Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin
RU EN






Today: 27.07.2025
Home Issues 2018 Year Issue №5 THE FUNCTIONING OF THE PRONOUN FORM GLI IN THE 16TH-CENTURY ITALIAN LANGUAGE
  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Bulletin Archive
    • 2025 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2024 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2023 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2022 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2021 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2020 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 2019 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 2018 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
    • 2017 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2016 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2015 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2014 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2013 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2012 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2011 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
      • Issue №13
    • 2010 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2009 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2008 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2007 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
    • 2006 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
      • Issue №10
      • Issue №11
      • Issue №12
    • 2005 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2004 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 2003 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
    • 2002 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
    • 2001 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
    • 2000 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
      • Issue №8
      • Issue №9
    • 1999 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
      • Issue №7
    • 1998 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
      • Issue №4
      • Issue №5
      • Issue №6
    • 1997 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
      • Issue №3
  • Rating
  • Search
  • News
  • Editorial Board
  • Information for Authors
  • Review Procedure
  • Information for Readers
  • Editor’s Publisher Ethics
  • Contacts
  • Manuscript submission
  • Received articles
  • Accepted articles
  • Subscribe
  • Service Entrance
vestnik.tspu.ru
praxema.tspu.ru
ling.tspu.ru
npo.tspu.ru
edujournal.tspu.ru

TSPU Bulletin is a peer-reviewed open-access scientific journal.

E-LIBRARY (РИНЦ)
Ulrich's Periodicals Directory
Google Scholar
European reference index for the humanities and the social sciences (erih plus)
Search by Author
- Not selected -
  • - Not selected -
Яндекс.Метрика

THE FUNCTIONING OF THE PRONOUN FORM GLI IN THE 16TH-CENTURY ITALIAN LANGUAGE

Zholudeva Lyubov Ivanovna

DOI: 10.23951/1609-624X-2018-5-9-14

Information About Author:

Zholudeva L. I., Lomonosov Moscow State University (Leninskiye gory, 1, building 51, Moscow, Russian Federation, 119991). E-mail: l.zholudeva@gmail.com

The article focuses on the polifunctional pronoun form gli and its patterns of use in the 16th-century Italian. In Old Italian, as a result of phonetic changes, this form became virtually universal, as it performed various subject, direct object and indirect object functions and co-occurred with other developments of the Lat. ille. In Modern Italian gli has several uses, but they are not stylistically equal: gli as the indirect object masculine singular pronoun is normative, gli as the indirect object plural form is colloquially marked, and gli as the indirect object feminine singular pronoun is regarded as a vulgarism. The 16th century, in a way, was a transition period when certain uses of gli that later became obsolete are only present in comic genres and in the writings by semiliterate authors. Another interesting feature is the growing discrepancy between the dialect of Florence and the codified norm. The reduction of superfluous uses of gli in the 16th-century Italian has not been dealt with specially before. The present piece of research aims at assessing the way the functions of gli were gradually being reduced and differentiated stylistically, which becomes evident when one confronts prose and verse writings belonging to different genres and to authors from different regions of Italy.

Keywords: Italian language, history of Italian, personal pronouns, grammatical synonymy, language norm

References:

1. D’Achille P. Sintassi del parlato e tradizione scritta della lingua italiana. Rome, Bonacci, 1990. 400 p.

2. Sabatini F. L’italiano dell’uso medio: una realtà tra le varietà linguistiche italiane. Gesprochenes italienisch in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Tübingen, Gunter Narr, 1985. P. 154–184.

3. Cortelazzo M. A. Evoluzione della lingua, percezione del cambiamento, staticità della norma. Lingua scuola e società. I nuovi bisogni comunicativi nelle classi multiculturali. E. Pistolesi (ed.). Trieste, Istituto Gramsci del Friuli Venezia Giulia, 2007. P. 47–55.

4. Pescarini D. The emergence of two classes of clitic clusters in (Italo) Romance. Romance Linguistics 2012: Selected papers from the 42nd Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Cedar City, Utah, 20–22 April 2012. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2015. Vol. 7. Pp. 171–183.

5. Salvi G. Difesa e illustrazione della legge di Wackernagel applicata alle lingue romanze antiche: la posizione delle forme pronominali clitiche. Cadernos de Estudos Linguísticos, 1993. Vol. 24. Pp. 111–130.

6. Maiden M. Linguistic History of Italian. Bologna, Mulino, 1998. 307 c.

7. Rohlfs G. Historical Grammar of Italian and its Dialects. Vol. II. Turin, Einaudi, 1966–1970. 399 p.

8. Berruto G. Sociolinguistica dell’italiano contemporaneo. Rome, Carocci, 2014. 280 p.

9. Benincà P., Penello N. L’uso di le al di là dei suoi confi ni. Italiano, italiani regionali e dialetti, 2009, vol. 21, pp. 13–28.

10. Egerland V. Sull’uso del pronome loro nell’opera di Pietro Fortini. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 1999, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 77–94.

11. Telve S. Essere o avere? Sull’alternanza degli ausiliari coi modali potuto, voluto (e dovuto) davanti a infi niti inaccusativi in italiano antico e moderno. Studi linguistici per Luca Serianni. V. Della Valle & P. Trifone (eds.). Roma, Salerno. 2007. Pp. 313–325.

12. Patota G. Per. Studi linguistici per Luca Serianni. V. Della Valle & P. Trifone (eds.). Roma, Salerno. 2007. Pp. 3–18.

13. Nencioni G. Di scritto e di parlato. Discorsi linguistici. Bologna, Zanichelli. 1983. 290 p.

zholudeva_l._i._9_14_5_194_2018.pdf ( 449.99 kB ) zholudeva_l._i._9_14_5_194_2018.zip ( 443.86 kB )

Issue: 5, 2018

Series of issue: Issue 5

Rubric: ROMANCE AND GERMANIC LANGUAGES

Pages: 9 — 14

Downloads: 1159

For citation:


© 2025 Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin

Development and support: Network Project Laboratory TSPU