DOCSLIB.ORG

Comparative Romance Linguistics Bibliographies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Comparative Romance Linguistics Bibliographies Comparative Romance Linguistics Bibliographies Volume 62 (2013) Contents Brianna Butera, “Current studies in general Romance linguistics,” 1-17. Brian Imhoff, “Current studies in Romanian linguistics,” 18-57. Fernando Tejedo-Herrero, “Current studies in Spanish linguistics,” 58-117. Previous issues and a brief history of the CRLB/CRLN may be consulted at: http://hisp462.tamu.edu/CRLB/. Contributors Brianna Butera Department of Spanish and Portuguese University of Wisconsin-Madison [email protected] Brian Imhoff Department of Hispanic Studies Texas A&M University [email protected] Fernando Tejedo-Herrero Department of Spanish and Portuguese University of Wisconsin-Madison [email protected] Current Studies in General Romance Linguistics Comparative Romance Linguistics Bibliographies Volume 62 (2013) Brianna Butera University of Wisconsin-Madison Abad Nebot, Francisco. 2011. Del latín a los romances ibéricos. Epos 27: 267-294. Aboh, Enoch, Elisabeth van der Linden, Josep Quer, and Petra Sleeman (eds). 2009. Romance languages and linguistic theory 2007, Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ Amsterdam 2007. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Abraham, Werner, and Cláudio C. e C. Gonçalvez. 2011. Non-state imperfective in Romance and West- Germanic: How does Germanic render the progressive? Cahiers Chronos 22: 1-20. Acedo-Matellan, Victor, and Jaume Mateu. 2013. Satellite-framed Latin vs. verb-framed romance: a syntactic approach. Probus: International Journal of Latin and Romance Linguistics 25.2: 227- 266. Acosta, Diego de. 2011a. Gothic Loanwords in Spanish and Portuguese: Evidence for Sounds and Sound Changes. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 4.1: 127-170. —. 2011b. Rethinking the Genesis of the Romance Periphrastic Perfect. Diachronica 28.2: 143-185. Adam Aulinas, Montserrat. 2009. La distinció del mode verbal: ús d’una oposició fonològica al català de la i a l'occità. Estudis Romànics 31: 35-54. Adli, Aria. 2011. A heuristic mathematical approach for modeling constraint cumulativity: Contrastive focus in Spanish and Catalan. Linguistic Review 28.2: 111-173. Alboiu, Gabriela. 2009. Null Explicatives and Case: The View from Romance. In Masullo, O’Rourke, and Huang 2009: 1-18. Alén Garabato, Carmen, Xosé Afonso Álvarez, and Mercedes Brea (eds). 2010. Quelle linguistique romane au XXIe siècle? Paris: L’Harmattan. Ale iadou, Artemis, ianina Iord c ioaia, and Elena Soare. 2010. Syntactic realizations of plural in Romance and Germanic nominalizations. In Arregi, Fagyal, Montrul, and Tremblay 2010: 107- 124. — —, and Florian Schäfer. 2011. Scaling the variation in Romance and Germanic nominalizations. In Sleeman, and Perridon 2011: 25-40. Alfano, Iolanda, and Renata Savy. 2012. Los estilos conversacionales en la interacción dialógica: un análisis de las peticiones en italiano y en español en contextos pragmáticamente orientados. Oralia 15: 35-62. Alfonso, Esperanza. 2012. Glosas romances (le’azim) en hebreo en dos comentarios medievales de la península Ibérica. Romance Philology 66.1: 1-55. Alkire, Ti, and Carol Rosen. 2010. Romance Languages: a historial introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Álvarez Xosé, Alfonso, and Joao Saramago. 2012. Áreas lexicais galegas e portuguesas: um novo olhar para a proposta de Cintra. Estudis Romànics 34: 55-97. Alvord, Scott M. (ed). 2011. Selected Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Laboratory Approches to Romance Phonology. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Anderson, Step en R. 2010. Failing one’s obligations: Defectiveness in Rumantsc refle es of debere. In Baerman, Corbette, and Brown (eds), Defective Paradigms: Missing Forms and What They Tell Us, 19-36. Oxford: British Academy/Oxford University Press. —. 2011. Stress-conditioned Allomorphy in Surmiran (Rumantsch). In Maiden, Smith, Goldbach, and Hinzelin 2011: 13-35. Andreose, Alvise, and Lorenzo Renzi. 2013. Geography and distribution of the Romance languages in Europe. In Maiden, Smith, and Ledgeway 2013: 283-334. Andújar Moreno, Gemma, and Montserrat Cunillera Domènech. 2010. Subjetividad y punto de vista en la 1 CRLB 62 (2013) traducción de unidades léxicas: análisis de un caso francés-castellano-catalán. Archivum 60: 9-35. Arnaus Gil, Laia. 2013. La selección copulativa y auxiliar: las lenguas romances (español - italiano - catalán - francés) y el alemán en contacto. Su adquisición en niños bilingües y trilingües. Tübingen: Narr Verlag. Arnavielle, Teddy. 2012. Limites de la Gollo-romania et la Galoo-romania, ou comment sortir d’un dilemme. Revue des Langues Romanes 2012.1: 85-100. Arosio, Fabrizio. 2010. Infectum and Perfectum. Two faces of tense selection in Romance Languages. Linguistics and Philosophy 33.3: 171-214. Arregi, Karlos, Zsuzsanna Fagyal, Silvina A. Montrul, and Annie Tremblay (eds). 2010. Romance Linguistics 2008. Interactions in Romance. Selected Papers from the 38th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Urbana Champaign, April 2008. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Aski, Janice. 2010. Intersective Gradience: Possessive Modifiers from Latin to Italian. Romance Philology 64.2: 159-172. Aslanov, Cyril. 2013. The Romance Component in Yiddish: A Reassessment. Journal of Jewish Languages 1: 261–273. Ayer, Cyprien. 2011. Introduction a l’Études des Dialectes du Pays Romand. München: LINCOM. Azofra Sierra, María Elena. 2009. Entre el préstamo léxico y el cultismo morfológico: la herencia del gerundivo latino en las lenguas romances. Revista de Filología Románica 26: 35-50. Baauw, Sergio, Frank Drijkoningen, Luisa Meroni, and Manuela Pinto (eds). 2013. Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2011. Selected papers from 'Going Romance' Utrecht 2011. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Bachmann, Iris. 2013. Creoles. In Maiden, Smith, and Ledgeway 2013: 400-444. Baldi, Philip, and Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds). 2009. New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax. Volume 1. Syntax of the Sentence. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. — — (eds). 2010a. New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax. Volume 2. Constituent Syntax: Adverbial Phrases, Adverbs, Mood, Tense. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. — — (eds). 2010b. New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax. Volume 3. Constituent Syntax: Quantification, Numerals, Possession, Anaphora. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Balocco, Anna Elizabeth, and María Labarta Postigo. 2009. Sujeito, discurso e vida urbana: um estudo contrastivo de discursos sobre a exclusão social no Brasil e na Espanha. Linguagem em (Dis)curso 9.1: 11-34. Ballester, Xaverio. 2010. Del latín-ibérico al romance valenciano-catalán. Estudios de Lenguas y Epigrafía Antiguas 10: 13-70. Banegas Saorín, Mercedes, and María Gloria Ríos Guardiola. 2009. Semiologías de la diátesis pasiva en francés y español: principios semánticos subyacentes. Estudios Románicos 18: 7-20. Banniard, Michel. 2011. Du latin tardif (IIIe-IVe siècle) au protofrançais (VIIIe siècle): vers un nouveau paradigme. Diachroniques 1: 39-58. —. 2012. La parole entre deux diasystèmes: retour sur quelques paramètres de diachronie latin-roman. Revue de Langues Romanes 2012.1: 47-62. —. 2013. The transition from Latin to the Romance languages. In Maiden, Smith, and Ledgeway 2013: 56-106. Barbato, Marcello. 2010. Il principio di dissimilazione e il plurale di I classe (con excursus sul destino di TUUS SUUS e sull’analogia). Zietschrift für romanische Philologie 126: 39-70. —. 2012. La fabbrica analógica: note sui perfetti devoli di seconda classe nelle lingue romanze. Romance Philology 66.2: 397-422. Barco, Javier del. 2011. Estudio lingüístico de glosas romances en un manuscrito exegético hebreo del s. XIII. Romance Philology 65.2: 173-193. Bardel, Camilla, and Christina Lindqvist. 2011. Developing a lexical profiler for spoken French L2 and Italian L2: The role of frequency, thematic vocabulary and cognates. EUROSLA 11: 75-93. Bárdosi, Vilmos. 2009. Os perfís lingüísticos da “man” en francés, contrastados co úngaro, español, galego e alemán. Cadernos de Fraseoloxía Galega 11: 17-48. 2 CRLB 62 (2013) Barnes, Hilary. 2010. Subject Pronoun Expression in Two Null-Subject Languages. In Arregi, Fagyal, Montrul, and Tremblay 2010: 9-22. Barra-Jover, Mario. 2009. Comment évolue un trait grammatical: le pluriel en français dans une perspective romane. Romance Philology 63.2: 25-67. —, Guylaine Brun-Trigaud, Jean-Philippe Dalbera, Patrick Sauzet, and Tobias Scheer (eds). 2012. Études de linguistique gallo-romane [«Sciences du Langage»]. Saint-Denis: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes. Basciano, Bianca, Nancy Kula, and Chiara Melloni. 2011. Modes of compounding in Bantu, Romance and Chinese. Lingue e Linguaggio 2: 319-332. Battista, Emiliano. 2012. Los programas de “Lingüística romance” entre 1924 y 1946. El giro dialectológico. Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Historiografía Lingüística 8: 119-41. Batllori, Montserrat, and Maria Lluïsa Hernanz. 2013. Emphatic polarity particles in Spanish and Catalan. Lingua 128: 9-30. Becker, Martin G., and Eva-Maria Remberger (eds). 2010. Modality and Mood in Romance. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Benarroc , Myriam. 2010. L’emprunt arabe dans l’Ibéroromania: elements d’une synt èse. Revue de Linguistique Romane 74: 549-564. Bentley, Delia. 2010. Principles of subject markedness in Romance. Archivio Glottologico Italiano 95.2: 152-189. Berns, Janine, Haike Jacobs, and Tobias Scheer (eds). 2011. Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2009. Selected papers from 'Going Romance' Nice 2009. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Bidaud, Samuel. 2010. Remarques sur la structure déterminant/infinitif dans les langues romanes. Onomázein 22: 229-236. Biville, Frédérique,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Romanian Grammar
    1 Cojocaru Romanian Grammar 0. INTRODUCTION 0.1. Romania and the Romanians 0.2. The Romanian language 1. ALPHABET AND PHONETICS 1.1. The Romanian alphabet 1.2. Potential difficulties related to pronunciation and reading 1.2.1. Pronunciation 1.2.1.1. Vowels [ ǝ ] and [y] 1.2.1.2. Consonants [r], [t] and [d] 1.2.2. Reading 1.2.2.1. Unique letters 1.2.2.2. The letter i in final position 1.2.2.3. The letter e in the initial position 1.2.2.4. The ce, ci, ge, gi, che, chi, ghe, ghi groups 1.2.2.5. Diphthongs and triphthongs 1.2.2.6. Vowels in hiatus 1.2.2.7. Stress 1.2.2.8. Liaison 2. MORPHOPHONEMICS 2.1. Inflection 2.1.1. Declension of nominals 2.1.2. Conjugation of verbs 2.1.3. Invariable parts of speech 2.2. Common morphophonemic alternations 2.2.1. Vowel mutations 2.2.1.1. the o/oa mutation 2.2.1.2. the e/ea mutation 2.2.1.3. the ă/e mutation 2.2.1.4. the a/e mutation 2.2.1.5. the a/ă mutation 2.2.1.6. the ea/e mutation 2.2.1.7. the oa/o mutation 2.2.1.8. the ie/ia mutation 2.2.1.9. the â/i mutation 2.2.1.10. the a/ă mutation 2.2.1.11. the u/o mutation 2.2.2. Consonant mutations 2.2.2.1. the c/ce or ci mutation 2.2.2.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Hungarian Influence Upon Romanian People and Language from the Beginnings Until the Sixteenth Century
    SECTION: HISTORY LDMD I HUNGARIAN INFLUENCE UPON ROMANIAN PEOPLE AND LANGUAGE FROM THE BEGINNINGS UNTIL THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY PÁL Enikő, Assistant Professor, PhD, „Sapientia” University of Târgu-Mureş Abstract: In case of linguistic contacts the meeting of different cultures and mentalities which are actualized within and through language are inevitable. There are some common features that characterize all kinds of language contacts, but in describing specific situations we will take into account different causes, geographical conditions and particular socio-historical settings. The present research focuses on the peculiarities of Romanian – Hungarian contacts from the beginnings until the sixteenth century insisting on the consequences of Hungarian influence upon Romanian people and language. Hungarians induced, directly or indirectly, many social and cultural transformations in the Romanian society and, as expected, linguistic elements (e.g. specific terminologies) were borrowed altogether with these. In addition, Hungarian language influence may be found on each level of Romanian language (phonetic, lexical etc.), its contribution consists of enriching the Romanian language system with new elements and also of triggering and accelerating some internal tendencies. In the same time, bilingualism has been a social reality for many communities, mainly in Transylvania, which contributed to various linguistic changes of Romanian language not only in this region, but in other Romanian linguistic areas as well. Hungarian elements once taken over by bilinguals were passed on to monolinguals, determining the development of Romanian language. Keywords: language contact, (Hungarian) language influence, linguistic change, bilingualism, borrowings Preliminary considerations Language contacts are part of everyday social life for millions of people all around the world (G.
    [Show full text]
  • The Perception of Loan Verb Integration Strategies in Romanian
    The Perception of Loan Verb Integration Strategies in Romanian Master’s Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University by Riley D. Wagner Graduate Program in Linguistics The Ohio State University 2019 Advising Committee: Dr. Brian Joseph, Adviser Dr. Andrea Sims Copyrighted by Riley Dane Wagner 2019 Abstract The study of cross-linguistic lexical borrowing is a hot topic today, yet there remain some languages on which there has been little work regarding these words once they have been borrowed. In particular, the borrowing of verbs is of interest due to the amount of information that is encoded on them in the form of morphological endings. One language that has a rich morphological system and yet seems to have no issues with borrowing is Romanian. Borrowed verbs in Romanian tend to take one of three suffixes during conjugation: -ez, -esc, or -uiesc. These suffixes hold no meaning, and yet seem to be obligatory. This shows some similarity to the claims of Ralli (2016) in her work on verbalizers in Greek; therefore, I use this comparison as a starting point for analysis. In this study, I look to investigate speakers’ perceptions of the use of these suffixes, as well as the function of these suffixes, through the use of a perception study aimed at speakers’ reactions to the use of each suffix on various loan verbs. I also compare the ways in which loan verbs are integrated into Romanian to those in which they are integrated in Greek.
    [Show full text]
  • Romance Languages
    This page intentionally left blank Romance languages Ti Alkire and Carol Rosen trace the changes that led from colloquial Latin to five major Romance languages, those which ultimately became national or transnational languages: Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, and Romanian. Trends in spoken Latin altered or dismantled older categories in phonology and morphology, while the regional varieties of speech, evolving under diverse influences, formed new grammatical patterns, each creating its own internal regularities. Documentary sources for spoken Latin show the beginnings of this process, which comes to full fruition in the medieval emergence of written Romance languages. This book newly distills the facts into an appealing program of study, including exercises, and makes the difficult issues clear, taking well-motivated and sometimes innovative stands. It provides not only an essential guide for those new to the topic, but also a reliable compendium for the specialist. TI ALKIRE is a senior lecturer in the Department of Romance Studies at Cornell University. Besides historical Romance linguistics, his research interests include sty- listics, translation theory, and current variation in French and Italian. CAROL ROSEN is a professor of Linguistics and Romance Studies at Cornell University. Her work in language typology, grammatical relations, and formal theory design lends a special character to her research in Romance linguistics, ranging over histor- ical and contemporary topics. Ti Alkire and Carol Rosen Romance Languages a historical introduction CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo, Delhi, Dubai, Tokyo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521889155 © Ti Alkire, Carol Rosen, and Emily Scida 2010 This publication is in copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • Vowels of Romanian: Historical, Phonological and Phonetic Studies
    VOWELS OF ROMANIAN: HISTORICAL, PHONOLOGICAL AND PHONETIC STUDIES A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Margaret Elspeth Lambert Renwick May 2012 © 2012 Margaret Elspeth Lambert Renwick VOWELS OF ROMANIAN: HISTORICAL, PHONOLOGICAL AND PHONETIC STUDIES Margaret Elspeth Lambert Renwick, Ph. D. Cornell University 2012 This dissertation investigates the Romanian vowel system from historical, phonological and phonetic perspectives, centering on marginal contrasts, in which a sharp distinction between allophones and phonemes is insufficient to capture the relationships among sounds. Study of both morpho-phonological alternations and synchronic phonetics is necessary to understand the forces driving the phonemic system of Romanian, which is under-studied with respect to other Romance languages. The dissertation first investigates a historically-based phonological question. In the history of Romanian /ɨ/, it is shown that a combination of native phonological processes and borrowings shaped the vowel’s distribution, and although /ɨ/ is synchronically phonemic it remains restricted to a small set of phonologically- determined contexts. A quantitative synchronic counterpart to this study describes relative type frequency among Romanian phonemes, and argues that /ɨ/, as well as diphthongs /e̯ a/ and /o̯ a/, are marginally contrastive in the language. They have very low type frequency, and their distribution can almost be predicted, although minimal pairs demonstrate their status as phonemes. While /ɨ/ lies in a pairwise relationship of marginal contrast with its former allophone /ʌ/, the diphthongs’ contrastiveness is reduced by their large role in the morphology. Turning to the acoustics of the Romanian vowel system, a phonetic study shows the positioning of monophthongs and diphthongs in the Romanian vowel space, as well as their durational characteristics.
    [Show full text]
  • Language Classification and Manipulation in Romania and Moldova Chase Faucheux Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected]
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2006 Language classification and manipulation in Romania and Moldova Chase Faucheux Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Linguistics Commons Recommended Citation Faucheux, Chase, "Language classification and manipulation in Romania and Moldova" (2006). LSU Master's Theses. 1405. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/1405 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LANGUAGE CLASSIFICATION AND MANIPULATION IN ROMANIA AND MOLDOVA A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in The Interdepartmental Program in Linguistics By Chase Faucheux B.A., Tulane University, 2004 August 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………….……...…..iii 1 INTRODUCTION: AIMS AND GOALS …………………………………….……….1 2 LINGUISTIC CLASSIFICATION ……………………………………………………3 2.1 Genealogical Classification ……...………………………………………………4 2.2 Language Convergence and Areal Classification ………………………….…….9 2.3 Linguistic Typology ………………………………………………………….…16 3 THE BALKAN SPRACHBUND
    [Show full text]
  • The Grammar of Romanian Ed. by Gabriela PANĂ DINDELEGAN Oxford: Oxford University Press, Xxxiii + 704 Pages
    ISSN 2385-4138 (digital) Isogloss 2015, 1/2 http://dx.doi.org/10.5565/rev/isogloss.27 293-297 The Grammar of Romanian Ed. by Gabriela PANĂ DINDELEGAN Oxford: Oxford University Press, xxxiii + 704 pages. ISBN: 978-0-19-964492-6. £95.00 Received: 17-09-15 Accepted: 27-09-15 Reviewed by Elena Ciutescu Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona / Centre de Lingüística Teòrica The book under review is the first comprehensive and concise descriptive grammar of contemporary Romanian language in English. As Gabriela Pană Dindelegan (Emeritus Professor at the University of Bucharest and Senior Researcher at the ‘Iorgu Iordan - Alexandru Rosetti’ Institute of Linguistics) points out in the preface, it should be seen as an ‘essential grammar’ that covers the most significant aspects of present-day Romanian. The editor highlights the modern character of the framework used, which is updated ‘in conception, terminology, topics, and bibliography’ (p. xxv). The grammar was written by members of the ‘Iorgu Iordan - Alexandru Rosetti’ Institute of Linguistics of the Romanian Academy, and benefited from Martin Maiden’s (University of Oxford) editorial consultancy. Two modern Romanian Grammars served as a basis for the present book: Gramatica limbii române (2008), a modern academic grammar, and Gramatica de bază a limbii române (2010), a recent synthesis of it. The book consists of 16 chapters, a table of “Detailed contents and author attributions” (p. vii), a “Preface” (p. xxv), a page on “Notes on style and format” (p. xxvii), a list of “Abbreviations and conventions” (p. xxviii), a description of “The contributors” (p. xxxii), the “Sources” used (p.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical, Social and Cultural Setting for Romanian-Hungarian Contacts in 16Th-Century Transylvania
    Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Philologica, 4, 2 (2012) 357-372 Historical, Social and Cultural Setting for Romanian-Hungarian Contacts in 16th-Century Transylvania Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania Department of Humanities [email protected] Abstract. All around the world there are different communities or language groups with specific contacts that influence each other’s development. Theoretically we might delimitate homogeneous communities, practically, however, these would be only mental constructs as all groups are essentially heterogeneous. Even amongst communities that speak the same language and share the same culture there will be individual differences. One specific type of contact between two nations is that between a minority and the majority. My research focuses on this particular issue, referring to the contacts between Romanians and Hungarians in a peculiar geographical setting: Transylvania. Not only this space but also other factors (i.e. temporal, economic, etc.) play an important role in these contacts. During many centuries Romanians and Hungarians lived in symbiosis, especially in Transylvania, which led to numerous mutual influences: not only social or cultural ones but on linguistic level as well. My paper regards mainly the Hungarian influence on the Transylvanian Romanian society in that period. Thus, we can outline the influence upon the Romanian social system, their lifestyle or confessional / religious orientation, folk art and, generally, upon the Romanian language vocabulary (see the relation between Reformation and the first texts written in Romanian). All these were provided by geographical, historical and political factors that characterised Transylvania in the 16th century. Keywords: space in ethnic contacts, Transylvania, Romanian-Hungarian symbiosis, cultural influence 357 358 E.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Analysis of Romanian-English and Romanian-Spanish Code-Switching Patterns*
    A comparative analysis of Romanian-English and Romanian-Spanish code-switching patterns* Ariana Bancu University of Michigan [email protected] The present study compares Romanian-Spanish and Romanian-English code-switch patterns at a morpho-syntactic level. Spanish and Romanian have similar grammatical features and share many structural and phonological properties, while Romanian and English differ in most of these aspects. In comparing 240 code-switches from both language pairs, I address whether these differences and similarities in code-switch patterns can be explained by typological factors. The results show that switch points in both language pairs are the same at phrase level. However, different CS patterns occur at morpheme-level, with Romanian-Spanish switches showing more complex combinations between Spanish stems and Romanian inflectional or function morphemes, than in the Romanian-English data. These findings shed light on the role of feature matching between switched categories and the effect of typological similarity. 1. Introduction Code-switching, a type of language mixing during language contact, has been the focus of extensive research over the past six decades; the phenomenon is defined by the alternate use of more than one language in a conversation by the same individuals (Weinreich 1968), or more specifically “…the alternation of two languages within a single discourse, sentence or constituent” (Poplack & Sankoff 1981:214). Much has been written about code-switching from a sociolinguistic perspective, which has resulted in a closer understanding of why bilinguals code-switch, the circumstances that influence their language use, and what attitudes bilinguals and others have towards code-switching (Myers-Scotton 1988, Romaine 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Ludmila Alahverdieva
    Studii şi cercetări filologice. Seria Limbi Străine Aplicate A LEXICOGRAPHER’S REMARKS ON SOME OF THE VOCABULARY DIFFICULTIES AND CHALLENGES THAT LEARNERS OF ENGLISH HAVE TO COPE WITH – AND A FEW SUGGESTIONS CONCERNING A SERIES OF COMPLEX DICTIONARIES1 Abstract: The present paper aims at stressing the need for applied linguistics in dealing with didactic and lexicographical instruments, not only in the traditional manner, but also – or mainly – in the novel modalities suggested and allowed by the new information and communication technologies, concepts and devices. Proceeding from the contrastive and didactic view of the lexicon and the lexicographer’s task, and also taking advantage of the various models that good learner’s dictionaries in use have already set, the author presents the main aspects involved by compiling a complex, grammaticized Romanian-English dictionary – in fact, one of a larger series projected. In such a complex / grammaticized Romanian-English dictionary, meant as a polyfunctional, flexible, ready-to-use tool of learning, based on an interconnective approach blending the semantic description proper and the grammatical regimen, every relevant item is explained in terms of grammatical usage, and relevant diverging data about morphological markers and irregularities, collocation and syntactic rules, pronunciation, spelling are provided, as well as a number of frequent Romanian proper names with their English equivalents. To do that, an accessible code-system was used. The material that was used as illustrations in the present approach was provided by the author’s experience as a lexicographer and teacher. Similarly, the development is proposed of interactive, software implements usable by advanced students, and also by translators and teachers of ESL; such devices can be a valuable help, a kind of learn-while-working instruments, combining the classical dictionary and the grammar manual, plus the efficiency and rapidity of modern ICT.
    [Show full text]
  • Expression of SELF in and Through the Romanian Language
    WLC 2016 : World LUMEN Congress. Logos Universality Mentality Education Novelty 2016 | LUMEN 15th Anniversary Edition Expression of SELF in and through the Romanian Language Cipriana-Elena Peicaa* * Corresponding author: Cipriana-Elena Peica, , [email protected] aAssistant Lecturer, PhD Candidate,Department of Romanian Language and General Linguistics, Faculty of Letters, Babeş–Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, [email protected] Abstract http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.09.91 Romanian is a Romance language, characterised by several particularities that distinguish it from the other Romance languages. Some of the particular features of this Romance language are the grammatical ways in which self is expressed; these particularities have important consequences that are reflected in literary expression and are explained from a grammatical standpoint. The purpose of this paper is to show how the expression of self is extremely interesting in Romanian from the morphological and syntactical point of view. In the first part of the paper, we will refer to the morphological particularities of Romanian with respect to the expression of self and we will consider the personal pronoun, the reflexive pronoun, the nominative case, the accusative case and the reflexive voice of Romanian verbs; the second part of the paper will detail the aspects reflected also in the Romanian syntax, presenting the subject and direct object syntactic functions. We want to point out in this paper how the grammatical peculiarities of this Romance language contributes to the semantic and stylistic richness of the language in general and to the semantics and style of expression of self in particular; both situations are reflected in particular in the fictional style of the language.
    [Show full text]
  • Romanian Grammar by Dana Cojocaru © SEELRC 2003
    Romanian Grammar by Dana Cojocaru © SEELRC 2003 1 Cojocaru Romanian Grammar 0. INTRODUCTION 0.1. Romania and the Romanians 0.2. The Romanian language 1. ALPHABET AND PHONETICS 1.1. The Romanian alphabet 1.2. Potential difficulties related to pronunciation and reading 1.2.1. Pronunciation 1.2.1.1. Vowels [ ǝ ] and [y] 1.2.1.2. Consonants [r], [t] and [d] 1.2.2. Reading 1.2.2.1. Unique letters 1.2.2.2. The letter i in final position 1.2.2.3. The letter e in the initial position 1.2.2.4. The ce, ci, ge, gi, che, chi, ghe, ghi groups 1.2.2.5. Diphthongs and triphthongs 1.2.2.6. Vowels in hiatus 1.2.2.7. Stress 1.2.2.8. Liaison 2. MORPHOPHONEMICS 2.1. Inflection 2.1.1. Declension of nominals 2.1.2. Conjugation of verbs 2.1.3. Invariable parts of speech 2.2. Common morphophonemic alternations 2.2.1. Vowel mutations 2.2.1.1. the o/oa mutation 2.2.1.2. the e/ea mutation 2.2.1.3. the ă/e mutation 2.2.1.4. the a/e mutation 2.2.1.5. the a/ă mutation 2.2.1.6. the ea/e mutation 2.2.1.7. the oa/o mutation 2.2.1.8. the ie/ia mutation 2.2.1.9. the â/i mutation 2.2.1.10. the a/ă mutation 2.2.1.11. the u/o mutation 2.2.2. Consonant mutations 2.2.2.1.
    [Show full text]