Cover not available
Part of
Ditransitives in Germanic Languages: Synchronic and diachronic aspects
Edited by Eva Zehentner, Melanie Röthlisberger and Timothy Colleman
[Studies in Germanic Linguistics 7] 2023
► pp. 365–375

Giving in English and Norwegian

A contrastive perspective

This chapter investigates ditransitive constructions and their prepositional dative alternates, containing the cognate verbs English give and Norwegian gi, using data from the English–Norwegian Parallel Corpus (Johansson 2007). The bi-directional nature of the corpus enables us not only to compare the distribution of constructions in the original texts in the two languages but also to investigate how individual tokens are translated into the other language. The analysis shows that give constructions in the two languages are remarkably similar in their semantics and their distribution. There are, however, some differences, including the greater incidence of light verb constructions in English, and a tendency for Norwegian translators to employ a get construction with the recipient recoded as subject rather than indirect/prepositional object.

Keywords: give constructions, cognate verbs, prototypical and peripheral senses, light verbs, congruent translations, divergent translations
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background, data and methodology
    • 2.1Ditransitive give constructions in English and Norwegian
    • 2.2Data and methodology
  • 3.Original texts in comparison
    • 3.1Overall results
    • 3.2The individual semantic combinations
      • 3.2.1Ag-Tr-An-C
      • 3.2.2Ag-Tr-An-Ab
      • 3.2.3Ag-Ntr-An-C and Ag-Ntr-An-Ab
      • 3.2.4Ag-Ntr-In-C
      • 3.2.5Ag-Ntr-In-Ab
      • 3.2.6St-Ntr-An-C
      • 3.2.7St-Ntr-An-Ab
      • 3.2.8St-Ntr-In-Ab
  • 4.Translation evidence
    • 4.1Overall results
    • 4.2Divergent translations
    • 4.3Translation of light verb constructions
    • 4.4OO translated as OP and vice versa
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 8 August 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sigl.7.11ega
References
Åfarli, Tor A.
1992 The Syntax of Norwegian Passive Constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anderssen, Merete, Paula Fikkert, Roksolana Mykhaylyk, and Yulia Rodina
2012 “The Dative Alternation in Norwegian Child Language.” Nordlyd 39 (1): 24–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Askedal, John Ole
2005 “The Standard Languages and Their Systems in the 20th Century III: Norwegian.” In The Nordic Languages: An International Handbook of the History of the North Germanic Languages: Volume 2, ed. by Oskar Bandle, Kurt Braunmüller, Ernst Håkon Jahr, Allan Karker, Hans-Peter Naumann, and Ulf Teleman, 1584–1603. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Barđdal, Johanna, Kristian E. Kristoffersen, and Andreas Sveen
2011 “West Scandinavian Ditransitives as a Family of Constructions: With a Special Attention to the Norwegian V-REFL-NP Construction.” Linguistics 49 (1): 53–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan
1999 Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, and Jennifer Hay
2008 “Gradient Grammar: An Effect of Animacy on the Syntax of Give in New Zealand and American English.” Lingua 118: 245–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, and Marilyn Ford
2010 “Predicting Syntax: Processing Dative Constructions in American and Australian Varieties of English.” Language 86 (1): 168–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brøseth, Heidi
1998 “Dobbelt objekt og tilgrensende konstruksjoner i moderne norsk.” In MONS 7: Utvalde artiklar frå det 7. møtet om norsk språk i Trondheim 1007, ed. by Jan Terje Faarlund, Brit Mæhlum, and Torbjørn Nordgård, 13–34. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. W.
2005 A Semantic Approach to English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ebeling, Jarle
1998 “Using Translations to Explore Construction Meaning in English and Norwegian.” In Corpora and Cross-Linguistic Research: Theory, Method and Case Studies, ed. by Stig Johansson, and Signe Oksefjell, 169–195. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Ebeling, Signe Oksefjell
2003  The Norwegian Verbs Bli and Få and Their Correspondences in English : A Corpus-Based Contrastive Study. Acta Humaniora. Oslo: Unipub forlag.Google Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje, Svein Lie, and Kjell Ivar Vannebo
1997 Norsk Referansegrammatikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Garretson, Gregory
2004 “Coding Practices Used in the Project Optimal Typology of Determiner Phrases.” Unpublished manuscript, Boston University, Boston, MA. [URL]. (accessed 02 Sept 2020).Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele
1995 Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th
2003 “Towards a Corpus-Based Identification of Prototypical Instances of Constructions.” Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 1: 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2013 “Ditransitive Constructions: The Verb ‘Give’.” In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, ed. by Matthew S. Dryer, and Martin Haspelmath. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. [URL] (accessed 10 Oct 2018).Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney D., and Geoffrey K. Pullum
2002 The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto
1924 The Philosophy of Grammar. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Levin, Magnus, and Jenny Ström Herold
2015 “ give and take: A Contrastive Study of Light Verb Constructions in English, German and Swedish.” In Cross-linguistic Perspectives on Verb Constructions, ed. by Signe Oksefjell Ebeling, and Hilde Hasselgård, 144–168. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Lohndal, Terje
2011 “Freezing Effects and Objects.” Journal of Linguistics 47 (1): 163–199, 249–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mehl, Seth
2019 “Light Verb Semantics in the International Corpus of English: Onomasiological Variation, Identity Evidence and Degrees of Lightness.” English Language and Linguistics 23 (1): 55–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Molina-Plaza, Silvia, and Eduardo de Gregorio-Godeo
2010 “Stretched Verb Collocations with ‘Give’: Their Use and Translation into Spanish Using the BNC and CREA Corpora.” ReCALL 22 (2): 191–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mukherjee, Joybrato
2005 English Ditransitive Verbs: Aspects of Theory, Description and a Usage-Based Model. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newman, John
1996 Give: A Cognitive Linguistic Study. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik
1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ronan, Patricia, and Gerold Schneider
2015 “Determining Light Verb Constructions in Contemporary British and Irish English.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 20 (3): 326–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Röthlisberger, Melanie, Jason Grafmiller, and Benedikt Szmrecsanyi
2017 “Cognitive Indigenization Effects in the English Dative Alternation.” Cognitive Linguistics 28 (4): 673–710. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweet, Henry
1891 A New English Grammar, Logical and Historical. Part I: Introduction, Phonology, and Accidence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, Jason Grafmiller, Joan Bresnan, Anette Rosenbach, Sali Tagliamonte, and Simon Todd
2017 “Spoken Syntax in a Comparative Perspective: The Dative and Genitive Alternation in Varieties of English.” Glossa 2 (1): 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tungseth, Mai Ellin
2008 Verbal Prepositions and Argument Structure: Path, Place and Possession in Norwegian. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vinay, Jean-Paul, and Jean Darbelnet
1995 Comparative Stylistics of French and English: A Methodology for Translation, transl. and ed. by Juan C. Sager, and Marie-Josée Hamel. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna
1988 The Semantics of Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar