Language planning for Italian regional languages ... - MAFIADOC.COM

John Benjamins Publishing Company

This is a contribution from Language Problems and Language Planning 32:3 © 2008. John Benjamins Publishing Company This electronic file may not be altered in any way. The author(s) of this article is/are permitted to use this PDF file to generate printed copies to be used by way of offprints, for their personal use only. Permission is granted by the publishers to post this file on a closed server which is accessible to members (students and staff) only of the author’s/s’ institute. For any other use of this material prior written permission should be obtained from the publishers or through the Copyright Clearance Center (for USA: www.copyright.com). Please contact [email protected] or consult our website: www.benjamins.com Tables of Contents, abstracts and guidelines are available at www.benjamins.com

Language planning for Italian regional languages (“dialects”) Paolo Coluzzi

Universiti Brunei Darussalam

In addition to twelve recognized minority languages (Law no. 482/1999), Italy features a number of non-recognized so-called “dialects” that is difficult to state, but which renowned linguists like Tullio De Mauro and Giulio Lepschy calculate as ranging between 12 and 15. These languages are still spoken (and sometimes written) by slightly less than half of the Italian population and are the first languages of a significant part of it. Some of them even have a history of (semi)official usage and feature large and interesting literary traditions. An introduction on the linguistic situation in Italy, the classification of its “dialects” and their state of endangerment, is followed by discussion of the present (scant) legislation and action being taken to protect the seven language varieties chosen as case studies: Piedmontese, Western Lombard/Milanese, Venetan, Ligurian/Genoese, Roman, Neapolitan and Sicilian. These language planning strategies are discussed particularly in terms of graphization (corpus planning), status and acquisition planning, even when, as in most cases, this “planning” may be uncoordinated and even unconscious. The article closes with a few general considerations and with some suggestions on how these initiatives could be improved. Keywords: dialects, Genoese, Italy, language planning, Ligurian, Milanese, Neapolitan, Piedmontese, regional languages, Roman, Sicilian, Venetan, Western Lombard

Even excluding recent immigration, Italy is one of the most heterogeneous and diverse countries in Europe in linguistic terms. In addition to Italian, spoken in its standard form or in a regional variety by virtually all the Italian population of almost sixty million people, a number of minority and regional languages are spoken by almost half of them. It is difficult to give an exact figure for these languages. State Law 482 of 1999 on the protection of minority languages, recognized as such twelve languages: French, Provençal, Franco-Provençal, German, Ladin, Friulian, Slovene, Sardinian, Catalan, Albanian, Greek and Croatian. However, considering that Romany was excluded for political reasons1 and that under some of these linguistic items Language Problems & Language Planning 32:3 (2008), 215–236. doi 10.1075/lplp.32.3.02col issn 0272–2690 / e-issn 1569–9889 © John Benjamins Publishing Company

216 Paolo Coluzzi

quite different varieties were grouped together,2 this number should at least be doubled. On the other hand, with regard to those which are still known as “Italian dialects”, and which it would be more correct to term “regional languages”3 as they do not derive from Italian but are independent Romance varieties that developed directly from Latin (the same as fourteenth century Florentine which became what we know today as Italian),4 giving a figure is even more problematic. All Italian regional languages in fact are fragmented into hundreds of dialects — in this sense and in this sense only the term “dialect” could be considered appropriate — which their speakers consider different from those spoken in the nearby villages and towns. On the basis of a certain number of isoglosses, Italian linguists and dialectologists have tried to classify all these varieties, and nowadays a general categorization of three main areas (Northern varieties, Central and Southern varieties and Sardinian) is generally accepted, which is in its turn subdivided into nine families including those varieties which nowadays enjoy the status of minority languages: Gallo-Italian, Venetan, Ladin, Friulian (North), Tuscan, middle Italian dialects, upper southern dialects, extreme southern dialects (Centre and South) and Sardinian (Maiden & Parry 1997:3). The problems begin when a more detailed classification is attempted, as linguistic factors have to be reconciled with political ones. Tullio de Mauro, for instance, refers to “a dozen dialects” (1994:61), whereas Giulio Lepschy talks of “fifteen or so” (1994:9). The book The Dialects of Italy edited by Martin Maiden and Mair Parry (1997) describes the different “dialects” using the regions as a starting point, grouping some regions together in the cases when at least most of the “dialects” spoken in those regions are linguistically similar enough to justify such a choice. Excluding this time the varieties that have now been recognized by the Italian state as minority languages, Tuscan as being very close to the Italian standard and Corsican as being spoken outside the Italian political territory, we are left with thirteen chapters. Some of these chapters clarify very clearly that quite different varieties are spoken within the region,5 but I find this approach the most correct one as the political aspect, which includes issues of identity and self-perception, is always of extreme importance as far as matters of linguistic classification are concerned. While a dialect speaker from Southern Basilicata, for example, may realize that his/her language is closer to that spoken in bordering northern Calabria than the varieties spoken more to the north within his/her region, he/she would probably still prefer to consider he/she speaks Lucano (from the former name of the region, Lucania) rather than Calabrese. Returning to the number of languages spoken, if we raise the above figures slightly to accommodate the political/identity factor (for instance, Lazio, Umbria and Marche as well as Abruzzo and Molise may need to be kept separate [Maiden & Parry 1997:311–329]), and perhaps the linguistic one as well (some regions include quite distinct varieties within their territories: for example, in the Marche

© 2008. John Benjamins Publishing Company All rights reserved

Planning for Italian regional languages 217

Map. The seven regional languages (“dialects”) discussed in this article.

three quite different varieties are spoken [see note 5], and in Puglia two distinct varieties are present [Maiden & Parry 1997:338–348]), we may conclude that at least forty languages are still spoken in Italy, and probably more, almost half of which are not recognized by the Italian state as regional languages. For this paper seven regional languages have been chosen as case studies: Piedmontese, Western Lombard/Milanese, Venetan, Ligurian/Genoese (North), Roman, Neapolitan and Sicilian (Centre and South). This selection has been based first of all on the fact that all of them have been used for centuries in literature and music (and some have even enjoyed some official use in the past) and feature some form of koine, which makes their “identification” a little less problematic. Most of the other Italian regional languages have also been or are used for written


218 Paolo Coluzzi

purposes, mostly for poetry, theatre or songs, but each author tends to write in his/ her local dialect often using an idiosyncratic writing system.

Sociolinguistic situation These languages occupy the low position in a diglossic relationship to Italian, and are mostly spoken by older, less educated people living in smaller towns and villages, particularly in North-East Italy and the South. The available surveys also show that they tend to be spoken more by men than by women. Although many sociolinguistic surveys can be found on Italian “dialects”, to date only one extensive and thorough sociolinguistic survey has been carried out that has looked at both language use and language attitudes, including attitudes with respect to possible acquisition planning strategies. This is the one published in 1990 under the title La Sicilia linguistica oggi vol.1 (Lo Piparo et al. 1990). The survey was carried out between April 1984 and March 1985 and 1320 informants above fifteen years of age were interviewed. These interviews took place in 73 Sicilian towns: nine provincial administrative centres and 64 other communes. Here are some of the answers on language attitudes (Lo Piparo et al.:287–306):

1. S icilian is coarse and vulgar 2. E ducated people should speak Italian, not Sicilian 3. S icilian is especially suitable for cheerful and playful conversation 4. W orks written in Sicilian should be studied at school 5. Sicilian should be studied at school 6. Those who cannot speak Sicilian are not good Sicilians 7. Sicilian is a language, not a dialect

Agree

Disagree 60.2% 40.2%

Agree and disagree 12.6% 11.3%

Do not know, do not answer 2.3% 1.3%

24.9% 47.2% 83.7%

11.8%

3.8%

0.7%

82.2%

13.0%

2.0%

2.8%

71.2% 59.9%

23.6% 34.2%

2.5% 3.0%

2.7% 2.9%

47.7%

45.3%

3.1%

3.9%

Even though these results would be different twenty years later, possibly showing a somewhat increased status of Sicilian, they are in line with the results other more recent but limited surveys have shown. Just to give one example, in the short survey I carried out in the area of Milan on the local language (Milanese, a variety of Western Lombard: see Coluzzi 2007:264–272) in September 2002, to the question whether the interviewees thought that speaking Milanese was speaking badly (a question to an extent comparable to question 1 above), 84% disagreed, while to the



question whether they thought Milanese should be studied at school (comparable to question 5 above) 60.8% agreed (56.5% thought it should be optional whereas 4.3% believed it should be compulsory).6 This shows that overall attitudes towards the local languages are rather favourable, even though their status as basilects is evident, as shown for example in the answers to questions 2, 3 and 7 above. However, a discrepancy has been noted between attitudes and actual behaviour. Even most of the activists for the promotion of their “dialects” whom I have met during my research have not passed their language on to their offspring. As Mair Parry (2002:56–57) wrote: “general support for threatened languages is nowadays not hard to come by …, but concrete commitment is a very different matter”.

Linguistic vitality Of all the languages spoken in Italy, the only one that could be considered to be secure is Italian, even though German in South Tyrol and Slovene in Friuli-Venezia Giulia are at the moment relatively safe. All the other languages have to be considered endangered, particularly some of the “dialects”. No matter what parameters of linguistic vitality we apply to them, the invariable result is that Italian “dialects” are in a state of endangerment to a lower or higher degree (see Coluzzi 2007, 2009). Apart from the ongoing process of Italianization (see for example Sobrero 1997a) which is slowly eroding these languages from the inside, the percentage of people actively using the “dialects” is dropping from one year to the next. The latest ISTAT survey on the use of Italian and the “dialects” based on a representative sample of 24,000 Italian families for a total of about 54,000 individuals, shows that in 2006 48.5% of the Italian population above six years of age declared they mainly or exclusively used their dialect or both their dialect and Italian to communicate within the family. In 2000 this percentage was still above fifty (52%). This is the most significant drop since 1995; in fact, the percentage of people exclusively or mostly using their dialect or the latter together with Italian within the family was 52.1% in 1995 (56.9% in 1987/88). What is most worrying is the percentage of young people using the “dialect” within the family: only 35% of Italians aged between 6 and 24 — which corresponds to a loss of almost one fourth of the speakers from the previous generation (45.5% of the people aged between 35 and 54). Of course the percentage of speakers varies remarkably from one “dialect” to the next. For example, the “dialects” of Veneto, Campania (administrative centre: Naples) and Sicily are still spoken by more than two thirds of the regional population (Veneto: 69.9 per cent, Campania: 72.2 per cent, Sicily: 71.7 per cent), whereas less than 40 per cent speak the “dialect” in Piedmont, Lombardy (Milan), Liguria (Genoa) and Lazio (Rome) (Piedmont: 35.2 per


220 Paolo Coluzzi

cent, Lombardy: 35.7 per cent, Liguria: 25.9 per cent, Lazio: 35.0 per cent). Unless things change dramatically, this means that, while the first three regional languages will probably still have an acceptable percentage of speakers by the end of this century, the last four may be on the verge of disappearance. In fact, if we assume a loss of about one fourth of speakers for each generation7 and we calculate about three generations, at the end of this century no more than one third of the younger generation (aged 6–24) will be able to speak the local language (in a probably Italianized form) in Veneto, Campania or Sicily, whereas in the other above-mentioned regions no more than 15 per cent of the younger generation will be able to do so. The state of endangerment of Italian so-called “dialects” is also clearly evident if we apply to them the various parameters of language endangerment that have been put forward so far. For example, if the nine Major Evaluative Factors of Language Vitality drawn up by a UNESCO ad hoc expert group8 (2003) are applied to the “dialects” we are looking at in this paper, the results may be as follows:9 Factor 1: Intergenerational language transmission Piedmontese, Western Lombard/Milanese, Ligurian/Genoese, Roman:10 2 (severely endangered). Venetan, Neapolitan, Sicilian: 4 (unsafe). Factor 2: Absolute number of speakers This may vary considerably between one dialect and the other: in general the smaller the speech community, the greater the degree of endangerment. All the dialects examined here are still spoken (in versions farther or closer to Italian) by a relatively high number of people. Factor 3: Proportion of speakers within the total population Piedmontese, Western Lombard/Milanese, Ligurian/Genoese, Roman: 2 (severely endangered). Venetan, Neapolitan, Sicilian: 3 (definitely endangered). Factor 4: Trends in existing language domains Piedmontese, Western Lombard/Milanese, Ligurian/Genoese, Roman: between 3 (dwindling domains) and 2 (limited or formal domains). Venetan, Neapolitan, Sicilian: between 4 (multilingual parity) and 3. Factor 5: Response to new domains and media Piedmontese: 2 (coping). Western Lombard/Milanese, Venetan, Ligurian/Genoese, Neapolitan, Sicilian: 1 (minimal). Factor 6: Materials for language education and literacy Piedmontese: 3 (written materials exist and children may be exposed to the written form at school. Literacy is not promoted through print media).



Western Lombard/Milanese, Venetan, Ligurian/Genoese, Neapolitan: 2 (written materials exist, but they may only be useful for some members of the community; and for others, they may have a symbolic significance. Literacy education in the language is not a part of the school curriculum). Sicilian: 1 (a practical orthography is known to the community and some material is being written).

Factor 7: Governmental and institutional language attitudes and policies, including official status and use Piedmontese, Venetan: between 4 (differentiated support) and 3 (passive assimilation). Western Lombard/Milanese, Ligurian/Genoese, Roman, Neapolitan, Sicilian: between 3 (passive assimilation) and 2 (active assimilation). Factor 8: Community members’ attitude towards their own language All dialects: between 4 (most members support language maintenance) and 3 (many members support language maintenance; others are indifferent or may even support language loss). Factor 9: Amount and quality of documentation All dialects: 3 (fair). As can be observed, the scores obtained by these Italian “dialects” are on the whole low, averaging 2.6.

Legislation Legislation for the protection of Italian regional languages is at present scant. There is nothing at the State level, and only a few regions have passed some laws for their protection, mostly granting some funding for private initiatives involving the local language and in some cases establishing a regional institute devoted mostly to documentation. With regard to the seven case studies considered in this paper the most significant laws to date are the following: Liguria. Law no. 32/1990 (Regulations for the study, the protection, the promotion and the social use of some categories of cultural assets and in particular of dialects and folk traditions of Liguria), expanded and modified by Law no. 37/1998, grants financial help for the study and promotion of the Ligurian dialects and establishes the Regional Centre for the Documentation, Research and Promotion of the Ligurian Linguistic, Ethnomusical and Folk Heritage. Law no. 33/2006 (Testo unico regarding culture) includes Ligurian dialects among the cultural assets of the region to be protected and promoted.


222 Paolo Coluzzi

Lombardy. The only mention of the local dialects is to be found in Law no. 58 of 1977 (Interventions of the Region regarding theatrical productions). Piedmont. Together with Veneto, this is the “ordinary” region that has made the most effort to give as much protection as possible to its linguistic varieties. After a brief mention of the promotion of “the linguistic, cultural and traditional heritage of the local communities” in Law no. 78/1978 (Regulations for the establishment and the functioning of the public libraries of local bodies or of local interest), a first law referring expressly to the local languages (no. 30 “Protection of the linguistic and cultural heritage of Piedmont”) was passed as early as 1979. This was replaced by Law no. 26/1990 (Protection, development and promotion of the original linguistic heritage of Piedmont), later extended and modified by Law no. 37/1997. This law grants a certain degree of protection to the Piedmontese, Provençal, Franco-Provençal and Walser languages spoken in the region. Among other things, it supports teaching, the publishing of books and periodicals, research and the use of local place names in the above-mentioned languages and provides financial help for the private associations which deal with them. Veneto. As in Piedmont, the Veneto Region has passed several laws over the years in respect of its linguistic heritage. A first law was passed in 1974 (Regional Law no. 40 of 1974: “Protection of the historical, linguistic and cultural heritage of Veneto”), followed five years later by Regional Law no. 38/1979 (Interventions on the part of the Region for the promotion of the local cultures and civilizations of Veneto), both of which were later repealed. In 1994 a comprehensive law was passed, protecting and promoting the German (both the Cimbrian and the Bavarian of Sappada/Plodn), Ladin, Friulian and other ethnic and linguistic communities present in the region by granting financial aid to the various institutions and associations devoted to the promotion of the languages spoken in the region (Regional Law no. 73/1994: “Promotion of the ethnic and linguistic minorities of Veneto”, later modified by Law no. 3/1998). Only recently a new regional law for the “Protection, development and promotion of the Venetan linguistic and cultural heritage” has been passed (Law no. 8/2007). The absolute novelty of this law is that Venetan is called a regional language, not a dialect, which may allow its inclusion amongst the languages protected by the European Charter for Minority or Regional Languages at some point in the future. Among other things, this law provides for the use of Venetan on radio and television and its teaching at school. Lazio. In 2005 Law no. 12 was passed for “the protection and promotion of the dialects of Rome and Lazio” establishing the Institute for the Protection and Promotion of the Dialects of Lazio (ITPDL) and a Regional Centre for the Documentation, Research and Development of the Linguistic Heritage of Rome and Lazio.



This law also provides for use of the local dialects on radio and television and their teaching at school. Campania. After a brief reference to the “historical and linguistic heritage of the Campanian theatre” in Law no. 26 of 1979, a law was passed in 1990 (Law no. 6/1990) for the “Istituzione dell’Istituto linguistico Campano” (Establishment of the Linguistic Institute of Campania). Sicily. After Law no. 58 of 1953 (Granting of an extraordinary contribution to the Centre for Sicilian Philological and Linguistic Studies), Law no. 85 (Measures aimed at encouraging the study of the Sicilian dialect and of the languages of the ethnic minorities in the schools of the Island and financial regulations) was passed in 1981.

Language planning11 The seven regional languages considered in this paper have all been the object of some form of language planning by (mostly) private associations or individuals interested in the local language.12 The initiatives resulting from such language planning, however, have been irregular and uncoordinated.13 It is interesting to notice that, generally speaking, the languages that show a higher degree of vitality tend to be less promoted, in the sense that fewer associations and organizations exist to protect them and their presence is more limited in education (including adult education) and mass media (though with important exceptions). In brief the present situation with regard to the elaboration and the promotion of these languages is as follows:

Corpus planning As mentioned above, all these languages possess a more or less accepted koine, but in most cases feature more than one writing system. One of the problems is that the writing system has to represent sounds that are not present in Italian, and this has led to different solutions. Apart from more idiosyncratic orthographies used by some individuals, most of these languages tend to have two main writing systems: a “traditional” one, more etymological, used in the past for literature, etc. and a “modern” one that tends to be more phonetic and in some cases also more different from the writing system used for Italian. Piedmontese seems to be the most stable and standardized of all, but also the variations in spelling found for Roman, Neapolitan, Sicilian and Venetan14 are in most cases not very different from each other and they normally do not hinder comprehension. However, those in favour of a more modern/phonetic writing code are particularly worried


224 Paolo Coluzzi

that “outsiders” may mispronounce the regional language if some of its phonological characteristics are not clearly highlighted. For example, most unstressed vowels in Neapolitan, particularly final e and o, tend to be pronounced as the indistinct vowel [ǝ], but are still represented in the traditional writing system with etymological vowels reflecting Italian use. Some have suggested that at least the final vowels should be dropped altogether or replaced by apostrophes, smallercase vowels, the grapheme ë, etc. In Venetan, on the other hand, one letter that has caused controversy is the l, which is normally pronounced as a soft “evanescent” l in initial and intervocalic position, a sound which is close to [j̱]. It is nowadays often represented with the letter ł.15 More problematic are the cases of Milanese and Genoese, where, notwithstanding the existence of historical writing systems where, for example, the grapheme o is pronounced as [o] / [ɔ] or [u] according to the cases (as in Piedmontese), a more modern system has been put forward where the two sounds are represented as in Italian. The historical writing system in these three languages is, particularly for the vowels, closer to French (see also the use of eu (Genoese, Piedmontese) or oeu (Milanese) for [ø], and u (Piedmontese, Milanese) or û (Genoese) for [y]), whereas the modern systems have adopted more Germanic looking graphemes like ü and ö (Milanese, but sometimes used in Genoese as well). A solution that has been suggested to overcome the problem of having at least two writing systems for each regional language could be the adoption of a digraphic system: the modern phonetic writing system could be used on public signs, for place names, etc.,16 i.e. in situations where outsiders are more likely to interact with the regional language; whereas the historical-etymological orthography could be used for literature, the mass media, and so on.17

Status planning First of all it must be noted that Italian regional languages are practically absent in the Italian linguistic landscape, apart from very few exceptions, which include their rather infrequent use in shop signs or in bilingual place name signs. In fact, most of what may be considered status planning strategies for Italian regional languages have been carried out mainly for artistic/symbolic reasons, not really for the maintenance or promotion of local languages. This comes as no surprise considering the institutional vacuum and the lack of minority language planning agencies for Italian regional languages. As mentioned above, the regional languages looked at in this paper can all boast vast and interesting literatures dating back in some cases to the Middle Ages. Therefore, particularly collections of poems, but also plays, short stories and in some cases even novels (particularly as far as Piedmontese and Genoese are



concerned) can be found in the regions where these languages are spoken, and sometimes even in other regions. Modern and contemporary writers include, to name but a few: N. Costa, P. Pacòt, L. Oliviero (Piedmontese), A. Acquarone, E. Firpo, R. Giannoni (Genoese), D. Tessa, E. Guicciardi, F. Loi, G. Consonni (Western Lombard), V. Giotti, B. Marin, G. Noventa, E. Meneghetti, A. Zanzotto, E. Calzavara (Venetan), L. Zanazzo, Trilussa, M. Dell’Arco, M. Ferrara, M. Marè (Roman), R. Viviani, E. De Filippo, S. Di Natale, A. Serrao (Neapolitan), A. Di Giovanni, Vann’Antò, I. Buttitta, L. Pirandello, S. Calì, G. Battaglia (Sicilian) (Haller 2002:335–337). Occasionally, these languages have been used for non-fiction (including periodicals)18 and even to translate works of literature from other languages: for example, Le petit prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry has so far been translated into Piedmontese (Ël cit prinsi), Western Lombard (El princip piscinin), Neapolitan (’O princepe piccerillo) and Venetan (El principe picinin). An interesting development of the last few years has been the increasing use of these languages on the internet, with by now hundreds of pages, including grammars, courses and on-line magazines written in them.19 Nowadays even Wikipedia is available in all the languages dealt with in this paper, except Roman, with entries on many different subjects. An area where all these languages seem to enjoy a degree of popularity is music. There are nowadays thousands of recordings available where the language of the lyrics is a local one. In most cases the market is exclusively or almost exclusively regional, but in other cases songs sung in one of the Italian regional languages have become famous all over Italy and sometimes even abroad, particularly in the case of Neapolitan, but to a lesser extent also of Roman and the other regional languages. Such “regional music” covers all genres, from rock and rap to folk.20 While the presence of regional languages is very limited in television,21 there are some private radio stations featuring programmes where the regional language is used, on its own or with Italian.22 Other status planning strategies worth mentioning are for example the t-shirts with writings in the local languages that are proving so successful among young people in Liguria or Naples,23 or the bilingual notices that the local transport company has introduced on its public buses in Naples. A few towns and villages, particularly in the North, have also provided for the local place name in the local language to appear next to the one in Italian on bilingual signs.

Acquisition planning The educational presence of the regional languages under examination is sparse, except in the Piedmont region, where, partly thanks to the financial resources allocated by the regional government (which also accounts for the larger presence of


226 Paolo Coluzzi

groups and associations devoted to the promotion of Piedmontese and the larger number of teaching materials available), literally thousands of people, both adults and children, are involved in activities whose aim is the acquisition of the local language (apparently more than 50,000 for the 2006–2007 school year).24 Courses for adults can be found in most of the regions considered, and in a few cases the local language has been introduced in some schools (primary and secondary) on an experimental and optional basis.25 In the latter case obviously a major problem is the absence or very scarce presence of some form of teacher training and teaching materials.26 A positive turning-point, however, is that many on-line grammars and courses have been made available in the last few years.

Conclusions At present Italian regional languages enjoy little visibility. In spite of their literary traditions, most Italians still consider “dialects” as oral languages, which comes as no surprise considering that only a tiny percentage of Italians are literate in their local language, including those who can speak it. So even in those few cases where the regional language is written down, this is often done in an idiosyncratic way, using the orthographic rules of Italian, which are not suitable for the phonetics of most “dialects”. So even if regional languages are finding some niches where they are being used even in writing (internet, signs, messages, etc.), the writing system used is extremely variable, which is confusing and makes the reading much harder. Perhaps the first language planning strategies that should be implemented should aim at giving Italians the instruments that would enable them to write correctly and unambiguously in their local languages (acquisition planning) and at giving the latter more visibility, which may help to raise their prestige (status planning). One way of giving visibility to regional languages would be to use them in bilingual signs. Some attempts in this direction have been made particularly in Northern Italy: the place name signs that are found at the entrance of some towns, for example, are bilingual (Italian and regional language). One problem is that most of the local governments that have taken such an initiative are led by mayors belonging to the Northern League, and considering the far right racially divisive politics of this party, the instrumental use they make of the local languages does not help their prestige, quite the opposite. Even though many representatives of the Left are strongly supportive of regional languages, the parties they belong to are still rather centralist and imbued with the macronationalist myth of “one land, one people, one language”. As has been shown, (mostly private) initiatives are not lacking to promote the regional languages in Italy. Even the stigma that has been attached to local



languages for a long time is now somewhat receding, and as globalization advances, more and more people, particularly young people, are finding an interest in their local cultures and languages (most web pages on local languages, particularly on-line magazines, are run by enthusiastic young people). One of the problems is that resources to carry out meaningful initiatives that may slow down language shift towards Italian are virtually non-existent and if there are any at all, they are clearly insufficient, and most of what is being done is on a voluntary basis. Apart from resources, some kind of recognition for the Italian “dialects” at the state level may also help to give prestige to these languages, which may in turn slow down language shift. Another big problem already mentioned is that most academics in Italy, particularly linguists and dialectologists, do not favour any language planning for regional languages — leaving the area open to unprepared or insufficiently prepared (although often very enthusiastic) people, whose initiatives are not backed by competent research and monitoring. Most of these academics fear that any language planning initiatives may lead to a loss of variety, without realizing that an absence of language planning may eventually lead to their death altogether.27 As Colin Baker has written (1996:49): “Not to plan for language maintenance and spread may be to court language death”. Some academics are hopeful that the recent revival “dialects” are undergoing may by itself be sufficient to slow down language shift. To my knowledge, in this modern age very few minority or regional languages in the world have been able to retain their speakers’ basis and domains without official recognition and/or some form of language planning. Even protected “strong” minority languages have to fight on a daily basis to maintain their hard won positions vis-à-vis the dominant languages, as the Catalan or Welsh cases among others clearly show. This “dialect” revival may be able to maintain Italian regional languages as languages used in some specific contexts (art, the internet, etc.), i.e. in domains where their symbolic and expressive functions prevail over their communicative one, but not as widespread living languages used for communicative purposes.28 If no protective measures are taken, the use of the so-called dialects will continue to decline, especially if the present lack of conflict between them and Italian leads to complacency. They are in any case changing structurally, becoming more and more influenced by Italian, just as the Italian spoken in the different regions is marked by the underlying dialect structures. (Parry 2002:56)

Behind these hesitations and doubts about the protection and promotion of Italian regional languages one can discern the old (macro)nationalist imperatives of “one land, one people, one language” to which I have already alluded, that have accompanied the development of Italy as a nation since its establishment in 1861. Most


228 Paolo Coluzzi

of the linguists referred to above believe that the recent “dialectal resurgences” are the most that one can and should expect of the revival of local languages.29 I believe that a State Law for the protection of Italian regional languages (continuing to call them “dialects” does not help their present status) with adequate funding and links to the academic world (not only linguists, but also social and political scientists, economists and experts in law, particularly those with some experience in the field of language planning) could improve the situation dramatically and help Italy to retain one of its most characteristic and important features: its linguistic diversity.

Notes 1. Excluding Roma people was a condition required by the opposition (Forza Italia and Alleanza Nazionale) in return for not hindering the passing of the law. Both these parties abstained from voting in the Senate (Bogaro 2003:8). 2. Under “German”, for example, the standard as well as Alemannic, Bavarian and Carinthian varieties are included. 3. The features characterizing regional languages listed by Tomasz Wicherkiewicz (2001:3) seem to me particularly helpful: (1) close genetic relationship to the corresponding majority language of the state; (2) regiolects often regarded as being “only” dialects of a majority/state language; (3) relatively long history of common development, especially sociopolitical, of the regional and the corresponding majority language; (4) lacking or not fully shaped feeling of national separateness within the group of speakers; (5) however, strong regional and/or ethnic identity, with the language constituting the main constituent of the identity/regional ethnicity; (6) high dialectal differentiation within the regiolects, which, hence, can be often classified as dialect clusters or L-complexes; (7) lacking an adopted uniform literary standard or literary norm, or the standard being in statu nascendi; (8) rich, often very ancient literary tradition of dialectal/regional literature; (9) relatively low social prestige of a regiolect, often lower than in the past; (10) underdeveloped status language planning methods; (11) sometimes a confessional separateness of the regiolect speakers; (12) opposition within the group against being perceived and officially treated as [a] national minority group, often a paradoxical resistance against being seen as minority group at all; (13) an “embedded” national/linguistic identity. 4. Some Italian “dialects” have been already recognized as “languages” by some international organizations, such as UNESCO, ISO and SIL. 5. The most extreme case is perhaps Marche, where northern Gallo-Italian, middle Italian and upper southern dialects are spoken within the same administrative borders. 6. For this survey 69 Italian citizens above the age of fifteen who had lived in Milan or the surrounding area for at least 10 years were interviewed. 7. However, this percentage may be higher: see Coluzzi 2007.



8. This group is made up of the following scholars: M. Brenzinger, A.M. Dwyer, T. de Graaf, C. Grinevald, M. Krauss, O. Miyaoka, N. Ostler, O. Sakiyama, M.E. Villalón, A.Y. Yamamoto, O. Zepeda. 9. These nine factors, each one ranging from 5 (language shift under control) to 0 (language shift almost or fully completed), should show the degree of endangerment a language is facing. It goes without saying that the scores assigned are based on the results of my research and are obviously my own assessment. 10. Given the closeness to Italian and the difficulties that often arise when trying to define what can be considered Roman and what is just a Romanized form of regional Italian, the term is used here only for varieties furthest away from Italian. 11. I would like to thank the following people for the invaluable information they have provided: Prof. Mair Parry (University of Bristol), Prof. Vito Matranga (University of Palermo, Sicilian), Prof. Giovanni Ruffino (University of Palermo, Sicilian), Prof. Sergio Gilardino (Piedmontese), Vera Bertolino (Association Nòste Rèis, Piedmontese), Albina Malerba (Centro Studi Piemontesi, Piedmontese), Tavo Burat (Piedmontese), Prof. Nicola Di Blasi (University of Naples “Federico II”, Neapolitan), Amedeo Messina (Istituto Linguistico Campano, Neapolitan), Prof. Gennaro Gervasio (Macquarie University of Sydney, Neapolitan), Prof. Ugo Vignuzzi (University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Roman), Prof. Paolo D’Achille (University of Rome “Roma Tre”, Roman), Prof. Fiorenzo Toso (University of Sassari, Genoese), Prof. Flavia Ursini (University of Padua, Venetan), Alberto Manzoni (magazine El nost paes, Western Lombard), Tullio Barbato (Radio Meneghina, Western Lombard), Cesare Comoletti (Circolo Filologico Milanese, Western Lombard). 12. Among the most active of these associations are: Nòste Rèis, Centro Studi Piemontesi, Ël sol ëd j’Alp (Piedmontese), Circolo Filologico Milanese (Western Lombard), Veneto Nostro, E Nostre Raise (Venetan), A Compagna (Genoese), Centro Romanesco Trilussa (Roman), Istituto Linguistico Campano (Neapolitan). 13. The use of the term “language planning” may be questioned in cases when the initiatives being taken are not really aimed at “[influencing] the behaviour of others with respect to the acquisition, structure, or functional allocation of their language codes” (Cooper 1989:45). In fact, most of the strategies that will be mentioned have mainly symbolic or expressive purposes, i.e. their aim is not really trying to influence the linguistic behaviour of others in favour of the local languages. However, since some of these efforts, albeit perhaps in a vague sort of way, are aimed at the promotion of the local languages or they promote the languages irrespective of the initial intentions, use of the terms “language, corpus, status and acquisition planning” in this article seems to me legitimate. 14. The regional Government of Veneto had even appointed a scientific committee to come up with a graphic norm for Venetan, whose proposal was published in 1995 (Giunta Regionale del Veneto). However, in spite of, or perhaps because of, the flexibility of this graphic system, it has not been widely adopted. Taking into consideration, however, the sociolinguistic position of Venetan and the fact that little is published in it, this comes as no surprise. 15. Another controversial phoneme is [ʃ], and the generalized use of x for its representation may be a little confusing to people not accustomed to it (historically the letter x was normally used only for the spelling of xe, the third person singular of the present tense of the verb “to be”).


230 Paolo Coluzzi 16. It would simplify things if such inscriptions followed a simple phonetic orthography valid for all regional languages. 17. Some languages in the world make use of two distinct orthographies for different domains. For example, Malay can be written with Latin characters (rumi) or with Arabic characters (jawi). Nowadays the latter is used in some more formal contexts where their symbolic value related to Islam needs to be highlighted. 18. To give but a few examples of magazines completely or partly written in the local language, that are still published or were published until recently (financial problems seem to be the main reason for the short life span of most of these magazines): É!, Alp, Assion Piemonteisa, Neuv Piemont, Tron e Lòsna, La Slòira, Piemonteis ancheuj (Piedmontese), El Nost Paes, El Milanes, Sciroeu de Milan (Milanese), Quatro ciacoe, Sganassate (Venetan), Maccaja (Genoese), Rugantino, Voce Romana (Roman), L’Ammasciata, ‘E vvoce ‘e fora (Neapolitan). A few daily and weekly newpapers in Italian also devote some space to the local regional language, such as Torino Sette (half a page in Piedmontese) or the Messaggero (“Avventure in città”, where the dialogues are in Roman). 19. The quality and accuracy of these sites can vary widely. However, there are some which, in spite of their limitations, are well designed and constitute a rich source of interesting information; one example is www.linguasiciliana.org (in Sicilian) with its Sicilian courses and dictionaries. 20. Hundreds of singers and groups have used the local language for their songs. Among the most well known pop groups and singer songwriters are: Mau Mau, Gian Maria Testa, Roberto Balocco, Gipo Farassino (Piedmontese), Enzo Jannacci, Davide Van de Sfroos, Nanni Svampa, Walter Valdi, Walter di Gemma, Francesco Magni (Western Lombard), Pitura Freska, Archedora (Venetan), Fabrizio de André, Sensasciòu (Ligurian/Genoese), Claudio Villa, Gabriella Ferri, Er Piotta (Roman), Roberto Murolo, Almamegretta, Pino Daniele, Teresa de Sio, Enzo Gragna niello (Neapolitan), Kunsertu, Agricantus, Carlo Muratori, Roy Paci (Sicilian), etc. 21. There are important exceptions. For example in the Neapolitan area some private TV stations broadcast a few programmes using Neapolitan (cabaret, music programmes, etc.). One interesting initiative is the Neapolitan news programme ’A nutizia broadcast by Tele Akery and Napoli nova. 22. Italian “dialects” have always been present in Italian cinema, often in Italianized form, even though in most cases simply for artistic and expressive purposes (a good introduction on Italian “dialects” used in films is Rossi 2002). 23. T-shirts with writing in the local languages were also produced for the electoral campaign of PD (Partito Democratico) for the latest Italian general elections (13–14 April 2008). The slogan used by this left-wing party, “Si può fare” (it can be done), was translated into various Italian “dialects” and minority languages. 24. Information provided by Prof. Sergio Gilardino. 25. In the areas where the local language is still widely known, as in Campania, the “dialect” has been introduced not so much to teach it as to stimulate linguistic reflection and comparison with Italian.



26. A few books have been published, in Italy and abroad, to teach regional languages, for example: a few primary and secondary school textbooks have been issued for Piedmontese, and there is an Assimil course, Il piemontese in tasca (F. Rubat Borel et al. 2006); for Venetan the book Corso di Veneto per veneti e foresti (W. Basso et al., Ed. Scantabauchi) has been recently published; for Western Lombard the association La Vus de l’Insübria has issued a handbook of Western Lombard language and culture called L’insübrich senza fadiga (available at: http:// www.giurnal.org/pagine/dispens.htm), and the publisher Avallardi has produced a phrase book called A Milano si parla così. Avallardi has also published good pocket dictionaries of Milanese, Piedmontese, Venetan, Genoese, Neapolitan and Friulian, and also a phrase book in Neapolitan (A Napoli si parla così). Finally, a Beginner’s Sicilian (J. F. Privitera, Hippocrene Books) is even available in English. An Assimil course, Il genovese in tasca, is currently in press. 27. A short outline of the debate on minority language planning among Italian academics can be found in Coluzzi 2009. 28. For the difference between symbolic and communicative functions see Edwards 1985:17. 29. The expression “risorgenze dialettali” has been coined by Gaetano Berruto (see Berruto 2006).

References Altamura, Antonio. 1968. Dizionario dialettale napoletano. Naples: Fausto Fiorentino Editore. Atti. 2007. Atti del Convegno “Quale futuro per il piemontese?” (Polens 3rd February 2007). Ël Sol ëd j’Alp — GoPiedmont. Baker, Colin. 1996. Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 2nd edn. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Beggiato, Ettore. 1995. La normalizzazione della grafia veneta. Giunta Regionale del Veneto, ed. Grafia veneta unitaria. Venice: Editrice La Galiverna. Belloni, Silvano. 1991. Grammatica veneta. Battaglia Terme (PD): Editrice La Galiverna/Libreria Zielo. Berruto, Gaetano. 2002. Parlare dialetto in Italia alle soglie del Duemila. Gian Luigi Beccaria & Carla Marello, eds. La parola al testo Vol. 1. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’Orso. 33–49. Berruto, Gaetano. 2006. Quale dialetto per l’Italia del Duemila? Aspetti dell’italianizzazione e risorgenze dialettali in Piemonte (e altrove). Alberto Sobrero & Annarita Miglietta, eds. Lingua e dialetto nell’Italia del duemila. Galatina: Congedo Editore. 101–123. Bianchi, Patricia. 2002. Dialetti a scuola. Manlio Cortellazzo, Carla Marcato, Nicola di Blasi & Gianrenzo Clivio, eds. I dialetti italiani. Turin: UTET. 977–995. Bogaro, Anna. 2003. Cosa dicono i privati. Int 12:5. Cantà. 2000. Cantà el dialett…in dialett. El Nost Paes 7:9. Clivio, Gianrenzo. 2002. Il Piemonte. Manlio Cortellazzo, Carla Marcato, Nicola di Blasi & Gianrenzo Clivio, eds. I dialetti italiani. Turin: UTET. 151–195. Coluzzi, Paolo. 2004. Regional and Minority Languages in Italy. A General Introduction on the Present Situation and a Comparison of Two Case Studies: Language Planning for Milanese (Western Lombard) and Friulian. Barcelona: Ciemen. [Working Paper No. 14]


232 Paolo Coluzzi Coluzzi, Paolo. 2006. Minority Language Planning and Micronationalism in Italy: The Cases of Lombardy and Friuli. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 27/6:457– 471. Coluzzi, Paolo. 2007. Minority Language Planning and Micronationalism in Italy: an Analysis of the Situation of Friulian, Cimbrian and Milanese with Reference to Spanish Minority Languages. Oxford: Peter Lang. Coluzzi, Paolo. 2009. Endangered Minority and Regional Languages (“dialects”): The Present Situation in Italy and the Legislative Insufficiency. Modern Italy 14/1. Comoletti, Cesare. 2002a. La lengua de Milán: il dialetto milanese dalle origini ai nostri giorni. Pavia: Edizioni Selecta. Comoletti, Cesare. 2002b. A Milán se scriv inscì: piccola grammatica milanese. Pavia: Edizioni Selecta. Cooper, Robert L. 1989. Language Planning and Social Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Corrà, Loredana. 2005. Il dialetto e i giovani. Lingua ~ dialetto nelle opinioni dei giovani lamonesi. Gianna Marcato, ed. Lingue e dialetti nel Veneto Vol.3. Padua: Unipress. 43–67. Cortellazzo, Manlio, Carla Marcato, Nicola di Blasi & Gianrenzo Clivio, eds. 2002. I dialetti italiani. Turin: UTET. Coveri, Lorenzo. 1994. Dialetto rock! Italiano e oltre 3:134–142. D’Achille, Paolo & Claudio Giovanardi. 2001. Dal Belli ar Cipolla: conservazione e innovazione nel romanesco contemporaneo. Rome: Carocci. D’Achille, Paolo. 2002. Il Lazio. Manlio Cortellazzo, Carla Marcato, Nicola di Blasi & Gianrenzo Clivio, eds. I dialetti italiani. Turin: UTET. 515–567. De Blasi, Nicola & Franco Fanciullo. 2002. La Campania. Manlio Cortellazzo, Carla Marcato, Nicola di Blasi & Gianrenzo Clivio, eds. I dialetti italiani. Turin: UTET. 628–678. De Blasi, Nicola & Carla Marcato, eds. 2006. Lo spazio del dialetto in città. Naples: Liguori Editore. De Mauro, Tullio & Mario Lodi. 1979. Lingua e dialetti. Rome: Editori Riuniti. De Mauro, Tullio. 1994. Lingua e dialetti. Paul Ginsborg, ed. Stato dell’Italia. Milan: Il Saggiatore. Di Bari, Rolando. 2003. La canzone Milanese. Genoa: De Ferrari. Di Blasi, Nicola & Luigi Imperatore. 1998. Il napoletano parlato e scritto. Naples: Libreria Dante & Descartes. Di Blasi, Nicola. 2006. Profilo linguistico della Campania. Bari: Laterza. Edwards, John. 1985. Language, Society and Identity. Oxford: Blackwell. Feltrin, Paolo. 2003. L’ uso del dialetto: immagini della lingua locale presso i cittadini veneti. Gianna Marcato, ed. Italiano. Strana lingua? Padua: Unipress. 45–58. Gavagnin, Gabriella. 2003/2004. Il dialetto napoletano si deve scrivere come si parla? Polemiche ottocentesche sull’ortografia del napoletano. Quaderns d’Italià 8/9:91–104. Gioventura. 2007. Gioventura Piemontèisa 5. Giunta Regionale del Veneto, eds. 1995. Grafia veneta unitaria. Venice: Editrice La Galiverna. Grassi, Corrado, Alberto Sobrero & Tullio Telmon. 1997. Fondamenti di dialettologia italiana. Bari: Laterza. Grassi, Corrado, Alberto Sobrero & Tullio Telmon. 2003. Introduzione alla dialettologia italiana. Bari: Laterza. Haller, Hermann. 2002. La festa delle lingue: la letterattura dialettale in Italia. Rome: Carocci. J’instrument. 2005. J’instrument për amprende. É! 5:15.



Lepschy, Giulio. 1994. How many languages does Europe need? M.M. Parry, W.V. Davies & R.A.M. Temple, eds. The Changing Voices of Europe. Cardiff: University of Wales Press. 5–21. Lepschy, Giulio. 2002. Mother Tongue and Other Reflections of the Italian Language. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Lo Piparo, Franco at al. 1990. La Sicilia linguistica oggi Vol. 1. Palermo: Centro di Studi Filologici e Linguistici Siciliani. Maiden, Martin & Mair Parry, eds. 1997. The Dialects of Italy. London: Routledge. Malfatti, Elena. 2004. La tutela del pluralismo linguistico in Italia tra “dialetti” e “lingue minoritarie”: Bilancio e prospettive. Lingua e Stile 39:249–87. Manzoni, Alberto. 2001. Intervista a Nanni Svampa: “Canto un patrimonio culturale”. El Nost Paes 4:12–13. Marcato, Carla. 2002a. Il Veneto. Manlio Cortellazzo, Carla Marcato, Nicola di Blasi & Gianrenzo Clivio, eds. I dialetti italiani. Turin: UTET. 296–328. Marcato, Carla. 2002b. Dialetto, dialetti e italiano. Bologna: Il Mulino. Marcato, Gianna & Flavia Ursini. 1998. Dialetti veneti, grammatica e storia. Padova: Unipress. Marcato, Gianna. 2003. “Cafè Sconcerto”: un osservatorio linguistico interessante in area veneta. Gianna Marcato, ed. Lingua e dialetti nel Veneto Vol.1. Padua: Unipress. 93–107. Maturi, Pietro & Fabio Maria Risolo. 2001. Il dialetto è un plus. Italiano e oltre 2:100–103. Nicoli, Franco. 1983. Grammatica milanese. Busto Arsizio: Bramante. Nòste Rèis. 2006. Piemontese lingua d’Europa/Piemontèis lenga d’Euròpa. Turin: Nòste Rèis. Parry, Mair. 1994. Ël piemontèis, lenga d’Euròpa M.M. Parry, W.V. Davies & R.A.M. Temple, eds. The Changing Voices of Europe. Cardiff: University of Wales Press. 173–192. Parry, Mair. 2002. The Challenges to Multilingualism Today. Anna Laura Lepschy & Arturo Tosi, eds. Multilingualism in Italy, Past and Present. Oxford: Legenda. 47–59. Patrucco, Elisa. 2002. Dialetto on line. Italiano e Oltre 3:140–144. Rossi, Fabio. 2002. Dialetto e cinema. Manlio Cortellazzo, Carla Marcato, Nicola di Blasi & Gianrenzo Clivio, eds. I dialetti italiani. Turin: UTET. 1035–1047. Sanga, Glauco. 1985. Indagine sociolinguistica su Milano. Franco Della Peruta, Roberto Leydi & Angelo Stella, eds. Milano e il suo territorio Vol. 2. Milan: Silvana Editoriale. 683–705. Sobrero, Alberto. 1997a. Italianization of the Dialects. Martin Maiden & Mair Parry, eds. The Dialects of Italy. London: Routledge. 412–418. Sobrero, Alberto. 1997b. Dialetto in. Italiano e Oltre 4:215. Sobrero, Alberto. 1998. Sia italiano che dialetto. Italiano e Oltre 1:19. Sobrero, Alberto. 2002. Il dialetto c’è ancora? Italiano e Oltre 4:248–249. Sobrero, Alberto. 2003. I dialetti rinascono dalle ceneri. Italiano e Oltre 1:40–41. Sobrero Alberto & Annarita Miglietta, eds. 2006. Lingua e dialetto nell’Italia del duemila. Galatina: Congedo Editore. Tessarolo, Mariselda & Livia Gaddi. 2003. Rapporto tra italiano e dialetto in alcune regioni italiane: Lombardia, Toscana, Lazio e Sicilia. Gianna Marcato, ed. Italiano. Strana lingua? Padua: Unipress. 121–125. Toso, Fiorenzo. n.d. Per conoscere il genovese. Genoa: Provincia di Genova. Toso, Fiorenzo. 2002a. La Liguria. Manlio Cortellazzo, Carla Marcato, Nicola di Blasi & Gianrenzo Clivio, eds. I dialetti italiani. Turin: UTET. 196–225. Toso, Fiorenzo. 2002b. Dialetto e legislazione. Manlio Cortellazzo, Carla Marcato, Nicola di Blasi & Gianrenzo Clivio, eds. I dialetti italiani. Turin: UTET. 1063–1072.


234 Paolo Coluzzi Trovato, Salvatore. 2002. La Sicilia. Manlio Cortellazzo, Carla Marcato, Nicola di Blasi & Gianrenzo Clivio, eds. I dialetti italiani. Turin: UTET. 834–897. UNESCO Ad Hoc Expert Group on Endangered Languages. 2003. Language Vitality and Endangerment. UNESCO Document. Ursini, Flavia. 1999. L’identità linguistica: alcune riflessioni in margine all’uso giornalistico. Gianna Marcato, ed. Dialetti oggi. Padua: Unipress. 321–331. Ursini, Flavia. 2003. Oralità e nuovi media. Una dialettalità nuova? Gianna Marcato, ed. Italiano. Strana lingua? Padua: Unipress. 173–178. Verdone, Mario. 1989. Cinema e dialetto a Roma. Tullio de Mauro, ed. Il romanesco ieri e oggi. Rome: Bulzoni Editore. 239–247. Vignuzzi, Ugo. 1994. Il dialetto perduto e ritrovato. Tullio De Mauro, ed.. Come parlano gli italiani. Scandicci: La Nuova Italia. 25–33. Villarini, Andrea. 1999. La lingua, le lingue, i dialetti dell’utenza Enel. Tullio de Mauro & Massimo Vedovelli, eds. Dante, il gendarme e la bolletta. Bari: Laterza. 143–157. Viviani, Andrea. 2003. La percezione del dialetto negli informatori romani. Paolo D’Achille & Andrea Viviani, eds. La lingua delle città: i dati di Roma, Latina, L’Aquila e Catania. Rome: Aracne Editrice. 111–119. Wicherkiewicz, Tomasz. 2001. Becoming a Regional Language — a Method in Language Status Planning? Paper presented at the 2nd European Conference on Language Planning, Andorra, November 14–16, 2001.

Electronic sources Assuciaziun cülturala “La vus de l’Insübria”, at http://www.giurnal.org/pagine/ca.htm (9 May 2007). Bampi, Franco. Proposte di altri in sciâ grafia, at http://www.francobampi.it/zeneise/lengua/proposte_grafia.htm (18 October 2006). Bettini, Andrea. Chi era Lisander Manzon? Lo spiega la Wikipedia in dialetto. Repubblica online, at http://www.repubblica.it/2006/06/sezioni/scienza_e_tecnnologia/wikipedia (17 March 2007). Dialettando.com, at http://www.dialettando.com (2 January 2007). Istat. La lingua italiana, i dialetti e le lingue straniere (2006), at www.istat.it/salastampa/comunicati/non_calendario/20070420_00 (9 May 2007). Istituto Linguistico Campano, at www.ilc.it (21 April 2008). Italian Wikibooks. Entry: corso di napoletano/pronuncia, at http://it.wikibooks.org (21 March 2007). Italian Wikipedia. Entries: dialetto, dialetto lombardo occidentale, lingua ligure, lingua lombarda, lingua veneta, at http://it.wikipedia.org (18 October 2006). L’Altra Sicilia, at www.laltrasicilia.org (20 January 2008). Leggi regionali, at http://camera.mac.ancitel.it/lrec (9 May 2007). Ligurian/Genoese Wikipedia, at http://lij.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagina_prin%C3%A7ip%C3%A2 (9 May 2007). LinguaSiciliana.org, at http://www.linguasiciliana.org (9 May 2007). Mencaglia, Massimo. Il vernacolo in musica. Libero News, at http://news2000.libero.it/speciali/ sp111/pg2.html (11 November 2004).



Mencaglia, Massimo. Leggere e scrivere in dialetto. Libero News, at http://news2000.libero.it/ speciali/sp111/pg3.html (11 November 2004). Neapolitan Wikipedia, at http://nap.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paggena_prencepale (9 May 2007). Palmerini, Loris. Ricognizione delle grafie venete, at http://www.repubblica.org/rinassimento/ grafia.html (18 October 2006). Piedmontese Wikipedia, at http://pms.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrada (9 May 2007). Raixe Venete, at http://www.raixevenete.net/index.asp (9 May 2007). Sicilian Wikipedia, at http://scno.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0ggina_principali (9 May 2007). Venetan Wikipedia, at http://vec.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C3%A0xena_prinzsipa%C5%82e (9 May 2007). Western Lombard Wikipedia, at http://lmo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagina_prin%C3%A7ipala/UC/ WK (9 May 2007).

Sommario Pianificazione linguistica per le lingue regionali italiane (“dialetti”) Oltre a dodici lingue minoritarie riconosciute (Legge n. 482/1999), l’Italia possiede un numero di lingue non riconosciute normalmente chiamate “dialetti” difficile da stabilire, tra 12 e 15 secondo rinomati linguisti come Tullio De Mauro e Giulio Lepschy. Queste lingue sono ancora parlate (e a volte scritte) da un po’ meno della metà della popolazione italiana, e sono la prima lingua di una parte significante di essa. Alcune di esse sono state persino utilizzate in ambiti (semi)ufficiali e possiedono interessanti tradizioni letterarie. Ad un’introduzione sulla situazione linguistica dell’Italia, sulla classificazione dei suoi “dialetti” e sul loro stato di pericolo segue una discussione sull’attuale (scarsa) legislazione e ciò che si sta facendo per tutelare le sette varietà linguistiche che sono state scelte come casi studio: piemontese, lombardo occidentale/milanese, veneto, ligure/genovese, romanesco, napoletano e siciliano. Queste strategie di pianificazione linguistica vengono esaminate particolarmente in termini di grafizzazione (normativizzazione), normalizzazione ed acquisizione della lingua, anche quando, come nella maggior parte dei casi, questa “pianificazione” non sia coordinata o non avvenga intenzionalmente. L’articolo si chiude con alcune considerazioni generali ed alcuni suggerimenti su come eventualmente migliorare queste iniziative.

Resumo Lingvoplanado por italaj regionaj lingvoj Aldone al dek du rekonataj minoritataj lingvoj (Leĝo n-ro 482/1999), Italio posedas plurajn nerekonatajn tielnomatajn “dialektojn” kies nombron oni malfacile povas esprimi, sed kiujn lingvistoj kiel Tullio De Mauro kaj Giulio Lepschy nombras inter 12 kaj 15. Tiuj ĉi lingvoj estas ankoraŭ parolataj (kaj foje skribataj) de iom malpli ol duono de la enloĝantaro itala kaj estas la unuaj lingvoj de signifa parto de tiu grupo. Kelkaj el ili eĉ havas historion de (duon)oficiala uzo kaj posedas ampleksajn kaj interesajn literaturajn tradiciojn. Enkonduko pri la lingva situacio en Italio, la klasifado de ĝiaj “dialektoj” kaj ilia nivelo de endanĝeriĝo estas sekvata de diskuto


236 Paolo Coluzzi pri la nuna (malabunda) subtena leĝaro kaj la agado farata por protekti la sep lingvajn variaĵojn elektitajn kiel kazojn: la piemonta, okcidenta lombardia/milana, veneta, liguria/ĝenova, roma, napola kaj sicilia. Tiujn lingvoplanajn strategiojn oni diskutas precipe rilate al skribsistemigo (corpusa planado), statusa planado kaj akira planado — eĉ se, en plej multaj kazoj, tiu “planado” estas sen kunordigo aŭ eĉ senkonscia. La artikolo finiĝas per kelkaj ĝeneralaj konsideroj kaj iom da sugestoj pri vojoj por plibonigi tiujn ĉi iniciatojn.

Author’s address The Language Centre Universiti Brunei Darussalam Jalan Tungku Link, Gadong BE1410 Brunei Darussalam [email protected]; [email protected]

About the author Paolo Coluzzi, of Milan, received his MA in minority languages in Spain from the University of Exeter and his PhD in Italian sociolinguistics from the University of Bristol. At present he is a lecturer at the University of Brunei Darussalam. His articles have appeared in Language Problems & Language Planning, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development and Modern Italy. His first book Minority Language Planning and Micronationalism in Italy: An Analysis of the Situation of Friulian, Cimbrian and Western Lombard with Reference to Spanish Minority Languages (Oxford: Peter Lang) was published in June 2007.
