Chapter 14
Investigating address in regional varieties of Italian
Contrasting methodologies
In the context of great linguistic diversity
characterising Italy, the case of singular V pronouns is a prime example of
regional variation. Surprisingly, an updated and geographically
comprehensive account – after Rohlfs’s
study (1968) – is missing. This chapter contrasts the
methodologies employed in two relevant studies, namely the LinCi project
(Nesi & Poggi Salani
2013), and Bresin (2021).
Common methodological issues are: comparability of data from the various
research sites, authenticity of data, and generalisability of findings
(connected to representativeness of samples). However, geographical
comprehensiveness emerges as the most compelling methodological challenge in
the Italian context. This chapter outlines the basic characteristics of an
ideal methodology that would produce a geographically comprehensive account
of address in Italian.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Methodological background
- 2.1Comparability of data
- 2.2Authenticity and other validity considerations
- 2.3Generalisability
- 3.Linguistic background
- 3.1Why regional variation in Italian
- 3.2Local languages and regional varieties of Italian
- 3.3Singular address pronouns in Italian and in local languages
- 3.4Gap in the literature
- 4.The LinCi project
- 5.Bresin (2021)
- 6.Discussion: Contrasting methodologies
- 6.1Comparability in LinCi and Bresin
(2021)
- 6.2Authenticity, depth, and generalisability in LinCi and Bresin (2021)
- 6.3Geographical comprehensiveness in LinCi and Bresin (2021)
- 6.4An ideal methodology
- 7.Conclusions
-
Notes
-
References