A cluster of changes: Norwegian word order

Among the syntactic changes that can be observed in the transition from Old Norwegian to Modern Norwegian are the following word order changes: loss of OV order, object shift from a VP containing a verb (non-finite verb or any verb in a subordinate clause), preverbal preposition, and topicalization of a bare head. The fact that these changes all seemto occurat the same timeis not accidental. Old Norwegian was arguably a VO language, like Modern Norwegian, but unlike Modern Norwegian, OV order was also possible.It can be shown that it is possible to derive sentences with object shift with a verb in VP, sentences with preverbal prepositions, and with topicalized heads only from an OV structure. Therefore, when the OV order was no longer available, the other three structures could no longer be derived.

MATCHING Phrases in Norwegian Object Shift

One significant contribution of generative linguistics has been to our understanding of 'movement,' which occurs when a word is linearized in a position different from where it is interpreted. Even though movement often is considered a syntactic phenomenon, some cases seem best analyzed prosodically, such as pronoun post-posing in Irish (Bennett, Elfner, & McClosky 2016). We explore prosodically driven movement in Norwegian, which is known for having pronominal object shift (OS). We show that OS can be explained by Match Theory (Selkirk 2009, 2011), but only if the MATCH constraints are sensitive to lexical items and their projects instead of Elfner's (2012) definition where Match is sensitive to lexical and functional elements and their projections (see also Ito & Mester 2019).

VO-OV-variasjon i nordsamisk: Hva kan LIA Sápmi fortelle oss?

In this paper I investigate the alternation between VO and OV word order in spoken North Sami, based on data from LIA Sápmi – Sámegiela hállangiellakorpus. My results show that VO in general is the most frequent word order. However, I also find many instances of SAuxOV order in my material, particularly in sentences with periphrastic verb forms where the main verb is in the infinitive (that is, modal constructions) and where the object is a pronoun. In addition, I also find some cases where the object precedes both the auxiliary and the main verb, but crucially without being topicalized to clause-initial position. Based on the account of Norwegian Object Shift in Bentzen and Anderssen (2019), I suggest that OV word order in North Sami may be analyzed as IP-internal topicalization, where objects that are familiar in the context may move to a thematic position between VP and TP. This will account for the OV pattern with periphrastic tense forms. Furthermore, I suggest that there is an additional higher IP-internal topic position, and that object movement to this position is what results in OV with finite main verbs. This higher IP-internal topic position is also the position involved in patterns where the object precedes both the finite auxiliary and the main verb.

Variation in Mainland Scandinavian Object Shift: A Prosodic Analysis

Despite decades of research, debate continues over the analysis of Object Shift in Mainland Scandinavian, and all syntactic and information-structural accounts have run into empirical and/or conceptual problems. We argue that this debate can be resolved by recognizing that Object Shift is, in fact, a prosodic phenomenon. Our analysis builds on the observation that varieties with optional Object Shift (most Swedish dialects, South Danish dialects (e.g., Ærø)) also have a tone accent contrast. The in-situ word order in these varieties is licensed because tonal accent creates a prosodic domain that makes the incorporation of weak pronouns possible.

DOM AND NON-CANONICAL WORD ORDER IN ROMANCE: THE CASE OF GALICIAN

In this article, I investigate the link between VSO-VOS orders and differential object marking (DOM) via novel data from Galician. I present an analysis that sheds light on what may be required for a language to license DOM via movement, a requirement once thought necessary for licensing DOM that has recently been discredited on the basis of an overwhelming amount of cross-linguistic data (cf. Kalin 2018). I also show evidence for the variation regarding featural specification of DPs that must be differentially marked, adding to the highly variable factors that contribute to the appearance of DOM on nominal objects in natural language. Focusing on full DP objects, I conclude that licensing DOM in Galician is predicated on both the level of animacy of postverbal nominals and object shift in VOS configurations.

The finite clause

The topic of this chapter is the T-domain. The specifier of TP is the subject position. The finite verb never appears in T on the surface. In subordinate clauses it remains in V; in main clauses it moves on to C. There is an obligatory subject requirement for all finite, non-imperative clauses. In cases where no argument raises to SpecTP, a non-referential element is used to fill the subject role. There are two kinds of passives, a periphrastic one with an auxiliary and the perfect participle, or one derived from the reflexive form of the verb. The passive subject may be any nominal complement, including the complement of some prepositions, stranding the preposition. Sentence adverbials are left-adjoined to VP. By object shift an unstressed pronoun is shifted across the sentence adverbial if no other material intervenes. Negated objects cannot occur in VP, and have to be replaced by the negation above VP.

The acquisition of word order in L2 Norwegian: The case of subject and object shift

This article reports on a syntactic acceptability judgement study of 59 adult L2/Ln learners of Norwegian and a group of native controls, studying subject and object shift. These constructions involve movement of (mainly) pronominal subjects or objects across negation/adverbs. Both subject shift and object shift display considerable micro-variation in terms of syntax and information structure, dependent on factors such as nominal type (pronoun vs. full DP), function (subject vs. object), and information status (given vs. new/focused). Previous studies have shown that Norwegian children have an early preference for the unshifted position in both constructions, but that they acquire subject shift relatively early (before age 3). Object shift, on the other hand, is typically not in place until after age 6–7. Importantly, children are conservative learners, and never shift elements that should not move in the adult language. The results of the current study show that L2/Ln learners do not make all the fine distinctions that children make, in that they have a clear preference for all subjects in shifted position and all objects in unshifted position, although some distinctions fall into place with increased proficiency. Importantly, unlike children, the L2/Ln learners are not conservative learners; rather, they over-accept syntactic movement in several cases. The equivalent to this in language production would be to apply syntactic movement where it is not attested in the target language, which would be the opposite behaviour to that observed in L1 children.