Cover not available
Article published In:
Historical Germanic morphosyntax
Edited by Stephen Laker and John Ole Askedal
[NOWELE 74:2] 2021
► pp. 242–277

The typology of Old Norse revisited

The case of Middle Danish

| University of Copenhagen

Typologically, the Old and Middle Scandinavian languages preserve features lost in Modern Scandinavian (Danish, Norwegian and Swedish), especially zero arguments and inactive constructions. Both phenomena present difficulties for the analysis of the Old and Middle Scandinavian languages as configurational, and generative linguists often choose a reductionist strategy, claiming that at the level of deep structure, configurational structure persists. Based on Middle Danish, my claim will be that zero arguments are semantically different from – and therefore cannot be reduced to – pronouns, and secondly, that inactive constructions do not have oblique subjects, but oblique first arguments (A1s). The meanings of the case forms nominative and oblique differ, depending on their constructional context. Any functional theory must respect the relevant grammatical sign contrasts of the language analysed, not try to explain them away.

Article outline
  • 1.The issue
  • 2.Actant optionality (zero arguments)
    • 2.1Zero arguments and their content
    • 2.2A subject-object asymmetry?
    • 2.3The pragmatics of zero arguments
  • 3.Valence and actants in Middle Danish
    • 3.1Zero valence
    • 3.2Intransitive verbs and one-place inactive verbs
      • 3.2.1Intransitive verbs
      • 3.2.2Inactive one-place verbs
      • 3.2.3The A1 as a basic semantic option
    • 3.3Two-place constructions
      • 3.3.1Transitives
      • 3.3.2Inactive two-place verbs
      • 3.3.3Grammatical relations and argument hierarchy
  • 4.Non-configurational structure
    • 4.1Doing away with oblique subjects in Middle Danish
      • 4.1.1Reflexive pronouns
      • 4.1.2Conjunction and conjunction reduction
      • 4.1.3Raising and control
    • 4.2Topology
    • 4.3Zero arguments in PPs
    • 4.4Is there a VP in Old Norse?
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • Sources
  • References
Published online: 18 November 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/nowele.00058.hel
References

Sources

AM 187, 8o
= Det arnamagnæanske håndskrift nr. 187 i oktav, indeholdende en dansk lægebog Ed. by V. Såby. Universitets-Jubilæets danske Samfund. Copenhagen: Thieles Bogtrykkeri 1883.Google Scholar
Bønneb
= Middelalderens danske Bønnebøger I–V ed. by K. M. Nielsen. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel/Nordisk Forlag 1945–1982.Google Scholar
CCD
= Corpus Codicum Danicorum Medii Aevi. CCD III. Lex Scaniae, codd. B74 and GkS3121 ed. by J. Brøndum-Nielsen 1961; CCD X. Lex Jutiae, codd. C37 and C39, ed. by P. Skautrup. Copenhagen: Munksgaard 1973.Google Scholar
DgL V
= Danmarks gamle Landskabslove V, Eriks Sjællandske Lov ed. by P. Skautrup. Copenhagen 1936.Google Scholar
Dma
= Danmarks middelalderlige annaler [Denmark’s medieval annals] ed. by E. Kroman. Copenhagen 1980.Google Scholar
EL
Eriks Lov [Eric’s Law].
Fragm
= Fragmenter af gammeldanske Haandskrifter [Fragments of Middle Danish manuscripts] ed. by P. Diderichsen. Copenhagen: Schulz 1931–1937.Google Scholar
GldO
Gammeldansk Ordbog [Middle Danish Dictionary]. An electronically accessible, non-digitalised collection of excerpts for the Middle Danish Dictionary project. [URL]
Harp S
= Harpestreng ms. S from Harpestræng. Gamle danske Urtebøger, Stenbøger og Kogebøger Ed. by M. Kristensen. Copenhagen 1908–1920.Google Scholar
HKv
= De hellige Kvinder. En Legende-Samling Ed. by C. J. Brandt. Copenhagen 1859.Google Scholar
JBB
= Jesu Barndoms Bog. Ghemen ca. 1508. Danske Folkebøger 1, Apokryfe Bibelhistorier ed. by J. P. Jacobsen, 27–105. Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel Nordisk Forlag 1915 Electronic edition by Det Danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab: [URL]
Kempis
= Thomas a Kempis. Fire bøger om Kristi Efterfølgelse, i dansk oversættelse fra 15. Århundrede ed. by F. Rønning. Copenhagen 1884–1885.Google Scholar
KøbstL
= Danmarks gamle Købstadslovgivning I–V ed. by E. Kroman. Copenhagen: Rosenkilde og Bagger 1951–1961.Google Scholar
Luc
= Lucidarius. In A Danish Teacher’s Manual from the Mid-Fifteenth Century (COD. AM 76, 8°) Ed. by S. Kroon et al. Lund: Lund University Press 1993.Google Scholar
Lægeråd AM 819
Medical Advice, excerpt for GldO from ms. AM 819 33r. [URL]
Mandeville
= Mandevilles Rejse i gammeldansk Oversættelse [The journey of Mandeville in Middle Danish translation] ed. by M. Lorenzen. Copenhagen 1882.Google Scholar
Miss
= Missiver fra Chr. I’s og Hans’ Tid I–II, ved W. Christensen 1912–1914.Google Scholar
ML
= Mariager Legendehåndskrift ed. by G. Knudsen, for Samfund til Udgivelse af gammel nordisk Litteratur. Copenhagen 1917–1930.Google Scholar
OpbygSkr
Opbyggelige skrifter [Devotional writings], efter Cod. Holm. A29, excerpt for GldO from ms. Stockholm A29 173v. [URL]
Pass
Den danske passionstraktat, from manuscript in Stockholm. Duplicated for GldO.
Post
= Postil i Uppsala. In Svenska Medeltids-postillor III ed. by G. E. Klemming. Stockholm: P. A. Norstedts & söner 1873.Google Scholar
RigsL
= Den danske rigslovgivning indtil 1400 ed. by E. Kroman. Copenhagen: Munksgaard 1971.Google Scholar
Rim K41
= Den danske Rimkrønike ed. by H. Nielsen from manuscript Stockholm K41. Universitets-Jubilæets danske Samfund. Copenhagen: H. H. Thiele 1906–1911.Google Scholar
ScEL
Scanian Ecclesiastical Law.
ScL
Scanian Law.
SjT
= Sjælens Trøst. Consolatio animae ed. by N. Nielsen. Universitets-Jubilæets danske Samfund. Copenhagen 1937–1952.Google Scholar
Sydr
= Sydrak. Efter haandskriftet Ny kgl. Samling 236, 4to ed. by G. Knudsen. Universitets-Jubilæets danske Samfund. Copenhagen 1921–32.Google Scholar
Thord Degn
Danmarks gamle Landskabslove IV. Tillæg til Bind IV. Thord Degns Artikler, Text 2.
Askedal, J. O.
2001 ‘Oblique subjects’, structural and lexical case marking. In J. T. Faarlund (ed.), Grammatical relations in change, 65–97. Amsterdam: Benjamins. [URL]. DOI logo
Baker, M.
2001 Configurationality and polysynthesis. In M. Haspelmath, E. König, W. Österreicher & W. Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook, vol. 21, 1433–1441. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Barðdal, J.
2000 Oblique subjects in Old Scandinavian. NOWELE 371. 25–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 The perplexity of Dat-Nom verbs in Icelandic. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 241. 47–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barðdal, J. & Þ. Eyþórsson
2003 The change that never happened: the story of oblique subjects. Journal of Linguistics 391. 439–472. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018 What is a subject: The nature and validity of subject tests. In J. Barðdal, N. Pat-El & S. M. Carey (eds.), Non-canonically case-marked subjects. The Reykjavík-Eyjafjallajökull papers, 257–273. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bom, K.
1954 Gammeldansk Ordliste. Duplicated for GldO.Google Scholar
Christoffersen, M.
1993 Setning og sammenheng. Syntaktiske studier i Magnus Lagabøters landslov. ADH-serien, 65. Kristiansand: Agder distriktshøgskole.Google Scholar
Dyvik, H.
1980 Om definisjonen av tema og rema [On the definition of theme and rheme]. Eigenproduksjon nr. 8. Institutt for lingvistikk. Universitetet i Bergen.Google Scholar
Eyþórsson, Þ. & J. Barðdal
2005 Oblique subjects: A common Germanic inheritance. Language 811. 824–881. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Faarlund, J. T.
1990 Syntactic change. Toward a theory of historical syntax. Trends in linguistics. Studies and monographs 50. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 The notion of oblique subject and its status in the history of Icelandic. In J. T. Faarlund (ed.), Grammatical relations in change [Studies in Language Companion Series 56], 99–135. Amsterdam: Benjamins. [URL]. DOI logo
2004 The syntax of Old Norse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Falk, C.
1997 Fornsvenska upplevarverb. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Heltoft, L.
2003 Iconic and categorical focus systems in Scandinavian. In V. Molnar & J. Hetland, (eds.), Structures of focus and grammatical relations, 43–87. Linguistische Arbeiten. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Word order change as grammaticalisation. In J. Nørgård-Sørensen, L. Heltoft & L. Schøsler, Connecting grammaticalisation, 171–235. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Zero expression of arguments in Old Danish. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 44(2). 169–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 Fra gammeldansk til nutidsdansk. Under medvirken af M. A. Nielsen. In E. Hjorth, H. G. Jacobsen, B. Jørgensen, B. Jacobsen, M. Jørgensen & L. K. Fahl (eds.), Dansk Sproghistorie 3: Bøjning og bygning, Syntaks ch. 11.2, 129–225. Aarhus: Det Danske Sprog- og Litteraturselskab and Aarhus Universitetsforlag.Google Scholar
Submitted 2020 The semantic reorganisation of case paradigms and word order paradigms in the history of Danish. In G. Diewald & K. Politt (eds), Proceedings of the Workshop on Paradigmatic Organization. SLE Societas Linguistica Europea, Leipzig, August 2019.Google Scholar
Hjelmslev, L.
1943 Omkring Sprogteoriens Grundlæggelse. Københavns Universitets Festskrift 1943. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Hjartardóttir, Þ. B.
1987 Getið í eyðurnar. Um eyður fyrir frumlög og andlög í eldri íslensku. Master’s Thesis, University of Iceland.Google Scholar
Hrafnbjargarson, G. H.
2003 Ikke-nominative subjekter i det danske sprogs historie. In P. Widell & M. Kunøe (eds.), 9. Møde om Udforskningen af Dansk Sprog, 188–197. Department of Nordic Language and Literature: Aarhus University.Google Scholar
Luraghi, S.
2010 The rise (and possible downfall) of configurationality. In S. Luraghi & V. Bubeni’k (eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to historical linguistics, 212–229. The Bloomsbury Publishing Company PLC.Google Scholar
Melčuk, I.
2014 Syntactic Subject: Syntactic Relations, once again. In V. A. Plungjan (main ed.), M. A. Daniel’, E. A. Ljutikova, S. G. Tatjevosov & O. V. Fjodorova (co-eds.), Jazyk. Konstanty. Peremennye. Pamjati Aleksandra Jevgen’jeviča Kibrika, 169–216. Sankt-Peterburg: Aleteija.Google Scholar
Mørck, E.
1992 Subjektets kasus i norrønt og mellomnorsk. Arkiv för nordisk filologi 1071. 53–99.Google Scholar
Nielsen, M. Aa
2013 Syntaktisk utvikling fra urnordisk til mellomnorsk. In O.-E. Haugen (ed.), Handbok i norrøn filologi, 2nd edition, 556–598. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
Nørgård-Sørensen, J., L. Heltoft & L. Schøsler
2011 Connecting grammaticalisation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rögnvaldsson, E.
1995 Old Icelandic: A non-configurational language? NOWELE 261. 3–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sigurðsson, H. Á.
1989 Verbal syntax and case in Icelandic in a comparative GB approach. Lund: Department of Scandinavian Languages. University of Lund.Google Scholar
2006 The nom/acc alternation in Germanic. In J. M. Hartmann and L. Molnárfi (eds.), Comparative studies in Germanic syntax: From Afrikaans to Zurich German, 13–50. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zúñiga, F.
2011 Why should beneficiaries be subjects (or objects)? Affaction and grammatical relations. In S. Kittilä, K. Västi & J. Ylikoski (eds.), Case, animacy and semantic roles, 329–48. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar