Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin
RU EN






Today: 11.05.2025
Home Search
  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Bulletin Archive
    • 2025 Year
      • Issue №1
      • Issue №2
    • 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

Search

- Not selected -
  • - Not selected -
  • - Not selected -

    #SearchDownloads
    1

    THE FUNCTIONING OF THE PRONOUN FORM GLI IN THE 16TH-CENTURY ITALIAN LANGUAGE // Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin. 2018. Issue 5 (194). P. 9-14

    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

    1078
    2

    THE COMPARATIVE GRAMMAR BY G. M. ALESSANDRI AS A PIECE OF EVIDENCE REGARDING LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL CONTACTS BETWEEN ITALY AND SPAIN IN THE XVI CENTURY // Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin. 2018. Issue 8 (197). P. 62-68

    The present paper is devoted to a little-known XVI-century piece of linguistic writing – the comparative grammar of Italian and Spanish (“Il paragone della lingua toscana et castigliana”, “The comparison of Tuscan and Castilian languages”, 1560) by Giovanni Mario Alessandri, a Naples-born courtier. The grammar was meant both for the Spanish nobles eager to learn Italian and for the Italians who pursued a career at the Spanish court. In many ways “Il paragone” stands apart from the bulk of the Italian grammatical treatises of that epoch. Alessandri does not cite classic authors like Boccaccio or Petrarch to support theoretical points although it is on such XIV-century literary basis that the Italian language norm is based. The grammar contains a number of interesting comments of sociolinguistic nature, like those regarding social hierarchy and its impact on language use (the use of “Vostra Signoria”, for instance). It also gives an idea of how the ideology of Counter-Reformation could influence grammaticography in the Romance world (hence the frequent appeals to the authority of Catholic church – quite a queer feature for a grammatical treatise). G. M. Alessandri’s views on language have much in common with those of B. Castiglione, G. Trissino and other XVI-century Italian theorists of “courtly” language.

    Keywords: history of Italian, history of Romance linguistics, grammaticography, XVI-century Italian language, questione della lingua, language norm

    1012

    © 2025 Tomsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin

    Development and support: Network Project Laboratory TSPU