriented syntax (pp. 229-250). John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.226.10gio
Grasso, D. (2007). Innovazioni sintattiche in italiano alla luce della nozione di calco. PhD Thesis.
Ondelli, S., & Viale, M. (2010). L’assetto dell’italiano delle traduzioni in un corpus giornalistico: Aspetti qualitativi e quantitativi, Rivista internazionale di tecnica della traduzione, 12, pp. 1-62.
Richards, N. (2014). A-bar movement. In A. Carnie, D. Siddiqi, & Y. Sato (Eds.), Routledge handbook of syntax (pp. 167-191). Routledge.
Rizzi, L. (1982). Issues in Italian syntax. De Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110883718
Rizzi, L. (1997). The fine structure of the left periphery. In L. Haegeman (Ed.), Elements of grammar (pp. 281-337). Kluwer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7
Rizzi, L., & Bocci, G. (2017). Left periphery of the clause: Primarily illustrated for Italian. In M. Everaert, H. C. van Riemsdijk (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to syntax, second edition (pp. 1–30). Wiley Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom104
Rudin, C. (1988). On multiple questions and multiple wh-fronting. In Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 6, pp. 455-501. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00134489
Samek-Lodovici, V. (2015). The interaction of focus, givenness, and prosody: A study of Italian clause structure. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198737926.001.0001
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., & Paoli, S. (2004). Crosslinguistic influence at the syntax–pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in English–Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(3), pp. 183-205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728904001610
Sprouse, J., Almeida, D. (2013). The empirical status of data in syntax: A reply to Gibson and Fedorenko. Language and cognitive processes, 28, pp. 222-228. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2012.703782
Sprouse, J., Schütze, C. T., & Almeida, D. (2013). A comparison of informal and formal acceptability judgements using a random sample from Linguistic Inquiry 2001-2010. Lingua, 134, pp. 219-248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.07.002
Sprouse, J. (2015). Three open questions in experimental syntax. Linguistics Vanguard, 1(1), pp. 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2014-1012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2014-1012
Stoyanova, M. (2008). Unique focus: Languages without multiple wh-questions. John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.123
Vettorel, P. (2013). English in Italian advertising. World Englishes, 32(2), pp. 261-278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12023
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Anda Neagu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
Under the following terms:
-
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
-
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
