Maria Silvia Marini

This work aims to analyze complex noun phrases of the qualitative binominal kind (an N of an N) in a Southern Italo–Romance language, namely Apulian. The principle of compositionality – even if it represents a good working hypothesis for syntactic analysis – faces several challenges with linguistic expressions such as idioms (with which binominal qualitatives share several properties), whose meaning is not yielded compositionally (Szabò, 2004). The data under analysis here are particularly interesting for two main reasons. The first pertains to the nature of the preposition, and whether it is an a priori specified element depending on the syntactic embedding; two main working hypotheses are found: Den Dikken (2006) posits two different derivations, one for binominal qualitative of and one for genitive of. On the other hand, Kayne (1994) posits a unitary derivation for both instances of the preposition. The second reason pertains to the problem of the overall interpretation of the phrase, i.e., an intersectional interpretation of the predicate and the subject of the predication, and the focus/topic subdivision in the phrase (Villalba, 2007): the interpretation depends on the marked order of the predicate with respect to the subject. Given that N1 is a predicate and usually an adjectivized noun or a nominalized adjective and that in southern Italo–Romance only few adjectives can precede a noun, cases in which the predicate precedes the noun can be considered as displaying a marked order. Even though the case of the preposition might seem a challenge for compositionality, it will be shown that a proper characterization of such an element confirms that compositionality can still account for instances such as those of binominal qualitatives.

After a brief introduction about the problem of leopardian sources, I wish to introduce here a description of the diffusion of Addison’s theories about the Imagination in Italy at the time of Leopardi, trying to highlight their influence on his thinking and his philosophy. The third chapter is dedicated to the analysis of an important excerpt of the Zibaldone where Leopardi quotes Addison and his Catone to introduce an interesting reflection about the pleasure of beauty and the role of imagination, almost as a way to face Addison issues.This excerpt represents an occasion to compare the theories of Addison and Leopardi about Aesthetics and also the similarities and the differences between them. The last part of the paper is dedicated to the results of the analysis and the conclusions.

This paper aims to trace the links between Leopardi’s linguistic reflection and his theory of assuefazione, a theory that focuses on the functions of perception and the imaginative faculty within cognitive mechanisms. This theory also explains the functioning of the modalities with which human knowledge is articulated, starting from the experiential data, and therefore linguistic knowledge, in terms of a metaphorical apperception of the world. Specific attention will also be given to the notion of semantic vagueness, closely linked to the general concept of indefinite: a concept that Leopardi develops in his reflections on the theory of pleasure and which is fundamental to define the peculiarities of the imaginative faculty. Furthermore, through the Garronian study of metaoperativity a more in-depth reading of the leopardian theory of assuefazione and of the link between perception and imagination too, as well as the role these two last faculties play in language will be provided. Precisely the metaoperativity allows us to explain and define with greater clarity the disposizione a poter essere, that is a precondition in order to conceive the Leopardian notion of indefinite. This conceptual clarification will also be important to highlight how the thought of Leopardi – in spite of the asystematicity that characterizes Zibaldone – is structured and deeply coherent, in line with that unitary and global approach to human knowledge of its time: an approach in which linguistic reflection and the theory of knowledge mutually imply each other, tightened by a relationship of mutual relevance.