In this issue:
M. Amadò – S. Gilardoni – S. Cantarini – S. Vogler – R. Govorucho – V. A. Vaccaro
Michele Amadò, «Existe-t-il des signes visuels?» Rivisitazione del Traité du signe visueldel Groupe μ
In order to develop its great potential, visual communication needs to be founded on the characteristics of the visual channel and on the typologies of the visual signs (iconic and plastic), therefore, on a specific semiotic and rhetoric distinct from the ones of the linguistic sign. Visual signs, in particular the noblest expressions like the artistic ones, reveal themselves more as aims rather than as means. They do not point away from themselves but to themselves: this connotation is founded on the autonomy of visual signs as regards the reported reality. The respective itineraries can emphasize the possibilities and inherent to a visually constructed logic with nonverbal characteristics.
This paper aims at analyzing the Italian terminology used to describe wine and its characteristics, in order to identify lexical variations and recurring communicative strategies within specific textual genres of the wine sector. The research is based on a corpus of Italian written texts, which describe the analytical, organoleptic and sensorial characteristics of Italian wines (colour, smell, taste, tactile sensations). The corpus includes different text types, such as promotional brochures, web pages, wine guides, specialized magazines and regulations on wine production, offering a representative sample of various kinds of communication. After drawing a conceptual map of the wine tasting terminology, and outlining the different contexts of interaction and correspondent communicative flows, the analysis has focused on the most relevant lexical, rhetorical and stylistic aspects of the corpus.
Sibilla Cantarini, “Syntaktische Wortfelder”: von den “wesenhaften edeutungsbeziehungen” über die “Kollokationen” und “Selektionsbeschränkungen” bis zu den “lexikalischen Solidaritäten”
The possibilities for combining words with other words are traditionally considered from a syntactic point of view. W. Porzig was the first linguist to draw attention, in 1934, to the fact that syntagmatic combinability has not only to do with grammatical characteristics, but also with aspects of meaning. For the syntagmatic lexical relations he describes, W. Porzig introduces the term wesenha!e Bedeutungsbeziehungen. The study of these syntagmatic a&nities was neglected for a long period. Only in the 1950s and 1960s did the concept reappear in various theoretical approaches and under different names. The present article illustrates, in detail, the fundamental distinctions that characterize syntagmatic lexical relations in the various approaches after W. Porzig’s Wesenhafte Bedeutungsbeziehungen and points out that his ideas can still be considered very modern, however, from many points of view, not completely developed.
The paper originates from the author’s experience as a language learning adviser for GFL at the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore di Milano. Though underlining the adviser’s possibility to facilitate students to develop learner autonomy, it identites aspects of advising which are still problematic in Italy. The first part provides information on the development of the concept of learner autonomy and on research on language learning advising. In the second part, several examples of GFL-learners who came to see the adviser for varying reasons requiring different types of assistance will be presented and discussed. Eventually, possibilities will be suggested to increase the effectiveness of advising in the promotion of learner autonomy.
Roman Govorucho, СЛОЖНОЕПРЕДЛОЖЕНИЕСВРЕМЕННЫМЗНАЧЕНИЕМВИТА- ЛЬЯНСКОМИРУССКОМЯЗЫКАХИПРОБЛЕМЫРЕЧЕВОГОУЗУСА [La proposizione temporale complessa in italiano e in russo. Problemi dell’uso parlato]
The present paper aims at defining the preferred usage in constructing sentences with subordinate clauses of time in Russian and Italian. The research is based on about 400 examples from over seventy texts and their translations in both languages. The major difference between the languages lies in the grade of their explicitness, in the choice of formal means. The Italian text prefers hypotaxis with the sequence of tenses marking, with rather distinct characteristics of semantic relations within its parts supported both lexically and grammatically by time conjunctions.
In the Russian text the basic information is more often taken from the general context or lexical components of the proposition. The translation from Russian into Italian requires consecutive hierarchization of the statement: asyndetic propositions are replaced by coordinate ones, whereas coordination is replaced by hypotaxis. The translation from Italian into Russian requires the inverse process.
Valeria Anna Vaccaro, Il prestito linguistico tra teoria e retorica: criteri metodologici ed effetti stilistici
This work studies the rhetoric presence of linguistic loan in Marguerite Yourcenar’s literature. We try to understand how the encounter between languages affects on writing and stylistic peculiarities. From Ascoli to Gusmani, and Deroy, Wind, Guilbert, Martinet, Coseriu and Weinreich the loan receives an historiographical, sociolinguistic, structuralist approach, and then an interest of its dynamic linguistics. Relationships between rhetoric and loan focus on linguistic and literary creativity and rhetorical use of the loan in Yourcenar, analyzing loans and describing semantic peculiarities. This study shows that the nomadic life of Yourcenar has influenced his writing, and loans express conscious stylistic choices.
It is possible to download the entire journal as PDF file by clicking here.