MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF "THE FLAG OF ALBANIA" IN THE CONTEXT OF LINGUISTICS DEVELOPMENT OF NINETEENTH-CENTURY. THE CASE OF PRONOUNS

The newspapers of late nineteenth-century are considered an important vector in Italian linguistic history due to their undoubted impact on the common language. What characterizes the journalistic prose of the time, valid to a certain extent even today, are the great heterogeneity of the expressive registers on the one hand and the linguistic homogeneity on the other. In this context, the journalistic language must undoubtedly be placed on the tracks of the literary language of tradition, that’s why our morphological analysis in this article is in full harmony with the developments of the contemporary literary language. The linguistic analysis of the examined journal, «The flag of Albania», will prove to be true. Our analysis will not be broad-based grammar, but will only touch the grammatical category of pronouns. We will examine the most salient forms of personal, indefinite, demonstrative, relative and interrogative pronouns accepted by the author in various contexts of use, explaining the reason for this choice and why one form is more frequent than the other.


Introduction
The renewal of the traditional literary language after the political unification has always interested scholars because it represents one of the crucial periods of Italian linguistic history. The Manzoni reform, the affinity of spoken with written language, invested all its sectors and created the ground for a common language for evryone. Newspapers have contributed a lot to the spread of traditional Italian, the heritage of educated people, in the less educated strata of society, and have played an important role in the post-unification linguistic renewal process. Reconstructing this process, on which the structure of today's Italian language depends, has been the goal of many scholars, but in this study we will limit ourselves to analyse only pronouns. The choice of a bilingual monthly newspaper of the province of the southern area "Fiàmuri Arbërit -La Bandiera dell'Albania" (The Flag of Albania) 1883-1887 in 32 issues as the only source for our analysis may seem limiting, however it has a practical justification, because the nineteenth-century post-unification newspapers provides more evidence of various expressive registers of the coeval written language, an era in which the development of a national language is essential.
De Rada edits and translates the articles of the newspaper, so we can attribute the language to De Rada himself. Our morphological analysis in this article focuses on the author's pronominal linguistic choices. The analysis is based on the typical features of the prose language of the time. Starting from the pronominal phenomena found in our journal, we tried to make both the concordance with the journalist language of the time and with the contemporary literary language.
The language of De Rada is the literary Italian of the tradition where the acceptance of cultured pronominal forms, typical of the most illustrious tradition, both archaic forms or forms widely used in tradition, but in disuse in the nineteenth century, stands out. It is worth mentioning the use of the personal pronouns subject ei, eglino, elli, the use of il for lo as an atonal direct object pronoun; the use of the indefinite pronoun qualche with plural nouns and of the indefinite uom and alquanto like in the ancient language; the use of singular masculine demonstrative pronouns questi and quegli, limited to human referents, considered very formal as well as the forms costei, costui, costoro, and the use of the archaic form of desso/a; the use of the relative che after preposition in the place of cui and the use of cui as an object to give the language a more sustained tone. The author's individual stylistic choices cannot be denied. In some articles of an argumentative nature, with the intention of sublimating the dictation, the author chooses cultured traits of the literary tradition (the extensive use of the pronominal enclysis which becomes almost an automatic fact).
The informational function of journalism somewhat compromises the literariness of De Rada's language with the penetration of linguistic traits of the spoken language and of the Florentine's dialect which, in any case, are sporadic (che polyvalent, lui, loro as a subject pronoun). The influence of bureaucratic language is almost insignificant (use of il di lui, il di lei instead of the possessive pronoun suo).

Methodology
In this study we have employed an analitical approach based on a lingistic counting method. The data are collected through a keen observation of the pronominal forms in all issues of the journal. All the pronominal forms of the journal are compared with the coeval journalistic language as well as literary language. In each case the number of ocorrences is given to better understand their trend of use, which of the forms is prefered by the author and why? We have reported even the contexts of use accompanied with the number of the issue, month and year.

Personal pronouns. Third person subject tonic forms
The use of personal pronouns in our journal is similar to that of the contemporary narrative language as stated by Patota (1987) supported by the "centuries-old grammatical tradition" (p. 69) from Bembo to Manzoni. The studies of many scholars also go in line with this, such as (Serianni 1989, pp. 191-193;Migliorini 1963Migliorini , 2007Bonomi 2002, p. 71;Durante 1970, pp. 180 -202). The accepted pronominal forms reflect the coeval middle language and in some cases are choices that Serianni (1989) defines "as diaphasic variants proper of the high register" (p. 190). Let us begin by analyzing third person personal subject pronouns. We have noticed that the form ei occurs relatively more often than egli, however we do not have "the eviction of the pronoun egli" (Serianni 1989, p. 190)  The use of ei next to egli testifies that De Rada felt more the influence of tradition than Manzoni who was "decisive [...] in reducing or even eliminating the types ei, eglino, elleno from the prose" (Serianni 1989, p. 192). The pronoun Ei was, rather, common even in other writers such as Settembrini, Carducci, De Sanctis (Serianni 1989 The use of lui as subject is less frequent, "all nineteenth-century prose, even the most traditional, knows the use of lui, lei as marked personal pronouns (in the grammatical sense: è lui, lui stesso, anche lui, ecc. or even, more rarely, in a diaphasic-diastratic sense, as proper forms of dialogue or popular speakers)" (Serianni 1989, p. 191), but as we know, with the influence of Manzoni's novel "lui e lei expand its own sphere of use, to the point of transforming itself from marked variants, as they were traditionally, into neutral variants" (Serianni 1989, p. 192). In De Rada, as in coeval prose, lui as a subject does not find so much space, in front of egli, ei or esso. Serianni (1989) affirms that "In the journalistic prose of the time lui is, however, exceptional (nor can it be said that has done a long way even today); from SPM these data are obtained: out of 2021 occurrences of personal pronoun male subject, 1813 examples of egli (89.7%) are contrasted by 204 ei (10.1%) and just 4 lui (0.2%)" (pp. 51-52). Almost the same data are reported in Bonomi, 1973 andMasini 1977. Lui non vede (Num 4, 15 january1883, p. VII); lui e tutta la famiglia (Num 2, 20 may 1885, p.IV); prima che lui torni vivo. (Num 1, 15 october 1886, p. VIII); dove si fermò e, morto lui, successegli nel regno, ed edificò Anfilochio. (Num 5, 15 may 1887, p. III); We must remember the use of the form di lui instead of the possessive suo in the following case: Questa Chiesa fu fondata da Angelo Matranga nel 1602 per un prodigio operato dalla Vergine alla di lui consorte signora Ellena. (Num 12, 30 october 1884, p.VIII). "This use of il di lui, il di lei disliked by grammarians, was a result of the bureaucratic language" says Bonomi (2002, p. 71). Moise (1878) also has the same consideration, who reminds us that "most of the grammarians and philosophers are averse to these forms" (pp. 383-384). The last form found among the third person singular masculine subject personal pronouns is esso. This form is also well documented, both in anaphoric use and in marked contexts, though with fewer occurrences (24 in total). Let's see the contexts of use: Esso ebbe prima (Num 1, 20 july 1883, p. II); esso si tolse (Num 2, 30 september 1883, p. II); cosi esso caggia, e si sperda (Num 3, 15 december 1883, p. IV); anche esso vuol forse (Num 3, 15 december 1883, p. V); ch' esso le si spegna (Num 4, 15 january 1883, p. VIII); ch'esso avea dentro (Num 7, 30 april1884, p. III); da cui esso attinge. (Num 10, 30 july 1884, p. III); per esser stato esso (Num 10, 30 july 1884, p. IV); esso non sa di questi (Num 10, 30 july 1884, p. VI); ora ch' esso senza denaro (Num 10, 30 july 1884, p. VI); a quelli di che esso costa. (Num 12, 30 october 1884, p. IV); a tempi esso abbandonato (Num 3, 20 june 1885, p. VII); che'esso servi all'Ellenia (Num 4, 20 august 1885, p. I); esso venne avviato (Num 7, 20 november 1885, p. IV).
Turning to the feminine pronouns of the third person singular we have noticed that the dominant form is essa, a form quite used in the language of prose due to its nature and function (Klajn 1976). The numerical superiority (82 occurrences in total) of this form compared to other forms, including the masculine ones, is related to the fact that essa is used especially in its anaphoric functions, "in the same way for animate or inanimate beings" (Serianni, Castelvecchi 1989 In our journal, as in the coeval language "egli and the allocutive ella continue to flourish as diaphasic variants typical of the high register" (Serianni 1989, p. 190). The most usual form of politeness for De Rada is ella rather than lei, but in our journal ella is also attested in anaphoric functions and marked contexts. The number of occurrences is lower than the previous case (24 in total) because De Rada prefers essa, as we have seen before.
Here are some contexts of use of ella: On the contrary, lei as a subject is never used and as an allocutive in a few cases. Even the reduced form la never appears.
We have also found the form eglino "decidedly literary" (Bonomi 2002, p. 71) and elli "of archaic use" (Serianni, Castelvecchi 1989, while the oblique form loro is almost never used in function of subject except the following case: Elli si addormentarono; e, dormendo loro, il campo fu mietuto (Num 8, 20 december 1885, p. VII). This form is widely used by the author as an object. We have found more than 160 occurrences throughout the journal, especially in direct speeches even where it could be replaced with the atonic form gli. In reality, the use of loro remained firmly established in the nineteenth century, and it is still normal today in writing at all levels (Serianni 1986). We report the occurrences of eglino and some of elli (in total there are 16 occurrences): A frequent use De Rada makes of the pronoun seco "common in tradition and in the nineteenth century" (Masini 1977, p. 52

Atonal personal pronouns
The forms of the atonal personal pronouns, not being numerous, don't seem very relevant in our journal. The significant cases, in fact, are limited. One of the most representative phenomena is the use of the literary form il for lo. Here is a part of the contexts of use (in total there are 22 occurrences). The use of gli per li is very limited, only two cases: come senza mutamento sono i grani e la frutta che gli nutricano. (Num 10, 30 july 1884, p. II); Le si raccomandò perch'era messo fra due coltelli; e pur le espose come potea soccorrergli. (Num 9, 20 january 1886, p. V); while the variant gli per loro does not find space, leaving room to loro.
The enclysis of atonal personal pronouns is very frequent in our journal, in fact the nineteenth-century prose boasts of this use "although its presence is not linked to particular syntactic obligations" (Patota 1987, p. 78). Usually the enclysis occurs with the verbal voices of the third person singular (often impersonal forms), according to a usage established since the second half of the sixteenth century, but here it is also used with the first and second person singular and plural giving the idea of "an automatic fact, stylistically neutral" (Patota 1987, p. 78 De Rada uses even nol, "a form limited in the nineteenth century to the language of poetry and the highest prose" (Masini 1977, p. 54). Here are the contexts of use: elli nol sanno Num 6, 30 march 1884, p. I; nol lascia tra essi sonare Num 12, 30 october 1884, p. I; e questa ancor nol raccolse Num 4, 20 august 1885, p. IV; chè nol patisce il luogo malsano Num 7, 20 november 1885, p. V.

Indefinite pronouns and adjectives
The use of qualche as an adjective is very limited (qualche giornale Num 4, 15 january 1883 p. II; qualche agiatezza Num 4, 15 january 1883 p. V; qualche anno Num 10, 20 february 1886 p. II; qualche avviso Num 1, 15 october 1886 p. VIII;), because, as grammarians state, the meaning and contexts of use often make it interchangeable with alcuno (Serianni, Castelvecchi 1989. In fact, alcuno is more literary and characteristic of written language for this reason it is more sought after by the author. In our texts we have found instances in which qualche is used with plural nouns as it was used in the ancient language: qualche brani Num 3, 20 june 1885 p. II; qualche anni Num 3, 20 june 1885 p. VIII. The occurrences of alcuno adjective and pronoun, plural and singular are by far the majority in comparison with the four occurrences of qualche. In these functions alcuno is met in sentences with positive value in competition with qualche and qualcuno. We report some ocorrences of alcuno (in total there are 25 occurrences): Alcuno is encountered also in negative sentences, where in today's Italian is usually used nessuno. We report the occurrences: Alcunché find no place in our journal, but De Rada uses the detached form alcun che in three instances: (dà alla Vita alcun che, direi, d'eternale (Num 10, 30 july 1884, p. II); È alcun ché non possibile a contenere in petto. (Num 12, 20 april 1886, p. V); che facciasi alcun che di bene. (Num 3, 15 march 1887, p. VII). As for nessuno pronoun and adjective, we must say that it is the only form in use though the nineteenth-century prose largely presents the form niuno. The two forms have interchanged over the course of the history of the Italian language, states Serianni (1982) but "between the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries niuno gradually exits the language of every day use and tends to specialize in the poetic field [...] while nessuno becomes the only current form in every part of Italy" (p. 27). Even Masini (1977) is of the same opinion. In De Rada, we have found only nessuno. However, we shall remember the presence of the variant in i which must be attributed to the atonal vocalism, protonic e/i alternation, very present in the journalistic language of the time. The form in i is used much more willingly by De Rada so we have nissuno tuenty two occurrences, nissuna five and nessuno three, nessuna fuor. If nessuno/nissuno and alcuno are used constantly by De Rada, this does not happen with veruno, a rather literary form, except in the following case in which veruno adjective is postponed to the noun (che si nutrisse ivi gratuitamente pur Albanese veruno non battezzato in rito greco (Num 10, 30 july 1884 p. V).
The indefinite negatives nulla and niente are both present with a slight predominance of nulla (two more occurrences).
During our analysis we have noticed only the presence of the pronoun qualcuno although of few occurrences (two for qualcuno, three for qualcuna and one for the plural qualcuni) and the total absence of qualcheduno, on the other hand the pronoun and adjective taluno is encountered more frequently, almost three times the occurrences of qualcuno (14 in total). Here are some contexts of use: The forms qualunque and qualsiasi do not appear in our journal, while we have found an occurrence for each literary and traditional periphrases qualsifosse, checché, chicchessia: (quinci sciolta e isolata, qual si fosse ambizioso (Num 3, 15 march 1887, p. IV); non all'Italia o a chicchessia (Num 3, 15 march 1887, p. IV); Checché si voglia (Num 1, 20 july 1883, p. VI).

Demonstrative pronouns
Alongside the more common demonstrative pronouns questo and quello De Rada also uses the masculine singular pronominal forms, limited to human referents, questi e quegli that grammarians consider "of formal or literary use" (Trifone, Palermo 2008, p. 83  De Rada always uses the variant cotesto for codesto, a form considered very common by scholars both in the ancient language and in modern Tuscan (Serianni, Castelvecchi 2002, Brodin 1970. There are four plural forms in total, including two singular masculine forms and three singular feminine forms. In one case we found the form cotestui: (Cotestui alcun tempo prima (Num 10, 30 july 1884 p. V). Although in a few occurrences is present the anaphoric demonstrative pronoun of adjectival use esso, it should not be confused with the personal pronoun which is the same in all respects but is used, as Fornaciari states, "prefixing it to a name mentioned before, either to make it stand out more, or to make sure that the repetition of the name does not seem to be done randomly and out of negligence" (Fornaciari 1881(Fornaciari , 1974. The use of these literary forms testifies once again the elevated tone of De Rada's language. Here are the contexts of use of esso demonstrative: alcuna di esse potenze (Num 2, 15 november 1886, p. I); E da esso Verbo sta in noi la coscienza immota (Num 11, 20 march 1886, p. III); E poi è onor grande di essa Italia che (Num 10, 20 february 1886, p. VI). ch'è essa la Russia (Num 1, 15 october 1886, p. II).
We have found the archaic form desso/a with "anaphoric-reinforcing value" which, according to grammarians, is used "as predicate noun or predicative complement after essere, parere, sembrare, usually with reference to people" (Serianni, Castelvecchi 2002, p. 284). This form, as in the previous case, "gives the sentence a completely literary connotation" (Bonomi 2002, p. 72). In past centuries this form was widely used, but in the nineteenth century it was in slight decline, however present in the language of newspapers of the second half of the century (Masini 1977). De Rada makes limited use of it, only two occurrences in all: Perchè è dessa una storia semplice (Num 1, 20 july 1883, p. II); Erano dessi quattro giovani egregi (Num 12, 20 april 1886, p. II).
Alongside colui, coloro more often are used the forms costui, costoro. The distribution of the occurrences of colui and coloro is the same, five each:  (Num 12, 20 april 1886, p. VII); costei assomiglia (Num 2, 20 may 1885, p. VIII, note 1); The pronouns costui and costoro are the most used forms of this group. As it can be noticed, the pattern in which costui is placed between article and noun, is still present in our texts. In the second half of the nineteenth century such patterns are declining, although present in literary sustained texts, for example it is found in the language of Leopardi's prose (Vitale 1992, p. 92). We bring the occurrences of costui and costoro.

Neutral interrogative pronoun che? cosa? che cosa?
In our journal the alternation between che, both in direct and indirect interrogatives, with che cosa and the elliptical cosa is almost non-existent. Patota (1987) states that "in the most well-known texts of the normative tradition no mention is made of this linguistic habit, either to approve it or to condemn it (p. 84)", but from the beginning of the nineteenth century the use of cosa in place of che cosa is often contested by the most traditionalist grammarians. (Serianni 1989, Patota 1987, Migliorini 2007, Paradisi 1994, Zolli 1974. Even Manzoni, in many cases, substitutes the traditional form che cosa with cosa, a choice that becomes much more radical in later works, especially in linguistic writings (Serianni 1989). De Rada, on the other hand, does not find himself in this current. The variant che is considered by scholars of southern origin, therefore a form that predominates from Rome on down (Serianni, Castelvecchi 2002, Serianni 1986, Sabatini 1985. De Rada, who comes from the southern area too, constantly uses this form, while che cosa appears once (che cosa Num 10, 20 february 1886 p.V) and the colloquial form cosa is completely absent. The use of che interrogative adjective is very limited, three occurrences in all: Ma poi con che ragione? (Num 4, 15 april 1887, p. III); Da che regioni noi proveniamo? (Num 5, 15 may 1887, p. I); E con che disegno (Num 6, 15 august 1887, p. II).

Conclusions
It appears from our analysis that the language of the journal examined, like the language of the late nineteenthcentury newspapers, is fully placed on the tracks of the traditional Italian literary language (Serianni 1990, Mazzini 1977, Bonomi 1973, Scavuzzo 1988. Pronominal choices reflect the evolution of the contemporary literary language. The subject personal pronouns of the third person singular and plural are those of the traditional pronominal system, which are still firmly established in our texts. The fact that ei occurs more frequently than egli is to be attributed to a stylistic choice, not language, or it is an internal combination (ei next to egli) between forms considered legitimate in the nineteenth-century language. Egli masculine and the allocutive Ella are the forms used most in the formal language. The pronoun lei subject finds no place, however, as an allocutive it is used less than Ella. Even lui subject is not lucky enough: the normal forms are egli, ei and esso. Among the masculine and feminine third-person pronouns the most frequent is essa, while the reduced forms e', gli, la are totally absent. The most used third-person plural pronoun is essi. Elli and elle, occur quite often, while eglino, elle, loro count few occurrences. The literary form elleno and the reduced one le are entirely missing. The substantial linguistic homogeneity is also seen in the choices of other pronouns: the use of the indefinite uom e alquanto, the singular masculine demonstratives questi e quegli, the forms costei, costui, costoro and desso/a, the relative che after preposition instead of cui and the use of cui as an object.