Italian grammaticography between traditional and contemporary linguistics

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to show the current situation in contemporary Italian grammaticography, i.e., to analyse grammatical models (traditional, generative and dependency model) grammar reference books for different purposes are based on. By means of diachronic and synchronic analysis of grammar reference books, we have examined and showed to what extent traditional theories and terminology are retained, i.e., to what extent generative grammar and valency theory are present. The introductory part of the paper shows the development of Italian grammaticography from the first generative research conducted in Italy to this day. The first Italian generative grammar books were published in the late 1960s and early 1970s (Costabile 1967, Saltarelli 1970, Gamberini 1971, Parisi, Antinucci 1973), i.e., shortly after Noam Chomsky’s first monographs on generative grammar theory were published. However, although it can be said that Italian grammaticography kept up to date with the research carried out worldwide in the field of linguistics, the first comprehensive descriptive grammar book (Comprehensive Consultative Italian Grammar Book) was not published until 1988, when the most comprehensive traditional Italian grammar book by Luca Serianni was published as well, which is the reason why that year is considered to be a turning point in Italian linguistics. Following this turn of events, which is frequently described as revolutionary, grammar book production has flourished while authors have begun to turn to new linguistic theories more and more, i.e., mostly to the fruits of generative grammar and other theories formulated within its framework, although not for want of work dedicated to traditional grammar. Therefore, for the last two and a half decades, Italian grammaticography has abounded in traditional grammar books mainly for the purposes of school use and “new” (Andreose 2017), i.e., „modern” (Vanelli 2010) grammar books primarily for the purposes of pursuing linguistic issues professionally, as well as studying languages at the university level. The central part of the paper is dedicated to analysing individually some of the most renowned grammar books published during the first decades of the 21st century (Salvi, Vanelli 2004, Andorno 2003, Sabatini et al. 2011, Ferrari, Zampese 2016) with the aim of showing their new features in relation to tradition (the reference point of traditional linguistics was the Serianni's grammar book) regarding terminology, the norm, topics and the organisation of the very grammar books. With respect to the organisation of grammar books, i.e., the topics covered, a striking difference can be noticed between the Serianni’s and other analysed grammar books. In accordance with tradition, the Serianni’s grammar book has the so-called ascending order, i.e., the analysis is carried out from the specific to the general, from the constitutive elements to the sentence including all traditional grammar topics: phonetics and phonology, morphology, simple sentence syntax, complex sentence syntax and finally word formation. All important grammar books published after the Serianni’s grammar book are actually non-traditional grammar books, thus the organisation of the analysis and the order of the chapters are significantly different and there are also marked differences concerning the topics covered. Above all, the lack of any phonetic and phonological analysis in those grammar books is quite noticeable, as well as the growing interest in textual linguistics. Accordingly, we can actually talk about the natural development of grammatical analysis and linguistic disciplines as well, since the old Italian grammar books (that is, the work written before Fornaciari) were characterized especially by the analysis of phonological and morphological categories, which was in some cases so detailed that grammar books resembled dictionaries (e.g., Buonmatei 1623, Corticelli 1745, Soave 1771). Nevertheless, before generative grammar books, syntactic topics were disregarded falling behind the phonological and morphological ones and it was only at the end of the 20th century that the focus of grammatical analyses shifted towards morphosyntactic structures, i.e., primarily, to sentence analysis which has, undoubtedly, become the centre of linguistic research. Due to the natural development of linguistic disciplines but also the very nature and the relations between them, there is no longer mention of phonetics and phonology in contemporary grammar books (out of the contemporary grammar books analysed, only the school grammar book by Sabatini et. al deals with phonetic and phonological topics). The main reason why phonetics and phonology are no longer elements of grammatical analyses is that they show a high degree of autonomy in relation to morphosyntax, since phonological structures almost never correspond to morphological or syntactic structures and also, unlike them, have no meaning (Andreose 142). Apart from the topics and the organisation of the chapters, the difference between traditional and contemporary grammatical models is also reflected in the type of examples grammatical analyses are based on. The reference to linguistic norms is a characteristic of traditional grammar books, while contemporary grammar books tend to describe language fully not limiting the analysis only to grammatical, i.e., acceptable examples. Additionally, as regards the very examples, traditional grammar books show a tendency towards the analyses based on a certain corpus (usually literary), whereas contemporary linguistics rejects any corpora and the linguistic analysis is based on made-up examples, the purpose of which is to show the situation in contemporary written or spoken language in the best possible way. In other words, traditional Italian grammaticographers usually take into consideration only written literary language, while contemporary grammaticographers deal with living language in their analyses and take into account everything that a native speaker of that language would write or say. Contemporary linguistics, for the sake of a more comprehensive linguistic description, takes into consideration agrammatical examples as well, i.e., the examples that are, for different reasons, grammatically and linguistically completely unacceptable. As for the analysed grammar books, as expected indeed, only the Serianni’s grammar book is based on a corpus, mainly of the 19th and 20th century Italian literature, whereas other works are not limited to a certain corpus, but rather based on the examples of grammar book authors themselves. Salvi and Vanelli, Andorno and Ferrari and Zampese take into account not only grammatical examples but also non-grammatical ones (marked with *), partially acceptable (marked with) and textually incoherent (marked with #), while, nonetheless, Sabatini et. al consider only grammatically acceptable examples. As far as terminology is concerned, the greatest differences between traditional and contemporary grammar books are reflected in the field of syntactic topics. The main difference in relation to traditional studies, most terminological differences actually arise from, is that the verb, i.e., its valency becomes the focus of sentence analysis. This is exactly why there is a need for terms such as argomento (complement), nucleo (nucleus), espansioni (expansions), frasi argomentali/nucleari (sentences within the nucleus), frasi extranucleari (sentences outside the nucleus) which do not exist in traditional grammar books. The study of both simple and complex sentences in contemporary grammar books is based on the juxtaposition of the sentence nucleus, i.e., the verb and its obligatory elements (complements) and the nonnuclear part of the sentence consisting of optional elements, i.e., adjuncts or expansions. New terms and new classifications of subordinate clauses are related to this sentence approach as well. Namely, traditional Italian grammar books showed a tendency towards a three-part primary classification based on a logical analysis where the first group of subordinate clauses is identified with nominal elements (complement clauses), the second one with adjectival elements (relative clauses) and the third one with adverbial elements (adverbial clauses). Nevertheless, that type of analysis or classification is modified according to dependency and generative model where, based on verb valency, only clauses necessary for having the sufficient number of arguments a verb takes (thematic, nuclear) and clauses freely added to the main clause (nonnuclear, non-thematic, marginal) are prominent. Actually, the change in terminology in contemporary grammar books is directly connected to new linguistic topics, i.e., the new approach to existing topics. Since contemporary linguistics is syntax-oriented, terminological innovations are mostly related to syntax, whereas, for instance, morphological terms have remained unaltered. However, even though syntactic terminology has undergone certain changes, it can be concluded that in contemporary Italian grammar books syntactic terminology is not completely modified according to generative theory, rather it can be said that only some modifications of traditional terminology have occurred, though not so radical. Traditional terminology is just brought up to date according to new research and theories. Italian grammarians did not seek the complete change in terminology (not even regarding comprehensive generative grammar books intended for experts such as the “Renzi’s grammar book”), which is, for example, the case with numerous contemporary syntax reference books where generative terminology is completely borrowed, as well as the entire approach to sentence analysis (Donati 2008, Frascarelli, Ramaglia and Corpina 2012).