Cover not available
Part of
Reconnecting Form and Meaning: In honour of Kristin Davidse
Edited by Caroline Gentens, Lobke Ghesquière, William B. McGregor and An Van linden
[Studies in Language Companion Series 230] 2023
► pp. 45–69

Chapter 2
Impersonal passives in English and Norwegian

| University of Oslo

This chapter investigates passive constructions with an expletive subject, labelled as impersonal passives. The English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus (ENPC) provides material for comparison across both constructions and languages. The extracted dataset shows a higher frequency of impersonal passives in Norwegian, chiefly due to two patterns that English does not have, i.e. passives with intransitive verbs and transitive verbs which retain their postverbal complement in the passive. The study considers the communicative functions of the constructions, the process types of the passivized verbs, the expression of agency, and the thematic structure of clauses with impersonal passives, finding both differences and similarities. Translations between the languages are, however, most often non-congruent, even with extraposition and parentheticals, which exist in both languages.

Keywords: impersonal passive, expletive subject, extraposition, English/Norwegian
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous work
  • 3.Material, method and classification scheme
    • 3.1Corpus
    • 3.2Extraction method
    • 3.3Classification scheme
    • 3.4Comparison and tertium comparationis
  • 4.Contrastive analysis
    • 4.1Overall frequencies and patterns
    • 4.2Syntactic patterns
    • 4.3Process types in impersonal passives
    • 4.4Agency
    • 4.5Information structure
  • 5.Translation correspondences
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • Corpus material
  • References
Published online: 10 February 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.230.02has
References

Corpus material

The English-Norwegian Parallel Corpus (ENPC)
[URL]
Abraham, Werner & Leiss, Elisabeth
2006 The impersonal passive. Voice suspended under aspectual conditions. In Passivization and Typology. Form and Function [Typological Studies in Language 68], Werner Abraham & Larisa Leisiö (eds), 502–517. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Åfarli, Tor A.
2006 Passive and argument structure. In Passivization and Typology. Form and Function [Typological Studies in Language 68], Werner Abraham & Larisa Leisiö (eds), 373–402. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2018 Evidentiality. The framework. In The Oxford Handbook of Evidentiality, Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (ed), 1–46. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anthonissen, Lynn
2021 Individuality in Language Change. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berry, Margaret
1995 Thematic options and success in writing. In Thematic Development in English Texts, Mohsen Ghadessy (ed.), 55–84. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward
1999 Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman. Also published as Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward 2021 Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brezina, Vaclav
2018 Statistics in Corpus Linguistics. A Practical Guide. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidse, Kristin
1994 Fact projection. In Perspectives on English, Keith Carlon, Kristin Davidse & Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn (eds), 257–284. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
Davidse, Kristin & Van linden, An
2020 Revisiting ‘it-extraposition’. The historical development of constructions with matrices (it)/(there) be + noun phrase followed by a complement clause. In Crossing Linguistic Boundaries. Systemic, Synchronic and Diachronic Variation in English, Paloma Núñez-Pertejo, María José López-Couso, Belén Méndez-Naya & Javier Pérez-Guerra (eds), 81–103. London: Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ebeling, Jarle
2000 Presentative Constructions in English and Norwegian. A Corpus-based Contrastive Study. PhD dissertation, University of Oslo.
Ebeling, Jarle & Ebeling, Signe Oksefjell
2013 Patterns in Contrast [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 58]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Engdahl, Elisabeth & Laanemets, Anu
2015 Opersonlig passiv i danska, norska och svenska – En korpusstudie. Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 33: 129–156.Google Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje, Lie, Svein & Vannebo, Kjell Ivar
1997 Norsk referansegrammatikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Fredriksson, Anna-Lena
2016 A Corpus-based Contrastive Study of the Passive and Related Constructions in English and Swedish. PhD dissertation, University of Gothenburg. [URL] (24 August 2022).
Gómez-González, María Ángeles
2001 The Theme-Topic Interface. Evidence from English [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 71]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Granger, Sylviane
1983 The be + Past Participle Construction in Spoken English, with Special Emphasis on the Passive. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K.
1970 Language structure and language function. In New Horizons in Linguistics, John Lyons (ed.), 140–165. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M.
2014 Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasselgård, Hilde
2010 Adjunct Adverbials in English. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herriman, Jennifer
2000 Extraposition in English. A study of the interaction between the matrix predicate and the type of extraposed clause. English Studies 6: 582–599. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey K.
2002 The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johansson, Annika & Rawoens, Gudrun
2019 A corpus-based contrastive study of impersonal passives in Swedish and Dutch. Languages in Contrast 19(1): 2–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johansson, Stig
2007 Seeing through Multilingual Corpora. On the Use of Corpora in Contrastive Studies [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 26]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johansson, Stig & Lysvåg, Per
1987 Understanding English Grammar, Part II: A Closer View. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunter
2005  It-extraposition in English. A functional view. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 10(2): 119–159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
López-Couso, María José & Méndez-Naya, Belén
2014 From clause to pragmatic marker: A study of the development of like-parentheticals in American English. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 15, 36–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Los, Bettelou & Dreschler, Gea
2012 The loss of local anchoring. From adverbial local anchors to permissive subjects. In The Oxford Handbook of the History of English, Terttu Nevalainen & Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds), 859–871. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mauranen, Anna
2008 Universal tendencies in translation. In Incorporating Corpora. The Linguist and the Translator, Gunilla Anderman & Margaret Rogers (eds), 32–48. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Seppänen, Aimo & Herriman, Jennifer
2002 Extraposed subjects vs. postverbal complements. On the so-called obligatory extraposition. Studia Neophilologica 74(1): 30–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svartvik, Jan
1966 On Voice in the English Verb. The Hague: MoutonGoogle Scholar
Søfteland, Åshild
2014 Utbrytingskonstruksjonen i norsk spontantale. PhD dissertation, University of Oslo. [URL] (24 August 2022).
Thompson, Geoff
2014 Introducing Functional Grammar. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thyberg, Kajsa
2020  Det-konstruktioner i bruk. En systemisk-funktionell analys av satser med icke-referentiellt det i modern svenska. [ Det-constructions in use. A systemic-functional analysis of clauses with non-referential det in modern Swedish.] PhD dissertation, University of Gothenburg. [URL] (24 August 2022).