Ny forskning i grammatik 2020-08-04T04:10:34+02:00 Eva Skafte Jensen Open Journal Systems <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p> <p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p> Kolofon 2019-10-10T11:02:50+02:00 - Redaktionen 2019-09-18T11:58:16+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Indholdsfortegnelse 2019-10-10T11:02:50+02:00 - Redaktionen 2019-09-18T12:02:04+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Grammatikalisering af danske præpositioner 2020-08-04T04:10:34+02:00 Kasper Boye Maria Messerschmidt Josefine Straube Hansen Victoria Schaffalitzky de Muckadell <p>Messerschmidt &amp; al. (2018) made a distinction between grammatical and lexical prepositions based on the functional theory of grammatical status in Boye &amp; Harder (2012), and demonstrated that this distinction is significant for the description of agrammatic speech. The functional theory predicts that grammatical items attract less attention than lexical ones. In this paper, we use a letter detection experiment to demonstrate that this also holds for Danish prepositions. Not all grammatical-lexical preposition pairs contrasted show a significant difference between letter detection rates, however. We argue that varying degrees of differences reflect different positions in a grammaticalization cline in which a grammatical descendent is gradually distilled out of a lexical source.</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Hvordan valideres tværsproglige kategorier? Aspekt som eksempel 2020-08-04T04:10:26+02:00 Kasper Boye Jessie Leigh Nielsen Peter Harder <p>The precise status of cross-linguistic categories remains a contested issue in contemporary linguistics. This paper proposes a solution based on a functional rethinking of classic concepts in Danish structural linguistics. It is argued that the level of content substance constitutes the necessary starting point for typological categories (such as tense and aspect), distinct from but presupposed by structural categories. This theory is compared to Haspelmath’s influential notion of “comparative concepts”. Comparative concepts arise as subjective stipulations (as claimed by Haspelmath), but we argue that they can be evaluated and potentially validated as cross-linguistically real substance descriptions. A validation procedure based on semantic mapping is proposed and illustrated in an analysis of Comrie’s (1976) category of aspect, which is argued – in contrast to what is generally assumed – not to constitute a cross-linguistically valid semantic domain. We conclude, however, that the category of aspect does constitute a different type of generalization: a generalization over cross-linguistically frequent distinctions.</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Determinativproduktion: Fra Brocas afasi til en lingvistisk teori om, hvad grammatik er 2020-08-04T04:10:17+02:00 Kasper Boye Sarah Rosenbech Nielsen Byurakn Ishkhanyan <p>This paper summarizes recent experiments examining the production of grammatical and lexical determiners in healthy individuals and individuals with agrammatic aphasia. The experiments discussed employ a design in which the Danish grammatical indefinite article en/et is contrasted with the lexical numeral en/et. The results show that articles are harder to produce than numerals. In agrammatic speech the difference is reflected in a higher proportion of omissions of articles. In healthy speech the difference is reflected in increased response times and decreased accurary rates for articles. The results are interpreted in light of a usage-based and functional theory of grammar, in which grammatical items are defined as signs that are by convention discursively secondary and structurally dependent.</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sætningskløvninger koder fokus og non-fokus i dansk 2020-08-04T04:10:09+02:00 Marie Herget Christensen <p>It is a central claim in most Danish grammars that the Danish cleft construction encodes the clefted constituent with the function focus and that other sentence types do not have any grammatical focus encoding. This article will argue that not only does clefts encode focus, the construction also encodes the other part of the cleft – the cleft clause – with the anti-function of focus, non-focus. Further it will argue that while non-clefted sentence do not encode focus, they do encode both potential focus in one part and anti-focus in another part of the sentence. Thus, the article will show that focus structure in Danish consists of four different encodings making focus structure coding relevant for all sentence types in Danish.</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Peter og mig, vi gik i biografen. Paratagmer i ekstraposition i dansk 2020-08-04T04:10:02+02:00 Eva Skafte Jensen <p>This paper presents a study on the distribution of the case forms in personal pronouns used in dislocated coordinated conjuncts in Danish. Based on previous work on case distribution, coordinated conjuncts and dislocated pronouns, it is expected that pronouns will appear in the oblique form. This is tested empirically against a large corpus of coordinated conjuncts in spoken Danish. However, the results of the test do not satisfy the expectations. This prompts considerations on the nature of grammar in spoken language with reference to Auer’s (2009) notion of ‘on-line syntax’, and it also gives occasion to revisit the dependency relations between the entities in NP’s such as Peter og mig ‘Peter and me’.</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Hjælp! Jeg har mistede min yndlings rød taske. Et studie af grammatikafvigelser 2020-08-04T04:09:54+02:00 Katrine Falcon Søby Line Burholt Kristensen <p>Grammar anomalies are frequent in texts produced by second language learners. When describing these anomalies, two main issues arise: What is anomalous use of grammar? And how are grammar anomalies distinct from orthographic and lexical anomalies? We review earlier error-definitions and suggest defining grammar anomalies according to an explicit norm instead of L1 usage. We propose a broader definition of grammar than in previous studies, based on Boye &amp; Harder (2012). The distinction between grammar, lexicon and orthography is illustrated with data from 28 adult L1 English learners of L2 Danish. In the corpus, 55.9 % of the anomalies were related to grammar. Finally, we discuss how definitions and procedures can be used in future studies of naturally occurring grammar anomalies.</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Dansk med måde 2020-08-04T04:09:47+02:00 Henrik Høeg Müller <p>The purpose of this paper is to show that the use of manner verbs differs systematically between Danish and Spanish, and that this factor exercises a decisive influence on their clause formation and distribution of semantic content across linguistic units. It is argued that in Danish, due to its strong preference for using manner verbs as main predicates, the semantic component manner becomes the core information which frames the expression of the event, while in Spanish the manner in which an event evolves is usually not mediated linguistically as a central component of the clause, if expressed at all. Consequently, speakers of Danish focus on events as visual manifestations of reality, while speakers of Spanish are not attuned to conceptualizing events visually.</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Lokative pronominer og præpositionalfrasens struktur 2020-08-04T04:09:40+02:00 Michael Nguyen <p>In this paper, I investigate the syntax of the prepositional phrase in Danish and the locative pronouns her ‘here’, der ‘there’ and hvor ‘where’ in e.g. hertil ‘hereto’. I argue that (a) the directional adverb p is a functional head that projects a pP on top of a PP and takes this PP as its complement; that (b) the locative pronoun moves via an intermediate position within the prepositional phrase before it leaves the prepositional phrase; and that (c) the preposition moves to p (P-to-p-incorporation).</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Indirekte objekt i moderne dansk talesprog: En korpusundersøgelse af frit indirekte objekt 2020-08-04T04:09:32+02:00 Peter Juul Nielsen <p>Since the 18th c., the Danish indirect object (IO) has undergone a narrowing of its semantic potential, and Heltoft (2014) claims that free, non-governed IOs (FIOs) are no longer possible in present-day Danish. The paper presents an empirical test of this claim based on data from the LANCHART corpus of spoken Danish. The corpus findings suggest prima facie that the FIO construction is indeed no longer an option. However, the paper shows that the very few FIOs found in the corpus call for an analysis of pragmatic preconditions. It is suggested that the FIO presupposes aspects of regulative speech acts, which are rarely found in the text types of the LANCHART corpus, and the paper points out methodical problems in quantitatively oriented corpus-based assessments of grammatical systems.</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Spansk verbal-kongruent betydning: verbet, konstruktionen og det grammatiske aspekt. Et kontrastivt-sprogtypologisk perspektiv 2020-08-04T04:09:24+02:00 Johan Pedersen <p>Spanish and typologically related languages are characterized by absence of unaccusativization (Levin &amp; Rappaport Hovav 1995). According to Horrocks &amp; Stavrou (2007), the verb-inflected grammatical aspect explains the absence of unaccusativization. Against this view, the article argues that the phenomenon relates to the typologically privileged role of the Spanish verb lexeme. From a usage-based point of view, absence of unaccusativization is understood as an undeveloped possibility of schematization. Spanish constructions are verb-framed and constructional (schematic) patterns only have a secondary role elaborating on the verb-framed core meaning (Pedersen 2019). Grammatical aspect, it is argued, likewise plays a secondary role making the verbal contribution congruent with the intended aspectual meaning.</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement## Sætningsstruktur og strukturelle flertydigheder 2020-08-04T04:09:15+02:00 Sten Vikner <p>There is agreement across different approaches that although sentences consist of words, they are much more than strings of words: They also have structure. Section 1 shows how clause structure is analysed very differently across different approaches. The rest of the paper addresses ambiguity: lexical ambiguity in section 2, morphological structural ambiguity in section 3, and syntactic structural ambiguity in section 4. Subsections 4.1-4.2 analyse the ambiguity arising when a constituent, e.g. a PP, is interpretable either as the sister of one constituent or of another constituent. Subsection 4.3 argues that the ambiguous examples analysed in all of section 4 cannot be accounted for within approaches that do not recognise a constituent that contains a verb and its complement (i.e. a VP).</p> 2019-09-18T00:00:00+02:00 ##submission.copyrightStatement##