In:Reorganising Grammatical Variation: Diachronic studies in the retention, redistribution and refunctionalisation of linguistic variants
Edited by Antje Dammel, Matthias Eitelmann and Mirjam Schmuck
[Studies in Language Companion Series 203] 2018
► pp. 209–230
Making sense of grammatical variation in Norwegian
Published online: 24 October 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.203.08sam
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.203.08sam
Abstract
This study examines two examples of grammatical variation in Norwegian inflection, strong versus weak verb conjugation and affixal versus periphrastic adjective comparison. The main claim is that the choice of variants is not as arbitrary as one may think, which rather indicates a division of labour. The strong verb inflection tends to be motivated not only by phonology, but also by semantics. The affixal and periphrastic adjective comparisons tend to be used with different sets of adjectives and for different semantic purposes. These observations support the Principle of Contrast, the idea that a difference in form normally relates to a difference in meaning.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Verb conjugations
- 2.1Introducing the data – and the issue
- 2.2The link with semantics
- 2.3Supporting evidence
- 2.4Summarising Section 2
- 3.Comparative constructions
- 3.1The issue
- 3.2Meta-comparison
- 3.3A warning against introspection
- 3.4A comparison with two other studies on comparison
- 4.Conclusions
Acknowledgements Notes References
References (45)
Anderwald, Lieselotte. 2011. Are non-standard dialects more ‘natural’ than the standard? A test case from English verb morphology. Journal of Linguistics 47(2): 251–274.
Baayen, R. Harald & Moscoso del Prado Martín, Fermín. 2005. Semantic density and past-tense formation in three Germanic languages. Language 81(3): 666–698.
Bjerkan, Kirsten Meyer. 2000. Verbal Morphology in Specifically Language Impaired Children. Oslo: Unipub.
Dahlstedt, Karl-Hampus. 1962. Det svenska Vilhelmina-målet: språkgeografiska studier över ett norrländskt nybyggarmål och dess granndialekter 2.
(The Swedish dialect of Vilhelmina: studies in language geography on a North Swedish dialect and its neighbours). Uppsala: Lundequistska bokh.
Enger, Hans-Olav. 1998. The Classification of Strong Verbs in Norwegian with Special Reference to the Oslo Dialect: A Study in Inflectional Morphology. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.
. 2010a. How do words change inflection class? Diachronic evidence from Norwegian. Language Sciences 32(3): 366–379.
. 2010b. Partial and competing motivations for gender. In Kontrastive Germanistische Linguistik, Teilband 2, Antje Dammel, Sebastian Kürschner, Damaris Nübling (eds)], 673–693. Hildesheim: Olms.
Esher, Louise. 2013. Future and conditional in Occitan: A non-canonical morphome. In The Boundaries of Pure Morphology: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives [Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 4], Silvio Cruschina, Martin Maiden & John Charles Smith (eds), 95–116. Oxford: OUP.
Faarlund, Jan Terje, Lie, Svein & Vannebo, Kjell Ivar. 1997. Norsk referansegrammatikk (Norwegian Reference Grammar). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Hagen, Jon Erik. 1994. Svake verb på -Vde og -Vte i bokmål og deres paradigmetilhørighet (Weak verbs in -Vde and -Vte in Bokmål and their inflection class membership). In Helsing til Lars Vassenden på 70-årsdagen, Johan Myking, Helge Sandøy & Ivar Utne (eds), 57–67. Bergen: Nordisk institutt.
Hansen, Erik & Heltoft, Lars. 2011. Grammatik over det danske sprog (Grammar of the Danish language). Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag.
Hilpert, Martin. 2010. Comparing comparatives: A corpus-based study of comparative constructions in English and Swedish. In Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Grammar 10], Hans C. Boas (ed.), 21–41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Karlsson, Fred & Sahlquist, Åsa. 1974. Starka verb i förvandling (Strong verbs in change). Nysvenska Studier 54: 44–83.
Maiden, Martin. 2001. What sort of thing is a derivational affix? In Yearbook of Morphology 1999, Geert E. Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds), 25–52. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
. 2013. ‘Semi-autonomous’ morphology. In The Boundaries of Pure Morphology: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives [Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 4,], Silvio Cruschina, Martin Maiden & John Charles Smith (eds), 24–45. Oxford: OUP.
Mondorf, Britta. 2009. More Support for more-Support: The Role of Processing Constraints on the Choice between Synthetic and Analytic Comparative Forms [Studies in Language Variation 4]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Newmeyer, Frederick J. 1983. Grammatical Theory: Its Limits and its Possibilities. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.
Nicolay, Nathalie. 2007. Aktionsarten im Deutschen: Prozessualität und Stativität (Actionality in German: Processuality and stativity) [Linguistische Arbeiten 514]. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Nilsen, Marianne Brodahl. 2012. Sterke verb og semantiske fellestrekk: Om semantisk motivasjon for bøyingsklassetilhørighet ved norske verb (Strong verbs and semantic commonalities: On semantic motivation for inflection class membership in Norwegian verbs). MA thesis, University of Oslo. <[URL]>
Nordberg, Bengt. 1982. Vad händer med adjektivets endelseskomparation? [What happens with the adjective’s suffixal comparison?] In Förhandlingar vid trettonde sammankomsten för att dryfta frågor rörande svenskans beskrivning, Hanaholmen 1981, Mirja Saari & Marika Tandefelt (eds), 228–248. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston monistuspalvelu.
Pinker, Steven. (1999). Words and Rules: The Ingredients of Language. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Ramscar, Michael. 2002. The role of meaning in inflection: Why the past tense does not require a rule. Cognitive Psychology 45(1): 45–94.
Reitan, Jørgen. 1930. Interjeksjonsverber i norske målføre (Interjection verbs in Norwegian dialects). Maal og Minne 65–98.
Siemund, Peter. 2011. Universals and variation: an introduction. In Linguistic Universals and Language Variation [Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 231], Peter Siemund (ed.), 1–21. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Simon, Horst & Wiese, Heike. 2011. What are exceptions? And what can be done about them? In Expecting the Unexpected: Exceptions in Grammar [Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 216], Simon Horst & Heike Wiese (eds), 3–30. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Spilling, Eivor Finset. 2012. Gradbøying i norsk: En korpusbasert undersøkelse av talespråk (Comparison in Norwegian: A corpus-based study of spoken language). MA thesis, University of Oslo. <[URL]>
Spilling, Eivor Finset & Haugen, Tor Arne. 2013. Gradbøying i norsk: en bruksbasert tilnærming (Comparison in Norwegian: A usage-based approach). Maal og Minne 2013(2): 1–40.
. 2014. Metakomparasjon i norsk (Meta-comparison in Norwegian). Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 32(1): 3–29.
Teleman, Ulf, Hellberg, Staffan & Andersson, Erik. 1999. Svenska Akademiens Grammatik 2: Ord (The Swedish Academy Grammar vol. 2: Words). Stockholm: Norstedts.
Thornton, Anna M. 2011. Overabundance (multiple forms realizing the same cell): a non-canonical phenomenon in Italian verb morphology. In Morphological Autonomy: Perspectives from Romance Inflectional Morphology, Martin Maiden, John Charles Smith, Maria Goldbach & Marc-Olivier Hinzelin (eds), 358–382. Oxford: OUP.
Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Verbs and times. In Linguistics in Philosophy, Zeno Vendler, 97–121. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.
Venås, Kjell. 1967. Sterke verb i norske målføre (Strong verbs in Norwegian dialects). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Vincent, Nigel. 2013. Compositionality and change in conditionals and counterfactuals in Romance. In The Boundaries of Pure Morphology: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives [Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 4], Silvio Cruschina, Martin Maiden & John Charles Smith (eds), 116–137. Oxford: OUP.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Heinemann, Sabine
Enger, Hans-Olav
2019. Thoughts on morphomes, on a Scandinavian background. In Morphological Variation [Studies in Language Companion Series, 207], ► pp. 159 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
