No description available.

Notre recherche porte sur la compréhension approfondie de la chronogenèse italienne et, en son sein, de l'expression du futur, selon les principes théoriques et méthodologiques guillaumiens. Notre étude comparative associe les approches diachronique et synchronique. Nous étudions l'évolution de l'expression du futur de l'ancien italien à l'italien contemporain écrits grâce à un 1er corpus construit à partir du texte original du Decamerone de G. Boccaccio, de sa traduction en italien contemporain proposée par A. Busi et de sa traduction en français par J. Bourciez. Nous comparons l'expression du futur dans trois romans graphiques rédigés en italien (par des auteurs originaires de Vénétie et de Sicile) et en français, à l'aide d'une 2e série de corpus extrapolée à partir des transcriptions de ces BD. Nous observons, d'une part, les différences entre le français et l'italien standards contemporains, d'autre part, les réalisations de l'italien standard selon l'influence des substrats régionaux. Grâce à un 3e corpus, nous étudions l'expression du futur en napolitain en comparant les textes de chansons napolitaines du XIXe au XXIe, avec leurs traductions en italien et français standards. Notre confrontation des diverses solutions pour le futur couvre d'Ouest en Est la Romania occidentale (français standard, italien régional de Vénétie), la position centrale qu'occupe l'italien standard issu du florentin littéraire, la Romania orientale (italien régional de Sicile, napolitain). Nous étudions la distribution des formes morphologiques du futur (synthétiques, analytiques), leurs emplois (temporels, modaux) ainsi que les solutions alternatives d'expression du futur (autres temps, CC de temps). Nous discutons les concepts d'aspect, d'accompli et d'inaccompli, de perfectif et d'imperfectif et étudions leur distribution dans les formes morphosyntaxiques de l'expression du futur. / Our research focuses on the deep understanding of the Italian chronogenesis, and within it, of the expression of future, based on the theoretical and methodological principles of G. Guillaume. Our comparative study combines diachronic and synchronic approaches. We study the evolution of the expression of future from former Italian to contemporary Italian literature through a first corpus built from the original text of the Decameron of G. Boccaccio, its contemporary translation proposed by A. Busi and its French translation by J. Bourciez. We compare the expression of future in three Italian (by authors from the Veneto and Sicily) and French graphic novels, with a second series of corpus extrapolated from the transcripts of these comics. We observe, on one hand, the differences between French and Italian contemporary standards, and on the other hand, the achievements of the Italian standard according to its substrates' regional influence. With a third corpus, we study the expression of future by comparing Neapolitan songs texts from the XIXth to the XXth century, with their translations in Italian and French. Our comparison of the various solutions for future covers, from West to East, the western Romania (standard French, Veneto regional Italian), and the central position of the Italian literary standard from Florentine, Eastern Romania (Sicilian regional Italian, Neapolitan). We study the distribution of future's morphological forms (synthetic, analytic), uses (temporal, modal) and alternative expression of future (other times, adverbial phrase of time). We discuss the concepts of aspect, accomplished and unaccomplished, perfective and imperfective and study their distribution in the morphosyntactic forms of future's expression.

The purpose of this paper is to show the similarities between two authors, who both have been very successful in Italy and abroad. They are the 14th century writer Giovanni Boccaccio and the contemporary author Andrea Camilleri. I compare five short stories by Camilleri published in his books Gran circo Taddei and La regina di Pomerania and five short stories from Decameron. My aim is to show that they, although more than 600 years apart, have a common angle of approach when it comes to describing how women, seemingly subordinate and compliant, not rarely manage to achieve their aim even if it is trivial, low and not at all focused on changing the world. I also want to elucidate the fact that both writers not rarely let their female characters act as accomplices, that there is a female solidarity between them and that they seem to hav an energy and vigour that men seem to lack. The man on the other hand is often described as weak, as a false authority, who changes into a tool, a diversion in the hands of the woman. Besides this I make an analysis of the "false" short story by Boccaccio, Antonello da Palermo, written by Camilleri to see if it can fall into the genre of rewriting of classical works, which is typical of postmodernism, simply if it fulfills the criteria of such a rewriting.