In:Structuring Variation in Romance Linguistics and Beyond: In honour of Leonardo M. Savoia
Edited by Mirko Grimaldi, Rosangela Lai, Ludovico Franco and Benedetta Baldi
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 252] 2018
► pp. 111–120
Chapter 7Micro‑ and macro-variation
From pronominal allomorphies to the category of irreality/non-veridicality
Published online: 19 December 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.252.07rit
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.252.07rit
Abstract
Manzini and Savoia (2005, 2017) argue that morphophonology is involved in enclisis/proclisis alternations only in so far as it externalizes the syntactico-semantic category of non-veridicality, as outlined here in Section 1. In Section 2 we review typological literature reporting that the irrealis category governs the alternation between different pronominal series cross-linguistically. This evidence potentially fulfills a prediction issuing from the treatment of Romance. What is more, comparison between treatments of Romance microvariation and of typological macrovariation reveals a propensity to treat the former in terms of morphophonological organization and the latter in terms of conceptual systems. If Manzini and Savoia are correct, efforts at defining opposed notions of macro‑ and micro-parametrization are not warranted by the evidence (Section 3).
Keywords: clitics, modality, microvariation, parameters, Romance
Article outline
- 1.Enclisis/proclisis alternations in Romance
- 2.Realis/irrealis alternations in the typological debate
- 3.Microvariation and macroparameters
References
References (16)
Bafile, Laura. 1993. Fonologia prosodica e teoria metrica: Accento, cliticizzazione e innalzamento vocalico nel napoletano. PhD dissertation, Università di Firenze.
Biberauer, Theresa, Anders Holmberg, Ian Roberts & Michelle Sheehan. 2014. Complexity in comparative syntax: The view from modern parametric theory. In Measuring Grammatical Complexity, Frederick Newmeyer & Laurel Preston (eds), 103–127. Oxford: OUP.
Cardinaletti, Anna & Repetti, Lori. 2008. The phonology and syntax of subject clitics in Interrogative Sentences. Linguistic Inquiry 39: 523–563.
Cardinaletti, Anna & Starke, Michal. 1999. The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of three classes of pronouns. In Clitics in the Languages of Europe, Henk van Riemsdijk (ed.), 145–233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Chafe, Wallace. 1995. The realis-irrealis distinction in Caddo, the Northern Iroquoian languages, and English. In Modality in Grammar and Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 32], Joan Bybee & Suzanne Fleischman (eds), 349–366. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cristofaro, Sonia. 2012. Descriptive notions vs. grammatical categories: Unrealized states of affairs and ‘irrealis’. Language Sciences 34: 131–146.
Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2011. Negative and positive polarity items. In Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Vol. 2, Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn & Paul Portner (eds), 1660–1712. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Manzini, M. Rita & Savoia, Leonardo M. 2005. I dialetti italiani e romanci. Morfosintassi generativa, 3 Vols. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.
2017. Enclisis/proclis alternations in Romance: Allomorphies and (re)ordering. Transactions of the Philological Society 115: 98–136.
Mauri, Caterina & Sansò, Andrea. 2012. What do languages encode when they encode reality status? Language Sciences 34: 99–106.
Ordonez, Francisco & Repetti, Lori, 2014. On the morphological restrictions of hosting clitics in Italian and Sardinian dialects. L’Italia Dialettale LXXV: 173–198.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Manzini, Maria Rita
2019. Parameters and the design of the Language Faculty. Evolutionary Linguistic Theory 1:1 ► pp. 24 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 november 2025. 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.