Cover not available

Article published In: Historical Germanic morphosyntax
Edited by Stephen Laker and John Ole Askedal
[NOWELE 74:2] 2021
► pp. 242–277

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

The typology of Old Norse revisited

The case of Middle Danish

 | University of Copenhagen
Published online: 18 November 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/nowele.00058.hel
Abstract
Typologically, the Old and Middle Scandinavian languages preserve features lost in Modern Scandinavian (Danish, Norwegian and Swedish), especially zero arguments and inactive constructions. Both phenomena present difficulties for the analysis of the Old and Middle Scandinavian languages as configurational, and generative linguists often choose a reductionist strategy, claiming that at the level of deep structure, configurational structure persists. Based on Middle Danish, my claim will be that zero arguments are semantically different from – and therefore cannot be reduced to – pronouns, and secondly, that inactive constructions do not have oblique subjects, but oblique first arguments (A1s). The meanings of the case forms nominative and oblique differ, depending on their constructional context. Any functional theory must respect the relevant grammatical sign contrasts of the language analysed, not try to explain them away.
Article outline
  • 1.The issue
  • 2.Actant optionality (zero arguments)
    • 2.1Zero arguments and their content
    • 2.2A subject-object asymmetry?
    • 2.3The pragmatics of zero arguments
  • 3.Valence and actants in Middle Danish
    • 3.1Zero valence
    • 3.2Intransitive verbs and one-place inactive verbs
      • 3.2.1Intransitive verbs
      • 3.2.2Inactive one-place verbs
      • 3.2.3The A1 as a basic semantic option
    • 3.3Two-place constructions
      • 3.3.1Transitives
      • 3.3.2Inactive two-place verbs
      • 3.3.3Grammatical relations and argument hierarchy
  • 4.Non-configurational structure
    • 4.1Doing away with oblique subjects in Middle Danish
      • 4.1.1Reflexive pronouns
      • 4.1.2Conjunction and conjunction reduction
      • 4.1.3Raising and control
    • 4.2Topology
    • 4.3Zero arguments in PPs
    • 4.4Is there a VP in Old Norse?
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Sources
  • References
References (59)
Sources
AM 187, 8o = Det arnamagnæanske håndskrift nr. 187 i oktav, indeholdende en dansk lægebog. Ed. by V. Såby. Universitets-Jubilæets danske Samfund. Copenhagen: Thieles Bogtrykkeri. 1883.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bønneb = Middelalderens danske Bønnebøger I–V, ed. by K. M. Nielsen. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel/Nordisk Forlag. 1945–1982.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
CCD = Corpus Codicum Danicorum Medii Aevi. CCD III. Lex Scaniae, codd. B74 and GkS3121, ed. by J. Brøndum-Nielsen. 1961; CCD X. Lex Jutiae, codd. C37 and C39, ed. by P. Skautrup. Copenhagen: Munksgaard. 1973.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DgL V = Danmarks gamle Landskabslove V, Eriks Sjællandske Lov, ed. by P. Skautrup. Copenhagen 1936.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dma = Danmarks middelalderlige annaler [Denmark’s medieval annals], ed. by E. Kroman. Copenhagen 1980.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
EL = Eriks Lov [Eric’s Law].
Fragm = Fragmenter af gammeldanske Haandskrifter [Fragments of Middle Danish manuscripts], ed. by P. Diderichsen. Copenhagen: Schulz. 1931–1937.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
GldO = Gammeldansk Ordbog [Middle Danish Dictionary]. An electronically accessible, non-digitalised collection of excerpts for the Middle Danish Dictionary project. [URL]
Harp S = Harpestreng ms. S from Harpestræng. Gamle danske Urtebøger, Stenbøger og Kogebøger. Ed. by M. Kristensen. Copenhagen. 1908–1920.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
HKv = De hellige Kvinder. En Legende-Samling. Ed. by C. J. Brandt. Copenhagen 1859.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
JBB = Jesu Barndoms Bog. Ghemen ca. 1508. Danske Folkebøger 1, Apokryfe Bibelhistorier, ed. by J. P. Jacobsen, 27–105. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel Nordisk Forlag. 1915. Electronic edition by Det Danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab: [URL]
Kempis = Thomas a Kempis. Fire bøger om Kristi Efterfølgelse, i dansk oversættelse fra 15. Århundrede, ed. by F. Rønning. Copenhagen. 1884–1885.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
KøbstL = Danmarks gamle Købstadslovgivning I–V, ed. by E. Kroman. Copenhagen: Rosenkilde og Bagger. 1951–1961.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luc = Lucidarius. In A Danish Teacher’s Manual from the Mid-Fifteenth Century (COD. AM 76, 8°). Ed. by S. Kroon et al. Lund: Lund University Press 1993.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lægeråd AM 819 = Medical Advice, excerpt for GldO from ms. AM 819 33r. [URL]
Mandeville = Mandevilles Rejse i gammeldansk Oversættelse [The journey of Mandeville in Middle Danish translation], ed. by M. Lorenzen. Copenhagen. 1882.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miss = Missiver fra Chr. I’s og Hans’ Tid I–II, ved W. Christensen. 1912–1914.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ML = Mariager Legendehåndskrift, ed. by G. Knudsen, for Samfund til Udgivelse af gammel nordisk Litteratur. Copenhagen 1917–1930.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
OpbygSkr = Opbyggelige skrifter [Devotional writings], efter Cod. Holm. A29, excerpt for GldO from ms. Stockholm A29 173v. [URL]
Pass = Den danske passionstraktat, from manuscript in Stockholm. Duplicated for GldO.
Post = Postil i Uppsala. In Svenska Medeltids-postillor III, ed. by G. E. Klemming. Stockholm: P. A. Norstedts & söner. 1873.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
RigsL = Den danske rigslovgivning indtil 1400, ed. by E. Kroman. Copenhagen: Munksgaard. 1971.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rim K41 = Den danske Rimkrønike, ed. by H. Nielsen from manuscript Stockholm K41. Universitets-Jubilæets danske Samfund. Copenhagen: H. H. Thiele. 1906–1911.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ScEL = Scanian Ecclesiastical Law.
ScL = Scanian Law.
SjT = Sjælens Trøst. Consolatio animae, ed. by N. Nielsen. Universitets-Jubilæets danske Samfund. Copenhagen 1937–1952.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sydr = Sydrak. Efter haandskriftet Ny kgl. Samling 236, 4to, ed. by G. Knudsen. Universitets-Jubilæets danske Samfund. Copenhagen 1921–32.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thord Degn = Danmarks gamle Landskabslove IV. Tillæg til Bind IV. Thord Degns Artikler, Text 2.
References
Askedal, J. O. 2001. ‘Oblique subjects’, structural and lexical case marking. In J. T. Faarlund (ed.), Grammatical relations in change, 65–97. Amsterdam: Benjamins. [URL].
Baker, M. 2001. Configurationality and polysynthesis. In M. Haspelmath, E. König, W. Österreicher & W. Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook, vol. 21, 1433–1441. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2001. The perplexity of Dat-Nom verbs in Icelandic. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 241. 47–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barðdal, J. & Þ. Eyþórsson. 2003. The change that never happened: the story of oblique subjects. Journal of Linguistics 391. 439–472. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. What is a subject: The nature and validity of subject tests. In J. Barðdal, N. Pat-El & S. M. Carey (eds.), Non-canonically case-marked subjects. The Reykjavík-Eyjafjallajökull papers, 257–273. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bom, K. 1954. Gammeldansk Ordliste. Duplicated for GldO.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Christoffersen, M. 1993. Setning og sammenheng. Syntaktiske studier i Magnus Lagabøters landslov. ADH-serien, 65. Kristiansand: Agder distriktshøgskole.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dyvik, H. 1980. Om definisjonen av tema og rema [On the definition of theme and rheme]. Eigenproduksjon nr. 8. Institutt for lingvistikk. Universitetet i Bergen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eyþórsson, Þ. & J. Barðdal. 2005. Oblique subjects: A common Germanic inheritance. Language 811. 824–881. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faarlund, J. T. 1990. Syntactic change. Toward a theory of historical syntax. Trends in linguistics. Studies and monographs 50. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2001. The notion of oblique subject and its status in the history of Icelandic. In J. T. Faarlund (ed.), Grammatical relations in change [Studies in Language Companion Series 56], 99–135. Amsterdam: Benjamins. [URL].
2004. The syntax of Old Norse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Falk, C. 1997. Fornsvenska upplevarverb. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heltoft, L. 2003. Iconic and categorical focus systems in Scandinavian. In V. Molnar & J. Hetland, (eds.), Structures of focus and grammatical relations, 43–87. Linguistische Arbeiten. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2011. Word order change as grammaticalisation. In J. Nørgård-Sørensen, L. Heltoft & L. Schøsler, Connecting grammaticalisation, 171–235. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2012. Zero expression of arguments in Old Danish. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 44(2). 169–191. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2019. Fra gammeldansk til nutidsdansk. Under medvirken af M. A. Nielsen. In E. Hjorth, H. G. Jacobsen, B. Jørgensen, B. Jacobsen, M. Jørgensen & L. K. Fahl (eds.), Dansk Sproghistorie 3: Bøjning og bygning, Syntaks ch. 11.2, 129–225. Aarhus: Det Danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab and Aarhus Universitetsforlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Submitted 2020. The semantic reorganisation of case paradigms and word order paradigms in the history of Danish. In G. Diewald & K. Politt (eds), Proceedings of the Workshop on Paradigmatic Organization. SLE Societas Linguistica Europea, Leipzig, August 2019.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, L. 1943. Omkring Sprogteoriens Grundlæggelse. Københavns Universitets Festskrift 1943. Copenhagen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hjartardóttir, Þ. B. 1987. Getið í eyðurnar. Um eyður fyrir frumlög og andlög í eldri íslensku. Master’s Thesis, University of Iceland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hrafnbjargarson, G. H. 2003. Ikke-nominative subjekter i det danske sprogs historie. In P. Widell & M. Kunøe (eds.), 9. Møde om Udforskningen af Dansk Sprog, 188–197. Department of Nordic Language and Literature: Aarhus University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luraghi, S. 2010. The rise (and possible downfall) of configurationality. In S. Luraghi & V. Bubeni’k (eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to historical linguistics, 212–229. The Bloomsbury Publishing Company PLC.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Melčuk, I. 2014. Syntactic Subject: Syntactic Relations, once again. In V. A. Plungjan (main ed.), M. A. Daniel’, E. A. Ljutikova, S. G. Tatjevosov & O. V. Fjodorova (co-eds.), Jazyk. Konstanty. Peremennye. Pamjati Aleksandra Jevgen’jeviča Kibrika, 169–216. Sankt-Peterburg: Aleteija.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mørck, E. 1992. Subjektets kasus i norrønt og mellomnorsk. Arkiv för nordisk filologi 1071. 53–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nielsen, M. Aa. 2013. Syntaktisk utvikling fra urnordisk til mellomnorsk. In O.-E. Haugen (ed.), Handbok i norrøn filologi, 2nd edition, 556–598. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nørgård-Sørensen, J., L. Heltoft & L. Schøsler. 2011. Connecting grammaticalisation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, H. Á. 1989. Verbal syntax and case in Icelandic in a comparative GB approach. Lund: Department of Scandinavian Languages. University of Lund.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006. The nom/acc alternation in Germanic. In J. M. Hartmann and L. Molnárfi (eds.), Comparative studies in Germanic syntax: From Afrikaans to Zurich German, 13–50. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zúñiga, F. 2011. Why should beneficiaries be subjects (or objects)? Affaction and grammatical relations. In S. Kittilä, K. Västi & J. Ylikoski (eds.), Case, animacy and semantic roles, 329–48. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue