The Reduction of the Arbëresh Lexicon and its Effects on Syntax

Authors

  • Giuseppina Turano

    Department of Linguistics and Comparative Cultural Studies, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, 30123 Venice, Italy

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i7.7576
Received: 23 October 2024 | Revised: 31 October 2024 | Accepted: 7 November 2024 | Published Online: 21 July 2025

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to show how the loss of many lexical items in Arbëresh (a minority language genealogically and typologically related to Albanian and spoken in Southern Italy) has led to absence of the corresponding syntactic structures they project. This is the case, for example, of the conditional complementizer particles po, , nëse, sikur, all corresponding to the English ‘if’. They are used in standard Albanian to introduce conditional subordinate sentences, some of which show the regular Subject-Verb-Object word order; others, instead, display V-second effects, caused by the movement of the verb to a position preceding the subject. These lexical items have completely ceased to be used in the Arbëresh dialects. Therefore, the syntactic structures typical of standard Albanian do not have their counterparts in the Arbëresh dialects, which employ only a structure similar to that of Italian, i.e. they have only a single conditional conjunction (corresponding to the Italian se ‘if’) projecting an unmarked embedded SVO sentence. Based on the distribution of topics in relation to these particles, I will argue that all these complementizers occupy an intermediate position in the left periphery of the clause. In particular, I will assume that they are associated with the CP domain, which is split into various positions in the sense of Rizzi.

Keywords:

Arbëresh; Albanian; Italian; Contact; Conditional Complementizers

References

[1] Rizzi, L., 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In: Haegeman, L. (ed.). Elements of Grammar. Kluwer: Dordrecht, Netherlands. pp. 281–337.

[2] Grimshaw, J., 1993. Minimal projection, heads, and optimality. Rutgers University: New Brunswick, NJ, USA. Available from: https://ruccs.rutgers.edu/images/tech_rpt/tr-4/minproj4.pdf

[3] Kayne, R., 1975. French Syntax. The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA.

[4] Kayne, R., 1989. Null subjects and clitic climbing. In: Jaeggli, O., Safir, J.K. (eds.). The Null Subject Parameter. Foris: Dordrecht, Netherlands. pp. 85–103.

[5] Matushansky, O., 2006. Head movement in linguistic theory. Linguistic Inquiry. 37, 69–109.

[6] Turano, G., 2012. Cliticization: External or internal merge? Revisiting the syntax of (Albanian) clitics. In: Turano, G., Memushaj, R., Koleci, F. (eds.). Theoretical and Empirical Studies in Albanian Syntax. Lincom: Monaco, Germany. pp. 175–197.

[7] Turano, G., 2017. Modal particles in Albanian subjunctive, infinitive and supine constructions: Presence vs absence of clitic climbing. Quaderni di Linguistica e Studi Orientali. 3, 61–86.

[8] Rizzi, L., 1996. Residual verb second and the wh-criterion. In: Belletti, A., Rizzi, L. (eds.). Parameters and Functional Heads: Essays in Comparative Syntax. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK. pp. 63–90.

[9] Rizzi, L., Bocci, G., 2017. Left periphery of the clause: Primarily illustrated for Italian. In: Everaert, M., van Riemsdijk, H.C. (eds.). The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax. Wiley Blackwell: Oxford, UK.

[10] Agouraki, Y., 1991. A modern Greek complementizer and its significance for UG. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics. 3, 1–24.

[11] Roussou, A., 2000. On the left periphery: Modal particles and complementizers. Journal of Greek Linguistics. 1, 65–94.

[12] Hill, V., 2002. Complementizer phrases (CP) in Romanian. Rivista di Linguistica. 14(2), 223–248.

[13] Manzini, M.R., Savoia, L.M., 2007. A Unification of Morphology and Syntax. Investigations into Romance and Albanian Dialects. Routledge: London, UK.

[14] Manzini, M.R., Savoia, L.M., 2018. The Morphosyntax of Albanian and Aromanian Varieties. Case, Agreement, Complementation. De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany; Boston, MA, USA.

[15] Manzini, M.R., Savoia, L.M., 2018. Finite and non-finite complementation, particles and control in Aromanian, compared to other Romance varieties and Albanian. Linguistic Variation. 18, 215–264.

[16] Bloomfield, L., 1933. Language. Rinehart and Winston: New York, NY, USA.

[17] Haugen, E., 1950. The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language. 26, 210–231.

[18] Weinreich, U., 1953. Languages in Contact. Mouton de Gruyter: The Hague, Netherlands.

[19] Whitney, W.D., 1881. On mixture in language. Transaction of the American Philosophical Association. 12, 1–26.

[20] Mysken, P., 1981. Halfway between Quechua and Spanish: The case for relexification. In: Highfield, A., Valdman, A. (eds.). Historicity and Variation in Creole Studies. Karoma Press: Ann Arbor, MI, USA. pp. 52–78.

[21] Thomason, S.G., Kaufman, T., 1988. Language Contact, Creolization and Genetic Linguistics. University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA.

[22] Rizzi, L., 1976. Ristrutturazione. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa. 1, 1–54.

[23] Rizzi, L., 1982. Issues in Italian Syntax. Foris: Dordrecht, Netherlands.

[24] Demiraj, S., 1985. Gramatikë historike e gjuhës shqipe. 8 Nëntori: Tirana, Albania.

Downloads

How to Cite

Turano, G. (2025). The Reduction of the Arbëresh Lexicon and its Effects on Syntax. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(7), 1005–1024. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i7.7576