Article published in:
Revue Romane
Vol. 52:2 (2017) ► pp. 137169

Full-text

La nozione coseriana di dialetto e le sue implicazioni per l’area italo-romanza
Riferimenti bibliografici

Riferimenti bibliografici

Alinei, M.
(1981): Dialetto: un concetto rinascimentale fiorentino. Storia e analisi. Quaderni di Semantica 2, pp. 147–173.Google Scholar
Ammon, U.
(2003): On the social factors that determine what is standard in a language and on conditions of successful implementation. Sociolinguistica 17, pp. 1–10. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bergs, A.
(2014): The Uniformitarian Principle and the Risk of Anachronisms in Language and Social History, in: Hernández-Campoy & J. C. Conde-Silvestre (eds.): The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, pp. 80–98.Google Scholar
Berruto, G.
(1983): L’italiano popolare e la semplificazione linguistica. Vox Romanica 42, pp. 38–79.Google Scholar
(1987): Sociolinguistica dell’italiano contemporaneo. La Nuova Italia Scientifica, Roma (seconda edizione: Carocci, Roma 2012).Google Scholar
(1995): Fondamenti di sociolinguistica. Laterza, Roma/Bari.Google Scholar
(2001): Dialetti, tetti, coperture. Alcune annotazioni in margine a una metafora sociolingustica, in: Iliescu, M., G. Plangg & P. Videsott (eds.): Die vielfältige Romania. Dialekt – Sprache – Überdachungssprache. Istitut Ladin Micurà de Rü/Istitut Cultural Ladin Majon di Fascegn San Martin de Tor/Vich, pp. 23–40.Google Scholar
(2007): Miserie e grandezze dello standard. Considerazioni sulla nozione di standard in linguistica e sociolinguistica, in: Molinelli, P. (ed.): Standard e non standard tra scelta e norma, Il Calamo, Roma, pp. 13–41.Google Scholar
(2011): Italiano lingua pluricentrica?, in: Overbeck, A., W. Schweickard & H. Volker (eds.): Lexikon, Varietät, Philologie. Romanistische Studien Günter Holtus zum 65. Geburtstag. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/Boston, pp. 15–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bruni, F.
(2007): Per la vitalità dell’italiano preunitario fuori d’Italia. I. Notizie sull’italiano nella diplomazia internazionale. Lingua e Stile XLII, 2, pp. 189–242.Google Scholar
Cerruti, M. & R. Regis
(2014): Standardization Patterns and Dialect/Standard Convergence: A North-Western Italian Perspective. Language in Society 43,1, pp. 83–111. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 164 ]
(2015): The interplay between dialect and standard: evidence from Italo-Romance, in: Torgersen, E., S. Hårstad, B. Mæhlum & U. Røyneland (eds.): Language Variation – European Perspectives V Selected papers from the Seventh International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE 7). Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 55–68.Google Scholar
Clivio, G. P.
(1976 [1972]), Language Contact in Piedmont: Aspects of Italian Interference in the Sound System of Piedmontese, in: Clivio, G. P.: Storia linguistica e dialettologia piemontese. Centro Studi Piemontesi, Torino, pp. 91–106 [già in: Scherabon Firchow, E., K. Grimstad, N. Hasselmo & W. A. O’Neil (eds.): Studies for Einar Haugen. Mouton, The Hague, pp. 119–31].Google Scholar
Clyne, M.
(1989): Pluricentricity. National Variety, in: Ammon, U. (ed.): Status and Function of Languages and Language Varieties. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York, pp. 357–71. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1992): Epilogue, in: Clyne, M. (ed.): Pluricentric languages. Differing norms in different nations. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York, pp. 455–465.Google Scholar
(2004): Pluricentric Language/Plurizentrische Sprache, in: Ammon, U., N. Dittmar, K. J. Mattheier & P. Trudgil (eds.): Sociolinguistics / Soziolinguistik. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York, vol. 1, pp. 296–300.Google Scholar
Commedia = Dante Alighieri: La divina commedia
ed. S. A. Chimenz. UTET, Torino 1962.Google Scholar
Consani, C.
(1991): Διαλεκτος: contributo alla storia del concetto di « dialetto ». Giardini, Pisa.Google Scholar
Convivio = Dante Alighieri: Il convivio
ed. F. Chiappelli & E. Fenzi, in: Dante Alighieri: Opere minori. Torino, UTET 1986, pp. 9–322.Google Scholar
Coseriu, E.
(1980): “Historische Sprache” und “Dialekt”, in: Göschel, J., P. Ivić & K. Kehr (eds.): Dialekt und Dialektologie. Steiner, Wiesbaden, pp. 106–22.Google Scholar
(1981): Los conceptos de « dialecto », « nivel » y « estilo de lengua » y el sentido propio de la dialectología. Lingüística Española Actual 3, pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
(1988): Sprachkompetenz. Grundzüge der Theorie des Sprechens. Francke, Tübingen.Google Scholar
(1990): El español de América y l’unidad del idioma, in: Actas del I Simposio de Filología Iberoamericana. Pórtico, Zaragoza, pp. 43–75.Google Scholar
(1992): Competencia lingüística. Elementos de la teoría del hablar. Gredos, Madrid (trad. spagnola di Coseriu 1988).Google Scholar
(2005): Dialekt und Sprachwandel, in: Stehl, Th. (ed.): Unsichtbare Hand und Sprecherwahl. Typologie und Prozesse des Sprachwandels in der Romania. Narr, Tübingen, pp. 111–122.Google Scholar
Coupland, N. & T. Kristiansen
(2011): SLICE: critical perspectives on language (de)standardisation, in: Kristiansen, T. & N. Coupland (eds.): Standard languages and language standards in a changing Europe. Novus, Oslo, pp. 11–35.Google Scholar
D’Achille, P.
(1994): L’italiano dei semicolti, in: Serianni, L., P. Trifone (eds.): Storia della lingua italiana. II. Scritto e parlato. Einaudi, Torino, pp. 41–79.Google Scholar
(2012): Il concetto di italiano standard all’Unità a oggi: questioni di terminologia e problemi di norma, in: Di Pretoro, P. A. & R. Unfer Lukoschik (eds.): Lingua e letteratura italiana 150 anni dopo l’Unità. Meidenbauer, München, pp. 113–28.Google Scholar
D’Achille, P. & D. Proietti
(2011): Articolazioni e determinazioni nella definizione della lingua nazionale: l’“italiano con aggettivi” dall’Unità a oggi, in: Nesi, A., S. Morgana & N. Maraschio (eds.): Storia della lingua italiana e storia dell’Italia unita. L’italiano e lo standard nazionale. Cesati, Firenze, pp. 215–30.Google Scholar
De Mauro, T.
(1970): Storia linguistica dell’Italia unita. Laterza, Bari (seconda edizione).Google Scholar
[ p. 165 ]
(2014): Storia linguistica dell’Italia repubblicana dal 1946 ai giorni nostri. Laterza, Roma/Bari.Google Scholar
Durante, M.
(1981): Dal latino all’italiano moderno. Saggio di storia linguistica e culturale, Zanichelli, Bologna.Google Scholar
DVE = Dante Alighieri: De vulgari eloquentia
ed. M. Tavoni, in: Dante Alighieri: Rime. Vita Nuova. De vulgari eloquentia. Mondadori, Milano 2011, pp. 1065–547.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Ch. A.
(1996 [1987]): Standardization as a form of language spread, in: Ferguson, Ch. A.: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Papers on Language in Society 1959–1994, ed. Th. Huebner. Oxford University Press, New York/Oxford, pp. 189–199 [già in: Lowenberg, P. (ed.): Language Spread and Language Policy. Issues, implications, and case studies. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1987. Georgetown University Press, Washington, pp. 119–32].Google Scholar
Ferguson, R.
(2003): The formation of the dialect of Venice. Forum for Modern Language Studies XXXIX, pp. 450–464. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005): Alle origini del veneziano: una koiné lagunare? Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie 121,3, pp. 476–509. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2007): A Linguistic History of Venice. Olschki, Firenze.Google Scholar
Fontanella de Weinberg, B.
(1992): El español de América. MAPFRE, Madrid.Google Scholar
Galli de’ Paratesi, N.
(1984): Lingua toscana in bocca ambrosiana. Tendenze verso l’italiano standard: un’inchiesta sociolinguistica. Il Mulino, Bologna.Google Scholar
Garvin, P. L. & M. Mathiot
(1956): The urbanization of the Guaraní language: A problem in language and culture, in: Wallace, A. F. C. (ed.): Men and Cultures. Selected Papers of the Fifth International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 783–90.Google Scholar
Giovanardi, C.
(1998): La teoria cortigiana e il dibattito linguistico nel primo Cinquecento. Bulzoni, Roma.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. H.
(1986): Were there Egyptian koines?, in: Fishman, J. A., A. Tabouret-Keller, M. Clyne, B. Krishnamurti & M. Abdulaziz (eds.): The Fergusonian impact. In honor of Charles A. Ferguson. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, vol. 1, pp. 271–90.Google Scholar
Grübl, K.
(2011): Zum Begriff der Koine(isierung) in der historischen Sprachwissenschaft, in: Dessì Schmid, S., J. Hafner & S. Heinemann (eds.): Koineisierung und Standardisierung in der Romania. Winter, Heidelberg, pp. 37–64.Google Scholar
Haugen, E.
(1966): Dialect, Language, Nation. American Anthropologist 68,4, pp. 922–35. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hernández-Campoy, J. M. & Villena-Ponsoda, J. A.
(2009): Standardness and nonstandardness in Spain: dialect attrition and revitalization of regional dialects of Spanish. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 196/197, pp. 181–214.Google Scholar
Joseph, J. E.
(1980): Linguistic Classification in Italy: Problems and Predictions. Language Problems and Language Planning 4,2, pp. 131–40. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1982): Dialect, language, and ‘synecdoche’. Linguistics 20, pp. 473–91. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1984): The engineering of a standard language. Multilingua 3,2, pp. 87–92. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1987): Eloquence and Power. The Rise of Language Standards and Standard Languages. Pinter, London.Google Scholar
[ p. 166 ]
Kabatek, J.
(2013): Koinés and scriptae , in: Maiden, M., J. Ch. Smith & A. Ledgeway (eds.): The Cambridge History of the Romance Languages, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 143–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kloss, H.
(1978): Die Entwicklung neuer germanischer Kultursprachen seit 1800. Schwann, Düsseldorf (seconda edizione).Google Scholar
(1986): On some terminological problems in interlingual sociolinguistics. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 57, pp. 91–106.Google Scholar
(1987): Abstandsprache und Ausbausprache, in: Ammon, U., N. Dittmar & K. J. Mattheier (eds.): Sociolinguistics / Soziolinguistik. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York, vol. 1, pp. 302–08.Google Scholar
Koch, P. & W. Oesterreicher
(1985): Sprache der Nähe-Sprache der Distanz. Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 36, 15–43.Google Scholar
(2008): Comparaison historique de l’architecture des langues romanes, in: Ernst, G., M. -D. Gleßgen, Ch. Schmitt & W. Schweickard (eds.): Romanische Sprachgeschichte / Histoire linguistique de la Romania, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York, vol. 3, pp. 2575–610.Google Scholar
Krefeld, Th
(2011): « Primäre », « sekundäre », « tertiäre » Dialekte – und die Geschichte des italienischen Sprachraums, in: Overbeck, A., W. Schweickard & H. Völker (eds.): Lexikon, Varietät, Philologie. Romanistische Studien Günter Holtus zum 65. Geburtstag. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/Boston, pp. 137–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lapesa, R.
(1981): Historia de la lengua española. Gredos, Madrid.Google Scholar
Le Page, R. B. & A. Tabouret-Keller
(1985): Acts of identity . Creole-based approaches to language and ethnicity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lodge, R. A.
(2004): A Sociolinguistic History of Parisian French. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011): Standardisation et koinéisation: deux approaches contraires à l’historiographie d’une langue, in: Dessì Schmid, S., J. Hafner & S. Heinemann (eds.): Koineisierung und Standardisierung in der Romania. Winter, Heidelberg, pp. 65–79.Google Scholar
López Serena, A. & E. Méndez García de Paredes
(2011): Aproximaciones naturalistas y sociohistóricas en los discursos sobre la estandarización y la lengua estándar, in: Dessì Schmid, S., J. Hafner & S. Heinemann (eds.): Koineisierung und Standardisierung in der Romania. Winter, Heidelberg, pp. 13–36.Google Scholar
Marcellesi, J. -B.
(1984): La définition des langues en domaine roman: les enseignements à tirer de la situation corse, in: Actes du 17e Congrès international de linguistique et philologie romanes. Université de Provence, Aix-en-Provence/Marseille, vol. 5, pp. 307–14.Google Scholar
Martinet, A.
(1954): Dialect. Romance Philology 8,1, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
Mattheier, K. J.
(1997): Über Destandardisierung, Umstandardisierung und Standardisierung in modernen europäischen Standardsprachen, in: Mattheier, K. J. & E. Radtke (eds.): Standardisierung und Destandardisierung europäischer Nationalsprachen. Lang, Frankfurt am Main, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
Meillet, A.
(1920): Aperçu d’une histoire de la langue grecque. Paris, Hachette.Google Scholar
Mesthrie, R.
(1994): Koinés, in: Asher, R. E. (ed.): Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Oxford, Pergamon, pp. 1864–867.Google Scholar
Milroy, J.
(2001): Language ideologies and the consequences of standardization. Journal of Sociolinguistics 5,4, pp. 530–555. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 167 ]
Milroy, J. & L. Milroy
(1999): Authority in language. Investigating standard English. Routledge, London/New York (terza edizione).Google Scholar
Morpurgo Davies, A.
(1987): The Greek Notion of Dialect. Verbum X, pp. 7–27.Google Scholar
Muljačić, Ž.
(1989a): Über den Begriff Dachsprache , in: Ammon, U. (ed.): Status and Function of Languages and Language Varieties. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York, pp. 256–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1989b): Hanno i singoli diasistemi romanzi ‘emanato’ le ‘loro’ lingue standard (come di solito si legge) o hanno invece le lingue standard romanze determinato in larga misura a posteriori i ‘loro’ dialetti?, in: Foresti, F., E. Rizzi & P. Benedini (eds.): L’italiano tra le lingue romanze. Bulzoni, Roma, pp. 9–25.Google Scholar
(1991): L’italien est-il une langue polynomique?, in: Chiorboli, J. (ed.): Les langues polynomiques [P.U.L.A. 3–4]. Université de Corse, Corte, pp. 338–43.Google Scholar
(1992): L’approccio relativistico. Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia 15, pp. 183–90.Google Scholar
(1997a): Il piemontese da lingua alta (LA) a lingua media (LM) nell’area di convergenza italiana. La slòira. Arvista piemontèisa III,4, pp. 11–15.Google Scholar
(1997b): The relationship between the dialects and the standard language, in: Maiden, M. & M. Parry (eds.): The Dialects of Italy. Routledge, London/New York, pp. 387–93.Google Scholar
(2011 [ma 2000]): Le vicende delle sei lingue medie d’Italia più notevoli dal Cinquecento al secondo Ottocento, in: Burr, E. (ed.): Tradizione & Innovazione. Integrando il digitale, l’analogico, il filologico, lo storico e il sociale. Cesati, Firenze, pp. 183–91.Google Scholar
NGLEM = Nueva gramática de la lengua española. Manual
. Real Academia Española/Asosación de Academias de la Lengua Española, Madrid 2010.Google Scholar
Oesterreicher, W.
(2004): Plurilingüísmo en el Reino de Nápoles (siglos XVI y XVII). Lexis. Revista de lingüística y literatura XXVI, pp. 217–27.Google Scholar
(2007a): Mit Clio im Gespräch. Zu Anfang, Entwicklung und Stand der romanistischen Sprachgeschichtsschreibung, in: Hafner, J. & W. Oesterreicher (eds.), Mit Clio im Gespräch. Romanische Sprachgeschichten und Sprachgeschichtsschreibung. Narr, Tübingen, pp. 1–35.Google Scholar
(2007b): Historicismo y teleología: el Manual de gramática histórica española en el marco del comparatismo europeo. Lexis. Revista de lingüística y literatura XXXI, pp. 277–304.Google Scholar
Pandolfi, E. M.
(2009): LIPSI. Lessico di frequenza dell’italiano parlato nella Svizzera italiana. Osservatorio linguistico della Svizzera italiana, Bellinzona.Google Scholar
(2010): Considerazioni sull’italiano L2 in Svizzera italiana. Possibili utilizzazioni di un lessico di frequenza del parlato nella didattica dell’italiano L2, in: Rocci, A., A. Gnach & D. Stotz (eds.): Società in mutamento. Le sfide metodologiche della linguistica applicata (= Bulletin suisse de linguistique appliquée, numéro spécial), pp. 111–25.Google Scholar
Pellegrini, G. B.
(1975 [1973]): I cinque sistemi linguistici dell’italo-romanzo, in: Pellegrini, G. B.: Saggi di linguistica italiana. Storia, struttura, società. Boringhieri, Torino, pp. 55–87 [già in: Revue Roumaine de Linguistique 18, pp. 105–29].Google Scholar
Penny, R.
(2002): A History of the Spanish Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (seconda edizione). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2004): Variation and Change in Spanish. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Poems = The poems of the troubadour Raimbaut de Vaqueiras
ed. J. Linskill. Mouton, The Hague 1964.Google Scholar
Poggi Salani, T.
(1990): Italiano regionale del passato: questioni generali e casi particolari, in: Cortelazzo, M. A. & A. M. Mioni (eds.): L’italiano regionale. Bulzoni, Roma, pp. 327–54.Google Scholar
[ p. 168 ]
Prose = P. Bembo: Prose della volgar lingua
. L’ editio princeps del 1525 confrontata con l’autografo Vaticano latino 3210 ed. C. Vela. CLUEB, Bologna 2001.Google Scholar
Regis, R.
(2011): Koinè dialettale, dialetto di koinè, processi di koinizzazione. Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia 35, pp. 7–36.Google Scholar
(2012a): Note su koinè . Romanische Forschungen 124,1, pp. 3–16. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012b): Su pianificazione, standardizzazione, polinomia: due esempi. Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 128,1, pp. 88–133. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012c): Verso l’italiano, via dall’italiano: le alterne vicende di un dialetto del Nord-ovest, in: Telmon, T., G. Raimondi, L. Revelli (eds.): Coesistenze linguistiche nell’Italia pre- e postunitaria. Roma, Bulzoni, vol. 1, 307–18.Google Scholar
(2013): Può un dialetto essere standard? Vox Romanica 72, pp. 151–69.Google Scholar
Richardson, B.
(2007): The concept of a lingua comune in Renaissance Italy, in: Lepschy, A. L. & A. Tosi (eds.): Languages of Italy. Histories and Dictionaries. Longo, Ravenna, pp. 11–28.Google Scholar
Sanga, G.
(1990): La lingua lombarda. Dalla koinè alto-italiana delle Origini alla lingua cortegiana, in: Sanga, G. (ed.): Koinè in Italia dalle Origini al Cinquecento. Lubrina, Bergamo, pp. 79–163.Google Scholar
(1995): La koinè italiana, in Holtus, G., M. Metzeltin & Ch. Schmitt (eds.): Lexikon der romanistischen Linguistik. Niemeyer, Tübingen, vol. II,2, pp. 81–98.Google Scholar
Schmid, H.
(1982): Richtlinien für die Gestaltung einer gesamtbündnerischen Schriftsprache: Rumantsch Grischun. Lia Rumantscha, Chur.Google Scholar
Serianni, L.
(1988): Grammatica italiana. Italiano comune e lingua letteraria. UTET, Torino.Google Scholar
(1991): La lingua italiana tra norma e uso, in: Marello, C. & G. Mondelli (eds.): Riflettere sulla lingua. La Nuova Italia, Firenze, pp. 37–52.Google Scholar
Siegel, J.
(1985): Koines and Koineization. Language in Society 14,3, pp. 357–378. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, W. A.
(1968), A Sociolinguistic Typology for Describing National Multilingualism, in: Fishman, J. A. (ed.): Readings in the Sociology of Language. Mouton, The Hague/Paris, pp. 531–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sumien, D.
(2006): La standardisation pluricentrique de l’occitan. Nouvel enjeu sociolinguistique, de´veloppement du lexique et de la morphologie. Brepols, Turnhout. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Telmon, T.
(1988–1989): Dialetto-lingua-dialetto: un processo storico?, in: Espaces Romans. Études de dialectologie et de géolinguistique offertes à Gaston Tuaillon. Ellug, Grenoble, vol. II, pp. 587–591.Google Scholar
(1994): Gli italiani regionali contemporanei, in: Serianni, L. & P. Trifone (eds.): Storia della lingua italiana. III. Le altre lingue. Einaudi, Torino, pp. 597–626.Google Scholar
(2009): L’Italia degli italiani regionali, in: Beccaria, G. L. (ed.): La cultura italiana. II volume. Lingue e linguaggi. UTET, Torino, pp. 81–125.Google Scholar
Terracini, B.
(1951): Conflictos de lenguas y de cultura. Imán, Buenos Aires (trad. it.: Conflitti di lingue e di cultura. Neri Pozza, Venezia 1957).Google Scholar
(1963): Lingua libera e libertà linguistica. Torino, Einaudi.Google Scholar
Tesi, R.
(2001): Storia dell’italiano. La formazione della lingua comune dalle origini al Rinascimento. Laterza, Roma/Bari.Google Scholar
(2012): Un termine cruciale in Dante: vulgare semilatium (De vulgari eloquentia I XIX 1). Studi linguistici italiani XXXVIII,2, pp. 180–225.Google Scholar
Testa, E.
(2014): L’italiano nascosto. Einaudi, Torino.Google Scholar
[ p. 169 ]
Thompson, R. W.
(1992): Spanish as a pluricentric language, in: Clyne, M. (ed.): Pluricentric languages. Differing norms in different nations. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York, pp. 45–70.Google Scholar
Tomasin, L.
(2011): Italiano. Storia di una parola. Carocci, Roma.Google Scholar
Toso, F.
(2010): Le lingue polinomiche: alcune riflessioni. Studi Italiani di Linguistica Teorica e Applicata 39,1, pp. 147–59.Google Scholar
Trovato, P.
(1984): « Dialetto » e sinonimi (« idioma », « proprietà », « lingua ») nella terminologia linguistica Quattro e Cinquecentesca. Rivista di Letteratura Italiana 2, pp. 205–36.Google Scholar
(1994): Storia della lingua italiana. Il primo Cinquecento. Il Mulino, Bologna.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P.
(1986): Dialects in contact. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
(2004): New-dialect formation: the inevitability of colonial Englishes. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Tuaillon, G.
(1977): Remarques sur le français régional, avec des exemples dauphinois, in: Le français en contact avec la langue arabe, les langues négro-africaines, la science et la technique, les cultures régionales. Conseil International de la Langue Française, Paris, pp. 143–151.Google Scholar
Tuten, D.
(2003): Koineization in Medieval Spanish. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vàrvaro, A.
(1972–1973): Storia della lingua: passato e prospettive di una categoria controversa (I) e (II). Romance Philology 26,1 e 3, pp. 16–51 e pp. 509–31.Google Scholar
(1989): La tendenza all’unificazione dalle origini alla formazione di un italiano standard, in: Foresti, F., E. Rizzi & P. Benedini (eds.): L’italiano tra le lingue romanze. Bulzoni, Roma, pp. 27–42.Google Scholar
Villena-Ponsoda, J. A.
(1996): Convergence and divergence in a standard-dialect continuum: Networks and individuals in Malaga. Sociolinguistica 10, pp. 112–37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2004): Sociolinguistic patterns of Andalusian Spanish. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 193/194, pp. 139–60.Google Scholar
Vincent, N.
(2006): Languages in Contact in Medieval Italy, in: Lepschy, A. L. & A. Tosi, Rethinking Languages in Contact. The Case of Italy. Legenda, London, pp. 12–27.Google Scholar
Vitale, M.
(1978): La questione della lingua. Palumbo, Palermo (nuova edizione).Google Scholar
Vogl, U.
(2012): Multilingualism in a standard language culture, in: Hüning, M., U. Vogl & O. Moliner (eds.): Standard Languages and Multilingualism in European History. Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 1–42. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, R.
(2013a): Plurilinguismo nella penisola iberica (400–1000), in: Molinelli, P. & F. Guerini (eds.): Plurilinguismo e diglossia nella Tarda Età Antica e nel Medio Evo. Edizioni del Galluzzo, Firenze, pp. 149–64.Google Scholar
(2013b): Periodization, in: Maiden, M., J. Ch. Smith & A. Ledgeway (eds.): The Cambridge History of the Romance Languages, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 107–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Zholudeva, L. I.
2020. The Concept of <i>Italiano Neostandard</i>. Bulletin of Kemerovo State University 22:2  pp. 499 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 april 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.