Search

La nozione linguistica “latino volgare” e l’idea della diversificazione interna del latino risale a un dibattito nell’anticamera di papa Eugenio IV nel 1435. Leonardo Bruni e Flavio Biondo esposero le loro convinzioni sul latino nell’antichità romana in due brevi trattati.L’obiettivo del presente saggio è di ritrarre la discussione tra Bruni e Biondo e di esporre in quale maniera gli umanisti attingono alla teoria dantesca, anche se i due eruditi probabilmente non hanno avuto conoscenza diretta del trattato De vulgari eloquentia ( DVE), scritto che rappresenta, considerando il latino, un punto di vista tipicamente medievale ( grammatica vs. vulgare, ars vs. natura). La nuova idea, il latino come lingua viva che cambia e si modifica, emerge in questo contesto storico.

The concepts and terms of modern lexicography and variational linguistics (sociolinguistics) give clear evidence of a common interdependent history. The present study will first give a short overview of the genesis of the diasystem and the accompanying terms ‘diachronic’, ‘diaphasic’, ‘diastratic’ coined by Flydal, Weinreich and Coseriu as well as the later adoption and enlargement by Hausmann for lexicographic purposes. The second aim of the study is therefore not to question the still useful metalexicographic model in general, but just to contribute to a precise terminology by replacing the Hausmann term ‘diaintegrative’ by ‘diaxenic’ which for several reasons might be more adequate to express the foreignness of the so marked lexemes. Thirdly the present article tries to show the differences in the marking system of several Spanish, Italian and French dictionaries. To detect the gap between theoretical claim and practical application, the treatment of foreign words, especially the often controversial anglicisms, seemed to be most promising. The result of this empiric study showed not only the discrepancy between the dictionaries’ philosophies, expressed in the forewords, and the application under the respective lemma, but also that tolerance towards loanwords and adoption of modern linguistic research knowledge depends very much on lexicographic traditions.