Cover not available

In:Ditransitives in Germanic Languages: Synchronic and diachronic aspects
Edited by Eva Zehentner, Melanie Röthlisberger and Timothy Colleman
[Studies in Germanic Linguistics 7] 2023
► pp. 365–403

Get fulltext
PDF logo with download linkDownload Chapter PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Chapter EPUB

Giving in English and Norwegian

A contrastive perspective

 | Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 8 August 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/sigl.7.11ega
Abstract
This chapter investigates ditransitive constructions and their prepositional dative alternates, containing the cognate verbs English give and Norwegian gi, using data from the English–Norwegian Parallel Corpus (Johansson 2007). The bi-directional nature of the corpus enables us not only to compare the distribution of constructions in the original texts in the two languages but also to investigate how individual tokens are translated into the other language. The analysis shows that give constructions in the two languages are remarkably similar in their semantics and their distribution. There are, however, some differences, including the greater incidence of light verb constructions in English, and a tendency for Norwegian translators to employ a get construction with the recipient recoded as subject rather than indirect/prepositional object.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background, data and methodology
    • 2.1Ditransitive give constructions in English and Norwegian
    • 2.2Data and methodology
  • 3.Original texts in comparison
    • 3.1Overall results
    • 3.2The individual semantic combinations
      • 3.2.1Ag-Tr-An-C
      • 3.2.2Ag-Tr-An-Ab
      • 3.2.3Ag-Ntr-An-C and Ag-Ntr-An-Ab
      • 3.2.4Ag-Ntr-In-C
      • 3.2.5Ag-Ntr-In-Ab
      • 3.2.6St-Ntr-An-C
      • 3.2.7St-Ntr-An-Ab
      • 3.2.8St-Ntr-In-Ab
  • 4.Translation evidence
    • 4.1Overall results
    • 4.2Divergent translations
    • 4.3Translation of light verb constructions
    • 4.4OO translated as OP and vice versa
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (34)
References
Anderssen, Merete, Paula Fikkert, Roksolana Mykhaylyk, and Yulia Rodina. 2012. “The Dative Alternation in Norwegian Child Language.” Nordlyd 39 (1): 24–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Askedal, John Ole. 2005. “The Standard Languages and Their Systems in the 20th Century III: Norwegian.” In The Nordic Languages: An International Handbook of the History of the North Germanic Languages: Volume 2, ed. by Oskar Bandle, Kurt Braunmüller, Ernst Håkon Jahr, Allan Karker, Hans-Peter Naumann, and Ulf Teleman, 1584–1603. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barđdal, Johanna, Kristian E. Kristoffersen, and Andreas Sveen. 2011. “West Scandinavian Ditransitives as a Family of Constructions: With a Special Attention to the Norwegian V-REFL-NP Construction.” Linguistics 49 (1): 53–104. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, and Jennifer Hay. 2008. “Gradient Grammar: An Effect of Animacy on the Syntax of Give in New Zealand and American English.” Lingua 118: 245–259. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, and Marilyn Ford. 2010. “Predicting Syntax: Processing Dative Constructions in American and Australian Varieties of English.” Language 86 (1): 168–213. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brøseth, Heidi. 1998. “Dobbelt objekt og tilgrensende konstruksjoner i moderne norsk.” In MONS 7: Utvalde artiklar frå det 7. møtet om norsk språk i Trondheim 1007, ed. by Jan Terje Faarlund, Brit Mæhlum, and Torbjørn Nordgård, 13–34. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W. 2005. A Semantic Approach to English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ebeling, Jarle. 1998. “Using Translations to Explore Construction Meaning in English and Norwegian.” In Corpora and Cross-Linguistic Research: Theory, Method and Case Studies, ed. by Stig Johansson, and Signe Oksefjell, 169–195. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ebeling, Signe Oksefjell. 2003. The Norwegian Verbs Bli and Få and Their Correspondences in English: A Corpus-Based Contrastive Study. Acta Humaniora. Oslo: Unipub forlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje, Svein Lie, and Kjell Ivar Vannebo. 1997. Norsk Referansegrammatikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garretson, Gregory. 2004. “Coding Practices Used in the Project Optimal Typology of Determiner Phrases.” Unpublished manuscript, Boston University, Boston, MA. [URL]. (accessed 02 Sept 2020).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2013. “Ditransitive Constructions: The Verb ‘Give’.” In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, ed. by Matthew S. Dryer, and Martin Haspelmath. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. [URL] (accessed 10 Oct 2018).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney D., and Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1924. The Philosophy of Grammar. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levin, Magnus, and Jenny Ström Herold. 2015. “give and take: A Contrastive Study of Light Verb Constructions in English, German and Swedish.” In Cross-linguistic Perspectives on Verb Constructions, ed. by Signe Oksefjell Ebeling, and Hilde Hasselgård, 144–168. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lohndal, Terje. 2011. “Freezing Effects and Objects.” Journal of Linguistics 47 (1): 163–199, 249–250. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mehl, Seth. 2019. “Light Verb Semantics in the International Corpus of English: Onomasiological Variation, Identity Evidence and Degrees of Lightness.” English Language and Linguistics 23 (1): 55–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Molina-Plaza, Silvia, and Eduardo de Gregorio-Godeo. 2010. “Stretched Verb Collocations with ‘Give’: Their Use and Translation into Spanish Using the BNC and CREA Corpora.” ReCALL 22 (2): 191–211. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mukherjee, Joybrato. 2005. English Ditransitive Verbs: Aspects of Theory, Description and a Usage-Based Model. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Newman, John. 1996. Give: A Cognitive Linguistic Study. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ronan, Patricia, and Gerold Schneider. 2015. “Determining Light Verb Constructions in Contemporary British and Irish English.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 20 (3): 326–354. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Röthlisberger, Melanie, Jason Grafmiller, and Benedikt Szmrecsanyi. 2017. “Cognitive Indigenization Effects in the English Dative Alternation.” Cognitive Linguistics 28 (4): 673–710. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sweet, Henry. 1891. A New English Grammar, Logical and Historical. Part I: Introduction, Phonology, and Accidence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, Jason Grafmiller, Joan Bresnan, Anette Rosenbach, Sali Tagliamonte, and Simon Todd. 2017. “Spoken Syntax in a Comparative Perspective: The Dative and Genitive Alternation in Varieties of English.” Glossa 2 (1): 1–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet. 1995. Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation, transl. and ed. by Juan C. Sager, and Marie-Josée Hamel. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1988. The Semantics of Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue