Article in:
Revue Romane: Online-First Articles

Present/future tense variation in contemporary Italian

The role of settledness

| Universiteit Gent
According to normative descriptions of Italian future-framed adverbial clauses, the future tense is the only option (Quando verrai [F], ti presterò il libro ‘When you come, I’ll lend you the book’). However, the present tense may also be used (Quando vieni [P], ti presto il libro). I demonstrate that choice and acceptance of the present in future-framed adverbials are conditioned by the speaker’s presumption of settledness; that is, in every future world compatible with the speaker’s beliefs the eventuality necessarily occurs. The data come from an online questionnaire consisting of a forced-choice and an acceptability judgment task completed by 429 native speakers of Italian, and were analyzed using mixed-effects regression. Results show that the present is chosen most and rated highest when the future eventuality is presumed settled ([+certain, +immediate, +temporally specific]). These findings demonstrate that speakers use the present to express confidence in the realization of future eventualities.
Keywords: Italian, pragmatics, present, future, subordinate clauses, settledness
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous literature
    • 2.1The Italian present & future tenses
    • 2.2Settledness
  • 3.Research questions & hypotheses
  • 4.Methods
  • 5.Results
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Conclusions & future directions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 25 May 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/rro.19022.hof
References
Aaron, J.
(2014): A certain future: Epistemicity, prediction, and assertion in Iberian Spanish future expression. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 7,2, pp. 215–240. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aski, J. & D. Musumeci
(2014): Avanti: Beginning Italian, 3rd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Bates, D., M. Maechler, B. Bolker, & S. Walker
(2015): Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67,1, pp. 1–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Battaglia, S. & V. Pernicone
(1957): La grammatica italiana, 2nd edn. Torino: Loescher editore.Google Scholar
Bazzanella, C.
(1994): Le facce del parlare. Un approccio pragmatico all’italiano parlato. Firenze: La Nuova Italia.Google Scholar
Berretta, M.
(1990): Il futuro in italiano L2. Quaderni di Dipartimento di Linguistica e Letterature Comparate dell’Università di Bergamo, 61, pp. 147–188.Google Scholar
(1994): Il futuro italiano nella varietà colloquiale e nella varietà di apprendimento. Zeitschrift für romanische philologie, 110,1/2, pp. 1–36. Tubingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
Berruto, G.
(2000): Sociolingustica dell’italiano contemporaneo, 9th edn. Rome: Carocci editore.Google Scholar
Bertinetto, P. M.
(1986): Tempo, aspetto e azione nel verbo italiano: Il sistema dell’indicativo. Florence: Presso L’accademia della Crusca.Google Scholar
Bonomi, A. & F. Del Prete
(2008): Evaluating future-tensed sentences in changing contexts. Unpublished manuscript, University of Milan.Google Scholar
Calboli, G. & G. Moroni
(1989): Grammatica italiana. Bologna: Edizioni Calderini.Google Scholar
Comrie, B.
(1985): Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Copley, B.
(2002): The semantics of the future. PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
D’Achille, P.
(2003): L’italiano contemporaneo. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
D’Agostino, M.
(2007): Sociolinguistica dell’Italia contemporanea. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Danesi, M.
(2006): Complete Italian Grammar Review. : Barron.Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö.
(1985): Tense and aspect systems. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
De Rôme, D. & P. Tite
(2003): Soluzioni! A practical guide to Italian grammar. Malta: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Fleischman, S.
(1982): The future in thought and language: Diachronic evidence from Romance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gravano, A., S. Benus, J. Hirschberg, E. Sneed German, & G. Ward
(2008): The effect of contour type and epistemic modality on the assessment of speaker certainty, in Barbosa, P., S. Madureira, & C. Reis (eds.), Proceedings of speech prosody 2008. Campinas, pp. 401–404.Google Scholar
Giannakidou, A. & A. Mari
(2018): A unified analysis of the future as epistemic modality: The view from Greek and Italian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 36,1, pp. 85–129. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Graziano, C.
(2008): Italian verbs and essentials ofgrammar, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Hoff, M.
(2019): Settledness & mood alternation: A semantic-pragmatic analysis of Spanish future-framed adverbials. The Ohio State University: PhD thesis.Google Scholar
Hoff, M. & S. Schwenter
(2019): Settledness and morphosyntactic variation across Romance. Presented at the Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), University of Georgia, May 1–4.
Hothorn, T., K. Hornik, & A. Zeilis
(2006): Unbiased recursive partitioning: A conditional inference framework. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 15,3, pp. 651–674. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kaufmann, S.
(2002): The presumption of settledness. CLS, 381, pp. 313–328.Google Scholar
(2005): Conditional truth and future reference. Journal of Semantics, 221, pp. 231–280. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
King, R. & T. Nadasdi
(2003): Back to the future in Acadian French. Journal of French Language Studies, 131, pp. 323–337. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., P. B. Brockhoff, & R. H. B. Christensen
(2017): lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82,13, pp. 1–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lepschy, A. & G. Lepschy
(1977): The Italian language today. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Maiden, M. & C. Robustelli
(2007): A reference grammar of modern Italian, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Nanni-Tate, P.
(2012): Italian Grammar Drills, 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Peyronnel, S. & I. Higgins
(2005): Basic Italian: A grammar and workbook. New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S. & N. Dion
(2009): Prescription vs. praxis: The evolution of future temporal reference in French. Language, 85,3, pp. 557–587. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, S. & E. Malvar
(2006): Elucidating the transition period in linguistic change: The expression of the future in Brazilian Portuguese. Probus, 191, pp. 121–169.Google Scholar
Proudfoot, A. & F. Cardo
(2005): Modern Italian grammar: A practical guide, 2nd edn. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
R Core Team
(2017): R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Renzi, L. & G. Salvi
(eds.) (1991): Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione, vol. 21. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Rohlfs, G.
(1969): Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti: Sintassi e formazione delle parole. Torino: Giulio Einaudi Editore.Google Scholar
Sabatini, F.
(1985): “L’italiano dell’uso medio”: una realtà tra le varietà linguistiche italiane, in Holtus, G. & E. Radtke (eds.), Gesprochenes Italienisch in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Tübingen: G. Narr, pp. 154–184.Google Scholar
Schütze, C. & J. Sprouse
(2014): Judgment data, in Podesva, R. & D. Sharma (eds.), Research methods in linguistics. New York: Cambridge Univeristy Press, pp. 27-50. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schwenter, S.
(1999): Pragmatics of conditional marking: Implicature, Scalarity, & Exclusivity. New York/London: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
Serianni, L.
(1988): Grammatica italiana: Italiano comune e lingua letteraria. Torino: Utet Libreria.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. & H. Baayen
(2012): Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was-were variation as a case study for statistical practice. Language Variation and Change 24,2, pp. 135–178. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wiberg, E.
(2002): Information structure in dialogic future plans: A study of Italian native speakers and Swedish preadvanced and advanced learners of Italian, in Salaberry, M. R. & Y. Shirai (eds.): The L2 Acquisition of Tense-Aspect Morphology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 285–321. CrossrefGoogle Scholar