Cover not available
Part of
Word Order Change in Acquisition and Language Contact: Essays in honour of Ans van Kemenade
Edited by Bettelou Los and Pieter de Haan
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 243] 2017
► pp. 35–56

Chapter 3
Word order and verb movement in Norwegian wh-questions

A comparison of production and judgment data

| UiT – The Arctic University of Norway
This paper compares production and judgment data collected from several North Norwegian dialects, focusing on word order variation in wh-questions (V2 vs. non-V2). The findings show that non-V2 is widespread in questions with monosyllabic wh-elements and also fully accepted in questions with phrasal wh-elements in language contact areas. Furthermore, the acceptability of non-V2 correlates with the complexity of the wh-element, confirming previous accounts of the historical development. Age differences suggest that this development is currently being reversed. However, there is a major discrepancy between the production and judgement data, in that non-V2 is hardly ever produced with complex wh-elements. The findings are discussed in relation to what frequencies in diachronic data can(not) reveal about the grammar that produced historical texts.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
  • 3. Word order in wh-questions in Northern Troms
  • 4.Research questions
  • 5.Participants and methodology
  • 6.Results
    • 6.1Acceptability judgments
    • 6.2Comparison with similar data from Southern Troms
    • 6.3 The effect of information structure
    • 6.4Semi-spontaneous production
    • 6.5Age differences
  • 7. Discussion
  • 8.Summary and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 14 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.243.03wes
References (35)
References
Åfarli, Tor. 1985. Absence of V2 effects in a dialect of Norwegian. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 22: 1–21. University of Trondheim.Google Scholar
. 1986. Some syntactic structures in a dialect of Norwegian. Working Papers in Linguistics 3: 93–111. University of Trondheim.Google Scholar
Anderssen, Merete. 2006. The Acquisition of Compositional Definiteness in Norwegian. PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
Bayer, Josef. 2004. Decomposing the left periphery: Dialectal and cross-linguistic evidence. In The Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery, Horst Lohnstein & Susanne Trissler (eds), 59–95. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bech, Kristin. 2001. Word Order Patterns in Old and Middle English: A Syntactic and Pragmatic Study. PhD dissertation, University of Bergen.Google Scholar
den Besten, Hans. 1977. On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive rules. Ms, University of Amsterdam. Published 1981, Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik 20, 1–78; republished 1983, in On the Formal Syntax of the Westgermania [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 3], Werner Abraham, 47–131. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, and 1989, in Studies in Germanic Syntax , Hans den Besten (ed.), 14–100. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan & Nikitina, Tatiana. 2009. The gradience of the dative alternation. In Reality Exploration and Discovery: Pattern Interaction in Language and Life, Linda Uyechi & Lian-Hee Wee (eds), 161–184. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Eitler, Tamás & Westergaard, Marit. 2014. Word order variation in late Middle English: The effect of information structure and audience design. In Information Structure and Syntactic Change in Germanic and Romance Languages [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 213], Kristin Bech & Kristine Eide (eds), 203–231. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga, van Kemenade, Ans, Koopman, Willem & van der Wurff, Wim. 2000. The Syntax of Early English. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Haeberli, Eric. 1999. Features, Categories and the Syntax of A-Positions: Synchronic and Diachronic Variation in the Germanic Languages. PhD dissertation, University of Geneva.Google Scholar
van Kemenade, Ans. 1987. Syntactic Case and Morphological Case in the History of English. Dordrecht: Foris.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Kemenade, Ans & Westergaard, Marit. 2012. Syntax and information structure: Verb-second variation in Middle English. In Information Structure and Syntactic Change in the History of English [Oxford Studies in the History of English 2], Anneli Meurman Solin, María José López-Couso & Bettelou Los (eds), 87–118. Oxford: OUP.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroch, Anthony & Taylor, Ann. 1997. Verb Movement in Old and Middle English: Dialect variation and language contact. In Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change, Ans van Kemenade & Nigel Vincent (eds), 297–325, Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Lie, Svein. 1992. Ka du sei? [What are you saying?]. Maal og Minne 1992: 62–77.Google Scholar
Nilsen, Hilde. 1996. Koffer dæm sir det? [Why They Say That?]. Cand. Philol. thesis, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
Nordgård, Torbjørn. 1985. Word Order, Binding and the Empty Category Principle. PhD dissertation, University of Trondheim.Google Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan. 1991. Phrase Structures in Competition: Variation and Change in Old English Word Order. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Rognes, Stig. 2011. V2, V3, V4 (and maybe even more). The Syntax of Questions in the Rogaland Dialects of Norwegian. MA thesis, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Sollid, Hilde. 2003. Dialektsyntaks i Nordreisa: språkdannelse og stabilisering i møtet mellom kvensk og norsk [Dialect syntax in Nordreisa: Language creation and stabilization in a contact situation between Kven-Finnish and Norwegian]. PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
Taraldsen, Knut Tarald. 1985. Ka du trur? [What do you think?]. In Heiderskrift til KÃ¥re Elstad [Festschrift for KÃ¥re Elstad], Tove Bull & Anton Fjellstad (eds), 37–47. Tromsø: University of Tromsø, Department of Language and Literature.Google Scholar
. 1986. On verb second and the functional content of syntactic categories. In Verb Second Phenomena in Germanic Languages, Hubert Haider & Martin Prinzhorn (eds), 7–25. Dordrecht: Foris.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vangsnes, Øystein A. 2005. Microparameters for Norwegian wh-grammars. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 5: 187–226.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007. Pinning down fluctuating grammars: On main clause wh-syntax across Norwegian dialects. Talk given at NLVN seminar “Dialogue between paradigms”, Schæffergården 12–15 October.Google Scholar
VenÃ¥s, Kjell. 1993. On the choice between two written standards in Norway. In Language Conflict and Language Planning, Ernst HÃ¥kon Jahr (ed.), 263–278. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vikner, Sten. 1995. Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Vikør, Lars S. 1995. The Nordic Languages: Their Status and Interrelations [Nordic Language Secretariat Publication 14]. Oslo: Novus Press.Google Scholar
Warner, Anthony. 2007. Parameters of variation between verb-subject and subject-verb order in late Middle English. English Language and Linguistics 11(1): 81–112.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, Marit. 2003. Word order in wh-questions in a North Norwegian dialect: Some Evidence from an acquisition study. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 26(1): 81–109.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Optional word order in wh-questions in two Norwegian dialects: A diachronic analysis of synchronic variation. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 28(2): 269–296.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Acquisition and change: On the robustness of the triggering experience for word order cues. Lingua 118(12): 1841–1863.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009a. Microvariation as diachrony: A view from acquisition. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 12(1): 49–79.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, Marit & Vangsnes, Øystein. 2005. Wh-questions, V2, and the left periphery of three Norwegian dialects. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 8: 117–158.  DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, Marit, Vangsnes, Øystein & Lohndal, Terje. 2012. Norwegian som: The complementizer that climbed to the matrix left periphery and caused verb second violations. In Enjoy Linguistics! Papers Offered to Luigi Rizzi on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, Valentina Bianchi and Cristiano Chesi (eds), 329–343. Siena: CISCL Press.Google Scholar
. 2017. Variation and change in Norwegian wh-questions: The role of the complementizer som . Linguistic Variation17(1): 8–43. doi DOI logo.