{"title":"美式挪威语中的分控与明确标记","authors":"Kari Kinn","doi":"10.1017/S0332586521000135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article discusses definiteness marking in two possessive constructions that exhibit special patterns (split possession) for certain kinship nouns in Norwegian. It is shown that the special patterns, whereby the relevant nouns appear without a definite suffix, are retained by the majority speakers of American Norwegian (AmNo); some AmNo speakers use them even more extensively than homeland speakers, and only a minority do not use them. The forms without the suffix are analysed as a reflex of a poss feature that is a part of the featural make-up of certain kinship nouns (Julien 2005). I argue that the most conspicuous differences in distribution of this feature in the homeland vs. the heritage variety have emerged through a combination of decline in homeland Norwegian and retention and even extension in AmNo. The development in AmNo seems to be systematic and principled; it does not involve “loss” or incompleteness (e.g., Yager et al. 2015; Kupisch & Rothman 2016; Bayram et al. 2019).","PeriodicalId":43203,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of Linguistics","volume":"44 1","pages":"182 - 219"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Split possession and definiteness marking in American Norwegian\",\"authors\":\"Kari Kinn\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0332586521000135\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article discusses definiteness marking in two possessive constructions that exhibit special patterns (split possession) for certain kinship nouns in Norwegian. It is shown that the special patterns, whereby the relevant nouns appear without a definite suffix, are retained by the majority speakers of American Norwegian (AmNo); some AmNo speakers use them even more extensively than homeland speakers, and only a minority do not use them. The forms without the suffix are analysed as a reflex of a poss feature that is a part of the featural make-up of certain kinship nouns (Julien 2005). I argue that the most conspicuous differences in distribution of this feature in the homeland vs. the heritage variety have emerged through a combination of decline in homeland Norwegian and retention and even extension in AmNo. The development in AmNo seems to be systematic and principled; it does not involve “loss” or incompleteness (e.g., Yager et al. 2015; Kupisch & Rothman 2016; Bayram et al. 2019).\",\"PeriodicalId\":43203,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nordic Journal of Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"182 - 219\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nordic Journal of Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0332586521000135\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0332586521000135","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
摘要本文讨论了挪威语中某些亲属名词在两个所有格结构中所表现出的特殊模式(分属)的确定标记。研究表明,美国挪威语(AmNo)的多数使用者保留了相关名词不带确定后缀出现的特殊模式;一些说英语的人甚至比说母语的人更广泛地使用它们,只有少数人不使用它们。没有后缀的形式被分析为poss特征的反射,这是某些亲属名词特征构成的一部分(Julien 2005)。我认为,这一特征在家乡与遗产多样性分布上的最显著差异,是由于挪威家乡的衰落和挪威王国的保留甚至扩展的结合而出现的。AmNo的发展似乎是系统性和原则性的;它不涉及“丢失”或不完整(例如,Yager等人,2015;Kupisch & Rothman 2016;Bayram et al. 2019)。
Split possession and definiteness marking in American Norwegian
Abstract This article discusses definiteness marking in two possessive constructions that exhibit special patterns (split possession) for certain kinship nouns in Norwegian. It is shown that the special patterns, whereby the relevant nouns appear without a definite suffix, are retained by the majority speakers of American Norwegian (AmNo); some AmNo speakers use them even more extensively than homeland speakers, and only a minority do not use them. The forms without the suffix are analysed as a reflex of a poss feature that is a part of the featural make-up of certain kinship nouns (Julien 2005). I argue that the most conspicuous differences in distribution of this feature in the homeland vs. the heritage variety have emerged through a combination of decline in homeland Norwegian and retention and even extension in AmNo. The development in AmNo seems to be systematic and principled; it does not involve “loss” or incompleteness (e.g., Yager et al. 2015; Kupisch & Rothman 2016; Bayram et al. 2019).