Cover not available
Article published In:
Syntactic Variation and Change
Edited by David Håkansson, Ida Larsson and Erik Magnusson Petzell
[Linguistic Variation 17:1] 2017
► pp. 8–43

Variation and change in Norwegian wh-questions

The role of the complementizer som

| UiT The Arctic University of Norway | NTNU – Norwegian University of Science and Technology
| UiT The Arctic University of Norway | Western Norway University of Applied Sciences
| UiT The Arctic University of Norway | NTNU – Norwegian University of Science and Technology
In this paper, we consider variation in Verb Second (V2) word order in wh-questions across Norwegian dialects by investigating data from the Nordic Syntax Database (NSD), which consists of acceptability judgments collected at more than 100 locations in Norway. We trace the geographical distribution of the two main variables: phrasal vs. monosyllabic wh-elements (the latter argued to be heads) and subject vs. non-subject questions. In subject questions, non-V2 is realized by inserting the complementizer som in second position instead of the verb. We also discuss the connection between non-V2 and the possibility of inserting the complementizer som under extraction of a wh-subject from an embedded clause, i.e. in that-trace contexts. Based on synchronic data, we propose a diachronic account of the geographical distribution and argue that the development from V2 to non-V2 has started in subject questions, thus allowing us to relate the loss of the V2 requirement to changes in the properties of the complementizer som.
Keywords: complementizer, diachrony, dialect syntax, Norwegian, subject questions, that-trace, variation, verb second, wh-questions, word order
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background and previous research
  • 3.The data
    • 3.1Methodology
    • 3.2Non-V2 word order
    • 3.3Extraction
    • 3.4Intermediate summary
  • 4.A diachronic account of the synchronic variation
    • 4.1Theoretical preliminaries
    • 4.2Stage 0
    • 4.3Stage 1
    • 4.4Stage 2
    • 4.5Stage 3a
    • 4.6Stage 3b
    • 4.7Summary
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 29 June 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.17.1.02wes
References (52)
References
Åfarli, Tor A. 1986. Some syntactic structures in a dialect of Norwegian. Working Papers in Linguistics 31. 93–111.Google Scholar
Åfarli, Tor A. & Kristin Melum Eide. 2000. Subject requirement and predication. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 231. 27–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anderssen, Merete. 2006. The Acquisition of Compositional Definiteness in Norwegian. University of Tromsø dissertation.Google Scholar
Caha, Pavel. 2009. The Nanosyntax of Case. University of Tromsø dissertation.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna & Michal Starke. 1996. Deficient pronouns: a view from Germanic. In Höskuldur Thráinsson, Samuel David Epstein & Steve Peter (eds.), Studies in Comparative Germanic Syntax, Vol. 21, 21–65. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elstad, Kåre. 1982. Nordnorske dialektar. In Tove Bull & Kjellaug Jetne (eds.), Nordnorsk: Språkarv og språkforhold i Nord-Noreg, 11–100. Oslo: Det Norske Samlaget.Google Scholar
Engdahl, Elisabet. 2012. Optional expletive subjects in Swedish. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 351. 99–144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje, Svein Lie & Kjell Ivar Vannebo. 1997. Norsk referansegrammatikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Fiva, Toril. 1996. Spørresetninger i Tromsødialekten. Nordica Bergensia 91. 139–155.Google Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly. 2004. Grammaticalization as Economy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. The Linguistic Cycle: Language Change and the Language Faculty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2011. Where did Late Merge go? Grammaticalization as feature economy. Studia Linguistica 621. 287–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gundel, Janet K. 2002. It-clefts in English and Norwegian. In Hilde Hasselgård, Bergljot Behrens, Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen & Stig Johansson (eds.), Information structure in a cross-linguistic perspective, 113–128. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrmann, Tanja. 2002. Relative Clauses in Dialects of English: A Typological Approach. Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg dissertation.Google Scholar
Iversen, Ragnvald. 1918. Syntaksen i Tromsø bymaal. Kristiania: Bymaalslagets forlag.Google Scholar
Johannessen, Janne Bondi, Joel Priestley, Kristin Hagen, Tor A. Åfarli & Øystein A. Vangsnes. 2009. The Nordic Dialect Corpus – an Advanced Research Tool. NEALT Proceedings Series 41. 73–80.Google Scholar
Johannessen, Janne Bondi, Øystein A. Vangsnes, Signe Laake, Arne Martinus Lindstad & Tor A. Åfarli. 2010. The Nordic Dialect Corpus and Database: Methodological challenges in collecting data. In Barry Heselwood & Clive Upton (eds.), Proceedings of Methods XIII Papers form the Thirteenth International Conference on Methods in Dialectology, 113–122. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Johannessen, Janne Bondi & Øystein A. Vangsnes. 2010. Nye nordiske isoglossar: Dialektforsking ved bruk av Nordisk syntaksdatabase (NSD). Svenska landsmål och svenskt folkliv, 20111. 69–78.Google Scholar
Lie, Svein. 1978. Cleft wh-questions in Norwegian and their presuppositions. In Kirsten Gregersen, Hans Basbøll & Jacob Mey (eds.), Papers from the fourth Scandinavian conference of linguistics , 62–77. Odense: Odense University Press.Google Scholar
. 1992. Ka du sei? Maal og Minne 19921. 62–77.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David & Marit Westergaard. 2007. Language Acquisition and Language Change: Inter-relationships. Language and Linguistics Compass 11. 396–415. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindstad, Arne Martinus, Anders Nøklestad, Janne Bondi Johannessen & Øystein A. Vangsnes. 2009. The Nordic Dialect Database: Mapping Microsyntactic Variation in the Scandinavian Languages. NEALT Proceedings Series 41. 283–286.Google Scholar
Nilsen, Hilde. 1996. Koffør dem sir det? University of Tromsø Cand philol thesis.Google Scholar
Nordgård, Torbjørn. 1985. Word Order, Binding and the Empty Category Principle. University of Trondheim Cand philol thesis.Google Scholar
. 1988. Omkring ordstilling i hv-spørsmål i norske dialekter. Skriftserie fra Institutt for fonetikk og lingvistikk, Universitetet i Bergen 331. 26–37.Google Scholar
Norsk talespråkskorpus [NoTa corpus]. The text lab. ILN, University of Oslo. [URL]
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Liliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements of Grammar: A Handbook of Generative Syntax, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. On the position “(Int)errogative” in the left periphery of the clause. In Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds.) Current Studies in Italian Syntax, 287–296. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Rognes, Stig. 2011. V2, V3, V4 (and maybe even more): The syntax of questions in the Rogaland dialects of Norway. University of Oslo MA thesis.Google Scholar
Snyder, William. 2007. Child Language: The Parametric Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.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]. University of Tromsø dissertation.Google Scholar
Stroh-Wollin. Ulla. 1997. Framväxten av obligatoriska som . In Patrik Åström (ed.), Studier i svensk språkhistoria 41, 171–178. Stockholm: Institutionen för nordiska språk vid Stockholms universitet.Google Scholar
Stroh-Wollin, Ulla. 2002. Som-satser med och utan som [ Som-sentences with and without som ]. Uppsala University dissertation.Google Scholar
Svenonius, Peter. 1998. Clefts in Scandinavian: An investigation. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 101. 163–190.Google Scholar
Søfteland, Åshild. 2014. Utbrytingskonstruksjonen i norsk spontantale [The cleft construction in Norwegian spontaneous speech]. University of Oslo dissertation.Google Scholar
Taraldsen, Knut Tarald. 1986. Som and the Binding Theory. In Lars Hellan, & Kirsti Koch Christensen (eds.), Topics in Scandinavian Syntax, 149–184. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Travis, Lisa. 1984. Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation. MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Vangsnes, Øystein A. 1996. Om-spørsmål i rogalandsk. Nordica Bergensia, 91. 166–188.Google Scholar
2005. Microparameters for Norwegian wh-grammars. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 51. 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
2008. On peripheral doubling in Scandinavian. In Sjef Barbiers, Olaf Koeneman, Marika Lekakou & Margreet van der Ham (eds.), Microvariation in Syntactic Doubling, 419–441. Bingley: Emerald. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013. Syncretism and functional expansion in Germanic wh-expressions. Language Sciences 361. 47–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vangsnes, Øystein A. & Marit Westergaard. 2014. Ka korpuse fortæll? Om ordstilling i hv-spørsmål i norske dialekter. [What does the corpus tell us? On word order in wh-questions in Norwegian dialects]. In Janne Bondi Johannessen & Kristin Hagen (eds.), Språk i Norge og nabolanda. Ny forskning om talespråk, 133–151. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Westergaard, Marit. 2003. Word order in wh-questions in a North Norwegian dialect: Some evidence from an acquisition study. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 261. 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 281. 269–296. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009a. Microvariation as diachrony: A view from acquisition. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 121. 49–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009b. The Acquisition of Word Order: Micro-cues, information structure, and economy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009c. Many Small Catastrophes: Gradualism in a Microparametric Perspective. In Paola Crisma & Guiseppe Longobardi (eds.), Historical Syntax and Linguistic Theory, 75–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014. Linguistic variation and micro-cues in first language acquisition. Linguistic Variation 141. 26–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Koffør dæm IKKE sir det? Om ordstilling i hv-spørsmål i nordnorske dialekter. Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 33:2. 175–199.Google Scholar
Westergaard, Marit & Øystein A. Vangsnes. 2005. Wh-questions, V2, and the left periphery of three Norwegian dialects. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 81. 119–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, Marit, Øystein A. Vangsnes & Terje Lohndal. 2012. Norwegian som: The complementizer that climbed to the matrix Left Periphery and caused Verb Second violations. In Valentina Bianchi & Cristiano Chesi (eds.), Enjoy Linguistics! Papers offered to Luigi Rizzi on the occasion of his 60th birthday, 329–343. Siena: CISCL Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (8)

Cited by eight other publications

Westergaard, Marit, Terje Lohndal & Björn Lundquist
2023. Variable V2 in Norwegian heritage language. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 13:2 ► pp. 133 ff. DOI logo
Cowart, Wayne & Dana McDaniel
2021. The That-Trace Effect. In The Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Syntax, ► pp. 258 ff. DOI logo
Anderssen, Merete & Marit Westergaard
2020. Word order variation in heritage languages. In Lost in Transmission [Studies in Bilingualism, 59], ► pp. 100 ff. DOI logo
Brandner, Ellen
2020. A “borderline case” of syntactic variation. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 5:1 DOI logo
Lundquist, Björn, Maud Westendorp & Bror-Magnus S. Strand
2020. Code-switching alone cannot explain intraspeaker syntactic variability: Evidence from a spoken elicitation experiment. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 43:3 ► pp. 249 ff. DOI logo
Vangsnes, Øystein Alexander & Janne Bondi Johannessen
2019. The Nordic research infrastructure for syntactic variation: Possibilities, limitations and achievements. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 4:1 DOI logo
Westergaard, Marit
2017. Chapter 3. Word order and verb movement in Norwegian wh-questions. In Word Order Change in Acquisition and Language Contact [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 243], ► pp. 35 ff. DOI logo
Westergaard, Marit
2020. Language Acquisition, Microcues, Parameters, and Morphosyntactic Change. In The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, ► pp. 357 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 july 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.