Opersonlig passiv i danska, norska och svenska – en korpusstudie

Elisabet Engdahl; Anu Laanemets

Opersonlig passiv i danska, norska och svenska – en korpusstudie

Elisabet Engdahl, Anu Laanemets

Department of Nordic Studies and Linguistics

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Using spoken and written corpora we investigate the use of impersonal passives in the Mainland Scandinavian languages. We establish that Danish and Norwegian use both the periphrastic bli(ve)-passive and the morphological s-passive, roughly to the same extent. In Swedish, on the other hand, impersonal bli-passive is very uncommon and seems to be used primarily when talking about the failure of an expected outcome. The findings are compared to the predictions made by Holmberg (2002) who proposes a set of parameters to account for agreement and word order in transitive impersonal passives. Holmberg's parameter settings make the correct predictions for Norwegian bokmål, where the word order participle preceding direct object (PCP DO) is clearly dominant. However, in Danish, which has the same parameter settings as bokmål, we also find the opposite order, DO PCP, especially with negated objects and in dialects. Norwegian nynorsk and Swedish, which also have the same parameter settings according to Holmberg, should allow both word orders. The corpus investigations show that Swedish practically only uses the DO PCP order whereas nynorsk prefers PCP DO, just like bokmål.

Original language	Swedish
Journal	Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift
Volume	33
Issue number	2
Pages (from-to)	129-156
Number of pages	28
ISSN	0800-3076
Publication status	Published - 2015

Cite this

@article{7176cd1663ca4a99900a83c7ba281d0a,

title = "Opersonlig passiv i danska, norska och svenska – en korpusstudie",

abstract = "Using spoken and written corpora we investigate the use of impersonal passives in the Mainland Scandinavian languages. We establish that Danish and Norwegian use both the periphrastic bli(ve)-passive and the morphological s-passive, roughly to the same extent. In Swedish, on the other hand, impersonal bli-passive is very uncommon and seems to be used primarily when talking about the failure of an expected outcome. The findings are compared to the predictions made by Holmberg (2002) who proposes a set of parameters to account for agreement and word order in transitive impersonal passives. Holmberg's parameter settings make the correct predictions for Norwegian bokm{\aa}l, where the word order participle preceding direct object (PCP DO) is clearly dominant. However, in Danish, which has the same parameter settings as bokm{\aa}l, we also find the opposite order, DO PCP, especially with negated objects and in dialects. Norwegian nynorsk and Swedish, which also have the same parameter settings according to Holmberg, should allow both word orders. The corpus investigations show that Swedish practically only uses the DO PCP order whereas nynorsk prefers PCP DO, just like bokm{\aa}l.",

author = "Elisabet Engdahl and Anu Laanemets",

year = "2015",

language = "Svensk",

volume = "33",

pages = "129--156",

journal = "Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift",

issn = "0800-3076",

publisher = "Novus forlag",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Opersonlig passiv i danska, norska och svenska – en korpusstudie

AU - Engdahl, Elisabet

AU - Laanemets, Anu

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Using spoken and written corpora we investigate the use of impersonal passives in the Mainland Scandinavian languages. We establish that Danish and Norwegian use both the periphrastic bli(ve)-passive and the morphological s-passive, roughly to the same extent. In Swedish, on the other hand, impersonal bli-passive is very uncommon and seems to be used primarily when talking about the failure of an expected outcome. The findings are compared to the predictions made by Holmberg (2002) who proposes a set of parameters to account for agreement and word order in transitive impersonal passives. Holmberg's parameter settings make the correct predictions for Norwegian bokmål, where the word order participle preceding direct object (PCP DO) is clearly dominant. However, in Danish, which has the same parameter settings as bokmål, we also find the opposite order, DO PCP, especially with negated objects and in dialects. Norwegian nynorsk and Swedish, which also have the same parameter settings according to Holmberg, should allow both word orders. The corpus investigations show that Swedish practically only uses the DO PCP order whereas nynorsk prefers PCP DO, just like bokmål.

AB - Using spoken and written corpora we investigate the use of impersonal passives in the Mainland Scandinavian languages. We establish that Danish and Norwegian use both the periphrastic bli(ve)-passive and the morphological s-passive, roughly to the same extent. In Swedish, on the other hand, impersonal bli-passive is very uncommon and seems to be used primarily when talking about the failure of an expected outcome. The findings are compared to the predictions made by Holmberg (2002) who proposes a set of parameters to account for agreement and word order in transitive impersonal passives. Holmberg's parameter settings make the correct predictions for Norwegian bokmål, where the word order participle preceding direct object (PCP DO) is clearly dominant. However, in Danish, which has the same parameter settings as bokmål, we also find the opposite order, DO PCP, especially with negated objects and in dialects. Norwegian nynorsk and Swedish, which also have the same parameter settings according to Holmberg, should allow both word orders. The corpus investigations show that Swedish practically only uses the DO PCP order whereas nynorsk prefers PCP DO, just like bokmål.

M3 - Tidsskriftartikel

SN - 0800-3076

VL - 33

SP - 129

EP - 156

JO - Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift

JF - Norsk Lingvistisk Tidsskrift

IS - 2

ER -