Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:04:16.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dative case in Norwegian, Icelandic and Faroese: Preservation and non-preservation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2013

Þórhallur Eyþórsson ,
Janne Bondi Johannessen ,
Signe Laake  and
Tor A. Åfarli
Þórhallur Eyþórsson
Affiliation:
Institute of Linguistics and Department of English, University of Iceland, Árnagarði v/Suðurgötu, IS-101 Reykjavík, Iceland. [email protected]
Janne Bondi Johannessen
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics and Scandinavian Studies, University of Oslo, Postboks 1102 Blindern, N-0317 Oslo, Norway. [email protected]
Signe Laake
Affiliation:
Department of Literature, Area Studies and European Languages, University of Oslo, Postboks 1003 Blindern, N-0315 Oslo, Norway. [email protected]
Tor A. Åfarli
Affiliation:
Department of Scandinavian Studies and Comparative Literature, Norwegian University of Science and Technology NTNU, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway. [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This article investigates the morphosyntactic status of dative case in Norwegian, Icelandic, and Faroese. We hypothesize that these three languages represent three diachronic stages signalled synchronically by the degree of preservation or non-preservation of dative under movement. Thus, we explore the synchronic status of dative under passive movement and topicalization in the three languages, while simultaneously paying attention to the larger questions of diachronic preservation and non-preservation of dative. We suggest that our findings have interesting ramifications for the categorization of case as structural and non-structural in generative grammar.

Keywords

casedativedialect syntaxFaroeseIcelandicinherent caselexical casenon-structural caseNorwegianstructural case
Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 35 , Special Issue 3: Case Variation and Change in the Nordic Languages , December 2012 , pp. 219 - 249
Copyright
Copyright © Nordic Association of Linguistics 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aasen, Ivar. 1864. Norsk grammatik. Kristiania: Mallings Forlagsboghandel.Google Scholar
Åfarli, Tor A. 2011. On the syntax of the accusative/dative alternation in spatial PPs in Norwegian dative dialects. Ms., Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU).Google Scholar
Åfarli, Tor A. & Fjøsne, Eldfrid H.. 2012. Weak dative case in Norwegian dialect syntax. Studia Linguistica 66, 75–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Marianne. 2010. Med [blikket på mæ]. Ein syntaktisk analyse av spatiale preposisjonar og kasus i vestnesdialekten. Master's thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology NTNU.Google Scholar
Árnadóttir, Hlíf, Eythórsson, Thórhallur & Sigurðsson, Einar Freyr. 2011. The passive of reflexive verbs in Icelandic. Nordlyd 37, 39–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna. 2008. Lexical vs. structural case: A false dichotomy. Morphology 21, 619–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, Michael. 1986. Subject, nominative and oblique case in Faroese. Scripta Islandica 37, 13–46.Google Scholar
Beito, Olav T. 1973 [1958]. Drag av utviklinga i hallingmålet dei siste mannsaldrane. In Beito, O. T. & Hoff, I. (eds), Frånorsk m ålføregranskning, 190–226. Oslo, Bergen & Tromsø: Universitetsforlaget. [First published in 1958, Svenska landsmål och svenskt folkliv, 1–42.]Google Scholar
Bittner, Maria & Hale, Ken. 1996. The structural determination of case and agreement. Linguistic Inquiry 27, 1–68.Google Scholar
Blake, Barry J. 1994. Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Butt, Miriam. 2006. Theories of Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of Language. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Dagsgard, Asbjørn. 2006. Målet i Lom og Skjåk: Grammatikk og ordliste. Lom: Lom kommune/Skjåk kommune.Google Scholar
De Hoop, Helen. 1996. Case Configuration and Noun Phrase Interpretation. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Denison, David. 1993. English Historical Syntax: Verbal Constructions. London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Eythórsson, Thórhallur. 2008. The New Passive in Icelandic really is a passive. In Eythórsson, Thórhallur (ed.), Grammatical Change and Linguistic Theory: The Rosendal Papers, 173–219. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eythórsson, Thórhallur. 2012. Passive in Faroese. Ms., University of Iceland.Google Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje. 1990. Syntactic Change: Toward a Theory of Historical Syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje. 2000. Totenmålet. Østre Gjøvik: Toten kommune-Kulturetaten.Google Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje. 2004. The Syntax of Old Norse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fjøsne, Eldfrid Haaker. 2007. Dativ i oppdalsmålet. Master's thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology NTNU.Google Scholar
Garbacz, Piotr. To appear. Morphological dative in Norwegian dialects. Nordic Atlas of Language Structures (NALS) Online. http://www.tekstlab.uio.no/nals.Google Scholar
Haugen, Einar. 1982. Oppdalsmålet. Oslo: Tanum-Norli.Google Scholar
Haugen, Odd Einar. 1995 Grunnbok i norrønt språk. Oslo: Ad Notam Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Holten, Ola J. 1974. Dativbruken i surnadalsmålet. Master's thesis, University of Trondheim.Google Scholar
Johannessen, Janne Bondi. 2008. The pronominal psychological demonstrative in Scandinavian: Its syntax, semantics and pragmatics. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 31, 161–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johannessen, Janne Bondi, Priestley, Joel, Hagen, Kristin, Åfarli, Tor Anders & Vangsnes, Øystein Alexander,. 2009. The Nordic Dialect Corpus – An Advanced Research Tool. In Jokinen & Bick (eds.), 73–80.Google Scholar
Jokinen, Kristiina & Bick, Eckhard (eds.). 2009. The 17th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics NODALIDA 2009 (NEALT Proceedings Series 4), 73–80. Northern European Association for Language Technology (NEALT). [Published online by Tartu University Library (Estonia), http://hdl.handle.net/10062/9206.]Google Scholar
Lindstad, Arne Martinus, Nøklestad, Anders, Johannessen, Janne Bondi & Vangsnes, Øystein Alexander, 2009. The Nordic Dialect Database: Mapping microsyntactic variation in the Scandinavian languages. In Jokinen & Bick (eds.), 283–286.Google Scholar
Manzini, Maria Rita & Savoia, Leonardo M.. 2008. Uninterpretable features are compatible in morphology with other minimalist postulates. In Freidin, Robert (ed.), Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory, 43–72. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moseng, Bodil. 1996. Bruk av dativ blant unge i Os i Østerdalen – en dialektologisk og sosiolingvistisk undersøkelse. Master's thesis, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Neeleman, Ad & Weerman, Fred. 1999. Flexible Syntax: A Theory of Case and Arguments. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J. 1983. Grammatical Theory: Its Limits and its Possibilities. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Øygarden, Helen. 1995. Dativ i Vågåmålet. Bruken hjå eldre og yngre i dag. Master's thesis, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Safir, Kenneth J. 1987. What explains the Definiteness Effect? In Reuland, Eric J. & Ter Meulen, Alice G. B. (eds.), The Representation of (In)Definiteness, 71–97. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sandøy, Helge. 1996. Talemål. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Sandøy, Helge. 2000. Vitnemål frå ein dativbrukar. In Elmevik, Lennart (ed.), Dialekter och folkminnen. Hyllningsskrift till Maj Reinhammmar den 17. Maj 2000, 231–239. Uppsala: Sällskapet för svensk dialektologi.Google Scholar
Sandøy, Helge. 2011. Dativen i vekst og fall – men ikkje som relikt. In Reinhammar, Maj, Elmevik, Lennart & Edlund, Lars-Erik (eds.), Studier i dialektologi och språksociologi. Föredrag vid Nionde nordiska dialektologkonferansen i Uppsala 18–20 augusti 2010 (Acta Academia Regiae Adolphi CXVI), 259–268. Uppsala: Kungl. Gustav Adolfs Akademien för svensk folkkultur.Google Scholar
Schütze, Carson T. 1996. The Empirical Base of Linguistics: Grammaticality Judgements and Linguistic Methodology. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Skjekkeland, Martin. 1997. Dei norske dialektane. Kristiansand: Høyskoleforlaget.Google Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 2007. The Syntax of Icelandic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Höskuldur, Thráinsson, Petersen, Hjalmar P., Lon Jacobsen, Jógvan í & Hansen, Zakaris S.. 2012 [2004]. Faroese: An Overview and Reference Grammar, 2nd edn. Tórshavn: Føroya Fróðskaparfelag. [First edition, 2004.]Google Scholar
Torp, Arne. 1995. Norrøn hjelpebok. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Woolford, Ellen. 2006. Lexical case, inherent case, and argument structure. Linguistic Inquiry 37, 111–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar