Artikkelen gir ein analyse av personnamna til etterkommarane av finske innvandrarar i Noreg på grunnlag av opplysningar i folketeljinga frå 1900. Materialet omfattar namna på dei som er oppførte med finsk etnisitet, og som er fødde i Noreg. Dette materialet består av to delar: Grue-materialet (412 personar frå Grue Finnskog i Sør-Noreg) og kvenmaterialet med namnedata for 3840 kvenar frå Finnmark og Troms. Dei finske innvandrarane kom til Finnskogane alt på 1600-talet, mens finnane kom noko seinare til Finnmark og Troms – på 1700- og 1800-talet. Desse to folkegruppene, kvenane og dei finskætta på Finnskogane, viser klare forskjellar når det gjeld personnamn. Ein viktig grunn til dette er nok at dei finskætta på Finnskogane hadde budd lenger i Noreg enn kvenane, og at dei dermed hadde vorti meir fornorska. Fornamna i Grue-materialet er stort sett dei same som elles i Noreg på slutten av 1800-talet, mens det blant kvenane også finst nokre typiske finske fornamn, t.d. Hilja, Saima og Toivo.
Når det gjeld etternamna, har dei fleste finskætta på Finnskogane namn på -sen og -datter (68 %) eller eit etternamn som går tilbake til eit norsk stadnamn (31 %), gjerne eit gardsnamn, t.d. Bruvold. Også blant kvenane er etternamn på -sen og -datter vanlege (57 %), men i motsetning til dei finskætta på Finnskogane ber mange kvenar (33 %) eit finskspråkleg etternamn, t.d. Halonen og Pauna (i denne prosenten inngår det også etternamn som har fått ei justering på norsk grunn, t.d. Hallonen). Berre 1 % av kvenane har eit etternamn som er typisk norsk, t.d. Kramvik, dvs. eit etternamn som går tilbake til eit norsk stadnamn. Det er ein klar samanheng mellom det å tala finsk og å ha eit finsktypologisk etternamn: Mens 40 % av dei finskspråklege kvenane har eit finsk etternamn, er den tilsvarande prosenten for dei norskspråklege kvenane berre 14 %. Ei samanlikning av bruken av finske etternamn i nokre utvalde kommunar avdekker klare forskjellar. Såleis er det heile 72 % av kvenane i Vadsø som har eit finsk etternamn i 1900, mot berre 7 % i Lyngen. Det er muleg at denne forskjellen til dels kan forklarast ut frå at fornorskingspresset har variert i dei kvenske områda.
Ettersom både lydsystemet og det ortografiske systemet er ulikt i finsk og norsk, har dette ført til at mange finske etternamn har fått ei justering på norsk grunn, t.d. Haataja > Hadaja, Kantola > Gandola, Juntunen > Jondonen, Köngäs > Køngæs, Palo > Ballo. I artikkelen er det gjort greie for dei mest vanlege endringstypane.
Description:
Final draft post-refereeing av konferanseartikkel antatt til publisering.
Final draft post-refereeing of conference paper accepted for publication.
In this paper, I draw on data from Russian to argue for the asymmetry between Goal and Source prepositional phrases. Source prepositional phrases are structurally ambiguous; they can occur both as arguments and adjuncts in certain syntactic contexts. Goal prepositional phrases are unambiguously arguments. I claim that Source prepositions have lexically specified semantics, which determines their relative structural freedom; whereas Goal prepositions are derived from locative prepositions when the building of the event structure takes place and therefore they are bound to be the arguments of the verb.
Uno de los problemas fundamentales en la organización de la lengua es cómo se relacionan léxico y gramática para componer enunciados utilizados comunicativamente. En este trabajo estudiamos dos casos empíricos en los que ambos componentes interactúan de diversas formas, para argumentar sobre esta base que un sistema con inserción tardía donde el léxico se introduce en las representaciones gramaticales sin niveles intermedios de adaptación es el marco que puede dar cuenta de estos datos con menor número de hipótesis adicionales. Los fenómenos estudiados son las lecturas de variable ligada de los pronombres de primera y segunda persona y la sustitución de los interrogativos léxicamente especificados por una forma subespecificada qué en el español coloquial de la variedad peninsular.
Uno de los problemas fundamentales en la organización de la lengua es cómo se relacionan léxico y gramática para componer enunciados utilizados comunicativamente. En este trabajo estudiamos dos casos empíricos en los que ambos componentes interactúan de diversas formas, para argumentar sobre esta base que un sistema con inserción tardía donde el léxico se introduce en las representaciones gramaticales sin niveles intermedios de adaptación es el marco que puede dar cuenta de estos datos con menor número de hipótesis adicionales. Los fenómenos estudiados son las lecturas de variable ligada de los pronombres de primera y segunda persona y la sustitución de los interrogativos léxicamente especificados por una forma subespecificada qué en el español coloquial de la variedad peninsular.
This study is an attempt to perform a valency analysis of two Russian
constructions which differ only on the suprasegmental level: the noun
phrase knig pjat' (‘approximately five books’) and the sentence Knig –
pjat' (‘As to books, there are five of them’). In the semantic representation
of the NP the additional meaning indicated in the translation is accounted
for by the introduction of a suprasegmental one-place predicate
(inversion), taking the numeral as its argument. In the sentence, the pause
signals a contrastive meaning (‘books, as opposed to, for instance, journals’).
Of more interest and importance, however, is the enigmatic use of
genitive plural also in combinations with the numerals 2-4, which otherwise
take the genitive singular. It is suggested that numerals take two arguments,
one naming the actual set of, for instance, five books, the other
naming the set of all possible books. As a rule, the bigger set is expressed
by means of a preposition phrase, but in this particular construction it is
expressed by the initial genitive plural form.
The aim of this paper is to present diachronic changes in terms of the conditions of first language acquisition. Grammars, seen as mental organs, may change between two generations. A change is initiated when (a population of) learners converge on a grammatical system which differs in at least one parameter value from the system internalized by the speakers of the previous generation. Learnability issues then connect to both language acquisition and language change, and understanding language changes depends on understanding how children acquire their native language. Acquisition is a process in which Universal Grammar (UG) interacts with a context-specific set of Primary Linguistic Data (PLD: the linguistic input to the child-learner) and uses these PLD as the source for triggers or cues that map the innate (preexperience) knowledge to a mature grammar. If a certain phenomenon has survived through many generations, it must have been reflected clearly in the PLD. Then, if we note that it has changed, something in the language performance of the previous generation must have changed, and thereby paved the way for a new interpretation. Innovation leading to linguistic variation in the PLD and gradual changes in PLD play a central role in the explanation here: the immediate cause of a grammar change must lie in some alternation in the PLD. We will look at how the language spoken in a certain community (E-language) may gradually become different from the language that originally served as the triggering experience. These changes in the E-language also mean changes in the input available to the child-learners of the next generation and a motivation for a different parameter setting has arisen.
All Germanic languages make extensive use of verb-particle combinations (known as separable-prefix verbs in the OV languages). I show some basic differences here distinguishing the Scandinavian type from the OV West Germanic languages, with English superficially patterning with Scandinavian but actually manifesting a distinct type. Specifically, I argue that the P projection is split into p and P (in accordance with earlier work), roughly analogous to v and V in the verb phrase. In English, p is always present in PP, and enables P to assign case, if P has an internal argument (as it does in "fall in the hole"). The arguments of particle verbs are then arguments of p, external arguments of the particle (as in "throw the rock in"). OV West Germanic allows p to be missing completely, thus having a type of unaccusative particle whose inner argument must receive case from the verb (corresponding to "fall the hole in," impossible in English). Scandinavian allows p to be missing, so that there is no external argument of the particle, but provides an alternative source for case for the internal argument (giving examples corresponding to "pour in the glass"). Thus English and Scandinavian are different from OV West Germanic in lacking the unaccusative type of particle, while Scandinavian differs from OV West Germanic and English in having an alternative source of case.
This article deals with the L2 acquisition of differences between Norwegian and English passives, and presents data to show that the acquisition of these differences by Norwegian L2 acquirers of English cannot be fully explained by positive evidence, cues, conservativism or economy. Rather, it is argued, it is natural to consider whether indirect negative evidence may facilitate acquisition by inferencing. The structures in focus are impersonal passive constructions with postverbal NPs and passive constructions with intransitive verbs. These sentences are ungrammatical in English. Chomsky (1981) proposes that this is a result of passive morphology absorbing objective case in English. There is no such case to be assigned to the postverbal NP in impersonal passives. In passive constructions with intransitive verbs, the verb does not assign objective case, so that there is no case for the passive morphology to absorb. Thus, impersonal passives have to be changed into personal passives, where the NP receives nominative case, and the objective case is free to go to the passive morphology. Intransitive verbs, however, cannot be used in the passive voice at all. Both the structures discussed in this article, i.e. are grammatical in Norwegian. However, the options available in English, viz. personal passives and active sentences, are equally possible. Åfarli (1992) therefore proposes that Norwegian has optional case absorption (passive morphology optionally absorbs case). On the basis on such observations, we may propose a parameter with the settings [+case absorption] for English, and [-case absorption], signifying optional case absorption, for Norwegian. This means that none of the structures that are grammatical in English can function as positive evidence for the [+case absorption] setting, since they are also grammatical in optional case absorption languages. The question is how this parameter is set.
Description:
In special issue: Tromsø Working Papers in Language Acquisition
In this paper we discuss the phenomenon of Object Shift in Norwegian, and we show that this operation is more complex and discourse related than what has traditionally been assumed. We argue that Object Shift cannot be accounted for in a purely prosodic approach. Rather, we demonstrate that a common denominator for all objects undergoing Object Shift is that they are topics. We thus propose that Object Shift should be analysed as (IP-internal) topicalization. Furthermore, we discuss in detail the peculiar behaviour of the topical pronominal object det ‘it’ in cases where its referent is not an individuated, gender-agreeing noun, but rather a non-individuated referent, like a full clause, a VP or a type DP. In such cases, this pronoun typically refrains from Object Shift. We discuss the contrast between these types of objects and shifting objects in light of the topic hierarchy presented in Frascarelli & Hinterhölzl (2007) and show that pronominal objects that undergo Object Shift have the characteristics of familiar topics, while det ‘it’ in the nonshifting contexts have the characteristics of aboutness topics. Consequently, we propose that Object Shift only applies to pronominal objects that constitute familiar topics.