EuRom5 - Lire et comprendre 5 langues romanes (Hoepli 2011)

Author: Elisabetta Bonvino, Sandrine Caddéo, Eulàlia Vilaginés Serra, Sandra Garbarino (eds.); from Claire Blanche-Benveniste’s EuRom4 · Type: academic · Status: draft · Published: 2011-01-01

Licence: Scanned sample chapters of a copyrighted book (Hoepli 2011), held for internal research reference only. Short quotes with attribution are fine; do not republish the scans or extended excerpts.

Summary

EuRom5 (Lire et comprendre 5 langues romanes, Hoepli 2011; eds. Bonvino, Caddeo, Vilagines Serra, Garbarino; successor to Blanche-Benveniste’s EuRom4) is the intercomprehension method behind Immersive’s Bridge Method positioning (#407).

EuRom5 teaches receptive competence only — reading (plus listening) comprehension — in five Romance languages simultaneously (Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan, Italian, French), exploiting family resemblance (“intercomprehension”). No production practice, no drills, no A1→A2 ladder: adult learners with one Romance L1 reach autonomous newspaper reading (~B1/B2 receptive, grounded in the CEFR’s “partial competences” concept) in about 40 guided hours, working on authentic press articles from day one. Each of the 100 texts (20 per language, always presented in the geographic-continuum order PT–ES–CA–IT–FR) carries a scaffold: title pre-translated into the other four languages, native-speaker audio, numbered lines, five-language lexical tables keyed to line numbers, S/V/O structure skeletons for hard sentences, and § cross-references into a small contrastive grammar of reading. The aids thin out as the learner progresses.

The attached documents are the four scanned sample chapters (preface, general presentation, Italian text apparatus, grammar of reading); raw content holds the detailed per-chapter summaries. How the method maps onto Immersive is documented in docs/features/bridge_method.md.

Insights

The intercomprehension hypothesis holds that a native speaker of one Romance language can understand the other Romance languages to a useful degree by relying on structural resemblances among them. (medium, draft) intercomprehension romance languages transfer receptive skills

since the Romance languages resemble each other to varying degrees, a native speaker of one should be able to understand the others more or less well by relying on those resemblances. The idea has since acquired a name that has become almost a label: intercomprehension. — Preface, section “The founding idea”
The EuRom intercomprehension project, launched in 1990 with EU funding, used newspaper articles in the main Romance languages, recorded aloud, as its core learning material in university courses across four countries. (high, draft) intercomprehension authentic materials reading method design romance languages

With EU funding and colleagues across the Romance area, Blanche-Benveniste designed the project in 1990 … newspaper articles in the main Romance languages, chosen for accessible themes and interest; each article recorded by semi-professional voices. … university courses in the participating countries (four in the initial project). — Preface, section “The experiment (from 1990)”
In the EuRom method, the linguistic annotations attached to texts were derived from a corpus of difficulties reported by the learners themselves rather than from linguists’ predictions. (high, draft) learner corpus annotations method design intercomprehension

the difficulties reported by the learners themselves were collected and became the basis of the linguistic annotations on the articles. — Preface, section “The experiment (from 1990)”, “Corpus of obstacles”
The EuRom training mode was strictly receptive: each participant spoke their own language while learning only to understand the other languages through reading and listening. (high, draft) receptive skills reading listening intercomprehension

Mode: strictly receptive — each participant spoke their own language but learned to understand the others by reading and listening. — Preface, section “The experiment (from 1990)”, “Mode”
Years of EuRom experimentation found that students understood far more of related Romance languages than had been anticipated. (high, draft) intercomprehension comprehension romance languages empirical finding

Students understood much more than anyone had imagined. — Preface, section “Findings from years of experimentation”, item 1
A receptive command of related Romance languages at a satisfying level can be attained in a few months of intercomprehension training. (high, draft) receptive skills time to proficiency intercomprehension learning outcomes

A receptive apprenticeship of satisfying level can be reached in a few months — one of three results Simone calls extraordinary and little known. — Preface, section “Findings from years of experimentation”, item 3
In cross-Romance comprehension, false friends (‘faux amis’) proved less of an obstacle than folklore predicted, and true cognates (‘vrais amis’) outnumber false friends. (high, draft) false friends cognates lexicon romance languages intercomprehension

the famous false friends turned out to matter less than expected: important differences hindered learning not only where folklore placed them (“faux amis”), and there are more “vrais amis” than “faux amis”. — Preface, section “Findings from years of experimentation”, item 4
Genuine obstacles to cross-Romance comprehension lie in strong differences of pronunciation, spelling, grammar, and lexicon, not only in the celebrated false friends. (high, draft) comprehension obstacles pronunciation orthography grammar intercomprehension

Real obstacles exist: certain strong differences between the Romance languages — in pronunciation, in spelling, in grammar and lexicon beyond the celebrated “faux amis” — Preface, section “Findings from years of experimentation”, item 4
Because learners risk erroneous inferences from pronunciation or spelling, intercomprehension teaching needs a minimal contrastive grammar delivered as sparse annotations available in all project languages, letting each learner choose the explanation register that suits them. (medium, draft) contrastive grammar annotations learner autonomy intercomprehension

Learners risked erroneous suppositions based on pronunciation or spelling; hence the need for a minimal, contrastive “grammar” — artfully minimal annotations, written in all the project languages, plus the need to let the learner turn to whichever explanation register suits them. — Preface, section “Findings from years of experimentation”, item 5
EuRom4, published in 1997 for four Romance languages, showed immediate efficacy and served as reference or inspiration for about a dozen similar intercomprehension projects. (high, draft) eurom4 intercomprehension method adoption romance languages

The scenario was refined and published as EuRom4 in 1997 (four languages — Nuova Italia). Its efficacy was immediate; the material was used as reference or inspiration in a dozen similar projects. — Preface, section “From EuRom4 to EuRom5”
EuRom5 extended the method to a fifth language, Catalan, while keeping the same didactic principles as EuRom4 and adding comprehension aids drawn from fifteen years of accumulated experience. (high, draft) eurom5 catalan comprehension aids intercomprehension

Added Catalan as a fifth language … The result kept the same didactic principles as EuRom4 but benefited from fifteen years of accumulated experience, translated into innovations such as the various aids for text comprehension. — Preface, section “From EuRom4 to EuRom5”
Extending the EuRom intercomprehension method to Romanian was judged to require a more complex study phase because of that language’s particularities, while extension to Latin-American varieties and Romance dialects was considered feasible after experimentation. (medium, draft) romanian language distance intercomprehension romance languages

Romanian was considered but requires a more complex study phase given that language’s particularities; extension to Latin-American varieties and parallel Romance dialects is likewise imagined. — Preface, section “From EuRom4 to EuRom5”
The EuRom5 method trains only receptive competence: speakers of one of five Romance languages (Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan, Italian, French) learn to understand written texts in the other four, without any training in production or interaction. (high, draft) intercomprehension receptive skills romance languages reading

EuRom5 develops plurilingualism through a receptive competence in five Romance languages simultaneously (PT, ES, CA, IT, FR): a speaker of any of the five learns to understand written texts (and their read-aloud form) in the other four, in very little time. It does not train production or interaction. — Présentation générale, §1.1 Intercomprehension
Cross-linguistic relatedness between an L1 and a related L2 is typically treated in language teaching as a source of interference rather than exploited as a resource for comprehension. (medium, draft) transfer interference intercomprehension pedagogy

These are usually ignored because relatedness is treated as a problem (interference) instead of a resource. The idea that one must set aside the L1 to make room for the L2 still prevails — Présentation générale, §1.1 Intercomprehension (linguistic-competence view)
Receptive skills can be developed deliberately in isolation as legitimate partial competences, and learners reach comprehension much faster than production, in related and non-related language pairs alike. (high, draft) partial competence receptive skills cefr comprehension

Abilities can be dissociated: learners reach comprehension much faster than production, and this difference holds for related languages (observable in the case of non-related languages as well). — Présentation générale, §1.1 Intercomprehension (operative-competence view)
Experimentation with EuRom4/EuRom5 found that approximately forty hours of instruction suffice for a learner to acquire reading competence in all four related Romance target languages simultaneously. (high, draft) intercomprehension reading acquisition rate romance languages empirical

Key claim from experimentation: in about forty hours (“une quarantaine d’heures”) a learner acquires reading competence in all the confronted languages; speed of acquisition/learning is one of the principal assets and the most original characteristic of the method — Présentation générale, §1.2 From EuRom4 to EuRom5
Working on texts in several target languages within the same session (simultaneity) promotes transversal learning: comprehension strategies acquired become reinvestable in any related language, including ones not studied. (high, draft) simultaneity transfer comprehension strategies intercomprehension

Simultaneous contact favors transversality of learning and the capacity to reinvest comprehension strategies in any language. An Italian speaker doesn’t learn French or Portuguese; they acquire a receptive competence — becoming a reader of several Romance languages (and can extend to Romance languages not offered). — Présentation générale, §1.3 General principles (Simultaneity)
Among the five Romance languages of EuRom5, French is the typological outlier, with more rigid word order and an obligatory formal subject, while resemblance across the languages is strongest in the lexicon. (high, draft) romance languages typology french transfer lexicon

Typologically the languages are very similar, except French, which stands out (more rigid word order, obligatory formal subject). Resemblance holds at all levels, with lexicon weighted most. — Présentation générale, §1.3 General principles (Transferability)
Skilled L1 readers often regress to word-by-word ‘bad reader’ behavior when reading in an L2, and comprehension improves when they are recentered on L1 reading mechanisms: global meaning, world knowledge, context, and inference. (high, draft) reading comprehension strategies inference l2 reading

a good L1 reader often regresses to bad reader in L2: trying to understand everything, word by word. The method recenters the learner on mechanisms already known from the native language: privilege a global grasp of meaning, use world knowledge, exploit linguistic and extralinguistic context, stimulate inference. — Présentation générale, §1.3 General principles (Reading recentering)
Intercomprehension-based learners reach a CEFR reading competence between B1 and B2 very rapidly, skipping the usual linear A1-to-A2 beginner progression. (high, draft) cefr reading intercomprehension acquisition rate proficiency

The progression is not linear (not A1→A2→…): based on intercomprehension principles, learners reach a reading competence between B1 and B2 very rapidly (“il arrive très rapidement à un niveau de compétence de lecture qui varie entre B1 et B2 du CECR”), skipping the usual beginner path. — Présentation générale, §1.4 Objectives
In EuRom5, word count serves as the primary, empirically observed proxy for text difficulty: texts are graded into three tranches of 100-200, 200-300, and 300-400 words, since progressing learners can understand ever-longer texts. (high, draft) text difficulty grading reading materials design empirical

Text order is determined principally by progressive increase in word count — an objective criterion observed during experimentation: as learners progress, they can understand ever-longer texts. — Présentation générale, §3.2 Progression
During experimentation, learners’ interest in linguistic aids followed a consistent order: lexicon first, then syntactic phenomena, and finally morphology. (high, draft) lexicon syntax morphology learner behavior empirical

Observed order of learner interest during experimentation: lexicon first, then syntactic phenomena, and finally morphology. — Présentation générale, §3.1 Learning path
Alternating the target language every half hour within a session is an experimentally proven unit of time for maintaining simultaneity and keeping attention on acquiring reading skill. (high, draft) simultaneity session design reading intercomprehension

Experience shows that to guarantee simultaneity and keep attention on acquiring the savoir lire, changing language every half hour is a proven unit of time. — Présentation générale, §3.1 Learning path
Because the manual serves speakers of all five languages, its aids are a superset exceeding any single reader’s real difficulties, so teachers should filter aids by the learner’s L1 and self-learners should avoid soliciting translations as much as possible. (high, draft) scaffolding l1 background autonomy materials design

the syntactic/lexical aids are often superior to the real difficulties of any one reader (an Italian speaker easily understands a Spanish word that is a difficulty for a francophone). The teacher can sort/filter the aids to give; the self-learner should avoid soliciting the translations as much as possible. — Présentation générale, §3.1 Learning path
Teaching learners that they need not understand every word, because global comprehension suffices, is described as liberating and as a driver toward reading autonomy. (medium, draft) comprehension strategies approximation autonomy reading

It is therefore useful to make the learner understand they must not understand everything — global comprehension of meaning suffices, as it does (more often than believed) in their own language. “This discovery is incredibly liberating and pulls them toward autonomy.” — Présentation générale, §3.3.1 Global approach and the right to approximation
Listening to a native reading while reading aids comprehension by revealing syntactic grouping through prosody and by exposing cross-language resemblances when a word’s spelling is opaque but its sound is transparent. (high, draft) listening prosody orthography comprehension strategies input

it clarifies the organization of a syntactic construction by giving the regrouping of units; it permits identification of sentence phrases through prosody; and it can be useful when the spelling is opaque but the oral is transparent — Présentation générale, §3.3.2 Role of listening
Experimentation with Romance-language reading found more true cognates (‘vrais amis’) than false friends (‘faux amis’), indicating that false friends are not the real obstacle to intercomprehension. (high, draft) cognates false friends lexicon romance languages empirical

(Per the Preface: experimentation found more “vrais amis” than “faux amis” — the celebrated false friends are not the real obstacle.) — Présentation générale, §3.3.3 Lexical transparency
When readers replace an unknown word with a placeholder ‘phantom word’ and continue reading, they are often able to supply the correct word by the end of the sentence, using immediate context or collocation. (high, draft) phantom word inference context comprehension strategies reading

Experience showed that once arrived at the end of the sentence, the reader is often able to substitute the phantom word with the appropriate one. The strategy avoids supplying the solution too quickly. — Présentation générale, §3.4.1 Role of context and the “phantom word”
Segmenting an opaque word into smaller morphological units can make it transparent to related-language readers, as when Italian ‘storielle’ is decomposed into ‘storia’ plus ‘-elle’ to reveal its cognates. (high, draft) word segmentation morphology cognates comprehension strategies

a word segmented into smaller units can become more transparent and thus more comprehensible. Examples: I storielle → storia + -elle (the reader reaches the solution because P história – E historia – C història – F histoire resemble storia more evidently) — Présentation générale, §3.4.3 Word segmentation
In the EuRom5 model, reading comprehension operates through a permanent back-and-forth between top-down processes (global meaning, inference, encyclopedic knowledge) and bottom-up processes (word segmentation, identification of correspondences), and translation serves only as a cognitive tool to favor and verify comprehension. (high, draft) top-down processing bottom-up processing translation reading comprehension

Translation is not the final objective; it is a cognitive tool whose only purpose is to favor and verify the comprehension process. Comprehension operates by a permanent back-and-forth between top-down processes (“par le haut” — global approach to meaning, inference, recourse to encyclopedic knowledge) and bottom-up processes (“par le bas” — word segmentation, identification of correspondences). — Présentation générale, §3.5 Concluding notes on the language and the “translations”
EuRom5 (Hoepli 2011) uses exclusively authentic press articles as reading texts, each credited with source and date and printed with a word count, rather than pedagogically simplified texts. (high, draft) intercomprehension authentic texts romance languages materials design

All are authentic press articles with source and date credited (e.g. www.ansa.it; Airone, August 2007; Il Venerdì di Repubblica, 23/11/2007) and a word count printed under the text. — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “Contents of the Italian section” (book pages 291-367)
Each EuRom5 text unit pairs a clean, unannotated reading page with a separate annotated version of the same text, so learners first attempt unaided reading before consulting the scaffolding apparatus. (high, draft) intercomprehension reading aids scaffolding materials design
1. Clean reading page (left): … The article body with numbered lines … 2. Annotated page(s) (facing/following): the same text reprinted with the aid apparatus applied — colored/underlined words, margin annotations, and the bottom lexical table. — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “Layout of one text unit”
EuRom5 presents every text title simultaneously in all five Romance languages (Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan, Italian, French) in a fixed P-E-C-I-F order, orienting the reader through cross-lingual comparison before the text begins. (high, draft) intercomprehension romance languages cross-linguistic comparison reading aids

Five-column title row in P–E–C–I–F order; the text’s own language column highlighted. — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “Layout of one text unit”
In EuRom5, lexical aids gloss difficult words not into a single support language but into all four other Romance languages at once, keyed to line numbers in a bottom lexical table. (high, draft) intercomprehension reading aids vocabulary cross-linguistic comparison

Red words → rows in the bottom lexical table. The table columns are always P–E–C–I–F; the leftmost cell of each row is the line number. — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “The aid apparatus in practice”
EuRom5’s margin aids make sentence structure explicit by printing subject-verb-object skeletons under simplified extracts, flagging phenomena such as inverted subjects and omitted interruptions. (high, draft) intercomprehension scaffolding syntax reading aids

S/V/O skeletons under a simplified extract, e.g. 1A: La madre (S) — ha subito (V, with invece interposed) — uno shock (O); 2A: cadono (V) — le inibizioni (S) … an inverted subject flagged — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “The aid apparatus in practice”
EuRom5 uses vertical alignment boxes that display one grammatical construction side by side in all five languages, teaching periphrases and divergences (e.g. progressive forms, clitic placement) through direct parallel comparison. (high, draft) intercomprehension cross-linguistic comparison grammar romance languages

Vertical alignment boxes for one construction across the five languages, e.g. 1A line 8 entrando: P estava a entrar / E estaba entrando / C estava entrant / I stava entrando / F était en train d’entrer — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “The aid apparatus in practice”
EuRom5 integrates targeted listening into reading comprehension: word-level audio icons direct the learner to hear specific words whose sound is more transparent across Romance languages than their spelling. (high, draft) intercomprehension listening phonology reading aids

Word-level headphone icon next to a specific word (15C line 5 giocattoli): listen to this word — the sound is more transparent than the spelling. — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “The aid apparatus in practice”
Line numbering is the load-bearing indexing mechanism of the EuRom5 apparatus: lexical table rows, margin aids, and “already seen at line n” back-references are all keyed to numbered lines of the text. (high, draft) intercomprehension reading aids materials design annotation

Arrow + line number marks for “already seen at line n” (described in the Présentation; the apparatus relies on the line numbering). — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), sections “The aid apparatus in practice” and “Implications”
Text length serves as EuRom5’s primary difficulty proxy, with tranche A texts around 125-167 words (14-21 lines) growing to roughly 299 words (37 lines) by tranche C. (medium, draft) intercomprehension text difficulty progression reading

| Length | 125 / 167 words, 14–21 lines | 299 words, 37 lines | … length is the difficulty proxy — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “How the apparatus changes from tranche A to tranche C”
The learner-aid apparatus in EuRom5 systematically fades from tranche A to tranche C: lexical glossing thins per line, structure skeletons and alignment boxes become rare, moving from a heavy scaffold that teaches strategies to a light scaffold that expects the learner to apply them. (high, draft) intercomprehension scaffolding fading learner autonomy

| Overall | Heavy scaffold; the learner is being taught the strategies | Light scaffold; the learner is expected to apply the strategies | … autonomy is the goal — the aids fade rather than staying constant. — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “How the apparatus changes from tranche A to tranche C”
As lexical support fades in later EuRom5 tranches, grammar cross-references become proportionally more frequent, shifting the dominant aid type from vocabulary glossing to grammatical explanation once lexicon is less of an obstacle. (medium, draft) intercomprehension grammar fading reading aids vocabulary

| Grammar § refs | Present | Proportionally more — the aid of choice once lexicon is less of a problem | — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “How the apparatus changes from tranche A to tranche C”
EuRom5’s design implies that aid density in a reading tool should be a function of the learner’s level or tranche rather than a fixed property of the text presentation. (medium, draft) scaffolding fading adaptive learning materials design

Aid density should be a function of learner level/tranche, not a fixed property of the reader. — Text apparatus (Italiano texts), section “Implications for Immersive”, point 2
A grammar of reading is strictly receptive: its descriptions teach readers to recognize and decode forms, never to produce them, distinguishing it from a production grammar. (high, draft) grammar of reading receptive skills intercomprehension contrastive grammar

The descriptions are strictly receptive — they tell the reader how to recognize and decode a form (Catalan anar + infinitive “requires readjustment against the context”), never how to produce it. — Grammar of reading, How every entry is structured
EuRom5 selected the content of its grammar of reading empirically, covering only phenomena that caused real difficulties for non-native readers during the experimentation rather than a full grammatical description. (high, draft) grammar of reading intercomprehension reading difficulty pedagogical design empirical selection

explanations and descriptions of linguistic phenomena found in the texts, representing real difficulties encountered by non-native readers during the experimentation — Grammar of reading, opening page (charter restated from Présentation §2.2)
Each grammar-of-reading entry states the same observation in all five languages so the learner can read the explanation in whichever language they read best. (high, draft) grammar of reading intercomprehension multilingual explanation pedagogical design

A reader consults the statement in whichever language they read best — the “let the learner choose their explanation register” principle from the Preface. — Grammar of reading, How every entry is structured
Nearly every contrastive entry follows a fixed three-move template: name the phenomenon, state which language or languages deviate, and show the five forms side by side in an aligned example table with the divergence highlighted. (high, draft) contrastive grammar grammar of reading contrastive tables romance languages

Almost every entry has the same deep structure: name the phenomenon, state which language(s) deviate, show the five forms side by side. — Grammar of reading, The organizing principle
A cross-language reading grammar can operate with deliberately minimal terminology, reduced to S, V, O, Compl and negation ‘marks’, using compromise terms wherever the five national grammatical traditions diverge. (high, draft) grammar of reading terminology pedagogical design contrastive grammar

Terminology is deliberately minimal: constituents are only S, V, O, Compl; negation is described as “marks” before/after the verb; where the five grammatical traditions diverge, a compromise or widely known term is used. — Grammar of reading, How every entry is structured
EuRom5 orders its grammar sections lexicon first, then syntax, then morphology, matching the sequence of learner interest observed during the experimentation. (high, draft) grammar of reading curriculum sequencing intercomprehension learner interest

roughly the order of the learner-interest sequence observed in experimentation (lexicon first, then syntax, then morphology) — Grammar of reading, The organizing principle
In intercomprehension reading, the lexicon is the principal factor of comprehension: a transparent lexicon carries meaning even when the syntax is complex. (high, draft) lexicon lexical transparency reading comprehension intercomprehension

the lexicon is the principal factor of comprehension; if transparent, it carries meaning even through complex syntax — Grammar of reading, §1.1 Lexicon and comprehension
Lexical transparency among the Romance languages follows the geographic continuum, with the Iberian languages often forming a block that excludes Italian and French. (high, draft) lexical transparency romance languages dialect continuum intercomprehension

transparency follows the geographic continuum; the Iberian languages often form a block excluding Italian and French (também/también/també vs anche/aussi; queimar/quemar/cremar vs bruciare/brûler) — Grammar of reading, §1.2 Degrees of lexical proximity
Opaque cognates can be decoded indirectly, or diagonally, through synonyms or derivatives in the reader’s own language that preserve the common Latin origin. (high, draft) lexical transparency cognates reading strategies intercomprehension

opaque words reached “diagonally” via synonyms or derivatives that reveal the common origin (joelho/rodilla/genoll/ginocchio/genou via the genuflexão family — Grammar of reading, §1.6 Indirect lexical transparencies
French is lexically the most isolated of the five Romance languages, most often standing apart from the shared vocabulary of the other four. (high, draft) french lexicon romance languages lexical transparency

French most often stands apart lexically (muito/mucho/molt/molto vs beaucoup; trata-se vs il s’agit) — Grammar of reading, §1.5 French, the isolated language
Effective contrastive reading notes are written per reading direction, explicitly anticipating which L1 groups a phenomenon will surprise or mislead. (high, draft) l1 influence contrastive grammar grammar of reading pedagogical design

The reader’s surprise is anticipated by L1: “readers of Portuguese and Spanish L1 are surprised because in their languages the apostrophe is not used in this circumstance” — Grammar of reading, The organizing principle
Identifying the postverbal subject is of extreme importance for reading Romance languages, since postverbal subjects are more frequent in Portuguese, Spanish, Catalan and Italian than in French. (high, draft) word order syntax reading comprehension romance languages

Identifying the postverbal subject — of extreme importance for reading; postverbal subjects are more frequent in P/E/C/I than in French — Grammar of reading, §4.1 Identifying the postverbal subject
Anything that distances the subject from the verb, such as parentheses and incises, harms reading comprehension even for skilled readers in their own L1. (high, draft) syntax reading comprehension sentence processing readability

anything distancing subject from verb hurts comprehension, even for skilled L1 readers — Grammar of reading, §4.4 Parentheses and incises
Some cross-language contrasts resist rule formation for the reader: verbs that take postverbal subjects exist in all five languages, but the verb set differs per language, so no regularity can be established. (high, draft) word order syntax rule induction romance languages

fall/arrive-type verbs in all five, but never the same verb set from language to language, so no regularity can be established by the reader — Grammar of reading, §4.3 Postverbal subject with certain verbs
Verbal periphrases exist in all five Romance languages but their members and meanings do not coincide across languages, making them a systematic source of cross-language mismatch for readers. (high, draft) verbal periphrases morphology romance languages contrastive grammar

they exist in all five languages but form a block whose members and meanings do not coincide across languages — Grammar of reading, §10 Verbal periphrases (intro)
Because the five Romance verbal systems are very similar, differences in tense usage rarely block interpretation: readers reconstruct tense values from context. (high, draft) verb tenses reading comprehension context inference romance languages

the five verbal systems are very similar; tense-usage differences rarely block interpretation because readers reconstruct values from context — Grammar of reading, §13.1 Verb tenses, general observations
The Catalan periphrastic past anar plus infinitive is a grammatical false friend: readers of the other Romance languages confuse it with literal ‘go’ or with the near future, and must readjust their reading against context. (high, draft) false friends catalan verb tenses intercomprehension

a simple-past form that readers of the other languages can confuse with literal “go” or with the near future (§10.3); context readjustment required (va respondre = respondeu) — Grammar of reading, §13.3 Catalan anar + infinitive
Prepositions frequently fail to correspond across the Romance languages, and readers naturally project the preposition their L1 would select in the same syntactic context, a direct instance of negative transfer in reading. (high, draft) prepositions transfer l1 influence romance languages

prepositions frequently fail to correspond from one language to another; readers naturally project the preposition their L1 would select in that syntactic context — Grammar of reading, §23.1 Prepositions, general observations

Files (private S3)

Full text
1. Preface.pdf (application/pdf, 3017 KB)
2. Présentation générale.pdf (application/pdf, 26232 KB)
3. Italiano texts.pdf (application/pdf, 87172 KB)
4. Grammar.pdf (application/pdf, 19069 KB)