Presentational and related constructions in Norwegian with reference to German
This paper investigates constructions in Norwegian and German with an expletive pronoun in subject
position, and for Norwegian also in object position. The discussion covers presentational, impersonal and
extrapositional constructions in both languages, and in Norwegian also the ‘light reflexive’ seg in
its interaction with presentationals. We relate the discussion to a parameter of theticity, whereby
sentences with an expletive subject will count as thetic while sentences with a content-full NP subject will count as
categorical. Also sentences with expletive object are argued to have a thetic value. Categorical sentences on their
side are ranked according to a parameter of transitivity, accounting for constraints on
presentational constructions in Norwegian, and seen as constituting an opposite dimension of constructional values to
that of theticity.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1Extraposition and impersonals
- 1.2Presentationals
- 1.3Issues
- 2.Norwegian NPpres not having status as object
- 2.1Presentationals with light reflexives
- 2.1.1Presentationals with light reflexives
- 2.1.2Presentationals with light reflexives in secondary predicate constructions
- 2.2Double full NPs in presentationals
- 2.3Semantic role of NPpres
- 3.Status of NPpres in Norwegian as subject
- 4.Expletive pronouns as object
- 4.1Constructions with expletive pronouns as object
- 4.2Some formal consequences: Secondary predicate constructions (SCPR), and notions of ‘licensing’
- 5.Theoretical considerations: Transitivity and theticity
- 6.Concluding remarks
-
Notes
-
References
-
Appendix
References
Askedal, John Ole
1986 On ergativity in
Modern Norwegian.
Nordic Journal of
Linguistics 9: 25–45.
Bach, Emmon
1986 The
algebra of events.
Linguistics and
Philosophy 9(1): 5–16.
Barwise, Jon & Perry
1983 John,
Situations and Attitudes, London and Cambridge, MA MIT Press,
Bjerre, Anne & Bjerre, Tavs
2008b Danish
there-constructions with transitive verbs. In
Proceedings
of the 15th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar,
Stefan Müller (ed.), 46–66. Stanford CA: CSLI.
Börjars, Kersti & Vincent, Nigel
2005 Position
versus function in Scandinavian presentational
constructions. In
Proceedings of the LFG05
Conference,
Miriam Butt &
Tracy Holloway King (eds), 54–72. Stanford CA: CSLI.
Brentano, Franz
1995 Psychology
from an Empirical Standpoint, trans. by
Antos C. Runcurello,
D. B. Terell &
Linda L. McAlister. London: Routledge. (
Psychologie
vom empirischen Standpunkt
(1874,
1924), Sections V–IX 1973).
Bresnan, Joan
2001 Lexical
Functional
Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.
Copestake, Ann
2002 Implementing
Typed Feature Structure Grammars. Stanford CA: CSLI.
Copestake, Ann, Flickinger, Dan, Pollard, Carl & Sag, Ivan
2005 Minimal
recursion semantics.
Journal of Language and
Computation 3: 281–332.
Creissels, Denis
2007 Impersonal
and related constructions: A typological approach.
[URL] (21 March 2020).
Creissels. Denis
2016 Transitivity,
valency, and voice. Ms, European Summer School in Linguistic Typology,
Porquerolles.
Dalrymple, Mary
2001 Lexical
Functional Grammar [
Syntax and Semantics 34]. New York NY: Academic Press.
Diderichsen, Paul
1946 Elementær
dansk
grammatikk. Københvn: Gyldendal.
Dowty, David
1991 Thematic
proto-roles and argument
selection.
Language 67: 547–619.
Drubig, Hans Bernhard
1992 Zur Frage der
grammatischen Repräsentation thetischer und kategorischer
Sätze. In
Informationsstruktur und
Grammatik,
Joachim Jacobs (ed.).
Linguistische
Berichte,
Sonderheft 4: 142–195.
Fenstad, Jens Erik, Halvorsen, Per-Kristian, Langholm, Tore & van Benthem, Johan
1985 Equations,
Schemata and Situations: A Framework for Linguistics Semantics [
Technical Report
29]. Stanford CA: CSLI.
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt
2019 ‘Reflexives’
coding point of view of the subject. Presentation at SLE, Leipzig.
Gast, Volker & Haas, Florian
Hellan, Lars
1986 Some
core features of Norwegian syntax. Lecture, University of Tilburg.
Hellan, Lars
1988 Anaphora
in Norwegian and the Theory of
Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Hellan, Lars
2012 On
‘weak’ personal pronouns in Norwegian. Presented
at Workshop on Object Shift, University of
Gothenburg.
Hellan, Lars
2019 Construction-based
Compositional Grammar.
Journal of Logic, Language and
Information 128: 101–130.
Hellan, Lars & Platzack, Christer
1999 Pronouns
in Scandinavian languages. An overview. In
Eurotyp:
Clitics in the Languages of Europe 5 [
Empirical Approaches to Language Typology
20–5],
Henk van Riemsdijk (ed.), 123–144. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Hellan, Lars & Bruland, Tore
2015 A
cluster of applications around a Deep
Grammar. In
Proceedings from The Language &
Technology Conference (LTC) 2015,
Zygmunt Vetulani &
Joseph Mariani (eds). Poznan.
Hellan, Lars & Beermann, Dorothee
2019 Thetische
Repräsentationen und die Präsentativkonstruktion im Norwegischen und
Deutschen. In
Zur übereinzelsprachlichen Architektur von
Thetik und Kategorik [
Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 97],
Werner Abraham,
Elisabeth Leiss &
Shin Tanaka (eds), 43–66. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Holen, Gordana Iljic
2007 Automatic
anaphora resolution for Norwegian. In
6th Discourse
Anaphora and Anaphor Resolution Colloquium, DAARC 2007, Lagos, Portugal, March
29–30,
Antonio Branco (ed.), 151–166 Berlin: Springer.
Holmberg, A.
1986 Word
Order and Syntactic Features in the Scandinavian Languages and English. PhD
dissertation, University of Stockholm.
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A.
1980 Transitivity in
grammar and
discourse.
Language 56: 251–299.
Kim, Jong-Bok and Sag, Ivan
2005 English
Object Extraposition: A Constraint-Based
Approach. In:
Müller, St. (ed)
Proceedings
of the HPSG05 Conference. CSLI Publications.
[URL]
Kiss, K.
(ed.) 2005 Object
Shift. Special issue of Theoretical
Linguistics 31(1–2).
Kuroda, Sige-Yuki
1972 The
categorical and the thetic judgement. Evidence from Japanese syntax.
Foundations of
Language 9: 153–185.
Ladusaw, William A.
1994 Thetic and
categorical, stage and individual, weak and
strong. In
Proceedings of SALT
4,
Mandy Harvey &
Lynn Santelmann (eds), 220–229. Ithaca NY: Cornell University.
Lambrecht, Knud
1994 Information
Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representation of Discourse
Referents [
Cambridge Studies in Linguistics
71]. Cambridge: CUP.
Lødrup, Helge
1999 Linking
and optimality in the Norwegian presentational focus construction.
Nordic Journal
of
Linguistics 22: 205–230.
Lødrup, Helge
2000 Underspecification
in Lexical Mapping Theory: The case of Norwegian existentials and
resultatives. In
Argument
Realization,
Miriam Butt &
Tracy Holloway King (eds), 171–188. Stanford CA: CSLI.
Marty, Anton
1918 Gesammelte
Schriften, Vol. II, Part 1:
Abteilung. Halle an der Saale: Max Niemeyer.
Mikkelsen, Line
2002 Reanalyzing
the definiteness effect: Evidence from Danish.
Working Papers in Scandinavian
Syntax 69: 1–75.
Montague, Richard
1974 The
proper treatment of quantification in ordinary
English. In
Formal
Philosophy,
Richmond Thomason (ed.), 141–162. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.
Platzack, Christer
1983 Existential
sentences in English, Swedish, German and
Icelandic. In
Papers from the seventh Scandinavian
Conference of Linguistics,
Fred Karlsson (ed.), 80–100. Helsinki: University of Helsinki
Pollard, Carl & Sag, Ivan
1994 Head-Driven
Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.
Postal, Paul M. and Geoffrey K. Pullum
1988 Expletive
Noun Phrases in Subcategorized Positions.
Linguistic
Inquiry 19.4: 635–670.
Pütz, Herbert
1975 Über
die Syntax der Pronominalform es im modernen Deutsch [
Studien zur deutschen Grammatik
3]. Tübingen: Gunther Narr.
Rothstein, Susan
2004 Predicates
and their
Subjects. Berlin: Springer.
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
1995 “Theticity”
and VS order: A case study.
Sprachtypologie und Universalien-forschung
STUF 48: 3–31.
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
1996 Theticity [
Arbeitspapier
27 (Neue Folge)]. Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität zu Köln.
Sveen, Andreas
1996 Norwegian
Impersonal Actives and the Unaccusative Hypothesis. PhD
dissertation, University of Oslo.
Tesnière, Lucien
1959 Éleménts
de syntaxe
structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.
Vikner, Sten
1995 Verb
Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic
Languages. Oxford: OUP.
Vikner, Sten
1997 Andreas
Sveen: Norwegian impersonal actives and the unaccusative hypothesis.
Norsk
Lingvistisk Tidsskrift Årgang 15.
Zaenen, Annie, Engdahl, Elisabet & Maling, Joan
2017 Subject
properties in presentational sentences in Icelandic and
Swedish. In
The Very Model of a Modern Linguist: In Honor
of Helge Dyvik,
Victoria Rosén &
Koenrad De Smedt (eds). Bergen: Bergen Language and Linguistic Studies.
Cited by
Cited by 2 other publications
Hellan, Lars
2022.
A Valence Catalogue for Norwegian. In
Natural Language Processing in Artificial Intelligence — NLPinAI 2021 [
Studies in Computational Intelligence, 999],
► pp. 49 ff.
Schultze-Berndt, Eva
2022.
When subjects frame the clause: discontinuous noun phrases as an iconic strategy for marking thetic constructions.
Linguistics 60:3
► pp. 865 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 march 2024. 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.