[automatically translated] The dialectic tendencies of Camilleri's language shines first on the lexical level. But the analyzes to date notes on the words "dialect", more or less hybridized (or not exactly Italian), the camilleriana production seem to spring from an approach that tends to analyze it from the signifier point of view: no Italian words reflect the lexemes actually present in the dialect (and / or possibly recorded by lexicography dialect), or simply evoke them, as they undergo phonetic / morphological changes (and therefore sound-spelling) now in the direction of the language, the dialect matrix, now in the direction of dialect, those of Italian origin? Any classification of Camilleri lexicon based on those assumptions remain effectively connected "external" evaluation of dialectal / hybridized entries: every word of the dialect code is considered its base (native or Italian?) And its output (maintains the final vowel dialect, it italianized?); of each word of the language code is evaluated in the same terms, its final vowel (coinciding it with that of Italian, or you dialecticized?) and phonetics as the base (his voice and his consosonanti remain close to Italian , deviating from them and how much they deviate to approach the dialect model?). If we try instead to focus not so much on the interference play, as on that of the "dialectic tendencies" of Camilleri and we tried lexicon, Therefore, to analyze it from a different perspective, and in the meantime we might instead consider, with an obvious operation and even trivial, that the set of the code of the dialect vocabulary consists 1) of native words; 2) of Italian origin words that, over time, and massively in the '900, have undermined traditional (Italianisms against archaisms); 3) of words, by virtue of the partially shared history of the Sicilian and Tuscan, are (always) patrimonial present in Italian and in the dialect (slick, cchiù, firmari). A possible partition (also) lexical dialect Camilleri according to these three categories - native words, Italianate, and belonging (historically) to the dialect and language - would allow, perhaps, to test the dialect part of the lexicon of Camilleri from a different point of view : culturally, or rather that of the dialect culture. If the dialect component Camilleri lexicon was hired as the mirror of the actual dialect of the writer and then as reflecting the realistic appearance of the dynamics of the meeting / clash between conservation and innovation in the dialectal lexicon of a talking-senior author, you may be able to assess what degree of archaism and lexical autochthonous (not necessarily intentional or conscious) characterizes his literary dialect.
|Title of host publication||La linguistica in campo. Scritti per Mari D'Agostino|
|Number of pages||18|
|Publication status||Published - 2016|