In this paper, we argue for a view of case marking that does not treat case as the passive realisation of other morpho-syntactic properties of a construction but as independently bringing information to a clause. This different view of case entails that precise functions of case-marked expressions may be determined by the interaction of the case marking, the meaning of the host noun, the semantics of any predicate of which it is an argument and other contextually given factors. With respect to Estonian, it is argued that there is only one ‘structural’ case, the genitive, and this case marks non-subject, or oblique, dependency on some head. The partitive case, we argue, is semantically partitive in all its uses, except that the partitive meaning can be obscured or even eliminated depending on contextual factors. The nominative is merely the absence of case, associated with no specific positions or semantic effects.

In this study, we present an analysis of gender assignment tendencies in Jamtlandic, a language variety of Sweden, using a word list of 1029 items obtained from fieldwork. Most research on gender assignment in the Scandinavian languages focuses on the standard languages (Steinmetz 1985; Källström 1996; Trosterud 2001, 2006) and Norwegian dialects (Enger 2011, Kvinlaug 2011, Enger & Corbett 2012). However, gender assignment principles for Swedish dialects have not previously been researched. We find generalizations based on semantic, morphological, and phonological principles. Some of the principles apply more consistently than others, some ‘win’ in competition with other principles; a multinomial logistic regression analysis provides a statistical foundation for evaluating the principles. The strongest tendencies are those based on biological sex, plural inflection, derivational suffixes, and some phonological sequences. Weaker tendencies include non-core semantic tendencies and other phonological sequences. Gender assignment in modern loanwords differs from the overall material, with a larger proportion of nouns assigned masculine gender.

The present paper represents an attempt to explain the semantically deviant nature of causative constructions with present perfect effect sentences. As far as I known, such constructions have not been commented upon in the literature on causativity. I show that any counterfactual analysis of the traditional sort will bring them out as synthetic sentences, provided they are syntactically well-formed. On the other hand, if the notion os counterfactural dependence is re-interpreted along the lines of branching possible worlds, they can be shown to be systematically contradictory. I discuss the various revisions of the truth conditions for tensed formulae and of the general semantic framework which are necessary to accomplish this.

The topic of this paper is convergence in an asymmetrical bilingual setting, and it will be shown that the outcome of the convergence process is different in the dominant language (L1) from what it is in the receiving language (L2). In L1, there is complication of the receiving language, while there is reduction in the syntax of the L2.

The article investigates the meeting between linguistics and literary theory under the auspices of cognitive grammar. First, it places this recent meeting in contrast to the relation between the two under structuralism; second, it sketches the philosophical foundations of cognitive linguistics in a series of related ideal types, such as cognitivism, diagrammatism, gestaltism, phenomenology, etc.; third, it investigates the literary theory of cognitive semantics in Lakoff and Turner's More Than Cool Reason as a background for some critical remarks.

The article deals with Stephen R. Anderson's Icelandic Vowel Shift Rule as an example of the general concept of exchange rule and involving marked vs. unmarked rule orde˚. The evidence adduced from Modern as well as Old Icelandic is reexamined in detail and shown to be in fact nonexistent. The paper ends with a few concluding remarks on the general notions involved.

Previous studies have shown the productive nature of eye and how it enters into patterns of a more or less non-compositional nature (e.g. Sinclair 1991a, Więcławska 2012). This paper adds a contrastive dimension and explores the cross-linguistic phraseology of the English–Norwegian cognates eye and øye on the basis of monolingual, bilingual and multilingual corpora. Starting with a survey of uses in the bidirectional English–Norwegian Parallel Corpus+ (ENPC+), the contrastive analysis reveals that while the two languages overlap in many of their uses of eye/øye-expressions, differences also emerge, particularly with regard to the number of recurrent patterns recorded and their conditions of use. English has more recurrent patterns with eye, but Norwegian has by far the most frequent pattern, få øye på ‘catch sight of’ (lit.: get eye on). Following this general cross-linguistic survey, a focused contrastive case study of få øye på and its English correspondences shows how a combination of bilingual and monolingual corpora may complement each other in contrastive research. The study uncovers that English has three main correspondences – catch sight of, see and spot – of which the first is the one favoured by bilingual dictionaries. An in-depth analysis of få øye på and catch sight of and their extended context, i.e. when they are part of extended units of meaning (e.g. Sinclair 1996), suggests that although the two patterns are perfectly matched, there are substantial differences when it comes to their frequency of use. This contributes to the relatively low mutual correspondences in the bidirectional translation material at hand.

The paper touches upon the relations between grammar-oriented and communication-oriented ways of analysing language in the light of some recent related developments in theoretical linguistics, congnitive psychology and artificial intelligence. The integration of (linguistic) meaning, situational interpretation and background knowledge is discussed. In Particular, different types of linguistically relevant common-sense knowledge and higher level cognitive procedures are considered.

This paper attempts to combia a theoretical model of analysis with the empirical findings from a case study concerning shift. It seems that the process of language shift ought to be studied from an ecological point of view considering different levels of explanation. In the case of the Swedishpeaking minority in Finland, a description confined to the societal level would imply that the minority holds a secure position. On the other hand it is clear that certain subgroups within the minority shift to Finish. The results from a case study suggest that every miniority memeber occupies a key position in the process of language shift. Every attempt to save a language should therefore start with the bilingual individual.

The article deals with the possibility of constructing a synopsis of a given text by automatic means from the text itself. It is suggested that this might be done on the basis of a statistical analysis of the vocabulary and collocations in the vocabulary, followed by simple parsing of selected parts of the text, and simple textual analysis, everything based on the results of the vocabulary analysis. The sentences and sentence fragments that are found to be central can then be used for the reconstruction of a substantially abridged version of the original text. After a discussion of the background of the model, a sample analysis is shown.

The article gives an overview of a universalistic hypothesis concerning world order change. Though noting the probabilistic nature of tendencies, it presents for comparison facts from the history of a specific language, Russian. It is a matter of opinion how such facts are weighted when they seem to be rathr against than for the hypothesis. However, what hopefully emerges clearly enough is that linearity and variation in syntax are guided by intonation and information structure as much as by structural analogy.

First of all we want to thank the general editors of the Nordic Journal of Linguistics for this opportunity to present to the readers of one of the most important linguistics journals in Northern Europe some specimens of sociolinguistic research. When we were approached by the general editors, we wholeheartedly agreed that this would be a good idea, although – or rather, precisely for this reason – sociolinguists in general have not been keen on publishing in NJL in the past. We have a modest hope that the present issue will change this.

The notion of symbolizability is taken as the second requisite of computation (the first being ‘algorithmizability’), and it is shown that symbols, qua symbols, are not symbolizable. This has far-reaching consequences for the computational study of language and for AI-research in language understanding. The representation hypothesis is formulated, and its various assumptions and goals are examined. A research strategy for the computational study of natural language understanding is outlined.

This contribution focuses on Stroh-Wollin’s (2020 in NJL) etymologies of the Nordic definite articles enn and hinn and contrastive hinn/hitt. While I do not contest her central claim that Old Icelandic enn and Mainland Scandinavian hinn have separate historical origins, I do argue that her etymologies should not be accepted over more conventional ones already present in the literature. First, the etymology of enn should, along traditional lines, be connected to Germanic cognates such as Gothic jain-, German jen-, and English yon (rather than derived from an ancient PIE *eno-).1 Furthermore, contrastive hinn/hitt and definite hinn/hit should be considered a doublet, both ultimately deriving from a distal/contrastive element (rather than the article having separate origins in an innovated Proto-Nordic proximal demonstrative).