Cover not available
Part of
Reorganising Grammatical Variation: Diachronic studies in the retention, redistribution and refunctionalisation of linguistic variants
Edited by Antje Dammel, Matthias Eitelmann and Mirjam Schmuck
[Studies in Language Companion Series 203] 2018
► pp. 209–230

Making sense of grammatical variation in Norwegian

| University of Oslo
| Volda University College
| University of Oslo
This study examines two examples of grammatical variation in Norwegian inflection, strong versus weak verb conjugation and affixal versus periphrastic adjective comparison. The main claim is that the choice of variants is not as arbitrary as one may think, which rather indicates a division of labour. The strong verb inflection tends to be motivated not only by phonology, but also by semantics. The affixal and periphrastic adjective comparisons tend to be used with different sets of adjectives and for different semantic purposes. These observations support the Principle of Contrast, the idea that a difference in form normally relates to a difference in meaning.
Keywords: inflection, semantics, verb conjugation, adjective comparison, Principle of Contrast
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Verb conjugations
    • 2.1Introducing the data – and the issue
    • 2.2The link with semantics
    • 2.3Supporting evidence
    • 2.4Summarising Section 2
  • 3.Comparative constructions
    • 3.1The issue
    • 3.2Meta-comparison
    • 3.3A warning against introspection
    • 3.4A comparison with two other studies on comparison
  • 4.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 24 October 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.203.08sam
References (45)
References
Anderwald, Lieselotte. 2011. Are non-standard dialects more ‘natural’ than the standard? A test case from English verb morphology. Journal of Linguistics 47(2): 251–274.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by Itself. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2012. Morphological stems: What William of Occam really said. Word Structure 5(1): 28–51.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald & Moscoso del Prado Martín, Fermín. 2005. Semantic density and past-tense formation in three Germanic languages. Language 81(3): 666–698.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bjerkan, Kirsten Meyer. 2000. Verbal Morphology in Specifically Language Impaired Children. Oslo: Unipub.Google Scholar
Carstairs, Andrew. 1987. Allomorphy in Inflexion. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam A. 1986. Knowledge of Language. New York NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve. 1993. The Lexicon in Acquisition. Cambridge: CUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahlstedt, Karl-Hampus. 1962. Det svenska Vilhelmina-målet: språkgeografiska studier över ett norrländskt nybyggarmål och dess granndialekter 2. (The Swedish dialect of Vilhelmina: studies in language geography on a North Swedish dialect and its neighbours). Uppsala: Lundequistska bokh.Google Scholar
Dammel, Antje. 2011. Konjugationsklassenwandel. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Enger, Hans-Olav. 1998. The Classification of Strong Verbs in Norwegian with Special Reference to the Oslo Dialect: A Study in Inflectional Morphology. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.Google Scholar
. 2010a. How do words change inflection class? Diachronic evidence from Norwegian. Language Sciences 32(3): 366–379. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010b. Partial and competing motivations for gender. In Kontrastive Germanistische Linguistik, Teilband 2, Antje Dammel, Sebastian Kürschner, Damaris Nübling (eds)], 673–693. Hildesheim: Olms.Google Scholar
Esher, Louise. 2013. Future and conditional in Occitan: A non-canonical morphome. In The Boundaries of Pure Morphology: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives [Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 4], Silvio Cruschina, Martin Maiden & John Charles Smith (eds), 95–116. Oxford: OUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje, Lie, Svein & Vannebo, Kjell Ivar. 1997. Norsk referansegrammatikk (Norwegian Reference Grammar). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Fertig, David. 2013. Analogy and Morphological Change. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
Hagen, Jon Erik. 1994. Svake verb på -Vde og -Vte i bokmål og deres paradigmetilhørighet (Weak verbs in -Vde and -Vte in Bokmål and their inflection class membership). In Helsing til Lars Vassenden på 70-årsdagen, Johan Myking, Helge Sandøy & Ivar Utne (eds), 57–67. Bergen: Nordisk institutt.Google Scholar
Hansen, Erik & Heltoft, Lars. 2011. Grammatik over det danske sprog (Grammar of the Danish language). Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag.Google Scholar
Hilpert, Martin. 2010. Comparing comparatives: A corpus-based study of comparative constructions in English and Swedish. In Contrastive Studies in Construction Grammar [Constructional Approaches to Grammar 10], Hans C. Boas (ed.), 21–41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2003. Grammaticalization, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karlsson, Fred & Sahlquist, Åsa. 1974. Starka verb i förvandling (Strong verbs in change). Nysvenska Studier 54: 44–83.Google Scholar
Maiden, Martin. 2001. What sort of thing is a derivational affix? In Yearbook of Morphology 1999, Geert E. Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds), 25–52. Dordrecht: Kluwer.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. ‘Semi-autonomous’ morphology. In The Boundaries of Pure Morphology: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives [Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 4,], Silvio Cruschina, Martin Maiden & John Charles Smith (eds), 24–45. Oxford: OUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J. 1983. Grammatical Theory: Its Limits and its Possibilities. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Nicolay, Nathalie. 2007. Aktionsarten im Deutschen: Prozessualität und Stativität (Actionality in German: Processuality and stativity) [Linguistische Arbeiten 514]. Tübingen: Niemeyer.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nilsen, Marianne Brodahl. 2012. Sterke verb og semantiske fellestrekk: Om semantisk motivasjon for bøyingsklassetilhørighet ved norske verb (Strong verbs and semantic commonalities: On semantic motivation for inflection class membership in Norwegian verbs). MA thesis, University of Oslo. <[URL]>Google Scholar
Nordberg, Bengt. 1982. Vad händer med adjektivets endelseskomparation? [What happens with the adjective’s suffixal comparison?] In Förhandlingar vid trettonde sammankomsten för att dryfta frågor rörande svenskans beskrivning, Hanaholmen 1981, Mirja Saari & Marika Tandefelt (eds), 228–248. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston monistuspalvelu.Google Scholar
Pinker, Steven. (1999). Words and Rules: The Ingredients of Language. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph. 1970. Aspect and variant inflection in English verbs. Language 46(2): 300–311.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramscar, Michael. 2002. The role of meaning in inflection: Why the past tense does not require a rule. Cognitive Psychology 45(1): 45–94.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reitan, Jørgen. 1930. Interjeksjonsverber i norske målføre (Interjection verbs in Norwegian dialects). Maal og Minne 65–98.Google Scholar
Siemund, Peter. 2011. Universals and variation: an introduction. In Linguistic Universals and Language Variation [Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 231], Peter Siemund (ed.), 1–21. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simon, Horst & Wiese, Heike. 2011. What are exceptions? And what can be done about them? In Expecting the Unexpected: Exceptions in Grammar [Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 216], Simon Horst & Heike Wiese (eds), 3–30. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spilling, Eivor Finset. 2012. Gradbøying i norsk: En korpusbasert undersøkelse av talespråk (Comparison in Norwegian: A corpus-based study of spoken language). MA thesis, University of Oslo. <[URL]>Google Scholar
Spilling, Eivor Finset & Haugen, Tor Arne. 2013. Gradbøying i norsk: en bruksbasert tilnærming (Comparison in Norwegian: A usage-based approach). Maal og Minne 2013(2): 1–40.Google Scholar
. 2014. Metakomparasjon i norsk (Meta-comparison in Norwegian). Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift 32(1): 3–29.Google Scholar
Teleman, Ulf, Hellberg, Staffan & Andersson, Erik. 1999. Svenska Akademiens Grammatik 2: Ord (The Swedish Academy Grammar vol. 2: Words). Stockholm: Norstedts.Google Scholar
Thornton, Anna M. 2011. Overabundance (multiple forms realizing the same cell): a non-canonical phenomenon in Italian verb morphology. In Morphological Autonomy: Perspectives from Romance Inflectional Morphology, Martin Maiden, John Charles Smith, Maria Goldbach & Marc-Olivier Hinzelin (eds), 358–382. Oxford: OUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tobin, Yishai. 1993. Aspect in the English Verb: Process and Result in Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Verbs and times. In Linguistics in Philosophy, Zeno Vendler, 97–121. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Venås, Kjell. 1967. Sterke verb i norske målføre (Strong verbs in Norwegian dialects). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
. 1974. Linne verb i norske målføre (Weak verbs in Norwegian dialects). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Vincent, Nigel. 2013. Compositionality and change in conditionals and counterfactuals in Romance. In The Boundaries of Pure Morphology: Diachronic and Synchronic Perspectives [Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 4], Silvio Cruschina, Martin Maiden & John Charles Smith (eds), 116–137. Oxford: OUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wurzel, Wolfgang Ullrich. 1984. Flexionsmorphologie und Natürlichkeit (Inflectional morphology and naturalness) [Studia Grammatica xxi]. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Heinemann, Sabine
2021. Hochfrequenz und Irregularität – zur Stammallomorphie bei (a)frz. al(l)er/(a)it. andare, (a)frz. venir/(a)it. venire und afrz. ester/(a)it. stare . Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 137:4 ► pp. 961 ff. DOI logo
Enger, Hans-Olav
2019. Thoughts on morphomes, on a Scandinavian background. In Morphological Variation [Studies in Language Companion Series, 207], ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 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.