GRAMMATIK I FOKUS 2016 Lund, LUX huset (granne med SOL), rum C 126 Torsdagen den 4 och fredagen den 5 februari 2016

Torsdagen 4 februari 1315-1320 SYMPOSIET ÖPPNAS 1320-1420 Sten Vikner, Århus: (Inbjuden talare):The derivation of verb second in Germanic main and embedded clauses 1420-1500 Dianne Jonas, Frankfurt: On main clause phenomena and the syntax of adverbial clauses 1500-1520 KAFFE 1520-1600 Arthur Holmer, Lars Larm, Lund: HowcantheJapanese excessiveconstructioncontributetoaCinqueanalysisof adverbials? 1600-1640 Christine Meklenborg Salvesen, Oslo: Nu så börjar det lossna! 1640-1645 KORT PAUS 1645-1725 Christiane Müller, Lund: Adjunct Islands in Swedish 1725-1815 Eva Klingvall, Fredrik Heinat, Damon Tutunjian, Anna-Lena Wiklund, Lund: An acceptability study of long-distance extractions in Swedish 1830—RECEPTION på Institutionen för lingvistik (Humanisthuset, rum Hu 428 Fredagen den 5 februari 0945-1000 KAFFE 1000-1040 Mikael Berger, Växjö: Långt pronomenhopp från 1300 till idag – vad är så speciellt med möta? 1040-1120 Thorstein Fretheim, NUST: Construction-based strengthe- ning of the conceptual meaning of the Norwegian verb tenke 1120-1125 KORT PAUS 1125-1205 Gunlög Josefsson, Lund: The expression of stuff and collection in Mainland Scandinavian 1205-1245 Ulla Stroh-Wollin, Uppsala: Framväxten av (in)definithet i svenskan – en lååååång historia SYMPOSIET AVSLUTAS

30. Grammatik i Fokus, February 4-5, 2016 Nordiska språk/Lingvistik, Lunds Universitet

The derivation of verb second in Germanic main and embedded clauses

Sten Vikner Dept. of English, Aarhus University, Denmark

sten.vikner@dac.au.dk ● www.hum.au.dk/engelsk/engsv ● http://au.dk/en/sten.vikner@dac

This talk will give an overview of the verb second (V2) phenomenon, as found in both main and embedded clauses in the Germanic languages, and it will also explore a particular derivation of (embedded) V2, in terms of a cP/CP-distinction.

All the Germanic languages except modern English (but including e.g. Old English) are V2, i.e. in all declarative main clauses and in all wh-questions, the finite verb is in the second position. regardless of whether the first position is occupied by the subject or by some other constituent. This can be extended to yes/no-questions, provided it is assumed that the first position in such questions is empty (and such an assumption is supported by the fact that it allows an account for Greenberg's 1963:83 "Universal 11", cf. Vikner 2007).

As far as embedded clauses in the Germanic languages are concerned, V2 is never obligatory, and although it is optionally possible in many embedded clauses, this is not the case for all types of embedded clauses, as e.g. embedded questions never allow V2 (Julien 2007, Vikner 2001).

I will explore a particular derivation of (embedded ) V2, in terms of a cP/CP-distinction, which may be seen as a version of the CP-recursion analysis (de Haan & Weerman 1986, Vikner 1995 and many others). This analysis will be compared to a fine-grained left periphery approach (Rizzi 1997, Wiklund et al. 2007, Julien 2015, and many others).

The idea is that because embedded V2 clauses do not allow extraction, whereas other types of CP-recursion clauses do (Christensen et al. 2013a,b), CP-recursion in embedded V2 is assumed to be fundamentally different from other kinds of CP-recursion, in that main clause V2 and embedded V2 involve a CP ("big CP"), whereas other clausal projections above IP are instances of cP ("little cP")

Part of the talk builds on joint work with Ken Ramshøj Christensen and Anne Mette Nyvad.

References Christensen, Ken Ramshøj, Johannes Kizach & Anne Mette Nyvad. 2013a. Escape from the island: Grammaticality

and (reduced) acceptability of wh-island violations in Danish, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 42, 51-70. Christensen, Ken Ramshøj, Johannes Kizach & Anne Mette Nyvad. 2013b. The processing of syntactic islands – an

fMRI study, Journal of Neurolinguistics 26.2, 239-251. Greenberg, Joseph. 1963. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements

in Joseph Greenberg (ed.): Universals of Language, MIT Press, Cambridge MA. deHaan, Germen & Fred Weerman. 1986. Finiteness and Verb Fronting in Frisian. In: Hubert Haider & Martin

Prinzhom (eds.), Verb Second Phenomena in Germanic Languages. Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 77-110. Julien, Marit. 2007. Embedded V2 in Norwegian and Swedish. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 80. Lund:

Lund University, 103-161. Julien, Marit. 2015. The force of V2 revisited. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 18, 139-181. Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In: Liliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements of Grammar.

Dordrecht: Kluwer, 281-337. Wiklund, Anna-Lena, Gunnar Hrafn Hrafnbjargarsson, Þorbjörg Hróarsdóttir & Kristine Bentzen. 2007. Rethinking

Scandinavian verb movement. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 10, 203-233. Vikner, Sten: 1995, Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages, New York: Oxford

University Press. Vikner, Sten: 2001, Verb Movement Variation in Germanic and Optimality Theory, Habilitationsschrift, University

of Tübingen. <www.hum.au.dk/engelsk/engsv/papers/viknhabi.pdf>. Vikner, Sten. 2007. .Teoretisk og komparativ syntaks. In Henrik Jørgensen & Peter Widell (eds.), Det bedre

argument - Festskrift til Ole Togeby, 7. marts 2007, Wessel & Huitfeld, Århus, pp. 469-480. <www.hum.au.dk/engelsk/engsv/papers/vikn07a.pdf>

On main clause phenomena and the syntax of adverbial clauses

Dianne Jonas

Goethe University Frankfurt

It has long been observed that adverbial clauses exhibit variable word order. For instance, in the

Scandinavian languages, we find adverbial clauses that allow a non-subject XP-initial order

whereas others seem to resist such orders – some adverbial clauses allow main clause word order

while others do not. The framework adopted here is the typology of adverbial clauses set out in

Haegeman (2012, and much previous work) where adverbial clauses are divided into two group:

those that allow main clause phenomena and those that do not. Further, Haegeman distinguishes

between adverbial clauses that she terms 'peripheral' or 'central' to capture the degree of integration

of adverbial clauses with respect to the clause that they modify. For the Scandinavian languages,

we might expect that adverbial clauses that are 'peripheral' in Haegeman's sense might allow main

clause word order whereas such orders are resisted in central adverbial clauses.

This paper is concerned with the internal syntax of adverbial clauses in Faroese. Data are drawn

from both written and spoken Faroese and adverbial clauses are analyzed with respect to the

possibility of main clause phenomena as predicted by Haegeman’s typology.

References

Haegeman, Liliane. 2012. Adverbial clauses, main clause phenomena, and the composition of the

left periphery. The cartography of syntactic structures, volume 8. Oxford, Oxford University

Press.

How   can   the   Japanese   excessive   construction   contribute   to   a   Cinque  analysis  of  adverbials?  Arthur  Holmer  &  Lars  Larm      Cinque   (1999)   argues   that   adverbs   are   not   adjoined   to   the   clause,   but   located   in   the  specifiers  of  functional  projections  above  vP,  in  the  backbone  of  the  clause.  Ernst  (2002)  argues   that   the   fact   that   linear   ordering   of   adverbs   correlates  with   scope   is   evidence  against  Cinque’s   analysis,   and   instead   supports  an  adjunction  analysis.  Holmer   (2012)  shows   that   adverbs   in   Formosan   languages   are   realized  morphosyntactically   as   verbs  and   that   they   cannot   possibly   be   adjoined.   Rather,   they   seem   to   be   realized   in   head  positions  along  the  backbone  of  the  clause,  which  serves  as  direct  empirical  evidence  for  Cinque’s  analysis.  At  the  same  time,  the  fact  that  adverbial  verbs  in  Formosan  languages  can  also  display  ordering  variation  depending  on  scope  shows   that   the   issue  of  scopal  ordering  must  be  disconnected  from  the  issue  of  adjunction  vs  functional  categories  in  the  inflection  domain.  In  short,  if  data  from  Formosan  is  representative,  Cinque  is  right  about  the  structure,  while  Ernst  is  right  about  scope  and  hierarchical  ordering.     So   far,   data   has   been   lacking   on   a   third   type   of   construction   which   would   be  predicted  by  Cinque’s  analysis  and  by  the  Formosan  data:  an  adverbial  element  located  in  the  head  position  of  a  functional  category,  but  realized  morphologically  as  an  affix  to  the  verb,  rather  than  as  an  independent  verb.  Japanese  –sugi–  ‘too  much’  appears  to  fill  this   typological  gap.   In  this  paper,  we  outline  the  behaviour  of  –sugi–  and  show  that   it  can  refer  to  the  verb  itself  (1),  to  the  preceding  adverb  (2),  and  to  VP-­‐internal  arguments  of   the   verb   (3)   (the   example   is   taken   from   Toji   (2014:   1)).   It   can   also   license   the  adverbial  amari   ‘too  much’,  which   is  otherwise  only   licensed   in  NPI  environments  and  subordinate  clauses,  as  exemplified  in  (4)  taken  from  Martin  (1988:  434).  This  we  view  as  a  doubling  phenomenon  (cf.  Dekker  and  Zeijlstra  2012).    1.   Nomi-­‐sugi-­‐ta.     drink-­‐EXCESS-­‐PAST     ‘(I)  drank  too  much.’    2.   Hayaku   nomi-­‐sugi-­‐ta.     fast                        drink-­‐EXCESS-­‐PAST     ‘(I)  drank  too  fast.’    3.   Hade           na                                                  booshi     o     kaburi-­‐sugi-­‐ta.     gaudy       COP.NPAST              hat             ACC   wear-­‐EXCESS-­‐PAST     ‘(S/He)  wore  an  excessively  gaudy  hat  .’                            4.   Aa,     watashi     wa     amari  ni     hayaku     umare-­‐sugi-­‐ta.     ah   I         TOP     too         early     be  born-­‐  EXCESS-­‐PAST     ‘Ah,  I  was  born  too  soon!’                            It  will  also  be  shown  that  its  linear  placement  within  the  verb  can  also  vary,  in  that  it  can  either  be  realized  before  (5)  or  after  (6)  the  negative  morpheme,  with  different  readings.  This  typologically  very  unusual  fact  suggests  that  scope  does  not  only  affect  hierarchical  ordering  in  the  clause,  but  can  also  the  corresponding  morphological  realization  within  the  verb,  as  a  direct  result  of  the  Mirror  Principle  (Baker  1985).    

5.   Nomi-­‐sugi-­‐naide   kudasai.     drink-­‐EXCESS-­‐NEG   IMP     ‘Don’t  drink  too  much!’    6.   Tabe-­‐nasa-­‐sugi-­‐ta.     eat-­‐NEG-­‐EXCESS-­‐PST     ‘(S/he)  ate  too  little.’  (i.e.  (‘S/he)  was  excessive  at  non-­‐eating.’)    References  Baker,   M.,   1985.   The   Mirror   Principle   and   morphosyntactic   explanation.   Linguistic  Inquiry  16,  373–417.  

Cinque,  G.,  1999.  Adverbs  and  Functional  Heads.  Oxford  University  Press,  Oxford.    Dekker,   P.   and   Zeijlstra,  H.   2012.   Concord   and  Doubling   Phenomena:   an   Introduction.  Journal  of  Semantics    29,  295–303.  

Ernst,  T.,  2002.  The  Syntax  of  Adjuncts.  Cambridge  University  Press,  Cambridge.    Holmer,   A.   2012.   Evidence   from   Formosan   for   a   unified   theory   of   adverb   ordering.  Lingua  122,  902-­‐921.  

Martin,  S.  E.  1988.  A  Reference  Grammar  of  Japanese.  Rutland:  Charles  E.  Tuttle  Company.  Toji,   Y.   (2014).   V-­‐sugiru   koobun   ni   okeru   sugiru   no   toogoteki   tokusei   (Syntactic  properties   of   the  V-­‐sugiru   construction).  Kyushu  University  Papers   in  Linguistics,   34,  113-­‐128.  

Christine Meklenborg Salvesen, Universitetet i Oslo

Nu så börjar det lossna!I moderne svensk er adverbet så svært hyppig, spesielt i muntlig språk (Nordström 2006). Så opptrer etter innledende adverbialer (1), frie predikater og topics. Bare tematiske elementer tillater ikke så (2). I tillegg til så kan svensk også lage resumptive konstruksjoner med då (3), men disse har flere begrensninger.

1. Nu så börjar det lossna!2. *Det så börjar lossna.3. Idag då var jag ju tvungen att testa ännu något nytt plagg i stl 56.

Bruken av resumptive adverbialer kjennetegner alle moderne V2‐språk. Imidlertid er det stor forskjell mellom hvilke typer innledende elementer som kan følges av så. Mens norsk og svensk er svært liberale med hensyn til hvilke konstruksjoner som tillater så, er dansk noe mer restriktiv, mens tysk og nederlandsk er ytterlige tilbakeholdne i bruken av resumptiver.

I dette foredraget vil jeg vise hvordan utviklingen av resumptiver har vært i svensk, fra eldre fornsvensk og frem til yngre nysvensk. I de eldste tekstene er då den dominerende resumptiven (4), og den brukes utelukkende etter leddsetninger. Fra eldre nysvensk endrer dette seg, og det er så som generaliseres (5). På 1700‐tallet blir det vanlig med resumptiver også etter andre innledende ledd enn leddsetninger (6). Jeg argumentere for at då bare delvis grammatikaliseres, mens så gjennomgår en full grammatikaliseringsprosess 

4. Nw æn man slar præst ællir vighdan tha bøte biscope nyo marker'Hvis en mann dreper en prest eller en vigd mann så skal han betale ni marker til biskopen'    (Eldre Västgötalagen, 1280‐‐1290)

5. er hon kald, swa verma henne vty ena grytho'er hun kald, så varm henne oppi en gryte.'  (Läkebok 7,  1500–1600)

6. Ehuru dermed är , så är det säkert at Englands får‐slag i anseende til storlek / afwelsamhet och yllighet är det besta i hela Europa. (Engelska Åker­Mannen, 1727)

Fra et generativt kartografisk ståsted innebærer bruken av resumptiver at V2‐språkene aktiverer en del av venstreperiferien som ligger utenfor V2‐skjemaet. Dette strider mot den generelle oppfatningen av at de germanske V2‐språkene ikke har noen rik venstreperiferi. Jeg vil foreslå en analyse hvor det innledende leddet i en resumptiv konstruksjon ligger umiddelbart til venstre for den høyeste posisjonen assosiert med V2, men til høyre for ForceP. Jeg vil foreslå at resumptiven står i SpecFinP hvor den fungerer som en ekspletiv.

Adjunct Islands in Swedish

Christiane Müller, Lund University

Swedish and the other Mainland Scandinavian (MSc.) languages have been argued to allow

extraction from strong islands, constructions that are assumed to be opaque for movement

operations and that do not permit extraction in other languages. Island extractions are

interesting from a syntactic point of view because they violate locality constraints that are

assumed to apply universally. One type of island extraction that has received very little

attention so far is extraction from adjunct clauses, as exemplified in (i) for Swedish.

(i) [Den filmen]i grät jag [när jag såg _i].

this movie cried I when I saw

‘I cried when I saw this movie.’

However, extraction appears to be possible only from a restricted subset of clauses. To

identify the conditions that enable extraction from adjuncts in the MSc. languages, I have

investigated semantic and syntactic restrictions on the possibility of extraction in Swedish. In

my talk I will present the results of this study. I show that extraction from adjunct clauses in

Swedish is constrained by several factors.

First, extraction possibilities are influenced by the semantic relation between the events

described in the adjunct and in the matrix clause, a condition that has been shown to constrain

extraction from non-finite adjuncts in English (see Truswell 2007). Truswell’s approach

predicts that extraction is more acceptable if the two events described by the matrix and the

adjunct VP are related by a contingent relation such as causation or enablement, which makes

it possible to subsume the matrix and the adjunct VP under a single event.

Second, extraction is constrained by the degree of syntactic integration of the adjunct clause.

A distinction can be made between central and peripheral adverbial clauses (Haegeman

2012), where central adverbial clauses modify the matrix event and are merged low in the

structure, whereas peripheral adverbial clauses have a discourse structuring function and are

merged higher. Extraction is degraded when it occurs out of peripheral adverbial clauses,

which are less integrated with the clause that they modify. Furthermore, differences in the

internal syntax of adjunct clauses are shown to have an impact on extraction possibilities.

In sum, the possibility of adjunct clause extraction in Swedish is constrained by several

conditions. Nevertheless, Swedish still stands out in allowing extraction from at least a subset

of finite adjunct clauses. This is considered to be impossible in other languages.

An acceptability study of long-distance extractions in Swedish

Eva Klingvall, Fredrik Heinat, Damon Tutunjian, Anna-Lena Wiklund

In this talk we report the results from a controlled acceptability study of various long-distance extractions

in Swedish. Long-distance dependencies can (theoretically) span an inde�nite number of clauses, but are

at the same time structurally restricted. Such dependencies can for instance not be formed into relative

clauses in most languages of the world. The Mainland Scandinavian languages present a rare exception

in that they allow for extractions out of relative clauses (Allwood, 1976; Engdahl, 1997; Engdahl and

Ejerhed, 1982; Erteschik-Shir, 1973). However, these extractions are only possible if the relative clause

is restrictive (Engdahl, 1997).

In order to test the claim that extractions are restricted in this way, we investigated the acceptability

of extraction from att-clauses (`that'-clauses), (1a), restrictive relative clauses, (1b), and non-restrictive

relative clauses, (1c):

(1) a. Intrikatacomplex

styckenpieces

beundradeadmired

hanhe

attthat

ena

kvinnawoman

egenhändigtby herself

komponeradecomposed

påin

fritiden.free time

b. Intrikatacomplex

styckenpieces

beundradeadmired

hanhe

ena

kvinnawoman

somthat

egenhändigtby herself

komponeradecomposed

påin

fritiden.free time

c. Intrikatacomplex

styckenpieces

beundradeadmired

hanhe

ena

kvinnawoman

somthat

förrestenby the way

komponeradecomposed

påin

fritiden.free time

Our expectations were, �rstly, that the sentences without extraction should not di�er in acceptability

across structures, and, secondly, that the sentences with extractions should be rated as less acceptable

than the non-extracted versions, and, �nally, that extractions from non-restrictive clauses should be

considerably less acceptable than the other two extractions.

The material consisted of 30 critical items with six structural versions comprising extracted and non-

extracted forms of sentences as in (1). In addition, there were 30 distractor items, 10 of which were

well-formed, and 20 ill-formed (V2-violations). The items were rotated across three lists, such that each

participant saw one extracted and one non-extracted sentence from each item although not of the same

structural variant. 27 Swedish native speakers rated the sentences on a Likert scale from 1 to 7.

The results showed that the extracted sentences are rated lower than the non-extracted ones, as ex-

pected. Interestingly, in the non-extracted conditions the non-restrictive relative clause was rated lower

than the other two structures. In the extracted conditions, extraction from att-clauses was rated as more

acceptable than extraction from relative clauses. Surprisingly, there was no signi�cant di�erence between

the two relative clause extractions. Another unexpected �nding was that the ill-formed distractors in-

volving V2 were rated surprisingly high. In the talk, we will discuss possible explanations for these results.

References

Allwood, Jens. 1976. The complex NP constraint as a non-universal rule and some semantic factors in�u-

encing the acceptability of Swedish sentences which violate the CNPC. In University of Massachusetts

Occasional Papers in Linguistics ii, ed. J. Stillings, 1�20. Amherst, Ma.

Engdahl, Elisabet. 1997. Relative clause extractions in context. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax

60:51�79.

Engdahl, Elisabet, and Eva Ejerhed, ed. 1982. Readings on unbounded dependencies in Scandinavian

languages. Umeå: Umeå University.

Erteschik-Shir, Nomi. 1973. On the nature of island constraints. Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts

Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.

1

Mikael Berger Växjö BAVarger@gmail.com

Långt pronomenhopp från 1300 till idag – vad är så

speciellt med möta?

Object Shift (eller OS) innebär att ett objekt kan flytta ifrån sin ursprungsposition till en plats

till vänster om ett satsadverbial i satsens mittfält, jfr. t.ex. (1a) och (1b) nedan (se också

Holmbeg 1986). I den svenska litteraturen har detta kallats pronomenhopp (se bl.a. Josefsson

1992 och Platzack 2010), eftersom det bara är obetonade pronomen som kan ”hoppa” till

mittfältet i svenska.

(1) a. Han kastade inte den

b. Han kastade deni inte ti (OS Sv.)

(2) a. Peter smed deti ikke ti ud (OS Da.,Vikner 2005:398)

Peter kastade det inte ut

b. De kastet megi ikke ti ut (OS No.,Holmberg 1999:2)

De kastade mig inte ut

c. Pétur las bækurnarii/ Þæri eflaust aldrei ti (OS Isl., Vikner 2005:393)

Pétur läser böckerna/dem utan tvivel aldrig

d. Jógvan keypti hanai ikki ti (OS Färö., Vikner 2005:413)

Jógvan köpte den.ACC inte

Av (2a) – (2d) framgår det att OS också kan förekomma i de övriga skandinaviska språken,

men förutsättningarna är inte desamma: endast i islänska kan både pronominella och icke-

pronominella objekt flytta till denna position i mittfältet (se (2c) ovan); i danska och norska

måste det pronominella objektet placeras före en satsfinal verbpartikel, medan det omvända

normalt gäller i svenska osv.

Förutom detta är långt pronomenhopp – eller Long Object Shift – endast tillåtet i svenska: ett

objekt kan flytta till en position mellan det finita verbet och subjektet i mittfältet (jfr (2a) och

(2b) nedan). Emellertid tycks detta ha varit tillåtet i alla de skandinaviska språken under

medeltiden (se Platzack opublicerad); i (4a) och (4b) ger jag två fornsvenska exempel.

(3) a. Därför mötte pojken inte henne vid stationen (Sv.)

b. Därför mötte hennei pojken inte ti vid stationen (Sv.)

Mikael Berger Växjö BAVarger@gmail.com

(4) a. ther scula smalenningia hanum möta (FSv., Berger 2015)

där ska.PL smålänningarna honom.DAT möta

b. thær skulu hanumi upplændingiær ti mötæ (FSv., Berger 2015)

där ska.PL honom.DAT upplänningarna möta

Exempelmeningarna i (3) och (4) väcker åtminstone en intressant fråga: vad är så speciellt

med verbet möta? I denna presentation diskuterar jag predikat, θ-roller och

argumentstrukturer i konstruktioner med långt pronomenhopp i nusvenska och i fornsvenska.

Merparten av materialet är hämtat ur två korpusundersökningar: Berger 2013 och Berger

2015. Ur resultaten vill jag lyfta fram följande: (i) möta är en verbtyp som underlättar för

långt pronomenhopp; (ii) det pronominella objektet tilldelas oftast en θ-roll som tillhör den

semantiska rollfamiljen UPPLEVARE och (iii) långt pronomenhopp verkar endast vara möjligt när

predikatets argument inte konkurrerar om samma ϕ-drag (dvs. person och numerus).

Referenser

Berger, Mikael (2013). Ledföljdsvariation –

verben, semantik och syntax i samband med långt objektsflytt i svenska

Linnéuniversitetet. Växjö. Kandidatuppsats.

Berger, Mikael (2015). Long Object does not apply to objects

Lunds universitet. Lund. Magisteruppsats

Josefsson, Gunlög (1992): Object shift and weak pronominals in Swedish.

in Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 49: 59–94

Holmberg, Anders (1986): Word order and syntactic features in the Scandinavian languages

and English. Diss. Stockholm: Univ.

Holmberg, Anders (1999): “Remarks on Holmberg’s generalization”

in Studia Linguistica 53: 1–39

Platzack, Christer (2010). Den fantastiska grammatiken: en minimalistisk beskrivning av

svenskan. uppl. Stockholm: Norstedt

Platzack, Christer (opublicerad). ”The emergence of a parametric difference within mainland

Scandinavian”. Lund.

Vikner, Sten (2005). Object Shift. In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax. Henk van

Riemsdijk & Martin Everaert (eds.), p. 392 – 436. Oxford: Blackwell

Construction-based strengthening of the conceptual meaning of the Norwegian verb tenke Thorstein Fretheim, Norwegian University of Science and Technology Some transitive verbs of modal attitude license an infinitival clause complement as well as a finite clause complement in a number of languages, including English, Norwegian and Swedish. In such cases, the former syntactic configuration, unlike the latter, indicates that the referent of the subject of the modal attitude verb intends to bring about the state of affairs represented in the clausal complement. (1) sounds more optimistic than (2), informing the hearer of the speaker’s decision to get to the train station on time. (2), however, expresses the speaker’s hope, nothing more.

(1) I hope to catch the train at 9 o’clock. (2) I hope that I’ll catch the train at 9 o’clock.

(1) contains procedural information intended to direct the hearer to the strong implicature that the speaker is set on achieving the goal described in the infinitival clause.

Unlike the English verb think, its Norwegian counterpart tenke licenses a DO complement in the form of an infinitival clause. In (3), the combination of a present or past perfect form of the upper-clause verb and a non-finite DO complement automatically triggers pre-semantic pragmatic inference that causes the hearer to bridge the gap between linguistic meaning and speaker’s meaning: the concept THINK is replaced by INTEND (implying forethought) in the mental representation of the truth-conditional content of the utterance.

(3) Jeg har/hadde tenkt å rekke toget klokka 9. I have / had thought to reach the.train the.clock 9 ‘I intend/intended to catch the train at 9 o’clock.’

Unlike Swedish tänker and tänkte plus a bare infinitive, Norwegian present tense tenker or past tense tenkte in the matrix clause does not constrain the hearer’s comprehension in the same way as the perfect forms, and a finite clause complement, shown in (4), communicates the speaker’s epistemic stance but no decision that would commit the subject referent to goal-directed action.

(4) Jeg tenker at jeg rekker toget klokka 9. I think that I reach the.train the.clock 9 ‘I believe that I’ll catch the train at 9 o’clock.’

The semantic difference between (3) and (4) is not due to inherent lexical polysemy in the verb tenke. What coerces an intention interpretation of the matrix verb in (3) is the combination of a perfect form of the cognitive verb and an infinitival DO complement.

In (substandard) colloquial Norwegian, tenke can combine with the preposition til, the ultimate sign that the verb expresses an intention to achieve something. There is a semantic difference between the cleft sentences in (5) and (6), which has consequences for our understanding of the content of the abstract-entity anaphor det in the follow-up sentence. It will be interpreted in the epistemic modal domain in (5) but in the deontic modal domain in (6).

(5) Det er det de har tenkt. Men det er ikke riktig. it is that they have thought but it is not right ‘That’s what they’ve thought/believed. But it isn’t true.

(6) Det er det de har tenkt til. Men det er ikke riktig. it is that they have thought to but it is not right

‘That’s what they’ve planned (to do). But it isn’t right/fair.’

The preposition til of har tenkt til in (6) forces a syntactic analysis of its complement as an infinitival clause and so the future result of planned action, in spite of the absence of an overt DO complement. The follow-up declarative in (5), however, is about the falsity of the thought.

Gunlög Josefsson, Lund University

The expression of stuff and collection in the Mainland Scandinavian

According to Pinker (2007:80–81), the universal lexicon of ”the major words in a language of

thought” contains a taxonomy of entities, including those of ”object vs. stuff” and ”individual

vs. collection”. In my paper I explore how stuff (i.e. mass), and collection are expressed in the

Mainland Scandinavian languages. Even though there might be no designated mass/collection

morphology, the semantics of mass/collection can be conveyed by different types of

morphology: neuter (see (1a), which should be compared to (1b)), plural (see (2)), and

definiteness (see (3)).

(1) a a fik al det fisk a ku spis West Jutlandic (Ringgaard 1971)

I got al DEF.N fish I could eat

’I got all the fish I could eat.’

b den fisk a fanget i søndags West Jutlandic (Ringgaard 1971)

DEF.C fish I caught in Sunday

’the fish I caught last Sunday’

(2) (der er) manə flø˙ð å mjełkət Jutlandic (Arboe 2001)

(there be.PRS) many.PL cream.PL on milk.N.DEF

’There is much cream on the milk.’

(3) Vem skulle inte vilja ha kärl för peparin, salte, såckre

who would not want have holders for pepper.C.DEF salt.N.DEF sugar.N.DEF

och greddon på köksbordet? North Swedish (Parkvall 2011)

and cream.C.DEF on kitchen.table

’Who wouldn’t want to have holders for pepper, salt, sugar, and cream on the kitchen

table?’

The examples above show that we need to make a principled difference between morpho-

phonological exponents and their content or semantics. The morphological exponents in (1)–

(3) thus seem to be multifunctional.

In addition, there seems to be a fourth way of expressing a collectiion reading, though of a

slightly different kind, namely the ”collective -s”:

(4) Vi ska till Svensson-s ikväll.

we shall to Svensson-s tonight

’We will go to Svensson’s house tonight.’

The s-form in (4) looks very much like a genitive, but Josefsson (2009) and Delsing &

Josefsson (2010) show that the -s is more accurately analysed as the head of the noun phrase,

i.e. as an instance of No. This type of collective differs from other types, the noun

corresponding to Svensson in (4) denoting a salient member of the collection.

Arboe, Torben, 2001. Jyske kollektiver – et grammatisk fænomen under afvikling. Ord & Sag 21: 6–

14.

Delsing, Lars-Olof. 1993. The Internal Structure of Noun Phrases in the Scandinavian Languages.

Ph.D. Diss. Department of Scandinavian languages, Lund University.

Delsing, Lars-Olof & Josefsson, Gunlög, 2010. Kollektiviserande genitiv. In: Studier i svenska

språkets historia 11. Uppsala.

Josefsson, Gunlög. 2009. Sydvästsvensk a-genitiv – en levande relikt? Arkiv för nordisk filologi 124:

187–235.

Parkvall, Mikael. 2011. Lingvistbloggen. http://lingvistbloggen.ling.su.se/?p=775

Pinker, Stephen. 2007. The Stuff of Thought: Language As a Window Into Human Nature. Penguin.

Ringgaard, Kristian. 1971. Danske dialekter: En kortfattet oversigt. Århus: Akademisk boghandel.

UllaStroh‐Wollin GrammatikifokusInst.förnordiskaspråk Lund,4–5februari2016Uppsalauniversitetulla.stroh‐wollin@nordiska.uu.se

Framväxtenav(in)definithetisvenskan–enlååååånghistoriaDentidigastbelagdanordiskansaknadeformellamedelattuttrycka(in)definithet.Detfannsvarkenbestämdellerobestämdartikelochsubstantivkundeinteböjasibestämdform.Ochävenomdesvagaadjektivformernafanns,såvardeganskaovanligaochuppträddefrånbörjanframföralltipost‐positionellerisjälvständigafraserutansubstantiviskthuvudord.

Deförstabeläggenpåsubstantivibestämdformdykeruppiettparruninskrifterfrån1000‐talet.Meduppkomstenavbestämdhetsböjningenavsubstantivstartarenutvecklingavnominalfrasenssyntaxsomlederframtilldagensobligatoriskaformelladistinktionmellandefinitaochindefinitanominalfraser.

Mendettaärenutdragenprocess.Användningenavdenbestämdaformenökarstadigtunder1100‐,1200‐och1300‐talen,meninteförränvid1400‐taletsmitttycksdenbliobliga‐toriskiprototypisktdefinitakontexter.Intressantnogverkardetsomombruketavobe‐stämdochbestämdartikel,liksomfördelningenavstarkaochsvagaadjektivformer,”fallerpåplats”ungefärsamtidigt.(Stroh‐Wollin2015,Skrzypek2012)

Detärlättattsespråkförändringarsomtarflerahundraårpåsigsomenutmaningförenminimalistiskanalys.Mendetärensådanjagvillföreslå.Utgångspunktenärenmodellfördenmodernasvenskan,därdefinithetassocierasmedtvåsamverkandefunktionellasärdragivarsinprojektion.(Stroh‐Wollin2011)KortkanmodellenbeskrivassomDP‐dP‐NP.

FördetspråksomföregåruppkomstenavbestämdformpåsubstantivräknarjagintemedattstrukturenärenDP,mentillskillnadfrånBošković2012(jfrävenLander&Haegeman2013)tänkerjagmigändåenfunktionellprojektionovanförNP;jaganvänderbeteckningenEP(medEsomi”edge”)fördennaprojektion.ModellenkandåbeskrivassomEP‐NP.

Närettformelltbestämdhetsmorfemuppstårgenomgrammatikaliseringavettefter‐ställtdemonstrativ(hinn>‐inn)måsteemellertidböjningsmorfemethaenplatsistrukturen.JagmenarattdettainnebärattvifårendPmellanEPochNP.EmellertidharEPinteändratkaraktär,utanlåtersigfortsatttaNP‐komplementlikavälsomdP‐komplement.MankanbeskrivadettasomEP‐(dP)‐NP.Ochdettastadiumbeståriflerahundraår.ReferenserBošković, Željko. 2012. On NPs and clauses. I: G. Grewendorf & T. E.

Zimmermann(eds.),DiscourseandGrammar:FromSentenceTypestoLexicalCategories,179–242.Boston:WalterdeGruyter.

Lander, Eric T.& LilianeHaegeman.2013.Old Norse as an NP language:With observationon theCommon Norse and Northwest Germanic runic inscriptions. Transactions of the PhilologicalSociety.Vol.00,1–40.

Skrzypek,Dominika.2012.Grammaticalizationof(in)definitenessinSwedish.UniversityofPoznan.Stroh‐Wollin,Ulla.2011.Asemanticapproachtonounphrasestructureandthedefinite–indefinite

distinction inGermanicandRomance. In:P.Sleeman&H.Perridon(eds.),TheNounPhrase in

Romance and Germanic: Structure, variation and change. 127–140. Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins.

Stroh‐Wollin,Ulla,2015:Frångammalmantilldengamlemannen–definitmarkeringifornsvenskanominalfrasermedadjektivattribut.Arkivförnordiskfilologi130.