Cover not available
Part of
Studies in Övdalian Morphology and Syntax: New research on a lesser-known Scandinavian language
Edited by Kristine Bentzen, Henrik Rosenkvist and Janne Bondi Johannessen †
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 221] 2015
► pp. 47–85

On the morpho-syntax of verb/adverb placement and fronting in embedded clauses in Modern Övdalian

| University of Iceland
The constructions under investigation in this chapter include verb second (V2) and topicalization in various types of embedded clauses, stylistic fronting (SF) and transitive expletive constructions (TECs). It turns out that the older speakers of Övdalian allow V2 more freely than the younger speakers and the results from a verbal paradigm fill-in task reveal substantial variation in the use of verbal affixes and, interestingly, a tendency, especially by the younger speakers, to simplify the verbal morphology. Both SF and TECs receive very low acceptance scores. The data does not provide support for the ‘strong version’ of the Rich Agreement Hypothesis (RAH) but it is argued that the facts regarding verb/adverb placement can be accounted for under a ‘weak’ RAH analysis.
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 3.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 22 January 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.221.03ang
References (77)
References
Åkerberg, Bengt. 2012. Älvdalsk grammatik. Älvdalen: Ulum Dalska.Google Scholar
Angantýsson, Ásgrímur. 2007. Verb-third in embedded clauses in Icelandic. Studia Linguistica 61(3): 237–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. The Syntax of Embedded Clauses in Icelandic and Related Languages. PhD dissertation, University of Iceland.
Bentzen, Kristine. 2007. Order and Structure in Embedded Clauses in Northern Norwegian. PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø.
. Forthcoming. Kronoby revisited: Verb movement in embedded non-V2 contexts in Northern Ostrobothnian. Nordlyd: Tromsø Working Papers in language and Linguistic s.
Bentzen, Kristine, Hrafnbjargarson, Gunnar Hrafn, Hróarsdóttir, Þorbjörg, & Wiklund, Anna-Lena. 2007. The Tromsø guide to the Force behind V2. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 79: 93–118.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 1995. Morphosyntax: The Syntax of Verbal Inflection. PhD dissertation, MIT.
. 2002. Realizing Germanic inflection: Why morphology does not drive syntax. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 6: 129–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David & Jonas, Dianne. 1996. Subject positions and the role of TP. Linguistic Inquiry 27: 195–236.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David & Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 1998. Two heads aren’t always better than one. Syntax 1: 37–71 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Žjelko. 2001. PF merger in Scandinavian: Stylistic fronting and object shift. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 68: 75–115.Google Scholar
Bowers, John. 2001. Predication. In The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory, Mark Baltin & Chris Collins (eds), 299–333. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Arguments as Relations. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 58. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), 1–52. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Collins, Chris & Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 1996. VP-internal structure and object shift in Icelandic. Linguistic Inquiry 27: 391–444.Google Scholar
Cornips, Leonie & Poletto, Cecilia. 2005. On standardising syntactic elicitation techniques (Part 1). Lingua 115(7): 939–957. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Craenenbroeck, Jeroen & Haegeman, Liliane. 2007. The derivation of subject-initial V2. Linguistic Inquiry 38(1): 167–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Cuba, Carlos Francisco. 2007. On (Non)Factivity, Clausal Complementation and the CP-Field. PhD dissertation, Stony Brook, New York.
Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph. 2004. Unspecified categories as the key to root constructions. In Peripheries. Syntactic Edges and their Effects, David Adger, Cécile de Cat & George Tsoulas (eds.), 75–120. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph & Whitney, Roemarie. 2006. Double object constructions. In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Vol.II, Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), 73–144. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Falk, Cecilia. 1993. Non-Referential Subjects in the History of Swedish. PhD dissertation, University of Lund.
Garbacz, Piotr. 2006. Verb movement and negation in Övdalian. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 78: 173–190.Google Scholar
. 2010. Word Order in Övdalian. PhD dissertation, Lund University.
. 2011. Sambandet mellan morfologi och syntax i de nordiska dialekterna. In Studier i dialektologi och sociolingvistik, Lars-Erik Edlund, Lennart Elmevik & Maj Reinhammar (eds.), 113–122. Uppsala: Kungl. Gustav Adolfs Akademien för svensk folkkultur.Google Scholar
Garbacz, Piotr, Håkansson, David & Rosenkvist, Henrik. 2007. [Review of] John D. Sundquist, Morphosyntactic Change in the History of Mainland Scandinavian Languages. Ann Arbor MI: ProQuest, 2002, 389 pp. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 30(1): 137–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Haan, Germen J. 2001. More is going on upstairs than downstairs: embedded root phenomena in West Frisian. Journal of Comparative Germanic Syntax 4(1): 3–38.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2003. Conditional clauses: External and internal syntax. Mind and Language 18(4): 317–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006a. Argument fronting in English, Romance CLLD and the left periphery. In Negation, Tense and Clausal Architecture: Cross-linguistic Investigations Raffaela Zanuttini, Hector Campos, Elena Herburger & Paul Portner (eds.), 27–52. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
. 2006b. Conditionals, factives and the left periphery. Lingua 116(10): 1651–1669. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010a. The internal syntax of adverbial clauses. Lingua 120(3): 628–648. DOI logo
. 2010b. The Movement Derivation of Conditional Clauses. Linguistic Inquiry 41(4): 595–621. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heycock, Caroline, Sorace, Antonella & Hansen, Zakaris Svabo. 2010. V-to-I and V2 in subordinate clauses: An investigation of Faroese in relation to Icelandic and Danish. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 13(3): 61–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heycock, Caroline, Sorace, Antonella, Hansen, Zakaris Svabo, Wilson, Frances & Vikner, Sten. 2012. Detecting the late stages of syntactic change: The loss of V-to-T in Faroese. Language 88(3): 558–600. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, Anders. 2000. Scandinavian stylistic fronting: How any category can become an expletive. Linguistic Inquiry 31: 445–483. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Stylistic fronting. In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Vol. IV, Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), 532–565. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, Anders & Platzack, Christer. 1995. The Role of Inflection in Scandinavian Syntax. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Hooper, Joan B. & Thompson, Sandra A. 1973. On the applicability of Root Transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4: 465–497.Google Scholar
Hrafnbjargarson, Gunnar Hrafn. 2004. Stylistic fronting. Studia Linguistica 58: 88–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iatridou, Sabine, & Kroch, Anthony S. 1992. The licensing of CP-recursion and its relevance to the Germanic verb-second phenomenon. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 50: 1–24.Google Scholar
Jonas, Dianne. 1996a. Clause Structure and Verb Syntax in Scandinavian and English. PhD dissertation, Harvard University.
. 1996b. Clause structure, expletives, and verb movement. In Minimal Ideas: Syntactic Studies in the Minimalist Framework [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 12] Werner Abraham, Samuel David Epstein, Höskuldur Thráinsson & C. Jan-Wouter Zwart (eds.), 167–188. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jónsson, Jóhannes Gisli. 1991. Stylistic fronting in Icelandic. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 48: 1–44.Google Scholar
. 1996. Clausal Architecture and Case in Icelandic. Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Julien, Marit. 2007. Embedded V2 in Norwegian and Swedish. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 80: 103–161.Google Scholar
Koeneman, Olaf & Zeijlstra, Hedde 2012. One law for the rich and another for the poor: The rich agreement hypothesis rehabilitated. lingbuzz/001462.
Larson, Richard K. 1988. On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 335–391.Google Scholar
Levander, Lars. 1909. Älvdalsmålet i Dalarna. Ordböjning ock syntax (Övdalian. Inflection and syntax). Stockholm: Kungl. boktryckeriet P. A. Norstedt & söner.Google Scholar
Maling, Joan. 1980. Inversion in embedded clauses in Modern Icelandic. Íslenskt mál 2: 175–193.Google Scholar
Ottósson, Kjartan. 1989. VP-specifier subjects and the CP/IP distinction in Icelandic and mainland Scandinavian. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 44: 89–100.Google Scholar
Platzack, Christer. 1987. The Scandinavian languages and the null-subject parameter. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5(3): 377–401. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 365–424.Google Scholar
Poole, Geoffrey. 1992. The case filter and stylistic fronting in Icelandic. Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics 1: 19–31.Google Scholar
. 1996. Optional movement in the minimalist program. In Minimal Ideas. Syntactic Studies in the Minimalist Framework [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 12], Werner Abraham, Samuel David Epstein, Höskuldur Thráinsson & C. Jan-Wouter Zwart (eds.), 199–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar. Handbook in Generative Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Rohrbacher, Bernard W. 1999. Morphology-Driven Syntax. A Theory of V-to-I Raising and Pro-Drop [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 15]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosenkvist, Henrik. 1994. Tecken på syntaktisk utveckling i älvdalsmålet under senare tid. BA dissertation, University of Lund.
. 2011. Verb raising and referential null subjects in Övdalian. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 88: 1–20.Google Scholar
Rögnvaldsson, Erikur & Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 1990. On Icelandic word order once more. In Syntax and Semantics 24. Modern Icelandic Syntax, Joan B. Maling & Annie Zaenen (eds.), 3–40. San Diego CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ámann. 1989. Verbal Syntax and Case in Icelandic. Lund: Department of Scandinavian Languages, University of Lund.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann. 2010. On EPP effects. Studia Linguistica 64(2): 159–189.Google Scholar
Sundquist, John D. 2002. Morphosyntactic Change in the History of the Mainland Scandinavian Languages. PhD dissertation, Indiana University.
Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 1986. V1, V2, V3 in Icelandic. In Verb Second Phenomena in Germanic Languages, Hubert Haider & Martin Prinzhorn (eds.), 169–174. Dordrecht Foris.Google Scholar
. 1993. On the structure of infinitival complements. Harvard Working Papers in Linguistics 3: 181–213.Google Scholar
. 1996. On the non-universality of functional categories. In Minimalist Ideas: Syntactic Studies in the Minimalist Framework [Linguisik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 12], Werner Abraham, Samuel David Epstein, Höskuldur Thráinsson & C. Jan-Wouter Zwart (eds.), 253–281. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. Object shift and scrambling. In The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory, Mark Baltin & Chris Collins (eds.), 148–202. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. Syntactic variation, historical development and minimalism. In Minimalist Syntax, Randall Hendrick (ed.), 152–191. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. The Syntax of Icelandic. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Predictable and unpredictable sources of variable verb and adverb placement in Scandinavian. Lingua 120: 1062–1088. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vangsnes, Øystein Alexander. 2002. Icelandic expletive constructions and the distribution of subject types. In Subjects, Expletives and the EPP, Peter Svenonius (ed.), 43–70. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Vikner, Sten. 1995. Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 1997. V-to-I movement and inflection for person in all tenses. In The New Comparative Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 189–213. London: Longman.Google Scholar
. 2006. Object shift. In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Vol. III, Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), 392–436. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wiklund, Anna-Lena, Bentzen, Kristine, Hrafnbjargarson, Gunnar Hrafn & Hróarsdóttir, Þorbjörg. 2009. On the distribution and illocution of V2 in Scandinavian that-clauses. Lingua 119: 1914–1938. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wiklund, Anna-Lena, Hrafnbjargarson, Gunnar Hrafn, Bentzen, Kristine & Hróarsdóttir, Þorbjörg. 2007. Rethinking Scandinavian verb movement. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 10(3): 203–233 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwart, C. Jan-Wouter. 1997. The Germanic SOV languages and the universal base hypothesis. In The New Comparative Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 246–264. London: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar