The Italian Language

[Sile]

Here I spoke for Sicilian, but it's the same for the most typical Southern Italian dialects which I suppose are not standard Italian dialects of South but dialects with their own development from Latin. In France where centralisation is a religion, many people believe Oil dialects are derived from modern standard French when in fact they are derived from old Romance. Naive?

Basically it happened like this...............all italian regional dialects/languages came from vulgar latin mixed with their original regional ancient dialect...........then italian dialect/language was created 700 odd years ago from these italian regional languages..............

The basic fact/truth is that ........if Italy did not form 150 years ago, then the Italian language as we know it today would be extinct


note:......as per linguistic scholars, then is no difference between a dialect and a language, and basically the term dialect is the correct term for all languages worldwide.

 

[Sile]

http://www.evolpub.com/Italiandialects/ITALdial.html

 

[Sile]

http://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/special-reports-pdfs/italy.pdf




http://scholarlycommons.obu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=history

 

[Joey D]

Judging by this statement Latin and Romance languages would disappear from all over the ex Western Roman Empire.

PS: Byzantine empire was the Eastern Roman Empire and part of population spoken Latin too.

Except Greek remained the dominant language in Sicily (and the far South) throughout the Roman period, and by a long way - North of Calabria and Puglia, these regions became thoroughly latinised. Small Greek speaking communities have survived to this day in Calabria (they were significantly stronger a mere century ago).

Sicily then becomes part of the Eastern Roman Empire, and Greek becomes the official language again for the next 250 years.

Under Muslim rule, for 200 to 250 years, East Sicily remains overwhelmingly Greek-speaking and Orthodox, mosques are built in the West of the island and there are clearly Arabic speaking peoples over much of the island.

Did the Latin rite survive in Sicily during Muslim rule? Were there Western Christian churches celebrating Western style masses during this period - or were they all converted to Mosques?

You mention Maltese - during the Muslim period, most of Sicily would have shared the same language as Malta, post Norman conquest, they both go through a process of latinisation, but clearly it occurs to a lesser degree in Malta which retains an Arabic speaking population for longer than existed in Sicily (and as a much larger proportion of the population).

In the first 50 to 100 years of Norman rule, Greek and Arabic are retained as official languages. Official documents are written in Greek, Arabic and Latin (and very rarely, Norman French).

Anyway, the crucial point is that no one is sure of the degree to which Latin survived those six hundred years between the fall of the Roman empire and the Norman conquest of Sicily, but my personal opinion is that if it did survive at all, it was hanging by a thread.

 

[Joey D]

What???according to the linguistic Giarrizzo 56% of modern Sicilian vocabulary derives directly from Latin!

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingua_siciliana#Vocabolario

I'm talking about a direct lineage to the Latin of the Roman epoch. Sard descends directly from the Latin of the Roman epoch, and as a consequence we find more archaic Latin forms - Sicilian does not have this, or it's extemely limited.

I am arguing that the Normans re-introduced Latin to the island via the troops and mercenaries they used, who were predominantly from Campania (where the earliest Norman settlements were established) - it is for this reason that Sicilian has as its basis a form of vulgar Latin similar to that which forms the basis of Neapolitan (as you mentioned earlier in another post).

Let's not forget, the number of actual Norman knights, from your namesake, were very, very small - they supplemented their numbers with Lombards and Campani.

 

[Joey D]

This is exactly how it happened in my own area, but more rapidly and more thoroughly, to the extent that today young people can understand the "dialect" of their grandparents or great-grand-parents, but they virtually never speak it.

The only place in Italy that really has clung to its regional language is the Veneto.

So, all this hope that the "regional" languages will come back is a fantasy, in my opinion.

My personal experience is precisely as you described. My father wanted me to speak the "purest" Italian possible, and so no one was allowed to speak to me in dialect. It was part of his world view concerning the need for Italy to unify, and there was also a "class" element to it. It got to the point that if my mother and her friends were speaking dialect they'd abruptly switch to Italian when I came into the room. It worked: I can imperfectly understand my local dialect but can't speak it at all. I'm even worse with the Pramzan of the other half of my family.

It's also true, in my experience, that the more "Italianized" versions of the regional languages are easier for "Italian" speakers like me to understand. As an example, I'm a dedicated fan of the Montalbano series (I now own the full set of dvds.) When some characters slip into "Sicilian", I can understand almost all of it. The "older" Sicilian is much harder, but to say it's unintelligible is clearly absurd. It's not like trying to understand German or Russian for goodness' sakes. For whatever reason, I have more problems with "Camorra". It should be the other way around, as my grandmother in law was from Campania, from around Benevento, and I didn't find her all that difficult to understand once I got used to it. I emphasize once I got used to it. I found it pretty hard going in the beginning, and it wasn't just different vocabulary; it was the pronunciation too. I don't see any particular closeness to Tuscan. It's a southern Italian language.

Oh, the experience of Sicilian Americans backs up what you're saying. I know a lot of the older ones, the 100% Sicilian ones, who go on a visit and think they'll find people speaking as their grandparents did. They don't, and wind up very disappointed. That language is, according to them, virtually gone.

Angela
good post, very interesting to read your thoughts and experiences.

I would love for these regional languages to have survived, but as I said elsewhere, the horse has well and truly bolted.

My personal view is that they have become so italianised that it's hardly worth the effort, may as well speak Italian.

But I personally feel the loss quite strongly, because that was my language, my mother tongue. I now only have one auntie and one uncle who can genuinely speak it. I feel a certain sadness about that.

 

[Angela]

Angela
good post, very interesting to read your thoughts and experiences.

I would love for these regional languages to have survived, but as I said elsewhere, the horse has well and truly bolted.

My personal view is that they have become so italianised that it's hardly worth the effort, may as well speak Italian.

But I personally feel the loss quite strongly, because that was my language, my mother tongue. I now only have one auntie and one uncle who can genuinely speak it. I feel a certain sadness about that.

I do hope I didn't come across as insensitive to the feelings of the people who love these regional "languages", Joey. Believe me, I do understand. Even if I don't feel bound to our local dialect, I am extremely attached to our villages, our landscape, our food, our music, the entire way of life that has died out, and most of all to our people. It's for that reason that I've made a bit of a life's work of exploring and deepening my understanding of our history, and contributing to the work that is going on in that field.

There are times when I think I'm drowning in nostalgia, especially at this time of year. It brings me great joy to remember the past, but it saddens me as well. To quote from a movie, "Laughter through tears is my favorite emotion!"

 

[Joey D]

I do hope I didn't come across as insensitive to the feelings of the people who love these regional "languages", Joey. Believe me, I do understand. Even if I don't feel bound to our local dialect, I am extremely attached to our villages, our landscape, our food, our music, the entire way of life that has died out, and most of all to our people. It's for that reason that I've made a bit of a life's work of exploring and deepening my understanding of our history, and contributing to the work that is going on in that field.

There are times when I think I'm drowning in nostalgia, especially at this time of year. It brings me great joy to remember the past, but it saddens me as well. To quote from a movie, "Laughter through tears is my favorite emotion!"

Angela
not at all, I took your comments in the spirit they were intended, no problems from my end.

These sorts of discussions are now very much an exercise in nostalgia.

Also, the Sicilians have had a form of autonomy since 1947 and have had the parliamentary power to put into effect certain linguistic policies - if they wanted it, but the desire for it has never been there, so that's where it starts and ends.

 

[Hauteville]

I'm talking about a direct lineage to the Latin of the Roman epoch. Sard descends directly from the Latin of the Roman epoch, and as a consequence we find more archaic Latin forms - Sicilian does not have this, or it's extemely limited.

I am arguing that the Normans re-introduced Latin to the island via the troops and mercenaries they used, who were predominantly from Campania (where the earliest Norman settlements were established) - it is for this reason that Sicilian has as its basis a form of vulgar Latin similar to that which forms the basis of Neapolitan (as you mentioned earlier in another post).

Let's not forget, the number of actual Norman knights, from your namesake, were very, very small - they supplemented their numbers with Lombards and Campani.

Again this is a theory of Rohlfes but he has also retracted it. Modern Sicilian has loads of archaic latinism and even in the phonemes is closer to old Latin than standard Italian. This is your theory, but my theory and the theory accepted by most of linguistics is that Sicilian derives from vulgar Latin, even look at the large use of u at the fine of many words or the vocalism, these are signals of direct Latin origins. Sicily was bilingual, Eastern Romans did not deleted Latin, who was the language of rural populations mostly. Another origins who confirm the vulgar Latin origins of Sicilian is the postponed verb (example: Sicilianu sugnu--->>>Latinum sum) etc.

Let's not forget, the number of actual Norman knights, from your namesake, were very, very small - they supplemented their numbers with Lombards and Campani.

You've said in the precedent pages that Neapolitan is closer to Tuscan than to Sicilian as language and now you say that modern Sicilian derives from Neapolitan?Taking a decision...
If Sicilian is developed from a mix of Neapolitan and Lombard than why Sicilian is part of extreme Southern Italian dialects together with Calabese, Southern Cilentano and Salentino?in those three parts there were not Lombard or big Campanian settlements. It instead should be strong included among the Gallo Italic or Intermediate Southern italians dialects...The colonizers of mainland Italy introduced new words but not a new language, these new words overlapped with local vulgar language spoken among most of the population who was mostly bilingual with Greek communities, some pseudo-Maltese speakears (a mix of Arabic and vulgar Sicilian/Romance) probably survived around Palermo, but very few of them in the rest of Sicily.

 

[Hauteville]

I'm talking about a direct lineage to the Latin of the Roman epoch. Sard descends directly from the Latin of the Roman epoch, and as a consequence we find more archaic Latin forms - Sicilian does not have this, or it's extemely limited.

I am arguing that the Normans re-introduced Latin to the island via the troops and mercenaries they used, who were predominantly from Campania (where the earliest Norman settlements were established) - it is for this reason that Sicilian has as its basis a form of vulgar Latin similar to that which forms the basis of Neapolitan (as you mentioned earlier in another post).

Let's not forget, the number of actual Norman knights, from your namesake, were very, very small - they supplemented their numbers with Lombards and Campani.

Vulgar Sicilian from 1091

Vinni in la Marina

Anno Domini nostri J. XP. MXCI, tempora quadragesime,
Vinni in la marina di li Mikenki, ora dicta Donnalucata, lu barb. Ammiro Belicani Saraxino, cum manio exercitu, per dixtruire omni phidili Kriptiani, et la nostra ixula, et lu barburu cani nun chi riuxio, chi lu populu di Xicli si moxi tuctu, e si armau, et accursi per costringherlo et farilo fughire, a quillo barbaru infidili: ma, videndo lo numiro di li infidili, grassi assai, se prostraro cum la fachia per terra, et pricando nos Xeniuri J. XP. et la Vi. de la Pietati, che essi camaru per darichi fortia et corajo, per dischiacare li barb. Saraxini, et illico et statim, videro in lu Chelu una nugola, che isprindea ut solis, cum dintra la Vi. MP. cum brandus in dextera, et chi rintronava a lo sou populo "en adsum, ecce me, vivitas mea dilecta, protegam te dextera mea", si livaru di terra di un subito, et videro lo exercitu di li normandi, ut volociter acquile, per aiutarli et uniti tucti si moxiro ut fulminem supra quilli infidili et li destruxiro et fu tali la confuxioni et lo spavento, che si ucchisero ipsi stixi, ut more canis idrofobi; durau la punia quasi per uno jorno, et di poi li sacti xaxerdoti cantaru Tedeum laudamus, et lo Magnificat, accumpaniati di lo exercito, et la nocti tucti li normandi et tucto lo populo si rixtaro in lo dictu locu, per prigari et ringratiaru a Dio e Maria Vergine che li salvau di lu ecchidio di li infidili; la matina si arritrovao lu campu cum immenso numero di morti, at li barchi di li infidili tucti fugati, et poi si ringratiau lu gran Diu e la MP. Vi. et si chiamau, di li pii ss. saxerdoti, sata MP. Militum, pro siclensibus, et si stabeleo farichi la festa omni anno, in lo jorno sabato prechedente a la Dominica di passioni, jorno solenni di la punia, et cussi' fu liberata la nostra terra, per sempre amen S.T.L.
Scriptum in Tabula Ligni

https://scn.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussioni:Vinni_in_la_Marina

 

[Joey D]

Again this is a theory of Rohlfes but he has also retracted it. Modern Sicilian has loads of archaic latinism and even in the phonemes is closer to old Latin than standard Italian. This is your theory, but my theory and the theory accepted by most of linguistics is that Sicilian derives from vulgar Latin, even look at the large use of u at the fine of many words or the vocalism, these are signals of direct Latin origins. Sicily was bilingual, Eastern Romans did not deleted Latin, who was the language of rural populations mostly. Another origins who confirm the vulgar Latin origins of Sicilian is the postponed verb (example: Sicilianu sugnu--->>>Latinum sum) etc.


You've said in the precedent pages that Neapolitan is closer to Tuscan than to Sicilian as language and now you say that modern Sicilian derives from Neapolitan?Taking a decision...
If Sicilian is developed from a mix of Neapolitan and Lombard than why Sicilian is part of extreme Southern Italian dialects together with Calabese, Southern Cilentano and Salentino?in those three parts there were not Lombard or big Campanian settlements. It instead should be strong included among the Gallo Italic or Intermediate Southern italians dialects...The colonizers of mainland Italy introduced new words but not a new language, these new words overlapped with local vulgar language spoken among most of the population who was mostly bilingual with Greek communities, some pseudo-Maltese speakears (a mix of Arabic and vulgar Sicilian/Romance) probably survived around Palermo, but very few of them in the rest of Sicily.

I'm not saying Sicilian does not derive from vulgar Latin, I am saying it derives from a form of vulgar Latin introduced circa late 11th century - it does not derive from a form of vulgar Latin which continued to be used post the fall of the Roman Empire without interruption. For the six centuries between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Norman conquest, if Latin existed at all, it was hanging by a thread.

There is no inconsistency in saying that Neapolitan is closer to Tuscan than Sicilian is, while also saying that Sicilian derives from the form of vulgar Latin which was spoken in Campania at the time of the Norman conquest.

Throughout Europe, the various languages/dialects are like an array, it's no different on the Italian peninsular. The Calabro-Sicilian dialects derive from a form of vulgar Latin similar to the vulgar Latin from which the Neapolitan dialects are derived, and share some common features, however, the Calabro-Sicilian dialects have other influences which are not found in the Neapolitan dialects, and therefore, you see obvious distinctions.

In other respects, the Neapolitan dialects share some features with the central-Italian dialects, chief amongst them being a similar vowel system, and as a result, Neapolitan is further along the array towards the Central Italian dialects than Calabro-Sicilian (but I'm not saying it is closer to the Tuscan than it is closer to Sicilia, I hope I have been able to make that a bit clearer).

There is no inconsistency in the argument when viewed in that manner.

I'm willing to accept that it is unclear the extent to which Latin survived those intermediary six centuries (if it survived at all), but I can't accept your contention that Latin was spoken throughout Sicily at the start of the Norman conquest - I would suggest to you that that is nigh on impossible.

 

[Joey D]

Vulgar Sicilian from 1091

Vinni in la Marina

Anno Domini nostri J. XP. MXCI, tempora quadragesime,
Vinni in la marina di li Mikenki, ora dicta Donnalucata, lu barb. Ammiro Belicani Saraxino, cum manio exercitu, per dixtruire omni phidili Kriptiani, et la nostra ixula, et lu barburu cani nun chi riuxio, chi lu populu di Xicli si moxi tuctu, e si armau, et accursi per costringherlo et farilo fughire, a quillo barbaru infidili: ma, videndo lo numiro di li infidili, grassi assai, se prostraro cum la fachia per terra, et pricando nos Xeniuri J. XP. et la Vi. de la Pietati, che essi camaru per darichi fortia et corajo, per dischiacare li barb. Saraxini, et illico et statim, videro in lu Chelu una nugola, che isprindea ut solis, cum dintra la Vi. MP. cum brandus in dextera, et chi rintronava a lo sou populo "en adsum, ecce me, vivitas mea dilecta, protegam te dextera mea", si livaru di terra di un subito, et videro lo exercitu di li normandi, ut volociter acquile, per aiutarli et uniti tucti si moxiro ut fulminem supra quilli infidili et li destruxiro et fu tali la confuxioni et lo spavento, che si ucchisero ipsi stixi, ut more canis idrofobi; durau la punia quasi per uno jorno, et di poi li sacti xaxerdoti cantaru Tedeum laudamus, et lo Magnificat, accumpaniati di lo exercito, et la nocti tucti li normandi et tucto lo populo si rixtaro in lo dictu locu, per prigari et ringratiaru a Dio e Maria Vergine che li salvau di lu ecchidio di li infidili; la matina si arritrovao lu campu cum immenso numero di morti, at li barchi di li infidili tucti fugati, et poi si ringratiau lu gran Diu e la MP. Vi. et si chiamau, di li pii ss. saxerdoti, sata MP. Militum, pro siclensibus, et si stabeleo farichi la festa omni anno, in lo jorno sabato prechedente a la Dominica di passioni, jorno solenni di la punia, et cussi' fu liberata la nostra terra, per sempre amen S.T.L.
Scriptum in Tabula Ligni

https://scn.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussioni:Vinni_in_la_Marina

I'm familiar with the quote, it's a wonderful quote, and shows the Sicilian language coming to life from the extant vulgar Latin - a work in progress if you like - BUT - this is 1091 - the Norman conquest had already been going for 30 years - by that time Latin had become one of the four official languages of Sicily.

Also - please note that it's a work in progress - you can see clearly some vowel patterns which are more reminiscent of Neapolitan than Sicilian (so lo jorno would become lu jornu one century later).

It's an interesting historical document, but it is not evidence of Latin having survived the six centuries between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Norman conquest of Sicily.

 

[Joey D]

This is an interesting excerpt from a book written by the well known romance philologist, Geoffrey Hull: The Malta Language Question.

Maltese is an interesting case study because Sicily and Malta shared a very close history for milennia, and shared a similar linguistic history at the time of the Norman conquest, but Maltese remained an overwhelmingly Arabic language (with significant romance influences), while Sicily became thoroughly latinised with a relatively small Arabic influence.

In one chapter he describes the lexical stratification of Maltese, and in doing so, sheds some light on the linguistic situation of both islands at the time of the Norman conquest:

1. Pre-Arabic (before 870): presumably neo-punic or Byzantine Greek, with assimilated Latin elements from the Roman period [so even at the time of the Arab invasion of Malta, he is only talking about assimilarted Latin elements going back to the Roman era]

2. Sicilian Arabic (870-1243): of the Maghrebine type, originally Tunisian with possible residual neo-Punic and Berber elements.

3. Neo-Sicilian (1250-1800): basically a South Italian (continental) variety of Romance with Arabic, Greek and possible proto-Romance substratal elements, Norman French substratal elements and (after 1283) Tuscan, Catalan and occasional Spanbish superstratal elements. [This is important, in particular, "possible proto-Romance substratal element" - what this means is that neo-Sicilian has developed from a South Italian form of Romance, with the possibility of some proto-Romance elements, i.e. Latin elements going back to the Roman era - but quite clearly, this intimates that there has not been a continuous, uninterrupted linguistic development from the Roman era].

4. Tuscan (direct influence from 1450...)

5. French and Occitan (provencal) (1530-1800)

6. English (1800 to the present)

 

[Joey D]

I'm just remembering that I have in my possession another book written by Geoffrey Hull: Polyglot Italy.

He dedicates a chapter to the "dialects of Sicily, Calabria and Salento".

"...the Italian dialects of these regions are not local developments of Vulgar Latin but modern forms of a southern variety of Italian introduced not more than a thousand years ago into what used to be Greek and Arabic-speaking territory.
...
The Byzantine invasion of 535 AD enabled Greek to triumph over Latin throughout Sicily, at least on an official level, but it is likely that vernacular Romance lingered on the west of the island...

By the early eleventh century these islands and the whole of Sicily except the Hellenophone north-east had become predominantly Arabic in language...

There seems to be no conclusive evidence that any form of Romance speech survived the Saracen occupation of Sicily (or that it had even been vital there during the Byzantine period). Certainly the Italian speech that came to Sicily in the wake of the Norman conquest (1060-1091) was quite new to the island.

...Romance dialects of the two main groups of settlers brought in by the Hautevilles to reduce the Arab and Greek presence in Sicily. The Campanians (peasants from the Naples district and possibly from Cilento as well) colonised the Arabicized territory west of the Salso.
...
Most of the settlements in the east of the island were founded by pioneers from the Monferrat region of the western Po Valley. Padanian immigration to Sicily had been promoted by Roger I's marriage to Adelaide, daughter of the Marquis of Monferrat..and her brother Henry, married to Roger I's daughter Blandina, ruled the County of Paterno, the nucleus of Lombard settlement in eastern Sicily.

Norman Sicilian was slower in displacing the Padanian speech of these newcomers, but before its extinction in most areas this Northern language injected a substantial body of Gallo-Romance elements into the koine...the common Sicilian vocabulary had long since absorbed such fundamental Padanian words as soggiru (suoxer), cugnatu (cognau), bizzuni (besson), figghiozzu (figlioz), fadali (faudal), tuma, tumazzu (toma) fugazza (fogaza), orbu (orb), arricintari (rexentar), unni (ond), and the names of the week: luni (lunes), marti (martes), mercuri (mercor), jovi (juovia), venniri (venner).

Padanian influences on Sicilian extend into the realms of morphology and syntax...

The double Gallo-Romance (Old French and Padanian) impact on Sicilian accounts to a large extent for the relatively 'modern' (ie non-archaic) character of the dialect in comparison with vernaculars like Sardinian and Lucanian, the results of an uninterrupted bimillennial tradition of Latinity.

As Italo-Greek declined in neighboring Calabria it was replaced by the Messinese variety of Sicilian.

The neo-Italian (i.e. post-hellenic) speech of the Salentine penninsula (Terra d'Otranto) is not a form of Sicilian like that of lower Calabria, but represents the medieval Apulian dialect that filtered into the district during the period of civil reconstruction after the devastiting Moorish raids of the tenth century and the Norman conquest of 1054-1068. If Salentine appears superficially very similar to Sicilian it is because the Old Apulian from which it derives was itself not far removed from the South Italian koine that formed the basis of Norman Sicilian. The dialect has been strongly influenced by the local substratal Greek, but naturally lacks the Arabic and Padanian elements so prominent in the language of Sicily.

Professor Alberto Varvaro: " It is well known that opinion varies greatly on the linguistic situation that the Normans found in Sicily: no-one any longer doubts that a large part of the population, the administration and cultural milieux used Arabic, or is the survival of Greek (at least in the north-eastern area) a matter of controversy. Rather it is the existence and numbers of people speaking a neo-latin language that is uncertain and open to question.

 

[Hauteville]

This is an interesting excerpt from a book written by the well known romance philologist, Geoffrey Hull: The Malta Language Question.

Maltese is an interesting case study because Sicily and Malta shared a very close history for milennia, and shared a similar linguistic history at the time of the Norman conquest, but Maltese remained an overwhelmingly Arabic language (with significant romance influences), while Sicily became thoroughly latinised with a relatively small Arabic influence.

In one chapter he describes the lexical stratification of Maltese, and in doing so, sheds some light on the linguistic situation of both islands at the time of the Norman conquest:

1. Pre-Arabic (before 870): presumably neo-punic or Byzantine Greek, with assimilated Latin elements from the Roman period [so even at the time of the Arab invasion of Malta, he is only talking about assimilarted Latin elements going back to the Roman era]

2. Sicilian Arabic (870-1243): of the Maghrebine type, originally Tunisian with possible residual neo-Punic and Berber elements.

3. Neo-Sicilian (1250-1800): basically a South Italian (continental) variety of Romance with Arabic, Greek and possible proto-Romance substratal elements, Norman French substratal elements and (after 1283) Tuscan, Catalan and occasional Spanbish superstratal elements. [This is important, in particular, "possible proto-Romance substratal element" - what this means is that neo-Sicilian has developed from a South Italian form of Romance, with the possibility of some proto-Romance elements, i.e. Latin elements going back to the Roman era - but quite clearly, this intimates that there has not been a continuous, uninterrupted linguistic development from the Roman era].

4. Tuscan (direct influence from 1450...)

5. French and Occitan (provencal) (1530-1800)

6. English (1800 to the present)

A key of difference between Malta and Sicily is the pre-Roman antiquity. Malta was mostly a Punic possesion and probably the Phoenician language was the most used, while Sicily was almost fully hellenized with Siculo/Elimo/Sicano survived in rural areas and the indigenous cities while Phoenician maybe spoken in Palermo and Lilibeo (together with Greek). The same Elimi in the Decreti di Entella used Greek as language not the Elimo.

latinised with a relatively small Arabic influence.

Fixed: latinised with significant Greek influences (the vocalism for example) and an almost deleted Arabic influences limitated only to a couple of loanwords.

 

[Hauteville]

I'm just remembering that I have in my possession another book written by Geoffrey Hull: Polyglot Italy.

He dedicates a chapter to the "dialects of Sicily, Calabria and Salento".

"...the Italian dialects of these regions are not local developments of Vulgar Latin but modern forms of a southern variety of Italian introduced not more than a thousand years ago into what used to be Greek and Arabic-speaking territory.
...
The Byzantine invasion of 535 AD enabled Greek to triumph over Latin throughout Sicily, at least on an official level, but it is likely that vernacular Romance lingered on the west of the island...

By the early eleventh century these islands and the whole of Sicily except the Hellenophone north-east had become predominantly Arabic in language...

There seems to be no conclusive evidence that any form of Romance speech survived the Saracen occupation of Sicily (or that it had even been vital there during the Byzantine period). Certainly the Italian speech that came to Sicily in the wake of the Norman conquest (1060-1091) was quite new to the island.

...Romance dialects of the two main groups of settlers brought in by the Hautevilles to reduce the Arab and Greek presence in Sicily. The Campanians (peasants from the Naples district and possibly from Cilento as well) colonised the Arabicized territory west of the Salso.
...
Most of the settlements in the east of the island were founded by pioneers from the Monferrat region of the western Po Valley. Padanian immigration to Sicily had been promoted by Roger I's marriage to Adelaide, daughter of the Marquis of Monferrat..and her brother Henry, married to Roger I's daughter Blandina, ruled the County of Paterno, the nucleus of Lombard settlement in eastern Sicily.

Norman Sicilian was slower in displacing the Padanian speech of these newcomers, but before its extinction in most areas this Northern language injected a substantial body of Gallo-Romance elements into the koine...the common Sicilian vocabulary had long since absorbed such fundamental Padanian words as soggiru (suoxer), cugnatu (cognau), bizzuni (besson), figghiozzu (figlioz), fadali (faudal), tuma, tumazzu (toma) fugazza (fogaza), orbu (orb), arricintari (rexentar), unni (ond), and the names of the week: luni (lunes), marti (martes), mercuri (mercor), jovi (juovia), venniri (venner).

Padanian influences on Sicilian extend into the realms of morphology and syntax...

The double Gallo-Romance (Old French and Padanian) impact on Sicilian accounts to a large extent for the relatively 'modern' (ie non-archaic) character of the dialect in comparison with vernaculars like Sardinian and Lucanian, the results of an uninterrupted bimillennial tradition of Latinity.

As Italo-Greek declined in neighboring Calabria it was replaced by the Messinese variety of Sicilian.

The neo-Italian (i.e. post-hellenic) speech of the Salentine penninsula (Terra d'Otranto) is not a form of Sicilian like that of lower Calabria, but represents the medieval Apulian dialect that filtered into the district during the period of civil reconstruction after the devastiting Moorish raids of the tenth century and the Norman conquest of 1054-1068. If Salentine appears superficially very similar to Sicilian it is because the Old Apulian from which it derives was itself not far removed from the South Italian koine that formed the basis of Norman Sicilian. The dialect has been strongly influenced by the local substratal Greek, but naturally lacks the Arabic and Padanian elements so prominent in the language of Sicily.

Professor Alberto Varvaro: " It is well known that opinion varies greatly on the linguistic situation that the Normans found in Sicily: no-one any longer doubts that a large part of the population, the administration and cultural milieux used Arabic, or is the survival of Greek (at least in the north-eastern area) a matter of controversy. Rather it is the existence and numbers of people speaking a neo-latin language that is uncertain and open to question.

Varvaro as well as Hull were supporters of Rohlfs' theory, but many others (Trovato, Devoto, Merlo etc) are supported of Latin continuum and pursuance. Mind you that in the ares of Extreme Southern Italians languages (Sicilian group with Calabrese and Salentino) there are even nowadays Greek-speaking survivors. Anyway, repopulation in Norman era was present, but not just from modern Campania: there were two types of settlements called by Falcando; the Longobardi (mainland South Italians from Campania, Puglia, Basilicata from ex Ducato di Benevento) and Lombardi from North West Italy. The others were the orthodox from Calabria and Salento. A minority were called Franchi who means French and Normans (mostly nobility and clerics).

 

[Joey D]

It's true that not all Italian philologists accept Rohlfs' theory, but one cannot say that all Italian philologists have gone the other way as well.

I'm quoting here from an oft used text in Sicily: Profili Linguistici delle regioni - Sicilia, by Giovanni Ruffino, a cura di Alberto A. Sobrero:

Qual era la situazione linguistica della Sicilia quando arrivarono i Normanni, che erano di lingua francese? Su questo particolare problema non c'e concordanza di opinioni. C'e accordo sul fatto che l'arabo fosse di uso moto esteso e che il greco fosse ancora parlato, quanto meno nella parte nord-orientale... Le opinioni pero divergono rispetto all'uso del neolatino (il siciliano)...

He then goes onto summarise Rohlf's theory, and the reaction from certain quarters against this theory, but certainly Ruffino does not dismiss Rohlf's views outright, and he too goes onto to describe the Norman French and padanian influence on Sicilian in the same way that Hull does above.

Ciò che si nota subito è la presenza in Sicilia – come anche in Calabria meridionale, che è linguisticamente legata all’isola – di termini che non corrispondono all’antica forma Latina, che invece nelle altre regioni. E giacché queste parole più moderne sone entrate in Sicilia durante la dominazione normanna, si può ben dire che in questo periodo il siciliano si è profondamente rinnovato.

[so at a minimum, whatever we accept about the survival of Latin from the fall of the Roman empire to the Norman conquest, be it weak, strong, or non-existent, Sicilian is completely refreshed with the arrival of the Normans, their rag tag armies, and the padanian immigrants which arrived soon after in very large numbers - it's a modern form of vulgar latin, and it has very little to do with the Latin from the Roman era, except for some minor usages which may have survived]

Come si è detto, in questo period arriva in Sicilia anche un gran numero di coloni italiani settentrionali, che hanno certamente introdotto molti termini delle loro parlate.

Come si vede, dunque, è proprio nel periodo normanno che si compie la formazione del siciliano moderno.

 

[MOESAN]

Basically it happened like this...............all italian regional dialects/languages came from vulgar latin mixed with their original regional ancient dialect...........then italian dialect/language was created 700 odd years ago from these italian regional languages..............




note:......as per linguistic scholars, then is no difference between a dialect and a language, and basically the term dialect is the correct term for all languages worldwide.

I agree; "a national language is a dialect which has succeeded" (only partly true: someones are more artificial than others) my remark was a simplistic answer to someones who think a lot of today distinct Italic national languages are not issued from Latin for the most; that said, yes, vulgar Latin was surely not uniform in the Empire and some other Italic languages can have left some traces in the diverses"koînes"; my aim was to insist on the fact that dialectalisation had begun since a long time and is not a recent phenomenon;
dialects, languages; OK - but clearly some dialects are more recent fragmentations of more ancient dialects, spite not too recent; I suppose that previously gradual network- and waves-like differences on a big area had become more marked locally with more grouped isoglosses, when the sedentism augmented associated to local powers (Middle Ages?); the hyperdialectalisation took force when the local dialect lost its regional importance and began to be in competition with an higher status "national" dialect (linked to political conditions): it's clear concerning words use: lost of numerous PARTLY synonymic words in favor of ONE of them here and there (not the same eveywhere, of course) and this kept ONE took larger and less precise semantic fields.
Surely dialects in fact present forms directly inherited from an ancient source associated with (rarest) forms inherited through another dialects spite ultimately from the same ancient sources. Never simple. But very often phonetic aspect seems more coherent as a whole than the vocabulary one.
That said, some dialects separated since a long time without contacts during some period and then we could maybe speak of "language": can we say by instance there is a continuum between Germanic, Latin or Slavic dialects ?

 

[Maleth]

A key of difference between Malta and Sicily is the pre-Roman antiquity. Malta was mostly a Punic possesion and probably the Phoenician language was the most used, while Sicily was almost fully hellenized with Siculo/Elimo/Sicano survived in rural areas and the indigenous cities while Phoenician maybe spoken in Palermo and Lilibeo (together with Greek). The same Elimi in the Decreti di Entella used Greek as language not the Elimo.

This is defiantly not the case. There are no Phoenician reminiscent left in todays Maltese Language. According to Al-Himyari the Islands were totally destroyed and became uninhabited by the Aghlibites in 870 only the be repopulated from Sicily quite some time later. The present Maltese Language must have come from these people. Also prior to the Aghlibite invasion the Maltese islands were for some 300 years under Byzantine rule and another some 300 under Roman Rule. What effect this had on the language the population spoke during this time is all irrelevant anyway as the Island has been depopulated after this period only the be repopulated later from Sicily. So genetics and language can only be referred to to this time period and nothing before.

See also: Arab–Byzantine wars and Emirate of Sicily

​

​

​

Malta became involved in the Muslim–Byzantine Wars, and the conquest of Malta is closely linked with that of Sicily that began in 827 after admiral Euphemius' betrayal of his fellow Byzantines, requesting that the Aghlabids invade the island.^[59] The Muslim chronicler and geographer al-Himyari recounts that in 870 AD, following a violent struggle against the occupying Byzantines, the Muslim invaders, first led by Halaf al-Hadim, and later by Sawada ibn Muhammad,^[60] looted and pillaged the island, destroying the most important buildings, and leaving it practically uninhabited until it was recolonised by the Muslims from Sicily in 1048–1049 AD.^[60] It is uncertain whether this new settlement took place as a consequence of demographic expansion in Sicily, as a result of a higher standard of living in Sicily (in which case the recolonisation may have taken place a few decades earlier), or as a result of civil war which broke out among Muslim rulers of Sicily in 1038.^[61] The Muslims introduced new irrigation, some fruits and cotton and the Siculo-Arabiclanguage was adopted on the island from Sicily: it would eventually evolve into the Maltese language.^[62]
The Christians on the island were allowed freedom of religion; they had to pay jizya, a tax for non-Muslims, but were exempt from the tax that Muslims had to pay (zakat).^[63]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Malta#Roman_rule​

 

[Maleth]

This could be interesting in regards to the 'Italian Language' and the Knights of Malta

https://www.diplomacy.edu/resources/general/languages-knights