The noun phrase was long a neglected area within research in modern syntactic theory. Studies tended to focus instead on the clause and less attention was paid to the internal structure of the noun phrase. The early studies would often take an interest in the properties of noun phrases only in so far as they interacted with clausal morpho-syntax. Nominalisations were then subject to some early studies, as in Chomsky (1970) and work inspired by it.

This is the first issue of volume 31 of the Nordic Journal of Linguistics. The NJL is the journal of the Nordic Association of Linguists. Individuals may subscribe to the Nordic Journal of Linguistics by joining the Nordic Association of Linguists. The NAL membership form can be found on the Cambridge University Press web site of the NJL, <http://uk.cambridge.org/journals/njl/>, as well as on the NAL web site, <http://cc.joensuu.fi/linguistics/nal>. We are well aware that there have been problems with joining the NAL in the not so distant past, but we have reasons to hope that soon such problems will only be a memory.

The standard view concerning Case assignment or valuation is that Case is valued to determiner phrases (DPs) in syntax. Recently, Kayne has proposed an alternative model, in which Case is valued to lexical elements rather than to phrases. This article cites several facts from Finnish in support of this model. A detailed Kaynean model of Case is developed. According to this model, abstract Case is valued to lexical elements by the highest ranking c-commanding Case assigner when each phase (CP, vP) is sealed, where ranking is based on a particular Case Hierarchy and a simple notion of locality. Configurations in which Case is seemingly assigned under a spec–head relation are provided with an alternative interpretation.

The second issue of Volume 32 (December 2009) of the Nordic Journal of Linguistics will be a special issue devoted to sociolinguistics, edited by Frans Gregersen and Unn Røyneland.

The paper describes and discusses a demonstrative that has received little attention in the literature. The demonstrative can be found in many of the Scandinavian languages and dialects, and seems to be most frequent and widespread in the mainland Scandinavian languages. It has the same phonological form as third-person singular pronouns, and can be used only with nouns and have human (or human-like) specific reference. From a deictic perspective, the demonstrative is interesting because its conditions of use are linked to what I call psychological distance. Syntactically, it is also interesting because it has different characteristics in the different languages; in Norwegian and Icelandic it can be argued to be part of the DP, while the empirical facts of Swedish and Danish suggest that the psychologically distal demonstrative is DP-external in these languages.

In Modern Swedish certain groups of morphemes are systematically involved in word forms that would be expected to get Accent 2 but that surface with Accent 1. Thus, Swedish infinitives usually get Accent 2 (grip-a ‘seize’), but in combination with certain prefixes, that were borrowed from Middle Low German, infinitives will always be Accent 1 (be-grip-a ‘comprehend’). The dominance and systematic occurrence of Accent 1 suggests viewing it as the lexically specified accent. In this article we are looking for historical facts about these types of words and morphemes to see if we can draw any conclusions concerning lexical accent specification for native vs. non-native morphemes. By investigating the comments on rhymes and accents in the 18th-century poetic manual by Anders Nicander (1707–1781) in combination with his own rhymed verse we can provide information about 18th-century and modern tonal oppositions in Swedish.

Pronouns with a demonstrative function appear in most of the Scandinavian languages in phrases like Sjå på han mannen ‘Look at that man’. Despite the Scandinavian languages varying in phrase-internal morphosyntactic definiteness agreement requirements generally, the pronoun demonstrative appears universally with a definite noun (phrase). This is accounted for within a Lexical-Functional Grammar framework, where the pronoun demonstrative is treated as carrying the feature [specific = +], and the definite noun (phrase) is the morphosyntactic realisation of underlying specificity also. In addition, there is variation as to whether the pronoun demonstratives occur as a specifier within the NP, or as the head of its own DP, taking an NP object.

The Icelandic language is a morphologically complex language, for which a large tagset has been created. This paper describes the design of a linguistic rule-based system for part-of-speech tagging Icelandic text. The system contains two main components: a disambiguator, IceTagger, and an unknown word guesser, IceMorphy. IceTagger uses a small number of local elimination rules along with a global heuristics component. The heuristics guess the functional roles of the words in a sentence, mark prepositional phrases, and use the acquired knowledge to force feature agreement where appropriate. IceMorphy is used for guessing the tag profile for unknown words and for automatically filling tag profile gaps in the lexicon. Evaluation shows that IceTagger achieves 91.54% accuracy, a substantial improvement on the highest accuracy, 90.44%, obtained using three state-of-the-art data-driven taggers. Furthermore, the accuracy increases to 92.95% by using IceTagger along with two data-driven taggers in a simple voting scheme. The development time of the tagging system was only seven man-months, which can be considered a short development period for a linguistic rule-based system.

A central objective of this paper is to show how much variation there is across Scandinavian with respect to the morphosyntactic form of interrogative noun phrases. The present paper focuses on three main types of such DPs: (i) phrases involving a cognate of English which, (ii) phrases involving the same element as manner ‘how’ (which is morphologically complex and distinct from degree ‘how’), and (iii) phrases involving ‘what’ with or without an overt kind noun. With respect to all of these different types of noun-phrase-internal wh-expressions an interesting pattern seems to emerge: there are reasons to hold that adnominal wh-expressions start out as modifiers, yielding kind-querying noun phrases, and then develop into determiners, yielding token-querying noun phrases. Although further investigations will have to determine whether such a developmental path (or cycle) is quite general in nature, it can be made perfect sense of with reference to grammaticalization triggered by wh-movement which operates on a DP-structure that distinguishes modification from determination in such a way that the locus of determination is higher than modification.

Long-distance dependencies have been the object of much theoretical interest in the Scandinavian languages and in general, but the empirical foundation for theorizing has been limited. The present paper investigates extraction from complement and adverbial clauses in Danish using acceptability judgment and reading-time measures. Extraction from adverbial clauses was found to be rated near the bottom of the scale and to be associated with a processing cost. This was also true of extraction in adverbial clauses in semantically cohesive sentences, which Jensen (2001a, b) has suggested is acceptable. It is concluded that under the conditions investigated extraction from adverbial clauses in Danish is associated with a processing cost and very low acceptability ratings, despite semantic cohesion.