The many voices of Piedmont: language, identity and alterity in the works of modern and contemporary Piedmontese writers

The aim of this project is to carry out a linguistic analysis of a group of modern and contemporary narratives written by authors from the same Italian region: Piedmont. The novels and short stories examined stand out for the intriguing ways in which they move between a variety of idioms – Italian, Piedmontese dialects, English and pastiches, with some rare excursions into French. A sociolinguistic study and an overview of political changes that Piedmont underwent from the sixteenth to the twenty-first centuries are provided, with the purpose of outlining the region’s sociogeographical and historical background which can be seen to have fostered multilingualism in a group of writers. With the support of linguistic studies and philosophical theories on the relation between identity, alterity and language (such as Edwards’s Language and Identity and Bakhtin’s reflections on language), I then elucidate the presence of diverse linguistic varieties in selected narratives by Cesare Pavese, Beppe Fenoglio, Primo Levi, Nanni Balestrini, Fruttero & Lucentini, Benito Mazzi and Younis Tawfik. In other words, my purpose is to explain the reasons for multilingualism in each writer, as well as to underscore the ideological positions which lie behind the linguistic strategies of the authors. With this study I attempt to fill a gap and cast new light on Piedmontese literature. Although some critical studies on the use of dialect or English exist on individual authors and works (e.g. Meddemmem on Fenoglio’s use of English and Beccaria on Pavese’s inclusion of Piedmontese dialect), and some important contributions to the history of Piedmontese literature have appeared in print, to date no current, systematic study that compares different Piedmontese writers under the language/identity theme has been published. The study concludes with a summary of the evolution of plurilingualism in Piedmont and highlights the common trends in the use of multiple linguistic varieties as tools for both social demarcation and an opening up to alternative, marginalised andforeign cultures.

Defending the 'public interest': an assessment of competing actor representations of 'solutions' to growing natural resource deficiencies.

This paper applies a SRT framework to the study of two case studies, namely the recent campaign of opposition to the legalization of hydraulic fracking in the State of New York and the more ongoing debate on land leasing in Africa. In relation to both campaigns, the analysis accounts for the arguments of a major financial institution and industry representatives who stress the safe and value-adding dimensions of these practices, as well as the views of opponents who refute the validity of industry's position and point to the unacceptable risks posed to the community, health and the environment. In spite of a number of obvious differences between these two case studies, not least differences arising from contrasting socio-economic and geo-political settings, there were also some notable similarities. First, was a tendency amongst protesters in both cases to formulate their role as contemporaries in a historically extended struggle for democratic justice. All perceived of themselves as guardians of their community's right to resist a corporate 'invasion' of their territories, like their forefathers and mothers before them. A theme of colonialism was explored in both settings through various identity and thematic anchoring devices that deliberately evoked shared understandings and historical memories of exploitation and human suffering. The evocation of powerful symbols of identity through visual narratives of protest further reinforced the cultural comprehensibility of opponents' message of protest in both contexts.

Using parent report to assess early lexical production in children exposed to more than one language

Limited expressive vocabulary skills in young children are considered to be the first warning signs of a potential Specific Language Impairment (SLI) (Ellis & Thal, 2008). In bilingual language learning environments, the expressive vocabulary size in each of the child’s developing languages is usually smaller compared to the number of words produced by monolingual peers (e.g. De Houwer, 2009). Nonetheless, evidence shows children’s total productive lexicon size across both languages to be comparable to monolingual peers’ vocabularies (e.g. Pearson et al., 1993; Pearson & Fernandez, 1994). Since there is limited knowledge as to which level of bilingual vocabulary size should be considered as a risk factor for SLI, the effects of bilingualism and language-learning difficulties on early lexical production are often confounded. The compilation of profiles for early vocabulary production in children exposed to more than one language, and their comparison across language pairs, should enable more accurate identification of vocabulary delays that signal a risk for SLI in bilingual populations. These considerations prompted the design of a methodology for assessing early expressive vocabulary in children exposed to more than one language, which is described in the present chapter. The implementation of this methodological framework is then outlined by presenting the design of a study that measured the productive lexicons of children aged 24-36 months who were exposed to different language pairs, namely Maltese and English, Irish and English, Polish and English, French and Portuguese, Turkish and German as well as English and Hebrew. These studies were designed and coordinated in COST Action IS0804 Working Group 3 (WG3) and will be described in detail in a series of subsequent publications. Expressive vocabulary size was measured through parental report, by employing the vocabulary checklist of the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventory: Words and Sentences (CDI: WS) (Fenson et al., 1993, 2007) and its adaptations to the participants’ languages. Here we describe the novelty of the study’s methodological design, which lies in its attempt to harmonize the use of vocabulary checklist adaptations, together with parental questionnaires addressing language exposure and developmental history, across participant groups characterized by different language exposure variables. This chapter outlines the various methodological considerations that paved the way for meaningful cross-linguistic comparison of the participants’ expressive lexicon sizes. In so doing, it hopes to provide a template for and encourage further research directed at establishing a threshold for SLI risk in children exposed to more than one language.