The Scandinavian Languages: Fifty Years of Linguistic Research (1918 - 1968) [Reprint 2012 ed.] 9027923582, 9789027923585

Citation preview

JANUA LINGUA RUM STUDIA M E M O R I A E N I C O L A I VAN WIJK D E D I C A T A edenda curat C. H. V A N S C H O O N E V E L D Indiana University

Series Practica,

154

THE SCANDINAVIAN LANGUAGES Fifty Years of Linguistic Research

(1918-1968)

by

EINAR HAUGEN and THOMAS L. MARKEY

1972 MOUTON THE HAGUE · PARIS

© Copyright 1972 in The Netherlands. Mouton & Co. N.V., Publishers, The Hague. No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers.

Printed in The Netherlands by Mouton & Co., Printers, The Hague.

PREFACE

The present survey of linguistic research on Scandinavian languages from 1918 to 1968 owes its inception on the one hand to the needs of the senior author for background material in the writing of his projected survey of Scandinavian language history, and on the other to the invitation of Thomas A. Sebeok to write a chapter in volume IX of his monumental Current Trends in Linguistics. Sebeok's generous policy in not setting limits on the prolixity of his authors made the chapter into a monograph. That it can now appear as such is due, in turn, to the generosity of the publishers. It is hoped that experienced as well as novice linguists will profit from this opportunity to get a concentrated view of the creative productivity of Scandinavians and non-Scandinavians alike in grappling with the problems of these languages. The authors are only too conscious of the limitations of this first survey of the topic. The initial date was set by the editor of the series, and the final date was that of completion of the manuscript. Some of the omissions in this work will hopefully be remedied in the forthcoming Bibliography of Scandinavian Linguistics 1900-1970 and The Scandinavian Languages: History and Structures, by Einar Haugen. T.L.M. E.H.

TABLE O F CONTENTS

Preface

5

List of Abbreviations for Languages and Cities

10

Introduction

11

1. Danish

14

1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9

General Normalization Phonology Grammar Lexicology Stylistics Language History Philology Dialectology Place Names

14 15 16 18 20 21 22 25 29 34

2. Swedish 2.0 General 2.1 Normalization 2.2 Phonology 2.3 Grammar 2.4 Lexicology 2.5 Stylistics 2.6 Language History 2.7 Philology 2.8 Dialectology 2.9 Place Names

37 37 38 39 41 43 43 46 50 55 63

8

TABLE OF CONTENTS

3. Norwegian 3.0 General 3.1 Normalization 3.2 Phonology 3.3 Grammar 3.4 Lexicology 3.5 Stylistics 3.6 Language History 3.7 Philology 3.8 Dialectology 3.9 Place Names

68 68 70 72 73 75 76 77 79 82 90

4. Faroese 4.0 General 4.1 Normalization 4.2 Phonology 4.3 Grammar 4.4 Lexicology 4.5 Stylistics 4.6 Language History 4.7 Philology 4.8 Dialectology 4.9 Place Names

93 93 94 94 95 95 96 97 98 99 100

5. Icelandic 5.0 General 5.1 Normalization 5.2 Phonology 5.3 Grammar 5.4 Lexicology 5.5 Stylistics 5.6 Language History 5.7 Philology 5.8 Dialectology 5.9 Place Names

101 101 102 102 103 104 105 106 113 116 117

6. Pan-Scandinavian 6.0 General 6.1 Normalization 6.2-5 Language Description 6.6-7 Language History and Philology

120 120 122 123 124

TABLE OF CONTENTS

9

6.8 Dialectology

126

6.9 Place Names

128

List of Abbreviations for Journals and Institutions

129

Scandinavian Bibliography

132

ABBREVIATIONS

Languages Da DN ESc Fa Ic MLG NN Nw ODa OFr OIc ON ONw OSc OSw Sc WSc

Cities Danish Dano-Norwegian East Scandinavian Faroese Icelandic Middle Low German New Norwegian Norwegian Old Danish Old Frisian Old Icelandic Old Norse Old Norwegian Old Scandinavian Old Swedish Scandinavian West Scandinavian

Cop Hels Kra Rvk Sth

Copenhagen Helsinki Kristiania Reykjavik Stockholm

INTRODUCTION

The following report on Scandinavian linguistics since 1918 will be limited to research on the Scandinavian (Sc) languages proper. For their early, Germanic periods see the account by Herbert Penzl (CTL 9.1232-81, above). The terms 'language' and 'dialect' will here be used in their traditional senses of 'standard language' and 'nonstandard language' respectively. In this sense there are today six languages and innumerable dialects in Scandinavia, most of which are mutually comprehensible (with a little effort). The languages are Danish (Da), Swedish (Sw), (Dano-)Norwegian (DN), (New-)Norwegian (NN), Faroese (Fa), and Icelandic (Ic). The order in which they are listed reflects (roughly) their geographical and linguistic location, going from south and east to north and west, the usual direction of linguistic influence in the area. The relationship may be graphically represented as follows: Icelandic

Faroese

N-Norwegian

D-Norwegian

Swedish

I

Danish The oldest isoglosses (apparent already in the Viking period) distinguish a West Sc (Ic Fa NN) from an East Sc (DN Sw Da) area. Later developments have isolated Insular Sc (Ic Fa) from Continental Sc (NN DN Sw Da) and have set off Da from Sw within the latter group. The dialects have been less affected and still constitute transitional areas between the politically distinct languages. All of Scandinavia is a single isoglossic network on which has been imposed a superstructure of six literary languages, each one of which tends today to supersede the dialects in its area. Scandinavian linguistics, like European linguistics generally, has gone through three major phases: the normative (sixteenth to eighteenth centuries), the historical (nineteenth century), and the descriptive (twentieth century). All of these are still active components in linguistic research, though with different emphases in each country. Normative linguistics is of most concern where norms are recent, as in Fa NN DN; but it is everywhere an important part of mother-tongue pedagogy, a branch of applied linguistics. Underlying normative grammar there was a conception of description largely derived from Latin grammar, as embodied in traditional school

12

INTRODUCTION

grammar. Historical linguistics introduced a new dimension by making possible the diachronic reconstruction of linguistic genealogy, which provided important support for nationalistic aspirations. Descriptive linguistics grew out of the new scientific views of the late nineteenth century, which encouraged the exploration of synchronic and even panchronic language structure in all its aspects. Scandinavian linguists have made contributions to the theory and practice of linguistics in all these phases; it is sufficient to recall such names as Rasmus Rask, Holger Pedersen, Otto Jespersen, Adolf Noreen, Yiggo Brandal, Louis Hjelmslev, and Alf Sommerfelt. In this account their work and that of other general linguists will be referred to only in connection with the study of the Scandinavian languages. It is characteristic that in all too many cases the major contributions to general linguistics have been made by scholars not engaged in the study of their native language. Since most linguists have confined their primary research to the language and dialects of their own country, it has been found most expedient here to arrange the report by languages. Concern with the mother tongue has been dictated by national needs and the consequent availability of positions within the school and university systems. We shall order the languages according to the scheme above, beginning with Danish and combining the two Norwegian languages into one chapter: (1) Danish; (2) Swedish; (3) Norwegian; (4) Faroese; (5) Icelandic. Unfortunately this format tends to conceal the high degree of crossfertilization within Scandinavia. Most linguists of any stature have of course been aware of research in their own field in the other Scandinavian countries and have taken account of it in their writings. Journals like Arkiv for nordisk filologi and Acta Linguistica Scandinavica have provided joint forums and bibliographies. From time to time there have been pan-Scandinavian congresses, as well as extensive exchange of lecturers. Many problems of normalization, history, and description common to all or several languages have been discussed back and forth across national boundaries. Considering how closely the past and present of the Nordic countries are intertwined, this would seem inevitable; and failure in this respect is the more deplorable. In order to give some space to efforts at linguistic cooperation a final chapter on Pan-Scandinavian research has been included. There is no general consensus on how linguistics should be subdivided. We have tried to keep the divisions to a minimum. There is obviously a great deal of overlapping between the following topics, and some of them could easily have been subdivided still further. As the historical development of a language can be viewed as a telescoped series of synchronic grammars, we have placed first in our outline the sections on synchronic description. The extrapolation of historical development and the reconstruction of the earlier stages of a language necessarily proceed from philological investigations of older texts and place names, as well as the retrieval of archaic features preserved in the dialects. Therefore, philological, dialectological, and place-name studies are arranged to follow the section on language history. Each language chapter will follow a similar pattern: (.0)General; (.1) Normalization, the planning and standardization of orthography and basic grammar; (.2) Phonology, including phonetics,

INTRODUCTION

13

phonemics, phonotactics, graphemics, and problems of pronunciation generally; (.3) Grammar, including morphology, morphophonemics, and syntax; (.4) Lexicology, including semantics and the production of dictionaries; (.5) Sty lis tics, including the problems of correctness, rhetoric, levels of style, metrics, and poetics; (.6) Language History, including the rise of standard languages and their development; (.7) Philology, the publication and elucidation of texts, including paleography; (.8) Dialectology, the history and description of regional and social dialects; (.9) Place Names. Within each chapter primary responsibility for the descriptive sections (.0) to (.5) rests with Einar Haugen, the historical-geographical (.6) to (.9) with Thomas L. Markey. The authors express their deepest gratitude to Mette Markey for assistance at every stage of the MS, and to David Margolin for checking the references. They are grateful also to Solveig Persson and Peter Jorgensen for typing the often difficult MS. They are only too well aware of omissions in coverage and inadequacies of formulation; suggestions are invited. It is hoped that even as it stands, this survey may serve as an introduction to the topic for beginning students. A part of this work was done under National Science Foundation Contract GS-1748. The bibliographies are arranged by languages, corresponding to their order in the text. Runology has been entirely omitted.

1 DANISH

1.0 General Danish linguistics has a strong tradition of international orientation, as Selskab for nordisk filologi in Copenhagen could demonstrate in a 1937 lecture series honoring its twenty-fifth anniversary, which was published under the proud title Fra Rask til Wimmer. In 1962, on its fiftieth anniversary, the society organized a new lecture series, this time surveying twentieth-century research on the Da language (J. Larsen et al., 1965), with contributions by such leading scholars asJohs. Brendum-Nielsen, Karl Martin Nielsen, Anders Bjerrum, Kristian Haid, Poul Andersen, Kristen Moller, and Paul Diderichsen. The two most famous Da linguists of this period, Otto Jespersen and Louis Hjelmslev, both seminal thinkers in international linguistics, often drew on material from their native language. Jespersen retired from his chair of English linguistics in 1925, but continued to publish vigorously in later years, as reported in his autobiography En sprogmands levned (1938). As master linguist he contributed to phonetics, grammar, historical linguistics, linguistic theory, and sociolinguistics; within our period he published such well-known works as Language (1922), The philosophy of grammar (1924), Mankind, nation and individual (1925), and Analytic syntax (1937; republished 1969). His refreshing style and unorthodox views gave him a wide readership and an enduring influence on Da as well as international linguistics. Jespersen was a thoroughgoing empirical pragmatist, while the founders of Lingvistkredsen (Cercle linguistique de Copenhague, 1931), Viggo Brendal and Louis Hjelmslev, were oriented primarily to language theory, and were stimulated by the teaching of Saussure (Fischer-J0rgensen 1949). Br0ndal's chief work Ordklasserne (1928) was an attempt to establish the theory of word classes on a logical basis, while Hjelmslev's Prolegomena to a theory of language (1943; Eng. tr. 1953) tried to do the same for all linguistic theory. Through the other members of the linguistic circle they influenced the development of Danish linguistics as well, so that the treatment of Da grammar and phonology is today overwhelmingly structural, to an extent not seen in the other Scandinavian countries. For the standard language the chief names in grammar have been Paul Diderichsen and Aage Hansen, for phonology Eli Fischer-J0rgensen, and

DANISH

15

for dialectology Poul Andersen, all of them deeply influenced by Hjelmslev. A special field much cultivated in Denmark has been the history of Da linguistics. In addition to the surveys mentioned above there have been detailed studies of the work done by earlier linguists, especially Rask (M. Bjerrum 1959, Diderichsen 1960), who has been shown to build on a solid grammatical tradition from the eighteenth century. The ideas of that period have been explored in general by Lollesgaard (1925) and in particular those of the most distinguished Da linguist before Rask, Jens Pedersen Heysgaard (Bertelsen 1926, A. Bjerrum 1954a). Under the editorship of Henrik Bertelsen a number of early Da grammars have been reprinted, from that of Peder Syv (1663) to Hoysgaard (1747) (Bertelsen, Danske Grammatikere I-VI, 1915-29). The work of the nineteenth-century lexicographer Molbech has been studied by Borup (1954). Diderichsen worked from time to time on a large-scale survey of Da (and general) linguistics and its relation to mother-tongue teaching; his manuscript was published posthumously by Niels Rosenkjaer (Diderichsen 1968). Diderichsen's influence is patent also in a textbook for the secondary schools by Erik Hansen (1964), which fruitfully embodies a linguistic approach to the teaching of Da grammar and literature. The chief journal for Da linguistics is Danske studier (1904—); more general journals in which Da articles appear are Acta Philologica Scandinavica (1926-) and Acta Linguistica (1939-), recently revived as Acta Linguistica Hafniensia (1965-). Selskab for nordisk filologi publishes an annual bulletin with abstracts of papers given (Jrsberetning (1933-). The Linguistic Circle of Copenhagen publishes a series of Travaux, and the Dialect Archives a series of monographs, as well as a journal Danske folkemäl (1927-). The Institute of Jutlandic Dialects and Literature publishes the journal Sprog og Kultur (1932-). Important collective volumes are the festskrifter in honor of Peter Skautrup (Festskrift 1956) and Aage Hansen (Danica 1964). A great part of these materials has been worked into the four volumes of Skautrup's monumental Det danske sprogs historie (1944-68), which is more than a history, in that it brings descriptive analyses of the language at each stage, including the present, as well as an exhaustive account of the social and political setting of each historical period. 1.1

Normalization

Written Da has been effectively normalized since the late Middle Ages, but the first official orthography was adopted by the Ministry of Education in 1889. This was displayed in Dansk Retskrivningsordbog (1891), a spelling list which appeared with only minor changes through its eighth edition (1919). A society called Dansk Retskrivningsforening was formed in 1918 with the aim of making the orthography 'a faithful reflection of the Da standard language in its best pronunciation' (Skautrup 1944-68:4.69-76). Such reform attempts, going back to Rask, have uniformly failed, achieving only minor alterations in the unphonemic but traditional orthography.

16

DANISH

A committee on orthography (Retskrivningsndvalget) was appointed by the Ministry in 1920 to supervise the preparation of a new spelling list, edited by Jorgen Glahder, which appeared as Dansk Retskrivningsordbog (1923, 5th ed. 1946). Wartime sentiment for Nordic rapprochement, fanned by the agitation of Sven Clausen (below 6.1), led to a 1948 decree by the Ministry adopting the following changes: (1) Rejection of the German-derived capitalization of nouns; (2) Adoption of the Swedish (and since 1917 Norwegian) symbol ä for aa; (3) Replacing silent d's with geminates in the preterite modals: kunde, skulde, vilde > kunne, skulle, ville. The reform met vigorous opposition (e.g. by Dansk Sprognzvn), but has gradually been accepted by most publishers and writers. In 1955 a permanent advisory language commission {Dansk Sprognxvri) was appointed by the Ministry and entrusted with supervision of a new spelling list, Retskrivningsordbog (1955; see Skautrup 1955). Da has been the least radical of the Sc languages in respelling foreign loans; but a few new spellings have been accepted in recent years, e.g. bataljon for bataillon, kutyme for coutume. A problem of normalization that has agitated Danes considerably in recent years without being a problem of orthography is that of the numerals 50-90 and their derivatives. Da alone among Sc languages (excepting Faroese) employs a vigesimal system, which appears to have developed in the late Middle Ages. The decimal system has been adopted for check writing and other commercial purposes; reformers have long agitated for its introduction in all teaching, plus a change-over from the German to the Anglo-Swedish order, i.e. sekstiseks for '66' instead of seks og tresindstyve. One of the publications of Dansk Sprognxvn is a discussion of the problem and its background by Karker (1959).

1.2 Phonology A reliable analysis of Da phonetics was available in Jespersen's manual Modersmaalets fonetik (1906, 3rd ed. 1934) and internationally in the Berlin publication of Arnholtz and Reinhold's Einführung (1936) with recordings. In the mid-thirties Hjelmslev (1935a and b) and Uldall (1935) called for a phonemic interpretation of the data. The first full-length attempt in this direction was made by Martinet (1937), who followed the lead of Trubetzkoy and the Prague school. He therefore based his phonemes on the distinctive phonetic features and rejected the use which Hjelmslev had made of morphological alternations (Martinet 1937:171). Hjelmslev's phonemics was in any case not a goal in itself, but a part of his general theory of language, which he developed under the name of glossematics. In this theory (which was never completely presented) the inspiration of Saussure toward a purely relational linguistics led to a rejection of the phonic substance as part of phonological description. In a sketch of the Da sound system Hjelmslev (1948) illustrated his application of glossematic principles by analyzing the phonemes of Da entirely in terms of their privileges of occurrence, logically expressed as selecting (marginal) or selected (nuclear)

DANISH

17

units. Contrary to Martinet, he reduced the Da stops to a single series by interpreting the aspirated stops as clusters: [p c t ' k c ] > /bh dh gh/. The glottal catch, which he recognized as the major problem of Da phonology, was eliminated entirely from the phonemic inventory by being regarded as a signal for certain syllabic structures. In some instances this required him to interpret the syllable as containing a latent consonant, e.g. [fal'] > /fald/ 'fall'. A complex set of rules permitted the prediction of glottalization, except of course for loanwords and the like. The problem of glottalization continued to win a lively interest in linguistic discussion, especially after Aage Hansen's monograph (1943), in which the author thoroughly analyzed the functions of glottalization in standard Da. Like Hjelmslev he rejected its interpretation as a consonant (Uldall 1935) or as a prosodeme (Martinet 1937), i.e. as a word-distinguishing phoneme. Instead he regarded the presence of glottalization as distinguishing a class of wordtypes having stress on a final, sonorant syllable, as against a type in which the stressed syllable is signaled as non-final by not having glottalization. While this corresponds to the historical origin of Da stod and still reflects a kind of underlying pattern, historical change and borrowing have obscured t and made its occurrence highly arbitrary. Points of view similar to Hjelmslev's and Hansen's have been applied in the description of several Da dialects, e.g. A. Bjerrum (1944a), Ejskjaer (1954), E. Jensen (1956), and Poul Andersen (1958). Even the basically phonetic study of glottalization by Svend Smith (1944) tried to provide a linguistic interpretation of glottalization as a special kind of dynamic accent, in its origin identical with the musical Accent 1 of other Sc dialects. The connection is undeniable, but its nature is still unclear. Da dialects with remains of musical tone have been studied, most of them in southeastern Jutland, e.g. M. Bjerrum (1948), Kroman (1947), G. Nielsen (1959), Karen Marie Olsen (1949). Characteristic of all such studies is their structural approach, in Poul Andersen's words, 'an emphasis on the systematic connection between the units of the accent system' (Andersen in J. Larsen et al. 1965:103). A detailed study of West Jutlandic preglottalization of stops by Ringgaard (1960) shows that this is quite different in origin and distribution from the glottalization of the standard language. The orthoepy of Da is most fully treated in Aage Hansen's Udtalen i moderne dansk (1956), but see the criticisms leveled against it (in part an accusation of Jutlandic provincialism) by Diderichsen (1957). There is no proper pronouncing dictionary of Da (though pronunciations are included in the ODS); a brief popular guide is Albeck (1942b). A useful survey of the phonetics, including the values of the Da dialect alphabet, is found in Poul Andersen (1954); practice in phonetic reading of Da is available in Uldall (1933). The discrepancies between sound and spelling lead to many spelling errors by school children; studies of these have been made by Noesgaard (1945, 1951). Inspired by Hjelmslev's doctrine that writing and speech are separate manifestations of an underlying linguistic structure, Diderichsen (1953) undertook an analysis of the graphemic system of standard Da. The results are not very accessible, thanks to the intricate and idiosyncratic terminology characteristic of

18

DANISH

glossematics. Information about earlier pronunciations of Da have been culled from the previously mentioned grammarians, e.g. by N. A. Nielsen (1952).

1.3

Grammar

Traditional views of Da grammar are represented in the handbook most commonly used in the schools, K. Mikkelsen's Haandbog i dansk Sproglxre (1894), in many revised and amputated versions. Wiwel broke with these views and stimulated discussion of descriptive principles by his Synspunkter for dansk sproglsere (1901). His radically empirical and positivistic views have had enduring influence on the thinking of modern Da grammarians, even though no one has fully accepted them (Diderichsen in J. Larsen et al. 1965:143-63; Diderichsen 1968:84-101). The first attempt to introduce some of Wiwel's views in school grammar was made by Rehling (1924), who kept revising his system and terminology in later editions (1932, 1949) in an effort to incorporate more recent linguistic views. In the meantime Otto Jespersen, Viggo Brandal, and Louis Hjelmslev had all made important contributions to the major problem underlying all synchronic grammar, viz. the relation between grammatical and semantic structures (roughly the same as present-day 'surface' vs. 'deep' structure). The first writer to attempt a general reorientation of Da grammar was Aage Hansen (1933), a diligent worker in the linguistic vineyard, whose many years as staff member on the great Ordbog over det danske Sprog enabled him to collect vast materials to illustrate Da grammatical problems. His numerous monographs and comprehensive descriptions of Da constitute the largest body of observations on Da structures in existence, particularly since the appearance of his crowning work, Moderne dansk (1967), in three volumes. His strength is not in precise formal analysis, however; in Diderichsen's words, he lacks 'the capacity of applying the new concepts in a clear and consistent way' (Diderichsen in J. Larsen et al. 1965:183).* This capacity, on the other hand, does characterize Diderichsen, whose first contribution to Da grammatical discussion followed Hansen's by two years, being presented (1935) as a paper at the eighth Nordic Congress of Philologists (Forhandlinger 1936, reprinted Diderichsen 1966). Diderichsen was chiefly inspired by Brondal to adopt a structural and theoretical stance, which characterized the newer group of Da linguists who formed the Lingvistkreds (since 1931), in conscious opposition to Jespersen's (and Hansen's) pragmatic and empirical views. As Diderichsen later saw it, this meant the introduction in Denmark of Saussure's theoretical principles; Copenhagen became one of the great centers of European linguistic discussion. Diderichsen's programmatic paper called for a descriptive syntax, based on the sentence and its construction. To replace the traditional statements of 'word order' * In 1964 (printed 1965) Diderichsen wrote on rereading Hansen 1933: 'There is no other major work on Danish grammar that I have as much to criticize in — and that has meant as much for my own grammatical work ...' (Larsen et al. 1965:183).

DANISH

19

he developed a model for the Da sentence which took the finite verb as its center and point of reference and then placed other 'members' in relation to this. He first applied the model in a study of Old Danish (ODa) syntax as found in the Scanian Law (1941), intended to be part of a series of such monographs on texts from all periods of Da linguistic history. His definitive presentation of it is found, however, in his Elementar dansk grammatik (1946, revised ed. 1957), intended as a textbook for teachers of Da in the secondary schools, but rather beyond their level since it is anything but elementary. In brief, this is a theory not unlike that of Kenneth Pike in being based on a model consisting of positions ('slots') to be filled by various members or to be left open. The positions are grouped into three 'fields', initial (fundamentfeit), central (,neksusfelt), and final (indholdsfelt). (The English terms are translated from Erik Hansen's adaptation of Diderichsen's model, cf. Diderichsen 1966:369.) The initial field may contain any member, typically the subject; the central field contains the finite verb and its modifiers; the final field the non-finite verb and its modifiers: A N/vna/VNA V in which a (A) stands for 'adverbial', ν (F) for 'verbal', and η (JV) for 'nominal'; the small letters represent the central or finite members. The greatest value of the model lies in its emphasis on the relative flexibility of initial position in Da; but as Diderichsen admits, 'its chief problem is that a member must sometimes be moved when it is exchanged for a single word' (Diderichsen 1966:371). Such reorderings can of course more readily be handled in a transformational model. Diderichsen was asked to prepare a memorandum on Da grammatical terminology for the schools, in which the traditional terminology is revised to provide for newer insights (1961). In spite of the many innovations in Diderichsen's terminology, his general stand was one of favoring the traditional grammatical terms; his many and comprehensive studies of the history of grammatical thought taught him that in spite of the difficulty of defining these terms precisely, they were functionally effective and had demonstrated their value by centuries of usage (he did not accept the idea that they were merely derivatives of Latin grammar). Among the specific grammatical problems to which monographs have been devoted may be mentioned the following: the definite and indefinite articles were discussed by Aage Hansen (1927) and Kristen M0ller (1945); group genitives by Otto Jespersen (1934); diminutives by Moller (1943); number by Diderichsen (1946, printed 1966:6479). Dialect grammar was treated by Gotfredsen (1955) and Ella Jensen (1956). Other important works by Aage Hansen not mentioned above are his introduction to Da grammar (1938) and his discussion of linguistic analysis and description in the volume Dansk Sprog (Vestergaard 1963:37-97). In a posthumous and only partially completed work Diderichsen presented a perspective of Da mother tongue teaching, as well as of the history of grammar, language normalization, and principles of peda-

20

DANISH

gogy (1968). This work, together with the also posthumous collections of his essays (1964a, 1966), constitutes a monumentum aere perennius to this brilliant and lamented linguist, the leader of his generation. In his brief Essentials of Danish grammar (1964b), one may find a pedagogical summary of his wide-ranging knowledge of the Da language. 1.4

Lexicology

The main results of European lexicology were forcefully presented to a Da public by Vilhelm Grundtvig (1925), who called for a reorientation of the field. A generation later he was followed by Kristen Mailer (1959), whose book on lexicology and lexicography is a valuable survey of what has been done and what remains to be done. A brief outline of the field by Mailer is available in the 1965 volume of lectures on Da linguistics (J. Larsen et al. 1965:127-41); an earlier survey by Tollenaere (1943) is now out of date. Stimulated by the general principles of the German Wörter und Sachen movement, a great many monographs have been published on particular areas of meaning, such as weaving (Poul Andersen), fishing implements (Widding), games (Lisse), agricultural tools (Moller, Skautrup, etc.); these will not be listed here (see the above-mentioned outline by Mailer). Since most of these are rural activities, they strictly fall under dialect research, and with changing rural conditions, many of their vocabularies are already obsolete. These monographs are often more anthropological or sociological than linguistic, since their contents are also the contents of the cultures studied. One of the most massive and exemplary of such studies is Skautrup's presentation of the entire vocabulary of one dialect (1927-30), followed by a similar work from another dialect by Skyum (1948-54). A complete dialect dictionary of Jutland is being prepared under the editorship of Skautrup (1965), but is still unpublished. Special studies of urban class languages have not been made, aside from the several books by Kaj Bom on Da slang (1948, 1950), including a dictionary of slang (1957). The major effort and most important result of Da lexical research is the great ODS in 27 volumes, which appeared under the editorship of Verner Dahlerup, within the amazingly brief period from 1918 to 1952. This is a historical dictionary, on the same general plan as the OED, covering the period from Ludvig Holberg (d. 1754) to the present, with abundant citations. A smaller dictionary for popular use entitled Nudansk Ordbog was published (1953) under the editorship of Lis Jacobsen. Dictionaries of synonyms are available by Albeck (1941, rev. ed. 1957), H. Andersen (1945), and Karker (1957). A dictionary of Da plant names in three volumes by Johan Lange (1959-61) is an important contribution to one semantic area. Another specialized dictionary is the excellent etymological dictionary by Niels Age Nielsen (1966). The most important bilingual dictionary is Vinterberg and Bodelsen's Dansk-engelsk ordbog in two volumes (1954-56, 2nd ed. 1966). Small Da-Swedish dictionaries by Beckman (1907, 5th ed. 1929), Widman et al. (1951), and Moide and Ferlov (1958)

DANISH

21

as well as a Da-Icelandic one by Gunnarsson (1957) testify to the need for intra-Sc glossing. An important type of lexicological research has been conducted almost entirely by one man, Noesgaard, viz. word counting. Stimulated by similar American projects, Noesgaard began making word counts in the early thirties (1934). He produced a series of spelling lists for the schools based on frequency, with a union list for teachers (1940, 2nd ed. 1956). He further applied his results to studies of the vocabulary of school children (1955), to errors in Da orthography (1945), and to the effects of dialectical speech forms on the writing (1951). 1.5 Stylistics As Ulla Albeck points out (1939:9), stylistics may be either normative or descriptive, like any other branch of linguistics. Classical stylistics was usually normative, a set of rules for achieving the norms of a particular (mostly oratorical) style; modern stylistics (since the nineteenth century) has usually been descriptive of individual deviations from the norm by literary authors. Albeck's Dansk Stilistik (1939, 4th ed. 1963), written as a handbook for university students, has become the standard textbook in the field. It outlines succinctly the literary values associated with the choice of words and constructions, as well as the traditional tropes and figures of poetry, all with abundant exemplification from Da literature and references to earlier studies of particular authors and periods. Among these may be mentioned Rubow's study of saga imitations (1923) and of Hans Christian Andersen's style (1927a); Harry Andersen's analysis of Johannes V. Jensen's lyrics (1936) and the art of Ludvig Holstein (1956); Sven Melier Kristensen's studies of Sneedorff's prose (1933) and Da impressionistic prose from 1870 to 1900 (1938). Each of these has at least some discussion of linguistic features, along with more purely literary aspects of the texts; the same is true of Albeck's monograph on Blicher's stories (1942a) and Anders Bjerrum's collection of student essays on Blicher's novel Ε Bindstouw (A. Bjerrum et al. 1962). Brondum-Nielsen has made a special study of indirect discourse in Da literature before 1870 (1953). For those who have yet to achieve even the average standard norm of written and spoken Da, guidance is available in a variety of texts, e.g. Oxenvad (1933-34, 1950), E. Andersen and Rehling (1936), Rehling (1948), and Yestergaard (1963). Arnholtz (1948) provides texts for teaching students to read aloud. There is reason to single out Aage Hansen's Vort vanskelige sprog (1961, 2nd ed. 1965), which is the nearest Da parallel to Wellander's Riktig svenska (below 2.5). In principle Hansen is permissive, but as Diderichsen points out with a touch of irony, in practice he is more authoritarian (J. Larsen et al. 1965:189-90). If one adds to these the popularly written books of Kaj Bom (1955) and the author Knud Hjort0 (1918, 1927, 1936), one can agree with Diderichsen that Da is 'well supplied with interesting, liberal, and competent guides to the use of the literary language'. To these one can now further add

22

DANISH

Diderichsen's own book (1968), as well as Erik Hansen's (1964), which teaches grammar and style in the spirit of Diderichsen, beginning with syntax and ending with phonetics instead of the traditional reverse order. Erik Hansen has also produced an amusing and instructive study of the gaudy language of advertising (1965), most of which is obviously transplanted from English. Problems of cultivation are often the subject of debate, even in the popular press, but also by linguists. A tradition of puristic agitation goes back to the eighteenth century and has flared up from time to time, especially during periods of patriotic stress. After World War I a society was formed (1920) to combat Germanisms; again during the threatening years of German Nazism an agitation by the jurist and author Sven Clausen to replace German words with older Da and other Sc words won some attention (see below 6.5). In 1941 the Academy for Technical Sciences appointed a Central Council for Technical Terminology (Terminologicentralen). As noted above, Dansk Sprognxvn was appointed in 1955 to coordinate efforts of Da and other Sc languages toward common principles of regulation. So far these efforts have had little effect, since Danes have not been willing to follow Clausen's well-meant advice: 'If thine language ear offend thee, tear it off!'

1.6 Language History Danish Nordic scholars have not restricted their interest in the history of the Da language to specific phonological and morphological developments alone, but have also devoted a great deal of attention to the evolution of the standard language out of the perplexing welter of regional variants that are revealed in the earliest medieval texts. A prerequisite for an over-all view of this evolutionary process is a comprehensive historical grammar. Beginning in the 1880s a sequence of historical grammars of the Germanic dialects had been published under the editorship of Wilhelm Braune in the series, Sammlung kurzer Grammatiken germanischer Dialekte. During the early part of this century the Danes lacked a comparable historical grammar of Da, and the monumental task of providing such a grammar was undertaken by Johannes Brondum-Nielsen of the University of Copenhagen, five volumes of whose Gammeldansk Grammatik (Glda.Gr.) have appeared to date: I. Vokalisme (1928,2nd ed. 1950), II. Konsonantisme (1932, 2nd ed. 1957), III. Substantivernes Deklination (1935), IV. Adjektiver, Adverber, Numeralier (1962), V. Pronominer (1965). Lacking a predecessor, Brondum-Nielsen had to build from the ground up and undertook the irksome and time-consuming task of excerpting a vast number of older texts for suitable examples of linguistic changes. In matters of form, content, and presentation BrandumNielsen was deeply indebted to Nils Hänninger's Fornskänsk ljudutveckling (1917), a survey of the phonology of skänsk as revealed in Codex Runicus and AM 28, 8°, as well as Axel Kock's Svensk ljudhistoria 1-5 (1906-29). Glda.Gr. does not emphasize the development of the standard language during the course of the Middle Ages, but

DANISH

23

rather the development of regional variants as they occur in the manuscripts, so that it is in effect a dialectological survey of ODa with excursory allusions to the modern dialects. Although commendable for its thoroughness and solid critical commentary, Glda.Gr. is often bewildering with its profusion of detail and general lack of Übersichtlichkeit. For example, though a catalogue of the excerpted texts with dates and proveniences is given in Volume One, textual references are strongly abbreviated throughout and one is often in doubt as to the precise chronology of a change in a certain area. Despite such minor flaws, Glda.Gr. stands as one of the most impressive pieces of Sc historical linguistic scholarship in the traditional vein. Brandum-Nielsen is ever eager to put forth his own views on contested points and effuses a wealth of indispensable knowledge, but his work bears the imprint of an era of historical linguistics now past. He has received a great deal of criticism for his refusal to incorporate new methods into his work. However, rather than invoke novel theories, he wished his handbook to be founded on the solid groundwork of neogrammarian principles. In contrast to Brandum-Nielsen's grammar, Marius Kristensen's Folkemaal og sproghistorie (1933) is an undogmatic and unsystematic attempt to elucidate historical problems via comparisons with the modern dialects. The insights Kristensen offers are often brilliant, novel, and ultimately convincing. Though a pre-structuralist, his interpretations often have a structuralist flavor, such as his explanation of the dialectal reflexes of «-umlaut and his justified criticism of Kock's, Noreen's, and BrandumNielsen's contradictory use of labial consonants to explain both labialization and delabialization. Whereas Brondum-Nielsen exercised a stringent adherence to older methods and the exclusive use of older textual material, Peter Skautrup's all-encompassing, Det danske sprogs historie (1944, 1947, 1953, 1968), of which four volumes have appeared to date, places language evolution squarely in the midst of history, geography, and social change. Det danske sprogs historie is a many-faceted recapitulation of Da language development: the spoken and written language, the standard language and the dialects, rhetoric and poetics. For Skautrup the evolution of a language mirrors the evolution of a people, poet as well as peasant. The first volume treats Runic Da (c. 800-1100) and Early Middle Da (c. 1100-1350), and Skautrup assumes that by the time a change was first recorded, it must already have been carried out. Consequently, he concludes that the changes which set Da apart from the other Sc languages, such as the voicing of medial and final p, t, k, must have been completed by c. 1200, much earlier than was previously assumed. Skautrup makes a distinction between sound shifts and 'genuine' sound changes, which affect the whole complexion of the language. He designates the Old Danish accent shift as the prime mover behind such typically Da changes as vowel lengthening in open syllables, voicing of stops, lengthening of consonants and the development of the glottal stop in Jutland, northern and central Funen, and the greater portion of Zealand. Skautrup asserts that the accent shift furthered syncope and that these changes arose to counterbalance its effect. Skautrup's relegation of these typically Da changes to a common cause may be a

24

DANISH

nimium probare, but plausibility can be conferred upon it if all the changes it effects can be shown to have been carried out in one and the same area. As counterevidence Lis Jacobsen (1944) and Kristian Haid (1949) have pointed out that the weakening of unstressed vowels has its expansion center in Jutland, while the center for the voicing of consonants is found in the island dialects. The Norwegian scholar, D. A. Seip, had deliberated upon these problems in his "Om overgangen p, t, k > b, d, g i dansk" (1918) in which he also sought to explain voicing, as well as the origin of the glottal stop and vowel lengthening, as effects of the Da accent shift. In contrast to Seip, however, Skautrup's points of departure are intersyllabic stress patterns and juncture phenomena. In terms of explanatory adequacy Skautrup's theory goes a long way toward clarifying and uniting otherwise disparate changes, but until we know more about the phonetic quality of stress and juncture in Da and Germanic, his hypothesis remains purely speculative. Then, too, the traditional explanation that apocope (Proto-Germanic and ODa) was due to the fixation of stress on the initial syllable leaves a lot of residual forms unaccounted for and does not explain the rise of oxytone in the later dialects. The first volume of Aage Hansen's projected series, Den lydlige udvikling i dansk fra ca. 1300 til nutiden, appeared in 1962. As opposed to Brendum-Nielsen's Glda. Gr., Hansen had set for himself the task of describing the development of standard Da, which has its roots in Zealandic. He treats phonological changes which have taken place in ODa and early modern Da by an exclusive use of East Da texts composed after c. 1400. Although he had originally planned to include a survey of dialects in which changes took place that have not been incorporated into the standard language, this project was subsequently abandoned, and he has concentrated on providing information about Da in the sixteenth and following centuries. Hansen's work sometimes suffers from an uncritical acceptance of the literal representations in older texts, and he does not always appear to be familiar with variant readings, manuscript traditions, scribal practices, etc. Consequently, some of the phonological information he presents is misleading, and he often fails to account for residual forms and analogical reformation. In contrast to Skautrup, Hansen regards the earliest, infrequent instances of innovations as variants which do not reflect a completed change. This procedure, as in the case of ä > ä, can lead to inordinately late dating. Although a (o, aa) first regularly appears in writing in the fourteenth century and then only after w, Wigforss (1913-18:668-9) has convincingly shown that ä > ä in Skäne c. 1250, or possibly even earlier. Hansen includes an extensive account of weakly stressed vowels, a subject he had treated earlier in "Om kvantitetsudviklingen i dansk rigstalesprog" (1931), and concludes that there was a general tendency toward lengthening in both open and closed stressed syllables. He refers to Wigforss' early dating of vowel lengthening in texts from Skäne and generalizes that the whole of the Da speaking area must have been characterized by this tendency. While such an interpretation is open to doubt, Hansen does succeed in effectively demonstrating that the tendency was impeded by certain consonants.

DANISH

25

In the introduction to his edition of fragments of ODa religious texts Paul Diderichsen (Diderichsen and Nielsen 1931-37) suggests a modification of Lis Jacobsen's views on the development of the standard language in a 1910 monograph. He asserts that conservative texts do not present features which permit definite dialect localization, but merely orthographic deviations which do not reflect phonemic change. Diderichsen's well-founded statement implies that we must modify the view generally held by Scandinavian philologists that there was a distinct opposition between the traditional, conservative, hypercorrect Kanzleisprache on the one hand and the spoken, dialectally flavored literary language on the other hand, i.e. an opposition between a written norm which did not reflect pronunciation and an innovational 'written' spoken language. Diderichsen's rule of thumb is borne out by D. A. Seip's suggestion in "Et h0yere talemäl i middelalderen" (1934) that there must have been a reading pronunciation during the Middle Ages which sought to phonetically reproduce the conservative written norm. Therefore, archaic forms in conservative texts may, though infrequently, have affected the development of the standard language, and Skautrup has wisely taken this factor into consideration in Det danske sprogs historie. Even regional variants of 'normative Danish' may have influenced the course of development of the standard language during the post-Reformation period. Marius Kristensen (1935) has investigated the characteristics of Odense speech as revealed in Niels van Hauen's Et lidet orthographisk lexicon (1741). Then, too, the grammar of one of Denmark's most remarkable early linguists, Jens Pedersen Hoysgaard, has received detailed attention by Da scholars. Hoysgaard was greatly indebted to the so-called Port-Royal grammar, C. Lancelot and A. Arnaud's Grammaire generale et raisonnee (1650), currently brought back into vogue by Noam Chomsky. Haysgaard's Accentuered og Raisonnered Grammatica (1747) is an excellent source of information about the language of his time, and his presentation of the peculiarities of accent and quantity is outstanding. Marius Kristensen (1929) has clarified certain aspects of Hoysgaard's accent system on the basis of comparison with similar phenomena in the Arhus area of Jutland, and Brondum-Nielsen (1918) has reconstructed his rules for indicating stress and accent. As tools for the investigation of ODa mention should here be made of Marius Kristensen's Fremmedordene i det xldste danske skriftsprog for omtrent 1300 (1906). As a supplement to Kristensen's work, Ida Marquardsen (1908) has given a list of the earliest occurrences of Middle Low German loans in Da in the fifteenth century. Otto Kalkar undertook the task of producing a dictionary of ODa (1300-1700), and his Ordbog til det seldre danske sprog 1-5 (1881-1918) is the standard lexicon for the student of the earlier stages of the language.

1.7 Philology Since the turn of the century Da scholars have been concerned with providing defini-

26

DANISH

tive editions of older texts, and their work in this area has been extensive indeed. From Samfund til Udgivelse af gammel nordisk Litter atur there have appeared: Manager Legende Haandskrift, ed. by Gunnar Knudsen (1917-30); En Klosterbog fra Middelalderens Slutning, ed. by Marius Kristensen (1928-33); Valdemars Jordebog, ed. by Svend Aakjser (1926-45). From Universitets-Jubilxets danske Samfund particular mention should be made of: Harpestrseng, ed. by Marius Kristensen (1908-20); De gamle danske Dyrerim, ed. by Johannes Brondum-Nielsen (1908-09); Sydrak, ed. by Gunnar Knudsen (1921-32); Kvinders Rosengaard, ed. by Holger M. Nielsen (1930— 40); Sjselens Trost, ed. by Niels Nielsen (1937-52); Den danske Rimkronike, ed. by Helge Toldberg (1958-); Karl Magnus' Kronike, ed. by Poul Lindegärd Hjorth (1960). The important sixteenth century text, Peder Palladius's Danske Skrifter Vols. 1-5, has been edited by Lis Jacobsen (1911-26). Det danske Sprog- og Litteratur-Selskab has provided large editions of medieval texts: Danmarks gamle Landskabslove Vols. 1-8, ed. by Johannes Br0ndum-Nielsen, Erik Kroman, Peter Skautrup et al. (1920-61); Middelalderens danske Bonnebeger, ed. by Karl Martin Nielsen, of which four volumes have appeared (1945-63); Danmarks gamle Kobstadlovgivning Vols. 1-4, ed. by Erik Kroman (1951-61); and the following texts from the sixteenth century: Danske Viser 1-6, ed. by Η. Grüner-Nielsen (1912-31); Hans Mogensens Oversxttelse af Philippe de Commines Memoirer Vols. 1-3, ed. by Poul N0rlund (1913-19); En Rzffue Bog Vols. 1-2, ed. by Niels M0ller (1914-23); Skrifter af Paulus Helie Vols. 1-7, ed. by P. Severinsen, Marius Kristensen, and Niels Knud Andersen (1932-48). Peter Skautrup has edited Den jyske Lov. Text med overssettelse, kommentar og ordbog (1933-41) for Jysk Selskab for Historie, Sprog og Litteratur. Facsimile editions of legal manuscripts have appeared in the series, Corpus Codicum Danicorum (I960-.), and diplomatic texts have appeared in three series of Diplomatarium Danicum (1:1957-, 2:1938-, 3:1958-). The language of medieval legal texts and provincial laws has been treated by Brendum-Nielsen in "Danske lovhandskrifter og danske lovsprog i den aeldre middelalder" (1917), by Paul V. Rubow in L'antique style danois au moyen-äge (1927b). Of particular note are: Peter Skautrup's Sproget i Jyske Lov(1942),Anders Bjerrum's "Verbal number in the Jutlandic law"(1949) and "Utaen han aer opaenbarlic gen guth" (1952), and Johannes Lollesgaard's Syntaktiske Studier over det xldste danske Skriftsprog (1920). The language and sources of Christian the Ill's Bible have been investigated by Bertil Moide in Källorna till Christian III.s bibel 1550 (1949). As in the case of their Swedish colleagues, it may justifiably be claimed that the dialects have been one of the major sources of inspiration for Da philologists. At any rate, an overwhelming emphasis has been placed upon the localization of texts on the basis of comparison of their linguistic features, mainly phonological, with corresponding features in dialect speech. By employing this method Verner Dahlerup (1923) ascertained that the author of Eriks Lov was from Northeastern Zealand. On a more cautious note, Peter Skautrup (1924) described the language in AM 286 fol. of the Jutlandic Law in relationship to modern Jutlandic and, with references to medieval

DANISH

27

place-name material, showed that isogloss barriers have shifted in the course of time. Despite such shifts, he was able to localize the first portion of this text to Ribe and the second portion to the area around Vonsbaek on the Haderslev Fjord. In contrast to these examples of the exclusive use of dialectal features in precisely defining the provenience of texts, Brandum-Nielsen has employed a more eclectic approach in which he not only makes comparisons with dialects, but also with other contemporaneously localized texts, such as the provincial laws. Applying this approach in Skriververset i Kölner Dombibliotheks Codex CXXX (1929) he was able to determine that this text represents Zealandic from c. 1250 and not Old Swedish. Having made a detailed investigation of the methodology and results of dialectology in Dialekter og Dialektforskning (1927a), Br0ndum-Nielsen concluded that localization could not proceed from a comparison with contemporary dialectal features alone. By suggesting that a more eclectic approach be taken in determining the provenience of texts, Br0ndum-Nielsen accomplished for Da philology what Beckman (cf. Swedish 1917) had done earlier for Swedish philologists. As important examples of the results of Brendum-Nielsen's investigations, mention should be made of his (and Rohmann's) study of Mariaklagen (1929), which was shown to be from Skäne, c. 1325 with Jutlandic influence, Siselz Trost (1934), which is from Skäne, c. 1425, Digt om Christi Opstandelse (1955), which is from Skäne, c. 1325, Den skänske Postil fra Bekkaskogh (1959), which is from Northern Skäne, c. 1450. Brendum-Nielsen's localizations have contributed to our knowledge of the dialects by showing us how dialect isoglosses have shifted. For example, concerning the transition of ogh to öw, öj, BrendumNielsen asserts that ögh>öw in Southern and Central Zealand and öj in North Zealand and Skäne. This change resulted in hypercorrection in Skäne, where forms with of, yf > öw were replaced by öj, as soynehuss for sofnehuss. Another study in which the shift of isogloss barriers is investigated is Skautrup's "Jacob Madsens dansk" (1931) in which he comments on the svarabhakti vowel, u, before gh. Of particular importance is Brendum-Nielsen's classic paper on vowel harmony and vowel quantity in MS Β 47 of the law of Skäne (1927b), and Svend Aakjaer's introduction (1943) to his edition of King Valdemar's Jordebog (1926-45), as well as Erik Kroman's book on the same text (1936) in which he attempts to date sections of these cadastral rolls. Kroman (1943) has also written the Da section for the Nordisk Kultur volumes on paleography, the best introduction to Da paleography to date. In this contribution Kroman shows that the Zealandic domestic apothecary (AM 187, 8°) is not, as was previously thought, from the second half of the fourteenth century, but rather from the first half of the fifteenth. However, this interpretation is open to question, for this text shows many archaic features, such as a unique run-on of Latin and ODa and a consistent lack of oarly Middle Low German loans, such as blive, which are found in contemporaneous texts. The first detailed orthographic description of a Da text is Paul Diderichsen's (1937) treatment of religious fragments. Although his results are not entirely satisfactory, he was able te show that some of the texts stemmed from a prototype with an older

28

DANISH

orthographic norm. While the results and methods of dialectology were a major source of inspiration for Dahlerup, Kristensen, Skautrup, and Brondum-Nielsen, structural linguistics and graphemic theory inspired Paul Diderichsen, Anders Bjerrum, and John KousgardS0rensen. At times when one surveys the history of linguistics it must be conceded that our science might have advanced more rapidly if we had all been forced to learn Da, or at least to familiarize ourselves with the achievements of Da linguistics. Such is clearly the case when we consider progress in graphemic analysis. For example, in the research history in his A graphemic-phonemic study of a Middle-English manuscript (1963) John McLaughlin fails to note the important strides taken by Da linguists in this field. Paul Diderichsen was the first to attempt a graphemic analysis of an ODa text in his pioneering article, "Probleme der altdänischen Orthographie" (1938), written in German to overcome the communication barrier we have just mentioned. As the necessary postulates for graphemic analysis, Diderichsen states that we must assume that the alphabet or writing system in question was phonemic and that the principal criteria the scribes used to determine the spelling of each form were the distinctions they made. He suggests that a series of analyses of individual texts must be undertaken to show which variants represent the norm and which are dialectically distinctive. Kristian Haid (1952) has applied the principles of internal reconstruction and made a graphemic analysis of Knut the Holy's Gavebrev (c. 1085). In a historical phonological excursus to this work, Haid asserts that gh >j which effected /-umlaut in Skäne. From this he concludes that the weakening of aspirates must have taken place before voicing of p, t, k. Haid (1960) has found a confirmation of this assertion in Zealandic diplomatic texts from the thirteenth century, for here too gh has either disappeared or become a palatal glide, and he could thereby date distinctive phonological changes in Zealandic to the thirteenth century, a century later than Skautrup's terminus post quern. Ella Jensen (1949) has attempted to describe the language which forms the basis of the speech represented in Flensborg Stadsret (c. 1300) on the basis of comparison with West Scandinavian and Jutlandic dialect material. To determine the vowel inventory she applies a series of commutation tests and concludes that e and se were separate phonemes and that a and aa are allographs of ä. Anders Bjerrum's Grammatik over Skänske Lov efter Β 74 (1954b) is the most complete structural description of an ODa text to date. In this study he reacts against Brondum-Nielsen's view that legal language represents literary language with forms from the spoken language. His conclusion is based on a comparison of non-contrastive long components such as mxth sic and mseth sx. Anders Bjerrum (1960) has also made a complete graphemic analysis of Valdemars Jordebog, Valdemars Lov, and Eriks Lov, all of which are ascribed to Johannes Jutae. Having described Juts's orthography, Bjerrum is able to show that the language is a blend of old and new. He compares the two law texts with MS C39 and concludes that there are not, as was previously assumed, Jutlandic features in AM 455,12°. By applying a graphemic

DANISH

29

analysis Bjerrum was able to uncover the underlying phonemic shapes of forms and thereby indicate which represent the scribe's norm and which are due to later interpolations. This is surely one of the outstanding examples of the successful application of modern descriptive techniques to philological problems and effectively demonstrates the many advantages of this approach over more traditional philological methods. Serensen (1960) has subjected Roskildebispens jordebog to graphemic analysis and thereby attempted to uncover the ODa phoneme system as it is represented in texts from c. 1300. 1.8 Dialectology The modern era of Da dialectological research dates from the founding of Udvalg for Folkemaal in Copenhagen in 1908, and the establishment of an archive for that commission in 1922. In 1960 Udvalgfor Folkemaal was renamed Institut for dansk Dialektforskning (= IDD) and is now under the direction of Poul Andersen. In 1927 Udvalg for Folkemaal began the publication of Danske Folkemaal, the major journal for Da dialectological studies, and in 1964 IDD instigated a new series entitled Dialektstudier, of which two numbers (1964-65,1967) have appeared to date. In conjunction with the establishment of a university at Arhus, a second center for dialect research, Institut for jysk Sprog og Kulturforskning ( = IJSK), was founded in Arhus in 1932 with Professor Peter Skautrup as director. IJSK, currently under the direction of Kristian Ringgaard, also has its own journal of dialect studies, Sprog og Kultur, which began publication in 1932. A distinctive feature of modern Da dialectology has been its association, or, as their Swedish colleagues might prefer to say, complicity with Hjelmslevian linguistics, and the glossematic approach has frequently been used in the description of dialectal phonology. In addition, the traditional historical format with sets of equivalence classes (standard language χ = dialectal y) has also been used in phonological descriptions. Suitable examples of works which employ the latter approach are Jens Lund's Morsingmälets lyd- og formiere (1932-38) and Ole Widding's phonological sketch in Balthasar Christensen and his Lollandsk Grammatik-Radstedmaalet (1936). The same method is also applied in Peter Langfeldt's Die Mundart des Sundewitt (1936), which has been sharply criticized by Ella Jensen (1940). Further examples are H.M. Jensen's Brenderup-mälet (1919, 1926) and Holger Sandvad's Stauningmälet (1931). Among the earliest works in which Prague School and Hjelmslevian techniques were applied to dialect phonology were Anders Bjerrum's doctoral dissertation, "Fjoldemälets lydsystem" (1944a), and his earlier article, "Über die phonematische Wertung von Mundartaufzeichnungen" (1940). Bjerrum's major objective in Fjoldemälet was to provide a phonemicization which would expose the distinctive segmental interrelations in a dialect and offer a basis for further work in historical phonology and dialect geography. Here it should be noted that Fjolde (German Viöl) is a dialect area about 30 miles south of the present Danish-German border, and there are no longer

30

DANISH

any living informants. Bjerrum had painstakingly collected his material from informants in 1935, and his questionnaire was drawn up in the form of commutation tests, so that he could more readily extricate a phonemic inventory from this phonetic data. At the outset he had sought to contest Hjelmslev's insistence on the uniqueness and absolute objectivity of a phonemic analysis, but Bjerrum concluded that this actually could be achieved. He then argued that the discrete segments resulting from a phonemic analysis more nearly reflect phonological reality than the subjective phonetic transcriptions of the traditionalists. The nature of his method necessitated a maximum of cooperation from his informants, which may have colored his data. One should note that his material differs markedly from that of earlier investigators in the area. Approximately at the same time as Bjerrum's Fjoldemälet, Ella Jensen's Houlbjergmälet (1944) appeared. Like Bjerrum's work, Houlbjergmälet is a phonemicization, and this work became a model for subsequent monographs such as Karen Marie Olsen's Synchronisk Beskrivelse af Aabenraa Bymaal (1949), Inger Ejskjaer's Brondummdlet (1954), as well as Ella Jensen's own Nordsatnsisk (1959). Ella Jensen's Houlbjergmälet has but one objective: the presentation of the phonemic relations of a single dialect as they are deduced from commutation tests and the reduction of the phonetic stock to a phonemic notation. The material is presented in terms of environments and the raw data is filed at IDD in the same manner. The notation is in the form of a simplification of the Da dialect alphabet. The most stringent structural description of a Da dialect is B0rge Andersen's Ronnemdlet (1959), but his work is so infused with glossematic terminology that it presents difficulties for one unfamiliar with Hjelmslevian linguistics. Andersen has made an ultimate reduction of the data so that, for example, long vowels appear as geminates (ee, 00, etc.). Another outstanding example of a structural description is Poul Andersen's doctoral dissertation (1958), which describes the distinctive phonological features of dialects on Funen and is accompanied by a valuable set of maps. Although these structural descriptions mark a high point of technical proficiency and theoretical advancement, some serious objections may be raised to this approach. Da structural dialectologists have encountered criticism from their Swedish colleagues in Lund. For example, Sven Benson (1956) has questioned the practicality of phonemic analysis which takes a whole volume to do what the good old-fashioned traditionalist could do in a few pages, namely, expose the phonological system of a dialect; and he suggests that a combined phonetic-phonemic approach may have its merits. Suprasegmental features have been subjected to a phonetic, phonemic, and historical analysis by Marie Bjerrum in her description of an East Schleswig dialect, Felstedmälets tonale Accenter (1948), in which she sets up two distinctive 'word' accents. There are, of course, traces of musical accent throughout Southern Jutland and Funen, areas which lack the glottal stop, but there appears to be an essential difference in accent between Jutlandic and Island Da. In Island Da each word, whether compounded or not, receives a single unit of stress, while in Jutlandic, compounds receive

DANISH

31

two stress units. Erik Kroman (1947) has made a general investigation of musical accent in Da. In his study of the dialect of JE ro he convincingly demonstrates that there are two distinctive tones in this dialect. Kroman asserts that this feature represents an innovation, but, according to Anders Bjerrum (1948), it is more likely that both JEro and Langeland represent a relict area with respect to tonal accent. Kroman's presentation of two typical Zealandic accent features, glottal catch after short vowel in certain bisyllabic words and tone crest on the second weak syllable of bisyllabic words, does not seem to reflect the actual geographical distribution of these features. One of the most distinctive phonetic features of Da is the glottal catch and, though its geographical distribution in the dialects (it is not found in Southern Jutland, Southern Funen, JEw, Langeland, Falster, M0n, Lolland, Bornholm, and the southern tip of Zealand) has received detailed attention by dialectologists, it is primarily a phonetic problem and is reviewed under section 1.2. In the area of dialect morphology a number of outstanding works have appeared in recent years. Particularly worthy of mention are the following: Marius Kristensen (1942), Poul Lindegard Hjorth (1958), Ella Jensen (1956), L. Gotfredsen (1955), Hans Jorgensen (1950), Balthasar Christensen and OleWidding (1936), Peder Andersen (1957), and Gudmund Schütte (1939). Descriptions of particular morphological problems and syntax appear in H.P. Sonne (1935), Aage Rohmann (1935), Kr. Moller (1949), Chr. Moller (1943), Niels Haislund (1934), Anders Bjerrum (1930), Age Fjalland (1931), and Inger Ejskjasr (1963). One of the most hotly debated problems in Da dialect morphology is the definite article: whether it was originally placed before or after the noun. This isogloss, the most famous isogloss in Denmark and one of the most frequently discussed in Sc dialectology and historical linguistics, cuts down the center of Jutland (p. 1481). This problem straddles historical linguistics and dialectology, but it seems that the ultimate solution as to the origins of usage will eventually result from a detailed investigation of the dialects. It has still not been resolved whether the preceding article was thxn or inn. Aage Hansen (1927) and Peter Skautrup (1952) have argued in favor of thxn, while Kristen Moller (1945) argues for inn. There is also decided disagreement about the article's age and genitive form. Kristen Moller reasons that an enclitic article was once found in Western and Southern Jutland which was then superseded by a proclitic. Peter Skautrup maintains that the dialect form se must have evolved from thxn and not from an konungh Erik) and Middle Low German influence (bleff dopr > bleff dodh, cf. MLG blev dot). Surprisingly enough, he minimizes Middle Low German influence, only to suggest that forms without -er spread from the cloister and the court, both of which were greatly influenced by Middle Low German. Nevertheless, his hypothesis seems correct. In a monograph which is perhaps more dialectological than diachronic Ivar Modier (1946) has discussed the two hypotheses most commonly advanced to account for the origin of the strong feminine definite article in words like boka < boken. These are the analogy theory and the sound change theory. The analogy theory states that -a was introduced from the weak feminines like kyrka, while the sound change theory contends that -en regularly became -a in weakly stressed position. Mod6er attempts to show that the former theory is necessarily correct. If, he argues, -en > -a, then

SWEDISH

49

one would naturally expect to find traces of nasalized final vowels in the areas between these two forms. However, though we do find nasal vowels in peripheral areas such as Dalecarlian, nasality could have been lost in the intermediate area. As the isogloss for forms in -a coincides with that for kyrka, this suggests that the analogy theory is empirically motivated. However, nothing speaks against assuming that -en > -a in the same area as we find kyrka. As the quality of -a in both boka and kyrka is everywhere the same, Modeer maintains that this proves that the analogy theory is to be preferred to the sound change theory. However, the -a allophone from -en could have been aligned with the prevalent /a/ in the dialect, i.e. with /a/ in kyrka. Thus, though Modier often shows penetrating insights, he has not convincingly demonstrated that the analogy theory is to be preferred to the sound change theory. In his doctoral dissertation, Om s-passivum i svenskan (1952), Gösta Holm has investigated a problem that had been reviewed previously by Paul öhlin in Studier över de passiva konstruktionerna ifornsvenskan (1918), namely, the development of the s-passive in Sw. Roughly half of Holm's book decidedly the weakest portion, is devoted to a discussion of the .s-passive in the dialects, while in the remaining half he treats the s-passive in OSw. öhlin had earlier concluded that the .s-passive in OSw was originally restricted to a few verbs and that it owed its later expansion to influence from the Latin r-passive via OSw translations of Latin texts. After a comparative survey of Latin and OSw texts Holm reaches essentially the same conclusion. A real deficiency in Holm's book is his needless proliferation of semantic-syntactic categories. To date the most thorough examination of the syntactic and stylistic properties of the OSw provincial laws is C. I. Stähle's Syntaktiska och stilistiska studier i fornnordiska lagspräk (1958), which builds on H. de Boor's classic Studien zur altschwedischen Syntax in den ältesten Gesetztexten und Urkunden (1922). The most important sentence type in the laws is the conditional interrogative (Draper mapxr prel manss, 'If a man should kill a man's serf,...'), and it is an old question how this construction is to be interpreted. Stähle reacts against de Boor's earlier view and asserts that it was derived by inversion of an original narrative sentence, but this does not explain its historical origin. In West Sc legal prose this construction is regularly represented by a clause introduced by i f . Stähle contends that (/"-clauses in West Sc are a secondary development due to influence from Old English, but he does not engage himself in a detailed investigation of this topic. Stähle's work could have profited from the inclusion of a comparative analysis of the language of Old Danish and Old Norwegian legal texts to isolate specifically OSw features. Further studies which deserve special mention here are: E. Olson, De appellativa substantivens bildning ifornsvenskan (1916), W. Akerlund, Studier över adjektiv- och adverbbildningen medelst suffixen -liker och -lika i fornsvenskan (1929) and Fornnordiska ordföljdsprinciper (1935), I. Lundahl, "Studier över bruket av pluralis hos substantiv i fornvästnordiskan och fornsvenskan" (1940), Valter Jansson, "Palataliserade dentaler i nordiska spräk" (1944), Walter Akerlund, Om det finita verbets plats i den fornsvenska bisatsen (1943), G. Lindblad, "Relativ satsfogning i värt äldsta bibel-

50

SWEDISH

arbete' (1956), Bengt Loman, Fornsvenska Verbalsubstantiv pä -an, -ning och -else (1961b). Recently, Markey has attempted to give a complete description of the verbs varda (= werden) and bliva (= bleiben) in his doctoral dissertation, The verbs varda and bliva in Scandinavian (1969). The author has described the distribution of these verbs in the various Sc dialects, has attempted to determine the ultimate source language of bliva and to show when, why and how bliva began to replace native Sc varda. From the works surveyed above, which represent the weightier contributions to historical linguistics during the past half century, we can see that Sw scholars have operated well within the confines of traditional methods and that their efforts have sometimes suffered from a lack of the clarity that is often conferred by the application of more modern methods. Nevertheless, they offered many penetrating insights into the history of the language. Several of these studies straddle the fields of historical linguistics and dialectology, so that we have included many works on historical phonology under the heading of dialectology.

2.7

Philology

Sweden, contrary to Denmark and Norway, possesses an extensive and varied corpus of texts from the period 1350-1550, though their ultimate literary worth is sometimes negligible. This extensive corpus is presumably due to the inordinate amount of translation work carried out at cloisters such as Vadstena and Askaby and the Vadstena sister foundation at Nädendal outside Abo in Finland. In addition to translations of Latin hagiographic texts, we have translations from Middle Low German texts such as Namenlos och Valentin, as well as native productions such as Erikskrönikan, a vast corpus of diplomas, the provincial laws, and voluminous tänkeböcker 'court records', from the principal cities, such as Kalmar, Stockholm, and Arboga. In view of this comparatively enormous body of medieval texts it is but small wonder that Sw scholars have flooded Sc philology with a steady stream of articles, monographs, and dissertations. Then, too, definitive editions of many of these texts with commentaries and variora have been provided by Svenska fornskriftsällskapet, which has published nearly a hundred volumes since it was founded a century and a quarter ago. Sw diplomatic texts have continued to appear since 1829, but the material from 1365-1400 has yet to appear, though it is available in photostatic copies at the university libraries. Facsimiles of texts have appeared in the series Corpus codicum suecicorum medii sevi (1943-). Natanael Beckman's Studier i outgivna fornsvenska texter (1917) marks the transition from the older to the modern period of philological research in Sweden. As Studier is surely one of the outstanding introductions to the study of OSw texts, it is worthy of more than cursory mention. Beckman casts a gimlet eye upon the various methods used to date and localize medieval texts. In his discussion of the determina-

SWEDISH

51

tion of provenience on the basis of dialectal features, he takes up Hesselman's view that the contemporary location of isoglosses can be used to localize texts. Beckman points out that the present location of the ///e isogloss is in the immediate vicinity of Vadstena Cloister, one of the principal sources of OSw MSS, and its use in localization is therefore somewhat suspect. Beckman further points out that, when localizing texts on linguistic grounds, one must make a careful three-way distinction between: 1) the dialect spoken by the translator or scribe in his home province, 2) the dialect reflected in the translator's or scribe's source, and 3) the dialect spoken in the area in which he worked. Beckman points out that there are two chief methods for the linguistic localization of texts and that these methods are represented by two groups of Sw philologists. These methods and groups are: 1) the comparison of one MS with other related MSS (Axel Kock and Emil Olson) and 2) the comparison of forms in MSS with forms in the modern dialects (Hesselman). The application of Hesselman's method proceeds by a successive narrowing of the range of dialectal possibilities. Thus, given a text A with dialectal features P-l ... P-5 and a text Β with features P-l ... P-4, we conclude that the provenience of A is the area in which we find P-5 and that A and Β do not have the same provenience. The major objection to Hesselman's dialectological approach is that the present-day location of an isogloss barrier may in no way reflect its location in the Middle Ages. Having raised this objection, Beckman weighs the relative merits of Kock's vs. Hesselman's approach. Dialectal features necessarily play a subordinate role for Kock and his disciples. For example, though Emil Olson does give a list of östgötsk dialectal features in Östgötalagens 1300-tals fragment (1911), Beckman shows that Olson misunderstood and consequently misinterpreted the dialect data he presents. If Olson and Kock were all too eager to pass over dialect material, Hesselman and his followers were all too eager to permit dialect material to play the dominant role. Thus in Studier Beckman surveys and summarizes the course of earlier philological investigation in Sweden and criticizes some aspects of the approaches applied by Sw philologists in what is still the best introduction to the study of older Sc texts. Succeeding years saw further developments in the use of dialect material in the determination of MS provenience. Earlier, Hesselman (1905,1906) had shown that the location of the e//ä isogloss for the vocalism of the preterite singular of grata and lata could be used as a means for localizing texts. After Gösta Bergman (1921) investigated the development of Common Sc e in Sw, this isogloss was further shown to be a serviceable guide for localization. In his investigation of vowel balance in OSw texts, Vtbrediting av vokalbalansen a:d in medelsvenskan (1918), Erik Neuman showed that this feature had a greater geographical distribution in the Middle Ages than at present and that it could be used for determining localization. His study formed the basis for later studies of this phenomenon in the dialects (Geijer 1921, Bergfors 1961). Although the Hesselman branch of textual studies was advanced by studies such as these, Beckman's views were subsequently vindicated and many of his suggestions received scholarly attention.

52

SWEDISH

Though the oldest Sw documents are written in Latin, Sw glosses and place names abound, and Stig Olsson Nordberg has given a survey of this material in Fornsvenskan i vära latinska originaldiplom före 1300 (1926, 1932). Rolf Pipping (1919, 1926) has made detailed studies of Erikskrönikan (c. 1350), the provenience of which is uncertain, though Uppland is a possibility. In Kommentar till Erikskrönikan (1926) Rolf Pipping has provided one of the most complete commentaries of an OSw text that we have. Erik Neuman (1927,1931) has investigated Karlskrönikan. Although the chronicles have been described periodically, it is the provincial laws which have received continuous attention by Sw philologists. Sam Henning (1932) has given a survey of the MSS of Upplandslagen. Västgötalagen occupies a central place among OSw legal texts. It was probably composed c. 1220, and two pages have been preserved of a MS from 1225-1250, the oldest of all OSw MSS. The law is almost completely preserved in Cod. Holm. Β 59. Hugo Pipping (1913, 1915) has written on the vocabulary of this law, and Johan Götlind (1919-21) has investigated its localization. This problem was later taken up by Torsten Wennström (1931), who had written his doctoral dissertation (1925) on vowel variation in Västgötalagen. Ivar Lindquist (1941) has written about variant readings in Äldre Västgötalagen. The OSw paraphrase of the Pentateuch and the so-called Fornsvenska legendariet, both from c. 1350, form the basis for subsequent OSw religious prose. Bengt Hesselman (1927) has studied the Pentateuch paraphrase and thereby shown the relationship between the paraphrase and Äldre Västgötalagen, as well as reaffirmed Hultman's earlier view of α-umlaut of u in Västgötalagen. Olof Thorell (1951) has reinvestigated the paraphrase in a critical edition. Fornsvenska legendariet is the earliest religious text in OSw that has come down to us. It was probably composed between c. 1276 and 1307, and much of Legendariet's contents are found in Voragine's Legenda Aurea, while smaller portions were taken from Martinus oppaviensis krönika and, possibly, from Sächsischer Weltchronik(c. 1237-1250). Valter Jansson (1934) has made a detailed study of the manuscripts of Fornsvenska legendariet, their provenience, language, and date. This text is contained in four codices: Bureanus (c. 1350), Bildstenianus (c. 1400), Passionarius and Cod. Holm. A 124 (frag.). Jansson's findings cannot be regarded as altogether new, for his analysis of Bureanus was preceded by Ottelin's (1900-04) extensive commentary on this text. Jansson concludes that Bureanus is östgötsk and that Bildstenianus is a later uppsvensk copy of an östgötsk original. The Eufemiavisor are OSw reworkings of three continental poems: Chretien de Troyes' Yvain and Floire et Blanceflor and Herzog Friederich von der Normandie. The Eufemiavisor represent the earliest OSw secular verse and all are preserved in Cod. Holm. D4 from c. 1420-1445. According to the texts themselves, Herr Iwan was composed in 1303, Hertig Fredrik in 1308, and Flores och Blanzeflor in 1311-1312. The sources, dates, provenience, and authorship of these poems have long been matters of controversy among Sw philologists. E. Noreen has discussed these matters in Studier rörande Eufemiavisorna vols. 1-3 (1923-29), and Stanislaw Sawicki (1939) has

SWEDISH

53

made a detailed study of their style. Valter Jansson (1945) has provided the most definitive commentary on these texts to date. He concludes that they were composed by one and the same author, that they have a southwest Sw provenience, and that the composition dates as given in the MS are reliable. Jansson's study also contains a fine example of Quellenkritik: a review of the affinities between the Eufemiavisor and continental courtly literature, their metrics, and the loanwords they contain. However, his work could have profited from a more detailed comparison with the Middle Dutch Flor is ende Blanceflor (c. 1250), which may have been used by D 4's scribe, though certainly not by the author. The longest piece of Middle Low German religious prose translated into OSw is Siselinna threst, which follows the fc-stemma MSS of the Middle Low German Seelentrost (c. 1350) very closely. Ivar Thoren has studied this text in his doctoral dissertation, Studier över Själens tröst (1942). Thoren also investigates Barlaam och Josaphat and attempts to show that both texts were composed by a certain Olaus Gunnari, who was from Uppland and who wrote under the influence of the language then currently used at Yadstena. Sam Henning (1954) has not only written on the Middle Low German loanwords in Siselinna threst, but he has also produced (1960) the most detailed attempt to localize this text. He opposed Thoren's view and attempted to show that Barlaam's translator was the Vadstena brother, Johannes Hildebrandi. Henning concludes that Siselinna throst dates from c. 1438-1442 and that it was probably composed at Vadstena by a scribe who was conceivably of Fenno-Sw origin, but his identity remains unknown. Nevertheless, Barlaam's translator surely knew and used Seelentrost, as well as Vincent de Beauvais's Speculum historiale. As the OSw translations of the Bible (New Testament 1526, Gustav Vasa's Bible 1541) were definitive in shaping the course of development of the standard language, which was constructed around the dialects of the Mälar region, they have been studied by many philologists. The most notable scholar of the OSw Bible is Natan Lindqvist, who was the first to subject the Bible translations to a thorough investigation in his Studier över reformationstidens bibelsvenska (1918), which was followed by his study of the Bible's medieval origins (1928). Johan Palmer (1925) asserted that the translation revealed Danish influence, but Erik Neuman (1928) has effectively demonstrated that such was not the case. Sam Henning (1930) has pointed out that the proofreader's corrections reveal many insights about contemporaneous criteria of correctness, a point which had been overlooked by Palmir, Lindqvist, and Neuman. G. Sjögren (1949) has given a description of the language in the Bible translations and its relationship to that in Luther's translation. Recently, Sam Henning (1963) has reinvestigated the question of who translated the New Testament of 1526. Whereas the actual translators remain unknown, Olaus Petri was undoubtedly the leader of the project, along with Laurentius Andreae, who is referred to by Johannus Magnus in Historiade omnibus Gothorum Sueonumque regibus (1554) as Christi Euangelii corruptor. Gustaf Lindblad (1944) has even attempted, on the basis of the structure of relative clauses, to show which portions of the 1526 New Testament were translated by Olaus Petri or

54

SWEDISH

Laurentius Andre®. Gunnar Blomqvist (1941) has made a study of Schacktavelslek, the OSw translation of the medieval chess book morality, and Sju vise mästare, the OSw translation of Septem sapientes. Schacktavelslek is clearly indebted to the Middle Low German Meister Stephan's Schachspielbuch, as well as Jacobus de Cessolis. However, the Middle Low German work is found only in later incunabula, and the relationship between them and the OSw version is somewhat tenuous. For further details the reader is referred to C.I. Stähle's critical review (1943) of Blomqvist's study. O. Mattsson (1957) has investigated three hagiographic texts, Apostla gerningar, Helga manna leverne, and Vitx patrum, all of which are contained in Cod. Holm. A110, a Vadstena MS from c. 1385-1400. Mattsson ascribes Vitx patrum to Johannes Johannis. C.I. Stähle (1940) has pointed out that Apostla gerningar is contained in Fomsvenska legendariet, and he has described the relationships between these texts. Hans Ronge (1957) has subjected Konung Alexander to a thorough philological examination. This text is contained in one MS, Cod. Holm. D 4 from c. 1420-1445, which Ronge has dated on the basis of watermarks, the first attempt by a Sw philologist to employ this method. According to Ronge, Alexander is a translation of the gamma-group of MSS within the I 2 recensions of Archbishop Leo's copy, Nativitas et victoria Alexandri Magni regis (c. 950), of a delta-type version of Pseudo-Callisthenes. Alexander was probably composed between c. 1376-1386, and Ronge suggests that the translator may have known Seelentrost, which contains the de Alexandre Rege. Ronge localizes Alexander to the Kalmar region after a thorough study of the text's language. However, Gösta Holm (1958b) casts doubt upon such a precise localization, although it is probably safe to assume a southeastern provenience. David Kornhall (1959) has investigated the OSw versions of the Karlamagnus saga and demonstrated their relationship to the Norwegian version of this saga. His comparison of the OSw versions with the Old Norwegian version reveals the many differences between OSw and Old Norwegian. According to the conclusion, Historia Trojana was completed at twelve noon, the 29th of July, 1529, and is thus the most precisely dated of any OSw text we have. Bertel Fortelius (1966) has concluded that: 1) the direct source of this text was a Strassburg incunabulum from 1494 (UUB 35:54), 2) the present MS (Cod. Holm. D 3a) is a contemporary copy of the proto-type, possibly even a copy of the original, 3) the scribe possibly lived in Stockholm, 4) the translator was from southwest Smäland, and 5) there are many similarities between Historia Trojana and the writings of Peder Mänsson (d. 1534), who was from Smäland. Hans Ronge (1965) has taken exception to Fortelius's conclusions and states that: 1) none of the known Strassburg incunabula was used as a model for Historia Trojana and certainly not UUB 34:54, and 2) the translator probably spoke an östgötsk or smäländsk dialect, but it is impossible to make as precise a localization as Fortelius does. Sture Allen's doctoral dissertation (1965) is divided into two parts, the first on graphemic analysis as a basis for editing texts, and the second an edition on these

SWEDISH

55

principles of Johan Ekeblad's letters to his brother Claes (1639-55). This is the most thorough Sw attempt to provide a graphemic analysis of an older text. His work is also a practical application of graphemic theory in the form of a critical edition of a text. Nevertheless, his analysis suffers from many inconsistencies, failure to group clusters, such as ch, as unit graphemes, and a gross intersection of distinctive units. A116n's achievement is remarkable, but his methods and results have been misunderstood by more traditional philologists, such as Valter Jansson (1968), who reflects the attitude in Sweden on the part of traditionalists toward modern linguistics. Thus Sw philologists embarked upon the modern era with a critical review of previous methods and results by Beckman, and they have continued to apply a variety of approaches in their investigations of older texts, even incorporating the developments of structural linguistics. The majority of OSw texts will undoubtedly remain unlocalized; much work still remains to be done in this area. For example, a dialectological survey of the language of the diplomas, which are necessarily dated and localized, should be undertaken.

2.8

Dialectology

The various dialect archives in Sweden contain a wealth of material in the form of dictionary slips, dictionaries in manuscript form, answers to specific questionnaires, wordlists filled out by students and established scholars, and the fieldnotes of contemporary and earlier dialectologists, as well as extensive collections of grammophone and tape recordings. The Dialect and Folklore Institute in Uppsala (Uppsala landsmäls- och folkminnesarkivet = ULMÄ) was founded in 1914 (Strömbäck 1964). ULMA contains extensive collections of dialect material from north and central Sweden, as well as from Gotland, the Sw-speaking areas of Estonia, and the former Swedish colony in Russia, Gammalsvenskby. The Institute for Place-Name and Dialect Research in Gothenburg ([Institutet för ortnamns- och dialektforskning i Göteborg = IODG) was founded in 1917, and in 1962 IODG was attached to the Institute for Nordic Languages at Gothenburg University. The material at IODG is almost exclusively from the two provinces of Dalsland and Bohuslän. The Institute for Dialect Research in Lund (Landsmälsarkivet i Lund = LAL) was founded in 1932, and the material at LAL is taken from the provinces of Halland, Blekinge, Skäne, öland, and Smäland. Supplementary material from the latter two provinces is also found at ULMA, but ULMA contains little material from Dalsland and Bohuslän. The Commission for Dialect Research (Folkmälskommissionen = FMK) for the collection of Fenno-Sw dialect material was founded in 1927 and is currently located at the University of Helsinki. The major portion of the material at FMK consists of dictionary slips, some of which were used for the various Fenno-Sw dialect dictionaries. A smaller collection of dialect material from Northern Sweden is located at the Institute for Dialect and Folklore Research in Upper Norrland (Stiftelsen för folk-

56

SWEDISH

mils- och folkminnesundersökningen i Övre Norrlcmd = SFFN) in Umeä. Material has also been collected from some of the Sw-speaking areas in the United States. As the result of expeditions sent out from ULM A to the United States in 1962, 1964, and 1966, a considerable number of taped interviews with first, second, and third generation Sw speakers in this country were collected, and these are presently located at ULM A (Hedblom 1962, 1965, 1966). The leading journal of Sw dialectology is Svenska landsmäl och svenskt folkliv (Stockholm-Uppsala 1879-), which was founded by J. A. Lundell in 1878 and entitled Nyare bidrag till kännedom om de svenska landsmalen ock svenskt folklif until 1904, when the title was changed to its present name. This annual also includes a so-called Β Series reserved for longer dialectal and folkloristic monographs. In 1933 the Finnish-Sw dialectologist, Τ. E. Karsten, founded a counterpart to Svenska landsmäl which is entitled Folkmälstudier (Helsinki 1933-). A periodic journal, Skrifter utg. av Institutet för ortnamns- och dialektforskning vid Göteborgs högskola (Göteborg 1918— 34) was formerly issued by IODG but has subsequently ceased publication. Longer dialect monographs appear in the series Skrifter utg. genom Landsmälsarkivet i Lund (Lund 1932-) and Skrifter utg. genom Landsmäls- och folkminnesarkivet i Uppsala, Series A, Folkmal (Uppsala 1940-), as well as in Skrifter utg. av Institutionen för nordiska spräk vid Uppsala universitet (Uppsala 1953-). Important Fenno-Sw dialect studies have appeared in Studier i nordisk filologi (Helsinki 1910-) which forms an integral part of publications in Skrifter utg. av Svenska litteratursällskapet i Finland (Helsinki 1885-). Sw dialectology had its beginning in the compilation of dialect dictionaries, and lexicography has continued to play an important role in our era (Andersson 1960). Since the turn of the century enormous advances have been made in the editing and publication of dialect dictionaries. Among those that deserve special mention are J. Kalin's from Fagered (1923), Pehr Stenberg's from Umei (1966), J. Jacobsson's from Skrea (1966), J. Nordlander's from Multrä (1933), J.V. Lindgren's from Burträsk (1940), P.N. Peterson's from Vallda (1935-46), J. Wangö's from Knäred (1963), G. Danell's from Nuckö (1951). V. Ε. V. Wessman's Sämling av ord ur östsvenska folkmal (1925, 1932) is an important supplement to the earlier dictionary by Yendell of the East Sw dialects. A further supplement to Vendell's and Wessman's dictionaries was published by Wessman (1936), and again in 1954. Gotländsk ordbok (191845), based on collections by C. and P.A. Säve and edited by G. Danell, A. Schagerström, and Herbert Gustavson is so far the only dictionary published for an entire province. Gustavson is presently engaged in completing an expanded version of this dictionary. A dictionary of the dialects of Dalecarlia was planned by Lars Levander and Stig Björklund; after Levander's death the work has been carried on by Björklund, and two volumes have so far appeared of Dalmäls ordbok (1961, 1967). In the study of individual dialects overwhelming emphasis has been placed on phonology. The general format for the presentation of phonological material from specific dialects (parishes and small communities) and dialect areas (provinces and

SWEDISH

57

large areas of provinces) was established by Adolf Noreen in his pioneering works, Dalbymälets ljud ock böjningslära (1879-81) and Färömälets ljudlära (1879), in which tables of correspondences were set up between Old Icelandic forms and the forms presented by the particular dialect under investigation. Thus lists of examples are given in the following form: OIc ä > dial. Χ ά, as: fd =fä. Noreen's work paved the way for a series of other monographs by Sw dialectologists. Though such monographs provide readily accessible phonological information from specific dialects, they rarely discuss specific problems of historical phonology. They are products of the Neo-Grammarian era with its rigid views of sound laws which permit no exceptions. Residual problems which could not easily be explained in terms of sets of equivalence classes were explained by ad hoc principles, such as analogy, or inter-paradigmatic borrowing. Nevertheless, these monographs made the wide diversity of phonological developments in Sw dialects apparent for the first time and spurred on further investigations on a larger scale. The next stage of dialect investigation was the study of larger dialect areas. Early examples were monographs by G. Kallstenius and T. Ericsson. The most remarkable survey of a single dialect area from this period is Ernst Wigforss's monumental work, Södra Hailands folkmäl (1913-18). Wigforss was not only interested in presenting an enormous corpus of material, but also in discussing questions of fundamental importance to the methodology of dialect geography, such as the relative chronology and significance of various isoglosses in the region he studied. In the concluding section (pp. 594-692) he comments on some of the basic phonological changes in the area, as: 1) palatal affrication of final -k (bek:bets), 2) secondary diphthongization of e (ben: bain), 3) lengthening of short root vowels, 4) absorption of palatal on-glides (mjel:mel), and 5) spirantization of labial stops (piba:piva). The works of Kallstenius, Ericsson, and Wigforss are merely representative of a long series of monographs and books which describe the phonology and morphology of dialects in larger dialectal areas. Of such studies Lars Levander's Dalmälet (1925, 1928) is particularly noteworthy. It presents the phonology and morphology of the Dalecarlian dialects, which are among the most conservative in Scandinavia. However, these dialects have also undergone innovations — sometimes to an even greater extent than less conservative dialects. For example, α-breaking of e in Dalecarlia is more extensive than in any other dialect area in Scandinavia, as forms such as bjerä = bära are not found elsewhere in Scandinavia. Through Levander's work we can easily avail ourselves of information about a dialect area which, as we progress from north to south, often clearly shows us the order in which phonological developments must have taken place elsewhere in Scandinavia. N. Sjödahl also discussed a special problem in the light of dialect-geographical material in Gammal kort stavelse i västerdalmälen (Stockholm 1936-37). In his doctoral dissertation (1925) Folke Tyden takes up the problem of the transition ü>ö and discusses the geographical distribution of this change in Dalarna, Uppland, Östergötland, and Middle Sw dialects. In eastern Sweden ü did not generally undergo

58

SWEDISH

a-umlaut, and in OSw texts we generally find ü in brut, kul, bup, while in later OSw MSS we generally find δ or ä in these morphs. On the other hand OSw δ (from ü >δ or from α-umlaut of it) developed a set of more open allophones which were later realized as independent phonemes distinct from ά < ä. However, Tyden showed that ü had undergone a variety of developments other than the shift to δ and that both ü and δ have a rich set of allophonic variants in the dialects he investigated. In Äldre u ock ο i kort stavelse i mellersta Norrland (1924) Torsten Bucht took up the same problem as Tyd6n had in his dissertation. Bucht showed that δ and ü had a variety of reflexes in northern Sw dialects also. He commented on the effects of metaphony (progressive and regressive) in Jämtland and Härjedal which Herman Geijer (1921) had discussed previously. Geijer had attempted to determine the course and origin of metaphony and apocope on the basis of dialect evidence. He weighed the dialect evidence against that presented by material from older texts. On the basis of the dialect evidence alone one could conclude that metaphony spread from Trandelag and Eastern Norway to Jämtland, Härjedal, and northern Dalecarlia. However, on the basis of earlier studies on final -a > -ά in OSw, Geijer concluded that the areas in Sweden in which metaphony (i-a > e-a > a-a > ä-ä) is now found were in fact fringe areas on the periphery of a central Sw area in which metaphony had been found earlier but had subsequently been lost in the late medieval period. Therefore, metaphony could not be regarded as an innovation from Norway. One type of metaphony, α-α>ά-ά (baka>bäkä), in Dalecarlia has been the subject of a recent dissertation by E.O. Bergfors (1961), who concluded that: 1) complete α>ά metaphony in Dalecarlia took place after final -α>-ά, i.e. post c. 1400-1475, 2) e in the stem > a before this period, and 3) Hesselman's earlier explanation (1948— 53:251, 256f.) that metaphony was unrelated to the onset of oxytone was essentially correct. Assar Janz6n (1933, 1941) has been concerned with the course of development and cause of «-umlaut in two major works. In Utveckling af samnordiskt e i svenska spräket (1921) Gösta Bergman traced the course of development of Common Sc e as it is reflected in Sw dialects. Bergman's interpretations of dialect material are somewhat suspect. For example, he postulates a rule e>i to explain Gotlandic kniand tri, but these forms are better explained as the result of hiatus. The primary isogloss he discusses is that of ä/je between Götsk and Svea dialects respectively (as Götsk grät vs. Svea gret pret.sing. of gr&td). Bergman dates this isogloss to post c. 1000-1200. Gösta Sjöstedt (1936) has investigated the phonetic properties, dialect-geographical distribution and historical development of r-sounds (alveolar vs. uvular r) in southern Sw dialects. He also discusses the problems associated with the vocalization of r in Northeastern Skäne, Blekinge, and Southern Smäland, where r is vocalized before dentals (as: stort>stoat) and finally (as: far >fas), as well as in parts of Dalecarlia (Malung and Äppelbo), the only other area in Sweden where this change occurs. He also discusses the development of the cluster rj>, which is reflected as L (cacuminal

SWEDISH

59

flap) in northern Sweden and as r in southern Sweden. On the basis of place-name evidence he concludes that the present location of the r//L isogloss in southern Sweden was fixed c. 1450-1500. Lennart Moberg has made extensive use of dialect material in his doctoral dissertation (1 944) on the Sc nasal assimilations (mp >pp, nt > tt, nk > kk). As these assimilations have established one of the oldest and most distinctive isoglosses between West and East Sc (the border, for example, between eastern svamp and western sopp), this study deserves special mention. Moberg carefully weighs the two major theories, the so-called syllabicity theory and the weak stress theory which were advanced by previous scholars. Moberg rules out many of the examples which were previously used to support the syllabicity theory (that close versus open juncture caused assimilated versus unassimilated clusters). Though he suggests that the weak-stress theory (that assimilation took place only when forms occurred in weakly stressed position) has the greater explanatory power, Moberg freely admits that some forms, such as Old Gutnish vittr (cf. Old Icelandic vetr), cannot be explained in terms of either of the earlier theories (pp. 63-7). Moberg asserts that blank is the genuine East Sc form, as is shown by Uppland blank, 'cloudy', which was replaced by a West Sc blakk. He suggests that blakk was spread from Norway as the result of horse trading between eastern Norway and western Sweden. However, on the basis of place-name evidence, Jöran Sahlgren (1944) has shown that: 1) the spread of blakk was not due to horse trading or western influence of any kind, 2) the assimilation nk > kk in blakk is a genuine eastern development, and 3) this assimilation took place in the east in strongly stressed syllables. By mapping the pretsing. forms of binda (= band, batt, bant), Moberg has shown how dialect geography can solve important problems in historical phonology. In the case of band, the final -dis due to analogy, for band is a transitional form found in an intermediary area between batt in the west and bant in the east. In the concluding chapter of his dissertation, Moberg makes an impressive attempt to date these assimilations on the basis of, among other things, skaldic poetry. In this brief chapter, which should be standard reading for any course in the history of the Sc languages, Moberg brilliantly and convincingly shows that assimilation took place between c. 650-850. In her doctoral dissertation, Det nordiska u-omljudet. En dialektgeografisk undersökning (1959), Gun Widmark has shown the distribution of umlauted and unumlauted forms in Norway and Western Sweden. In all of the above works the authors have used dialect material to solve problems in historical phonology. These studies are based on the underlying assumption that the dialects conserve phonological features long after they have disappeared from the standard language and, hence, that dialects offer an invaluable source of information for reconstructing the course of phonological developments. At the very outset of the 'modern' investigation of Sw dialects attempts were made to group various dialects together linguistically and to show basic similarities and differences between major dialect areas in Sweden and Finland, such as: Göta dialects,

60

SWEDISH

South Sw dialects, Middle Sw dialects, North Sw dialects, East Sw dialects, and Gotlandic. The first such attempt was made by J. A. Lundell in an article of 1880. The problem of mainland-East Sw linguistic relationships, which is similar to that of Icelandic-Norwegian linguistic relationships, became the subject of an extended debate between O. F. Hultman, Bengt Hesselman, and Τ. E. Karsten. Hultman contended that the relationship was due to parallel independent developments, while Hesselman asserted that the relationship was due to parallel dependent developments, and Karsten took the radical view that East Sw represented a separate branch of East Germanic which came under Sw influence at a relatively late date. Valter Jansson (1942) has subsequently summarized and discussed these theories and, after a thorough investigation of the supporting evidence, he has convincingly reaffirmed Hesselman's view. The problem of dialect relationships has continued to capture the attention of Sw dialectologists. Bror Akerblom (1940) has described the relationship of an East Sw dialect to surrounding dialects. K.-H. Dahlstedt (1950) has made a novel attempt to show the relationships between various dialects in northern Sweden on the basis of the distribution of specific lexical items, such as berry names. The dialect area studied by Dahlstedt was first settled in the late eighteenth century by people from Angermanland and Vasterbotten, and Dahlstedt has attempted to sort out the reflexes of these dialects in the newly settled area. To date only one survey has been made of the relationship between a particular dialect and the standard language, and this is B. Björseth's impressive work, Dialekt och riksspräk i en bohuslänsk socken (1946). Several studies have been made of regional variants of the standard language and the dialects spoken in metropolitan areas, e.g. Gjerdman (1918, 1927) on the phonology of the cities of Sörmland, Ingers on South Sw (1956) and the speech of Lund (1957), Björseth (1958) on Göteborg, and Bucht (1962) on Härnösand. As we have seen, in earlier works in Sw dialectology the major emphasis was placed on phonology, while morphology was either neglected entirely or relegated to a subordinate role. In later years several works which treat dialect morphology are restricted to the analysis of a specific problem or section of the morphology of a group of dialects. S. Larsson has studied nominal inflection in Västerbotten (1929) and Assar Janz6n has made a thorough study of the inflectional categories of nouns in Bohuslän (1936a), while Olav Ahlbäck has done the same for Fenno-Sw dialects (1946). Carin Pihl (1948) has investigated verbal inflection in northern Sweden, and E. Hummelstedt (1939) and Lars Huldin (1957, 1959) have done the same for Fenno-Sw dialects. B. Ejder (1945) has studied the adjective ending -er (see above, 2.6). E. Törnqvist (1953) has studied nominal inflexion in Östergötland and has placed major emphasis on the masc.sing. article, while B. Magnusson (1965) has written on the fem.pl. endings -er, -ar. Marie Bjerrum (1952) has investigated tonal accent in an apocopating dialect in Värmland. On the borderline between syntax and morphology is Anders Sundqvist's outstanding study (1955) of the subjunctive in OSw and the modern dialects, in which he has made extensive use of dialect material from the

SWEDISH

61

various dialect archives in Sweden. The most extensive study to date of the effects of phonological changes on morphology is Bengt Hesselman's Huvudlinjer i nordisk spräkhistoria (1948-53) in which he shows the effect of hiatus, metaphony, apocope, assimilation, and dissimilation on the morphologies of the Sc languages. This study, uncompleted at the time of the author's death in 1952, is based on historical principles and makes extensive use of Sc placename, dialect, and older textual material. Though it presents a wealth of information, its rather confusing manner of presentation and its underlying assumption that the reader already has an extensive knowledge of the history of the Sc languages do not recommend it to the novice. In his further study of the Vilhelmina dialects in Northern Sweden (1962), K.-H. Dahlstedt has contributed to our knowledge of apocope in this area by showing the effects of quantity on apocope. Sven Benson (1951) has discussed the history, distribution, and frequency of the adjective suffix -ot in Blekinge. Of the various linguistic levels, the syntactic level has been the most neglected by Sw dialectologists. The only study to date which presents all the syntactic rules from a single dialect area is Gudrun Lundström's doctoral dissertation, Studier i Nyländsk syntax (1939). Shorter articles on dialect syntax have been written by G. Holm (1941) and A. Hellblom (1961). In his doctoral dissertation G. Holm (1952) restricted himself to a specific syntactic problem, the s-passive, and illustrated its use and distribution in Sw dialects (above 2.6). Holm (1958a) has also made a study o f f a r a and taka and the syntactic relationships which these verbs contract in the dialects and the older periods of the language. Significant developments have taken place in the field of word geography in recent years. Two works which may be classed on the borderline between philology and word geography are Ragnar Jirow's Zur Terminologie der Flachsbereitung in den germanischen Sprachen (1926) and Assar Janzen's Bock und Ziege (1937). Two of the leading scholars in the area of word geography have been Natan Lindqvist and D. O. Zetterholm. In Sydväst-Sverige i spräkgeografisk belysning (1947) Lindqvist mapped and commented on the dialect-geographical spread of various lexical items in Southern Sweden. He showed that the present-day distributional pattern of many words of southern origin constitutes an isogloss which cuts Sweden in half along a northwest/ southeast diagonal. He then stressed the importance of the various communication routes, such as the Lagan River, in the diffusion of new words and phonological innovations from south to north. In manner of presentation Lindqvist's word geographical studies are closely akin to those of Theodor Frings, the German dialectologist. In 1932 fifty questionnaires were circulated throughout Sweden by OLM A in order to gather material for a Sw counterpart to Atlas der deutschen Volkskunde. The responses to these questionnaires formed the basis for D. O. Zetterholm's Nordiska ordgeografiska studier (1937) in which the author mapped various terms for domestic animals. In a series of word-geographical studies Zetterholm (1940) investigated the

62

SWEDISH

distribution of words for 'barn', 'cowhouse', and various beckoning calls to domestic animals. Manne Eriksson (1943) has written on the words for the top bunk in wall beds in Sweden and Scandinavia in general and has shown that there is a semantic relationship between the place-name element, -torp, 'small farm', and the appellative, torp, 'top bunk in a wall bed'. Though Folke Hedblom (1945) is primarily concerned with -säter, 'out farm', as a place-name element, he has also discussed the distribution of this word as an appellative in Scandinavia. Lars Forner (1945) has investigated the distribution of words for measures of grain, and R. Wadström (1952) has studied milling terms, while Sigurd Fries (1964) has written on terms for stiles throughout Scandinavia. As the study of plant names may justifiably be considered a part of word geography, such studies should be mentioned. Since the seventeenth century Sweden has been distinguished by eminent botanists and many of the works by these early scholars cite the local provincial names for Sw flora, which constitute the earliest sources of Sw dialect material. As the variant second components of plant names, such as -svingel, -sälting, -tälel, differ from province to province, they present a rich source of material for word-geographical and phonological studies. Sigurd Fries has made use of this material in his Studier över nordiska trädnamn (1957). An important earlier study in this field is Bengt Hesselman's Fran Marathon till Längheden: Studier över växtnamn och naturnamn (1935). As previously mentioned, K.-H. Dahlstedt has made extensive use of berry names in Det svenska Vilhelminamalet (1950). In summary, from the foregoing survey we may conclude that Sw dialect research generally falls into two periods: an earlier collecting period and a later interpretive period. Though no sharp boundaries can be drawn between the two, the collecting period extends roughly from the 1880s through 1920, when the interpretive period was initiated. During the collecting period a wealth of lexical and a limited amount of syntactic material was elicited from informants and assembled in archives. During the first part of the interpretive period, major emphasis was placed on phonology; later this was followed by investigations of morphology and syntax. Throughout both periods interest in dialectology was spurred on by the fact that the results of dialect investigations offered an invaluable aid in uncovering and reconstructing the course of development of the Nordic languages. In comparison with their Norwegian and Danish colleagues relatively few Sw dialectologists have concerned themselves with theoretical and/or methodological problems, and extremely few have attempted to apply modern linguistic methods to dialect research. For example, on the phonological level, they have not explicitly made the distinction which must be drawn between phonetic change and phonemic change, that is, between phonetic changes which affect the system of autonomous contrasts and phonetic changes which do not and thus affect only the allophonic pattern. Sw dialectology is generally characterized by a thorough and precise collection of data and a Neo-Grammarian interpretation of these data in diachronic terms. For further details see Benson (1968).

SWEDISH

63

2.9 Place Names During the second and third decades of this century place-name studies in Sweden underwent enormous growth. Under the leadership of Jöran Sahlgren in Uppsala and Hjalmar Lindroth in Göteborg place-name archives were established in Uppsala and Göteborg. The Institute for Place-Name and Dialect Research at Göteborg University (Institutet för ortnamns- och dialektforskning vid Göteborgs högskola = IODGS) was established in 1917, and eleven years later the Svenska Ortnamnsarkivet (SOA) was established in Uppsala. IODGS has restricted itself to the Bohuslän area. In conjuction with IODGS and under the editorship of Hjalmar Lindroth that institution began the publication of a series of volumes to provide a complete description of the place names in Bohuslän: Ortnamnen i Göteborg och Bohuslän (Göteborg 1923-). A similar series had been initiated earlier in Uppsala under the direction of Kungliga Ortnamnskomitten, which had been formed in 1902 to undertake the publication of a series of volumes to describe the place names in Älvborgslän, Ortnamnen i Älvsborgslän, l-20(Uppsala 1906-48). This series, Sveriges ortnamn, was later incorporated into the activities of SO A. The journal Namn och bygd was also incorporated into the activities of SO A, which soon expanded its publication activities with the addition of two new journals: Ortnamnssällskapets i Uppsala ärsskrift(1936—) and Nomina Germanica. Arkivför germansk namnforskning utgivet av Jöran Sahlgren (Uppsala 1937-). IODGS also began publication of a series, Skrifter utgivna av Institutet för ortnamns- och dialectforskning vid Göteborgs högskola, a year after the IODGS was founded. After the founding of the South Swedish Place-Name Society on the initiative of Jöran Sahlgren in 1925 that society, too, began the publication of a journal for place names: Sydsvenska ortnamnssällskapets ärsskrift (Lund 1925-). These five journals are the main sources for the dissemination of place-name information in Sweden. Jöran Sahlgren is the most noted place-name scholar in Sweden. Sahlgren launched his career in 1912 with the publication of his dissertation, Skagershults sockens naturnamn (1912) for which he received immediate acclaim. Sahlgren's distinctive qualities are his utterly pragmatic approach to the semantic interpretation of place names and his insistence on sound etymological principles, as well as a first hand knowledge of the terrain. His earlier articles form a milepost in Sw place-name research. His dissertation, which was mainly concerned with lake names, contains a thorough and enlightening analysis of the operation of ellipsis on this category of place names, the very category most subject to this process. Though the problems associated with ellipsis were not unknown to Hellquist when he wrote his monumental work on lake names, Sahlgren was the first to analyze and evaluate its effect in a larger context, and the methods and theories he devised have played an enormous role in subsequent studies of lake names. In each of his earlier articles in the journal Namn och bygd (= NoB) of which he was the principal editor from its founding in 1913, Jöran Sahlgren made important contributions to the study of place names. Many of his most significant articles

64

SWEDISH

appeared in that journal as a continuing series entitled, "Nordiska ortnamn i spräklig och saklig belysning"(1922-46). On the basis of place-name evidence Sahlgren divided Scandinavia into three major cultural areas: Danish-Sw, Norwegian-Sw, and East Sw (1920). He also devised the so-called 'geometric' method for determining the relative chronology of place names which shows that there is an age-size relationship between various types of place names. An example of Sahlgren's critical judgment at its best is his discussion of false names in -vi, members of the so-called theophoric class of place names (1923). In a series of articles Elias Wessen, too, has attempted to unveil the history of culture by means of theophoric place names (1922). Though known primarily for his work in dialectology, Natan Lindqvist also made an important contribution to place-name research in the 1920s in the form of a detailed investigation of names in Vist parish, Östergötland (1926). In this work Lindqvist applied many of the methods he had developed in dialectology. For example, in his interpretation of the lake name Tolen (1926:346-54) he derived Tol- from *tordh. To support this interpretation Lindqvist showed that lake names in Tol- do not occur in southern Sweden where rdh > r, though we find names in Tor- in that area. Lindqvist also applied the dialect-geographical method to his interpretation of names in brunke-. Earlier T.E. Karsten (1921, 1923) had shown that we have an ablaut variation brink:brunk in East Sc. From this he concluded that brink was not a Middle Low German loan. One would naturally expect brunk to appear as brokk(e,a) in West Sc, and Lindqvist concluded that Norwegian dial, brokka was derived from brekka and that it did not go back to an earlier *brunkön. On the basis of this interpretation Lindqvist concluded that unassimilated Norwegian forms with k did not contain a Germanic *brunk-, but that they were ^-extensions of the stem brun, 'corner, edge'. In this he completely agreed with O. Rygh's (1904) explanation of Norwegian forms in brunk-. For Norwegian Lindqvist's explanation seems probable, but for Sw names in brunke- it seems much more likely that they actually contain a Gmc *brunkön. Thus, though some of Lindqvist's interpretations are open to dispute, he was the first place-name researcher to show the importance of dialect-geographical considerations in the interpretation of place names. C. G. Tengström made important strides in methodology in his Studier over sydbohusländska inkolentnamn (1931) in which he discusses habitation names which refer to people 1) who live or have lived in a certain place, 2) who have traveled to a certain place, 3) who have worked in a certain place, 4) who are from a certain place. The author suggested that the term inkolentnamn be used to describe this category of place names. Jöran Sahlgren's approach to place-name research soon began to be reflected in a number of dissertations completed under his direction. It is, for example, quite discernible in Nils ödeen's Studier i Smälands bebyggelsehistoria (1927-34). On the basis of place-name material ödeen attempts to reconstruct the history of the settlement of the Värend region of southern Smäland. The material for his study is largely based on names in -mäla, which constitute a younger group of settlement names, ödeen shows

SWEDISH

65

that the distribution of names in -mäla has its highest concentration in Värend and, having dated names in -mäla to post c. 1200, he concludes that this area was probably opened for settlement c. 1200. Another product of Jöran Sahlgren's stimulating teaching was Gösta Franzin, whose dissertation, Vikbolandets by- och gärdnamn (1937), owes much of its significance to Sahlgren's geometric method of dating place names. Further examples of Franzin's research are Runö ortnamn (1959) and Laxdxlabygdens ortnamn (1964 = ICELANDIC).

Though both Jöran Sahlgren (1932) and Hjalmar Lindroth (1931) have written popular accounts of place-name studies, Gösta Franzin has succeeded in writing what is surely the best introduction to the study of Sw place names (1939). In his article in Nordisk kultur Franzin presents a general introduction and then discusses various types of settlement names. He treats early settlement names in -löv, -lösa, -vin(i), -hem, -sta(d), etc. which date from the pre-Christian era, and shows that names in -torp (-arp) were used to designate younger settlements after the introduction of Christianity. He also discusses younger settlement names in -rum, -mäla, -satter (-sätra), -boda, -hatt(a). Finally, he concludes with a discussion of nature names and the significance of place-name research for the study of geography and history. Place-name research in Uppsala has been carried on by a number of distinguished scholars. Ivar Lundahl has studied the medieval history of Vastergötland as disclosed by place names (1961) and the relationship between place names and the names of the inhabitants of a specific area (1937). Harry Stähl, presently professor of place-name studies at Uppsala, has published a long series of articles on place names. One of the most interesting of these is a study of names in -arv(et) in the Falu area (1941). Stähl shows that names in -arv{et) in this area do not, as was previously assumed, date back to c. 500, but may date from c. 1200 at the earliest, though they became frequent during the late Middle Ages. Stähl then employed the results of this study in a later study of place names in Kopparbergslagen (1960) in which he used place-name material to reconstruct the settlement history of this important mining area. Professor Lennart Moberg at Uppsala has also written a series of penetrating articles on place names which reveal his almost mathematical manipulation of Germanic phonological changes. One of the leading place-name scholars from Göteborg is Assar Janzen. Though he has never written a separate monograph on place names, his work in this field has appeared in a long series of articles in Namn och bygd. Janzen made extensive use of place-name material in his critique (1941) of Hesselman's view (1932) that «-umlaut with retained u took place in southwestern Sweden. Janzen has not always been as careful as he might have been when reconstructing the etymologies of place names. An example of such a deficiency is his article on names in Jöra (1936b) which has been severely criticized by Valter Jansson (1939). In Lund Professor K.G. Ljunggren has taken up the extremely difficult problem of

66

SWEDISH

determining whether or not various phonological changes in Nordic place names reflect native or Middle Low German developments (1937). Due to lack of a thorough knowledge of Middle Low German and Low German dialects his results have not been entirely successful. Ljunggren has also studied (1948) a variety of different types of southern Sw place names which share a common feature, namely, that they have a suffix in -l: -löv, -nald, '"-hu^ilia, *-hillse. As a result of this investigation Ljunggren shows that many place names with a suffix in -/ do not, as was previously assumed, go back to an older -lev {-löv), but contain other /-suffixes. Bertil Ejder, another placename scholar in Lund, has shown (1951) that various types of field names may be dated according to the types and ages of agricultural tools which have been found in cultivated areas. FolkeHedblom (1945) has studied place names in -säter and has surveyed the distribution of this type of place name in relation to the presence of outfarming. The vast majority of Sw parishes, townships, and farms with names in -säter are now found outside the area in which the appellative säter is found and outfarming is still practiced. Hedblom has also studied the place names of his home province (1957, 1958). Bengt Holmberg has also made a study (1946) of a particular type of place name and has restricted himself to names in -tomt {-toft). Carl-Ivar Stähle has reinvestigated names in -inge (1946) and has shown that, contrary to Hellquist's earlier view, names in -inge are not merely patronymic, but also toponymic. He makes the interesting observation that names in -inge are generally located in the vicinity of bodies of water and formulates a well motivated hypothesis that they had a pejorative ring. The first components of -inge-names are often very difficult to interpret semantically, and Stähle suggests that they were provincial, nonliterary names which passed out of the language without leaving a trace in the literature, as they were probably pejorative nicknames. In view of geological changes (the rise in the level of the land), as well as linguistic evidence (/-umlaut), Stähle dates -/nge-names to post c. 500. Lars Hellberg (1950) has also studied one particular type of place name, those ending in -karlar. He puts forth the theory that names in -stad originally designated fields located around older settlements and were privately owned, as they are frequently compounded with personal names. He suggests that names in -by also originally designated cultivated areas around the periphery. These interpretations are suggested by the geographical location of the names with reference to central, older settlements. He also takes up the problem of names in -tora, but the etymology he suggests, 'thunder > the place where thunder roars', has been conclusively refuted by Moberg (1951). One of the most significant place-name studies of a particular place-name type is Valter Jansson's study of names in -vin (1951). These are of particular importance with respect to phonological development, as -vin has sporadically caused i- or uumlaut in the first component with which it is compounded. Moreover, names in -vin constitute a problematic class of names, as they have undergone a rich variety of

SWEDISH

67

reductions, and -vin variously appears as: -en, -ne, -e, etc. Consequently, it is extremely difficult to determine whether or not some names are genuine members of this class. However, Jansson's book contains much more than the analysis of a particular type of place name. An essential part of the book is a discussion of /- and «-umlaut (chapters 6 and 7 respectively). Concerning /-umlaut Jansson contends that the period theory as formulated by, among others, Axel Kock, is highly improbable and not empirically motivated. He suggests that /-umlaut was furthered by certain consonantal environments. As the result of his detailed analysis of names in -vin, Jansson concludes that: 1) -vin was consistently declined as a feminine noun, 2) the vocalism of -vin is everywhere preserved though c. 1450, 3) final -n was retained until at least c. 1450, and 4) names in -vin generally have grave accent. Jansson then employs these criteria to distinguish between genuine and false -v/n-names. He concludes that names which lack /-umlaut may date from before c. 600, while names which preserve -v- and the genitive in the first component came into being c. 800-1200. In his dissertation (1965) Thorsten Andersson treats the härad (OSw hxrap = Lat provincia) names in Götaland, the very area in Sweden in which this politico-geographical unit has its oldest roots. Andersson takes up the problem of härad names in -kind, a problem which has received considerable attention, but which has never been satisfactorily explained. From the fact that the oldest attestations of -kind-names in Östergötland occur without härad, the author concludes that names in -kind originally designated a district. When the fciW-district was subsequently divided into härad, kind- was used as a first component of compound härad names. Only the central portion of the old &iW-district was permitted to retain the old district name in uncompounded form. This seems to be a very plausible explanation. Recently Hans Jonsson (1966) has presented a thorough study of five words which denote bodies of water: träsk, tjärn, göl, gölpa, and korra (kurr/korr). All of these words present etymological difficulties, and Jonsson's etymological explanations seem somewhat suspect (space does not permit a detailed discussion here). In his discussion of tjärn he shows that broken and unbroken forms exist side by side. In conclusion we observe that the results of Sw place-name studies fall into two major, inter-related categories: 1) reconstruction of the course, development, and history of settlements, which involves attempts to date various types of place names on the basis of geographical, geological, linguistic, and archeological evidence, and 2) substantive evidence for dating phonological, morphological, and semantic change. As written records show place names at frequent intervals from a very early date, they offer the best source of data for uncovering the course of the types of linguistic change mentioned above. This has been the primary reason why Sc philologists have been so eager to collect, analyze, and evaluate place-name data. Larger monographs of place-name studies generally fall into two main categories or a combination of the two: 1) studies of a particular group or type of place name, i.e. studies of nature names or settlement names or names which end in a particular component (such as studies of names in -vin, -hem, etc.), and 2) studies of all of the types of place names which occur in a particular area.

3 NORWEGIAN

3.0

General

The old masters of Norwegian (Nw) linguistics at the turn of the century were the etymologists and Neo-Grammarians Hjalmar Falk (1859-1928), Alf Torp(1853-1916), and Sophus Bugge (1833-1907). Their places were gradually taken by such younger men as Didrik Arup Seip, Trygve Knudsen, Magnus Olsen, Sigurd Kolsrud, and Gustav Indreb0, all of whom had the mother tongue as their primary interest and all of whom worked within the traditional framework of historical-geographical linguistics. In addition to these, Norway developed an active community of general linguists, who dealt only incidentally with the mother tongue and made their chief contributions either to the study of foreign, even exotic languages, or to linguistic theory. There was less contact between these two groups than might have been expected, partly because the former group had as their target a native audience, and as their disciples the mother-tongue teachers, while the latter group looked outward to an international scholarly audience. The organ of the general linguists was Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap (1928-), founded and for many years edited by Carl J. S. Marstrander, who specialized in Celtic, with Indo-European as a background, and touched native material only in his extensive work on the older runes and in the relations with Celtic in the Viking age. Thanks to the old contacts between the Vikings and the Celts, Celtic has been a specialty of several Norwegian linguists: Alf Sommerfelt, Carl Hj. Borgstr0m, and Magne Oftedal. Hans Vogt has specialized in Georgian and other Caucasian languages, Olaf Broch and Christian Stang in Slavic, Knut Bergsland in Finno-Ugric and Eskimo-Aleut, Ingerid Dal in Germanic. At the same time many of these have made important contributions to the study of their native language, e.g. Sommerfelt as editor of Norsk Riksmälsordbok and author of popular books on language, or Borgstram through his textbook in linguistics, Innforing i sprogvidenskap (1958), which has brought home to the youngest generation of Norwegian students some of the concepts of general linguistics. The development has therefore been more like that of Denmark than of Sweden, except that there has never been a dominant theoretician like Hjelmslev and no tendency to establish a 'school';

NORWEGIAN

69

but the mother-tongue specialists have remained outside this movement, much like the corresponding Swedish scholars. Their chief organ is the quarterly Maal og Minne (1909-), which also prints folkloristic studies. The special feature that characterizes the Norwegian scene is the national diglossia, which expresses itself as a conflict between the adherents of two competing and officially recognized written languages which we shall here call Dano-Norwegian (DN) and New-Norwegian (NN). These names are chosen to clarify the fact that the former continues a tradition of Danish writing in Norway which goes back to the late Middle Ages, while the latter is a new language established only a century ago by the deliberate language planning of Ivar Aasen (1813-96). The current official names for these two varieties of Nw is bokmdl (book language) and nynorsk (New Norwegian), which officially (but not popularly) replaced the terms riksmäl and landsmäl in 1929. All four names are strictly arbitrary and could be applied equally well to both languages, which to their adherents are felt as simply 'Norwegian'. Further details are superfluous here; the interested reader is referred to Haugen 1966a, where the development is sketched and exemplified down to the date of writing, with special emphasis on the present century. Much of the energy of mother-tongue linguists (and some of the others as well) has gone into language planning and even propaganda on behalf of one or the other language; and it is clear that in many cases the specific direction of research has been slanted by the writer's stance in the national language controversy. Evidence has been sought in the Old Norwegian (ONw) documents or in the modern dialects to substantiate a particular view of language development which would logically lead to the adoption of one or another language form. While the two languages are still neatly distinct (for the most part) in writing, there is not a corresponding cleavage in speech, except on the part of academic speakers. A special concern of Nw linguists has been the tracking down of 'Norwegianisms' in the Danish writings of Nw authors from the period of political or linguistic union with Denmark. The purpose is the inverse of those Fenno-Swedish linguists who are on the watch for 'Finlandisms* in Swedish: while the Finns wish to suppress their deviations from the motherland tradition, Norwegians wish to encourage them. This research was initiated by Didrik Arup Seip in his (1914b) study of the poet Wergeland and continued in his books on Danish in Norway (1921), the Norwegianization of D N (1933a), and Norwegianisms in Holberg (1937, 1954d). Similar studies have been made in the writings of Petter Dass by Alfred Jakobsen (1953), Dorthe Engelbretsdatter by Egil Pettersen (1957), and Wessel by Trygve Knudsen (1942). Much of Seip's research was oriented toward showing that DN, although beginning as written Danish, had roots in Nw speech; therefore, by encouraging its specifically Nw elements, one could make it into a completely national Nw tongue. Supporters of NN, like Sigurd Kolsrud and Gustav Indreb0, were committed to taking the opposite view and regarding the Nw elements in D N as inorganic. Instead, their emphasis was on the rural dialects as linearly and legitimately descended from ONw, with any and all Danish elements in them to be regarded as dross and contamination (Beito 1960).

70

NORWEGIAN

3.1

Normalization

In the year 1885, the Ministry of (Church and) Education assumed full control over the orthography of the schools by authorizing the seventh edition of Jakob Aars' spelling manual for DN (Retskrivnings-regler til skolebrug). When nationalistic pressures after 1905 forced two major revisions of the DN orthography (1907, 1917), the spelling manuals were simply altered and new editions issued as guides for teachers and writers. Although the changes were called 'orthographic', they were also morphological and included novel word forms as well as inflections. The reforms of 1907 and 1917 effectively established for DN an orthographic framework that adequately reflected cultivated urban Nw speech and visually confirmed its differences from Danish. E.g., it restored historically voiceless stops after vowels (bage > bake 'bake', bide > bite 'bite', gäbe > gape 'gape'), and the gemination of final stops after short vowels (lzg>legg 'leg', tak>takk 'thanks', hat>hatt 'hat'). In effect it meant the adoption by DN of the orthographic principles established by Ivar Aasen for NN (in his Norsk Grammatik of 1864). The reforms of 1907 and 1917 were prepared by ad hoc committees including mother-tongue teachers, writers, and linguists (among the latter such eminent specialists as H. Falk, A. Torp, D. A. Seip, M. Haegstad, I. Alnaes, J. Storm, and A. Western). In 1917 both languages were regulated simultaneously for the first time, so that all forms that were pronounced alike in the two were now spelled identically. This reform also included a radical respelling of many loanwords, following a principle first applied in Sweden, but now going beyond Swedish practice (bureau > byrä, lieutenant >loitnant, but also nation > nasjon, present >presang) (Lundeby 1955). There were obvious pedagogical advantages in these reforms for children who were having to learn both languages in school (Haugen 1966a: 62-102). In the reform of 1917 tentative steps were also taken toward a harmonization of forms that were structurally different in the two languages. The ultimate purpose was nothing less than a fusion of the two, which some ardently desired for reasons of national unity, particularly those who felt that DN was still not adequately Nw and that NN was not adequately modern or representative. The method adopted was to require or permit certain forms in each language that were drawn from the other, or even from such speech (whether rural or urban) as had not been accepted in either language. An important example of this was the infusion into DN of the feminine gender, especially in the definite article; while these forms were in general use in dialects and colloquial urban speech, they had so far been excluded from serious writing because they did not exist in Danish. Aasen had adopted the suffixes -i for strong nouns and -a for weak nouns (soli 'the sun', visa 'the song'), but most speakers used -a for both. In the reform of 1917 it was decided that -a should be the future form of the article, and so it was made optional in both languages. Other major shibboleths were the restoration of old diphthongs for Danish monophthongs (sten > stein 'stone', los > laus 'loose', 0>ey 'island') and the adoption of -a as the preterite of weak verbs instead of the -et of standard urban speech (kästet > kasta 'threw').

NORWEGIAN

71

Some of the new forms were readily accepted and quickly became part of the written norm, usually in words of an affectionate or homely nature, e.g. ku 'cow', kua 'the cow'; barn 'children', barna 'the children' (for Da ko, koen, born, bernene respectively). Others aroused extended controversy and were not accepted outside the schools. Traditionalists on both sides resented many of the new forms as a 'vulgarization' of the norms. Renewed pressure for linguistic unification came in the 1930s from the Labor Party, which supported a third major reform in 1938. This is still in effect (with important modifications in the Textbook Norm of 1959) (see Ny rettskrivning 1938; Ny Ixreboknormal 1959). In this orthography many previously optional forms were made obligatory (e.g. feminine suffixes in -a), while new optional forms were introduced in order to break down still further the barriers between the languages and promote their eventual fusion. Opposition to the reform of 1938 was inhibited during the German occupation (194(M5), but broke out in full force after liberation. A movement for the preservation of traditional DN, approximately as established in 1917, rallied around the name riksmäl, which its supporters preferred as being a 'natural' language compared with the 'artificial' government bokmäl (Haugen 1966a: 103-62). Against vehement opposition by the traditionalists, whose support came largely from the Conservative Party, the government established a permanent advisory Language Commission (Norsk Spräknemnd) in 1952, to replace the previous ad hoc committees. The opposition centered around the instructions given to the Commission, which included a mandate to encourage the fusion of the languages 'on the basis of Norwegian folk speech'. The Language Commission, which was broadly representative of users and teachers of the language, established a secretariat which advised the Ministry on the language form of textbooks (as well as answering inquiries from the public). It published a series of pamphlets, and on its tenth anniversary a volume of essays on problems of language planning (Hellevik and Lundeby 1964). The effects of postwar urbanization and internationalism were apparent, however, in diminished enthusiasm for the NN language and for nationalistic language fusion generally. In 1964 the Labor government appointed a new committee (often known as the Vogt Committee from its chairman, the linguist Hans Vogt) to consider the whole language situation and make proposals that would relieve the tensions engendered by the controversy. In this committee the riksmäl traditionalists were represented for the first time, and the report (published in 1966) recommended in effect the abandonment of government attempts to fuse the languages. It thereby left the future unification of the languages to a natural development under the guidance of a non-political Council for Language Protection (Norsk Spräkvernräd), which would replace the Language Commission. The report has not been acted upon at the present writing (1969), but there can be little doubt that it represents a turning point in the language controversy (Haugen 1966a: 163-275). This controversy has spawned a huge literature, most of which will be found listed in Haugen (1966a), especially in the Nw translation (1969). A detailed survey of the

72

NORWEGIAN

language conflict in the nineteenth century is Burgun (1919-21); a study of the work of one of the main figures in the early controversy is Trygve Knudsen's monograph on P.A. Munch (1923). A brief survey of the main issues, with important documents, is available in Gundersen (1967). A dissertation on the problem by Bleken (1966) defends the thesis that the Nw conflict is not between two linguistic communities, as in other bilingual countries, but between potential language-reformers and nonreformers. He contends that in the discussion the latter have been overlooked, since their status-quo position has generally been misjudged as mere reaction. (For a critique see Bleken, Naes, and Stigen 1969.) There is no doubt that the Nw situation raises serious questions concerning the value of language stability: how much variation can a community tolerate? Today writers are dependent for correct spelling and grammar on wordlists, some of which are authorized (e.g. Krogsrud and Seip for DN, Hellevik 1962 for NN, Aschehoug's lists for both), others not (e.g. Riksmäls-ordliste 1952-). More extensive lists are Sverdrup and Sandvei (1940, 3rd ed. 1961) for DN, Matias Skard (1912, 7th ed. 1962) for NN, and Gundersen (1966) for both. Propaganda, some of which is enlightening, has included a long series of publications from the activist DN movement (e.g. by Bjerke) and a number from the other camp, among which may be mentioned Sigmund Skard (1963) and two symposia by younger men: Mälreising 1967 and Kontur og kontrast (1967).

3.2

Phonology

The standard handbook of Nw pronunciation has been Alnaes' pronouncing dictionary, a valuable guide to traditional D N (1910, 2nd rev. ed. 1925), of which Berulfsen now has published a complete revision (1969). Alnaes also contributed the only available study of sentence intonation (1916) and a guide to proper reading (1932). An English presentation of the pronunciation of D N is now available by Popperwell (1963), in which the sounds are described phonetically according to the Daniel Jones system and rules are given for their distribution in words. Unfortunately this work is innocent of linguistic theory and does not take into account such contributions as Borgstram's pioneer phonemic analysis of Nw (1938), which is based on the principles of N. S. Trubetzkoy. A more recent study of the Trondheim variety of D N by Vanvik (1966) brings a 'phonetic-phonemic' analysis which hugs the phonetic ground pretty closely. Vogt (1939) discussed a case of nonuniqueness, the problem of whether the retroflex consonants of East Nw [s {d 1 n] are unit phonemes or clusters (of r + consonant). He has also analyzed (1942) the structure of monosyllables. The question that has excited the greatest interest among linguists has been that of the so-called 'word tones,' which Nw shares with Swedish (though the realization is different in details). Alnaes described them with musical notes, while Selmer made a series of studies based on kymographic recordings, chiefly of the various urban dialects (Oslo 1920, Bergen 1921, Stavanger 1927; but Sunnmare 1948). These studies made

NORWEGIAN

73

it apparent that the dialects here, as in Sweden, offered virtually opposite melodic curves, so that e.g. the Oslo Accent 2 could resemble a Bergen Accent 1. What Selmer had not taken into account in his purely mechanical analysis of the curves was the temporal relationship of the tone peaks to the stress pulses. When this is considered, it becomes clear that Accent 1 is everywhere characterized by a single high or low peak in the stressed syllable, which may come early or late according to the dialect, resulting in either a rising or a falling tone; Accent 2, on the other hand, usually displays more than one peak, the first normally later than the peak of Accent 1, resulting in a complex curve which may be either rising-falling or falling-rising (Haugen and Joos 1952). As noted above (2.2), this view has been confirmed and further elaborated by öhman for Swedish (with some but not enough consideration of the Nw material). M. Kloster Jensen has contributed several studies to the problem of the 'tonemes' (which in this writer's opinion should be reduced to a single toneme, Accent 2), esp. the paper in which he presents ab. 2,400 minimal pairs (of the type be'kene 'the books'; be'kene 'the beeches') (Jensen 1958) and his dissertation Tonemicity (1961), in which he confirms the existence of a large toneless area around (but not including) the city of Bergen, using listener tests and minimal pairs. Curiously enough, although Jensen is an instrumental phonetician, he does not present a single tone curve picture; his methods have been vigorously criticized (B. Ulvestad in Lg 43.790, 1967), but there can be no doubt that his mapping of the toneless area is substantially correct. An attempt by Vanvik to establish a third accent in Nw (1961) was decisively rejected and the data given a different interpretation (Borgstrom 1962, Haugen 1963). Borgstrom has also analyzed the rules for the application of tones in the Nw pronunciation of Latin (1968). Broch showed in two classic articles (1937, 1939) how the tonal difference could become morphemically distinctive through the elision of vowels in rapid speech. More studies of phonology will be found under the section on dialectology below (3.8). The question of a standard pronunciation for N N has been discussed by Olav Midttun (1960), but so far there is no pronouncing dictionary; each NN speaker gives the letters the pronunciation he would use in his native dialect, the result being a spelling pronunciation which has yet to become a living tradition.

3.3

Grammar

One of the few original thinkers in Nw grammar was August Western, whose Norsk Riksmäls-Grammatikk (1921) remains a classic, not only because it was a remarkably detailed descriptive study of DN in his time, but also because he tried to establish new principles of grammatical analysis. His chief inspiration, as the preface points out, was Jespersen, especially his book Sprogets logik (1913). Western's grammar has been described (by Diderichsen) as difficult to orient oneself in; this is due to his division of the grammar into a 'logical part' and a 'formal part'. The logical part has some

74

NORWEGIAN

similarities to what is now often known as 'deep structure', since it enumerates the underlying semantic relationships of the language, and then states the formal expressions of these. The formal part conversely enumerates the formal expressions and states their meanings. For example, the relation of active to passive is treated first in the logical part, after which follow the ways in which passive can be expressed (-s or auxiliary verb bli, etc.). In the formal part the suffix -s and the auxiliary verbs are listed along with their respective meanings (including the passive). The exemplification is largely from written texts, but the emphasis is on the spoken standard and the attitude is mildly normative. Western's deviations from traditional organization were not followed by later grammarians. Knudsen in his originally stenciled lecture notes on the case system and the pronouns reverted to traditional arrangements (Trygve Knudsen 1941, new ed. 1967). The emphasis here was not so much on describing the current language as on relating it to its history. While Western had limited himself entirely to D N in its colloquial form, Knudsen included many forms from N N so that his books became an exercise in comparative grammar. This was even more true of the grammars published by Olav Naes, which include many interesting and original points of view; the first grammar (1952) was only a 'word grammar', with syntax to follow, but the second (1965) embedded both of these into a complete perspective of the language from phonology to stylistics. Influence is apparent from Diderichsen, Borgstrom, and other linguists, including Americans, but the work is an original and useful introduction to the over-all structure of Norwegian, with special emphasis on syntax. A shorter and more entertaining perspective is that which Berulfsen offers in his grammar (1967), which so far includes only the parts of speech, not the syntax. G. Coward's (1958) grammar of riksmal differs from the preceding in being primarily normative, and in its sharp opposition to the trend that would amalgamate the two languages; it normalizes approximately to the spelling norm of 1917 in its most conservative form, with only some purely graphic changes from 1938. The chief grammar on the N N side has been Leiv Heggstad's (1914, 2nd ed. 1931); a small compendium by Torvik (1966) is now used in university classes. One of the most radical innovations in Nw grammar was an attempt by Flydal (1954) to apply glossematic analysis to the corpus of all book titles published in Norway in 1952; on the whole the result is merely confusing. Lundeby presented a dissertation on the so-called 'double definite' in Nw and the other Sc languages (1965), a result of the co-occurrence of the preposed adjectival definite article (den store) and the postposed nominal article (mannen). The interest of this construction, which Lundeby needlessly calls 'hyper-definite' (overbestemt), following E. Schwyzer, is that in the late Middle Ages it developed in all the Sc languages except Danish. In Norway, where it is universal in the dialects, it therefore became an isogloss between spoken and written Nw; but it has now penetrated into literary D N very rapidly in the course of the last few decades. Finally, we should mention that Diderichsen's syntactical principles have been taken up in Norway also by Bruaas (1965), who bases himself

NORWEGIAN

75

largely on Erik Hansen (1964 = DANISH, above 1.3) in recommending its adoption in the schools. Introductory, simplified grammars for foreign learners are Sandvei (1934) in German; Steblin-Kamenskij (1957) in Russian; Haugen (1937), Marm and Sommerfelt (1943), Berulfsen (1963), and Haugen and Chapman (1964) in English. 3.4

Lexicology

The major lexical handbook of Nw is Norsk riksmälsordbok (NRO) (1937-57), which in two massive volumes covers literary DN from the beginning of the nineteenth century to the present. The principles used in preparing its definitions are discussed in an article by the two chief editors, Knudsen and Sommerfelt (1958). In addition to etymologies, pronunciations, and definitions, the dictionary provides abundant citations. A corresponding dictionary for NN is appearing under the title of Norsk ordbok (1966, first volume A—doktrinär) and edited by Hellevik; this includes not only literary NN but also the dialects. A comprehensive historical dictionary of both literary languages is in preparation under the editorship of Dag Gundersen. Unfortunately there is no good one-volume desk dictionary of either language; the available ones are little more than wordlists intended to establish the spelling and grammatical forms (above 3.1). Prior to NRO the most complete and useful dictionaries were bilingual, e.g. Brynildsen's Norsk-engelsk ordbog (1892, 3rd ed. 1927) or Norsk-tysk ordbog (1926). In recent years have appeared Arakin's Norsk-russisk ordbok (1963) and Haugen's Norwegian-English Dictionary (1966b). An important original contribution to Nw lexicology is Norsk-dansk ordbog by H. Christiansen and N. A. Nielsen (1955). A special kind of Nw glossary is the Fornorskingsordliste by L. Heggstad (1940,9th ed. 1963), in effect a DN to NN dictionary, used either for Norwegianizing one's DN or for writing NN. There is a dictionary of synonyms by Gundersen (1964). Seip studied the Low German loanwords in Nw (1915, 1919), and Aasta Stene the more modern English loanwords (1945). Both of these are important contributions to the study of linguistic borrowing. A collection by Iversen (1939b) presents loanwords in the dialects, particularly in the language of vagabonds and gypsies. Word counting in Nw was introduced by Hans Bergersen, who made a relatively small word count in order to improve mother-tongue teaching, especially spelling, in the early thirties (Bergersen 1935, 1957). The present writer based his American textbooks in Nw on a very large word count of literary works (Haugen 1942c). Further word counts have been made by K. Simonsen, again for pedagogical purposes (1947, 1953). At present a project (entitled STRIL for 'Structure in Language') has been organized at the University of Bergen under the direction of Kolbjern Heggstad, in which modern techniques of data retrieval and computer work are being adapted to the creation of a word count of the present-day language (Universitet i Bergen, Arsmelding 1965-66: 171-2).

76

NORWEGIAN

3.5

Stylistics

There is no general handbook of style or 'correct' Nw, comparable for example to Wellander in Sweden. The reason for this is clearly the language controversy and the consequent rapid changes in taste, encouraged by statesmen and educators, who have deliberately planned to reeducate Nw taste. For this reason the main thrust in modern Nw style has been away from formality (which is associated with 'Danish') in the direction of informal speech (which is associated with 'Norwegian'). Since the literary tradition was less formidable or less cherished than in Denmark and Sweden, it was easier to make oral (muntlig) style an ideal, with a resulting liveliness that risks becoming banal. The latter is the case with such an elementary set of guide rules as Iversen's books on style (1929a, 1939a), in which the emphasis on native speech forms in writing results in a kind of naive simplicism. This tradition is continued in Dale and Sandvei (1953). Andre Bjerke, one of the champions of conservative DN, who is also a brilliant user of the language in poetry and prose, has outlined his conception of levels of Nw style, according to a scale in which Danish elements are the 'higher' and native elements the 'lower' level (1955, 1962). Linguists of some standing have also considered the problem, e.g. Western (1931), but more recently a handbook of usage by Finn-Erik Vinje (1968) rises above the controversies to emphasize and exemplify the ideals of clarity, correctness, and beauty, values that are a permanent part of all good writing. Vinje clarifies the relationship of normative to descriptive linguistics and offers his readers sensible guidance on disputed points of usage. On many points he reflects ideas and attitudes of Swedish stylists, whose work he has studied with profit (above 2.5). Both of the early language reformers, Knud Knudsen and Ivar Aasen, were purists and sought to eliminate foreign words from Nw writing. Both of them created new words and expressions from native materials in an effort to displace the intruders. The tradition has been carried over into modern times by the NN movement, which in some respects has tried to emulate Icelandic practice (below 5.5), e.g. in Gjelsvik (1938). Oddly enough, Greco-Latin words have been accepted, while Dano-German words are still proscribed, though the opposition has relaxed in recent years. Some of the NN innovations have actually entered DN as well, though often with specialized meanings, e.g. brnad 'folk costume', hove 'opportunity', loyve 'permit', or caiques like kringkasting 'broadcasting', fjernsyn 'television', syketrygd 'health insurance'. In recent years, especially since World War II, a flood of Anglo-American words has entered Nw like every other European language, arousing some concern. Here is a cause that could actually command interest in both language camps; a judicious consideration of the problem is offered by Hellevik (1961-62, 1963), who notes the dilemma resulting from the disjuncture between English sound and spelling: either the borrowed words have to be misspelled or mispronounced, since there is a reluctance to respell familiar words like team and jeep as tim and jip (although an earlier generation did change gear and beef to gir and b i f f ) .

NORWEGIAN

77

The first general study of literary style in Nw is Willy Dahl's Stil og struktur (1965), which places Nw stylistic trends in their broader European setting; it also includes a valuable bibliography. There have been a number of studies of the use of dialect in Nw writers, e.g. Trygve Knudsen on Kinck (1927). But the only major contributions in the field have been the dissertations of Dale (1950) on Arne Garborg and Olaf 0ysleb0 on Hamsun (1964). Other studies which include stylistic comments are listed in Dahl's bibliography. The stylistic phenomena of slang and jargon have been treated in a popular book by Marm (1962). A handbook in metrics for N N was prepared by Handagard (1932,2nd ed. 1942), but this has now been completely overshadowed by Hallvard Lie's impressive Norsk verslxre (1967), in which a theoretical introduction is followed by a systematic enumeration of more than 2,000 different meters, with a rich exemplification from Nw verse in both languages.

3.6 Language History The modern era in the study of the history of Nw was ushered in by Marius Haegstad's (1850-1927) monumental work, Vestnorske maalfere fyre 1350 (1906-42), which was published in seven parts, two of which appeared posthumously in 1936 and 1942. Vestnorske maalfere had been preceded by the same author's Gamalt trendermaal (1899) and Maalet i deigamle norske kongebrev (1902), two works which exposed the developments of the medieval language of Tr0ndelag. Vestnorske maalfere presents an enormous corpus of material excerpted from medieval texts and extends far beyond the stated limit of 1350, for material from later texts as well as the modern dialects is included. This work is, however, geographically restricted to the western part of Norway, Iceland, and the Faroes, while the eastern portion of the country (Soler, Oslo, Smälenene, etc.) is excluded. All of Haegstad's works are constructed on a rigid NeoGrammarian basis, and comparisons between changes evinced in older texts and changes of a comparable nature reflected in the dialects are made at every step. Although a vast amount of data is presented in Vestnorske maalfere, it is regrettable that no index has been provided, and this impressive piece of work must remain as a reference work for the specialist. It is a bewildering forest of forms whose pattern does not reveal itself until the entire work has been surveyed. The standard ONw reference grammar is, of course, Adolf Noreen's Altisländische und Altnorwegische Grammatik (1884, 4th ed. 1923), which the author revised in line with the volumes then available of Vestnorske maalfere and C. J.S. Marstrander's Bidrag til det norske sprogs historie i Irland {1915). In the light of the overwhelming influence which Danish exerted upon Nw during the period which he examines, Ragnvald Iversen's Bokmal og talemäl i Norge 15601630 (1921, 1932) is necessarily a comparative grammar. Nw phonological and morphological phenomena are compared and contrasted with corresponding phenomena

78

NORWEGIAN

in Danish, and the pattern of Nw usage at the time is thereby revealed. Iversen is ever careful to question which forms in the Nw texts represent the actual spoken language and which are purely Danish. For example, he notes that Norwegians more often use the neut.plur. without an ending than do the Danes, and he concludes that the unmarked neut.plur. represents the Nw spoken language. In 1914 Didrik Arup Seip (1884-1963) published En Uten norsk spräkhistorie (1914a) as a brief outline guide of the history of the Nw language, and seventeen years later this guide was followed by Norsk spräkhistorie til omkring 1370 (1931). In the preface Seip writes that Norsk spräkhistorie, though preceded by Noreen's (1923) grammar by only eight years, was necessitated because Noreen had often given the false impression that Old Icelandic and ONw were equivalent in many aspects of their development and because Noreen had based his work on a limited number of texts. Then, too, Seip continues, Haegstad had only managed to cover the western portion of the country, while the eastern portion, precisely the one area to which Seip gives major attention, had been omitted. Having discussed the changes which took place in the language through 1150, Seip then divides the remaining period into two geographical and chronological sectors: 1) Trondheim-Bergen 1150-1300, 2) Oslo 1300-1370, which division reflects the shift of the country's administrative center to Oslo and the linguistic innovations which attended that shift. The cut-off point of 1370, rather than Hsgstad's 1350, is well taken, for it is after 1370, not 1350, that the trenchant morphological changes took place which altered the picture of the written language almost beyond recognition. Seip gives a clear list of the MS sources he has used, and this is one of the text's finer achievements. One might say that Seip's grammar is actually a composite of scribal errors which are interpreted as sound changes, and Trygve Knudsen (1936) has shown that many of Seip's examples of sound change are actually due to misreadings on his part. Nevertheless, the majority of these questionable readings were left unchanged in the second edition (1955). Seip merely accepted many of his readings on faith from earlier investigators without bothering to go to the sources, and these earlier scholars had in turn merely accepted readings on faith from critical editions. Such procedure often leads to 'cultural lag' in linguistics, and one illustrative example will suffice. In his Norsk spräkhistorie (1931:262 [1955:326]) Seip dates the analogical replacement of ONw e by ο in the perf.part. of vera 'be' (veret > vore) to about 1300. This dating is based on the uncritical acceptance of a form voret in a fragment of Konungs skuggsja (c. 1280), cited from Flom's (1911) edition by Noreen (1923: §498, anm. 7). Seip's suggestion is echoed by Hoff (1946: §149), who in turn is echoed by Myhre (1952: §131). A careful look at the MS would have revealed that voret here can only be a (miswritten) form of verda 'become' (ONw ordet), since a construction ero....veret is impossible and the main MS quite correctly has ordit. All this is merely to suggest that one cannot use Seip without great caution. Seip's total production comprises an enormous list of articles, and many of the more significant of these have been gathered together in Studier i norsk spräkhistorie (1934)

NORWEGIAN

79

and Nye studier i norsk spräkhistorie (1954a). Seip is what one might call a fine example of the plenary paleographical interpretation of language history, for he was ever ready to propose that a scribal error, or a variant reading (lectio facilior vs. lectio difficilior) reflected phonological or morphological change, and he used this approach to explain many innovations, such as the loss of ö after r and d>t (Seip 1944). Though one may sometimes react rather negatively to his approach and results, his over-all contribution to Nw historical linguistics has indeed been valuable. More recent general histories of Nw are Gustav Indrebe's Norsk mälsoga (1951), and Vemund Skard's Norsk spräkhistorie til 1523 (1967). Norsk mälsoga is the only attempt to date to provide a complete history of the language. Whereas Hsegstad has given a thorough investigation of the language in western Norway to c. 1350 and Seip has surveyed the language in eastern Norway to c. 1370, there remains a gap (c. 1350-1550) of almost two hundred years between the material covered in these works and that presented by Iversen in Bokmäl og talemäl. This is precisely the critical period when major changes, such as the dissolution of the old case system, took place and when written Nw as a national language with literary monuments of note was transformed into DN. It is hoped that further work will be done on the development of the language in this period. Syntax has also been a greatly neglected area and with the exception of a few short articles, such as August Western's "Nye streiftog i gammelnorsk syntaks" (1936), no extensive work has been done on ONw syntax during the latter portion of the Middle Ages (see below 3.7). The standard ONw dictionary is still Fritzner's Ordbog (1883-96), but Anne Holtsmark has made a valuable contribution with the publication of Ordforrädet i de eldste norske händskrifter til ca. 1250 (1955), and Leiv Heggstad's Gamalnorsk Ordbok (1930) is a competent reference dictionary based on Fritzner. With the publication of Läneordstudier (1915, 1919) Seip provided a Nw equivalent of Marius Kristensen's Fremmedordene i det xldste danske Skriftsprog til omkring 1300 (1906 = DANISH). As diplomas represent the bulk of textual material we have from the medieval period after c. 1300, it is hoped that the long projected dictionary of Diplomatarium Norvegicum, as well as the Gammalnorsk ordbok now in progress at the University of Oslo will soon appear. 3.7 Philology Whereas Norway produced a rich variety of literature during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the period from the fourteenth century to the modern era may rightfully be regarded as a twilight zone. In addition to the well known native kings' sagas and chronicles of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, we have many Nw reworkings and translations of what may be regarded as the commune bonum of European medieval courtly literature. For example, the Old French tale of Floire et Blancefloire (c. 1160-1170) was translated into ONw as Flores saga ok Blankiflür (NRA 36, c. 1300-

80

NORWEGIAN

1370) at the end of the thirteenth century, and the same tale was translated into Swedish c. 1311 (MS-Cod. Holm D4, c. 1420-1445); we also have a Middle Low German translation from c. 1300-1325, as well as Diedrik van Assenede's Middle Dutch translation from c. 1250. There is an involved intertwining of borrowing among all of these texts: loanwords, constructions, names, etc., which reflect the lively give and take of medieval intellectual life and present a nightmare of pitfalls and problems for the philologist. After the onset of the Black Death (c. 1347-1350) there was a marked decline in Nw literary activity, and practically the only textual material from c. 1350-1550 are diplomas and cadastral rolls. The bulk of Nw diplomas have been edited and appear in Diplomatarium Norvegicum 1-20 (1847-1915), but the editing of some of the earlier volumes was rather carelessly done, and anyone who makes use of these texts must do so with care. Meager as this material is in comparison with the corpus of Old Swedish texts, it is chronologically fixed and has known proveniences, thereby enabling us to reconstruct the course of linguistic development. As we have noted previously, Nw historical linguists and philologists have left a lacuna of some two hundred years (c. 1350-1550) in their histories of the language. Why they have done so becomes clear when we survey the paucity of texts available. Then, too, there are no critical studies of the material contained in Diplomatarium Norvegicum from c. 1450-1550, the period when the language underwent many critical changes and came under the influence of the Danish Kanzleisprache. The Icelanders received a Bible translation in 1540, which was translated by Odd Gottskalksson (1516-56), who, according to legend, worked at his enterprise in the cow house at Skälholt in order to stay warm. However, the Norwegians were forced to make do with the Danish Bible, and the Norwegians were therefore deprived of a vernacular version of the one book which, more than any other, served to determine the later development of the Danish, Swedish, and Icelandic national languages. The only major pieces of Nw prose we have from this period are Absalon Pederss0n's Dagbog (1552-72), which has been edited by Ragnvald Iversen (1963), and Mattiss St0rss0n's Den norske krenike, edited by Mikjel S0rlie (1962). Both editions were published by Det norske sprak- og litteraturselskap, which since 1956 has published critical editions of texts from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. At the outset of the period of research under consideration here major philological work was done by George T. Flom, who not only edited texts, but also wrote on the Latin script in Norway and Nw paleography in general (Flom 1915a and b, 1917, 1924). Flom (1918) has commented on the Nw portion of Codex Regius 3260,4° and edited (1925) the Borgarting Law as contained in Codex Tunsbergensis (NkS 1642, 4° from c. 1320-1350), which has also been commented upon by Gratvedt (1939a). Flom (1937) has also edited the general law of Gulathing (GkS 1154, fol.) and commented (1930) on a fragment of Konungs skuggsja (Speculum regale). Many older texts have appeared in the publications of Den norske historiske Kildeskriftkommission, which has published the following texts of note: Gustav Indreb0's edition of Sverris saga (1920) and Gamal norsk Homiliebok (1931), O.A. Johnsen's

NORWEGIAN

81

edition of the legendary Olafs saga (1922), O.A. Johnsen and J. Helgason's Olav den heilige (1930-41), and Ludvig Holm-Olsen's Konungs skuggsja (1945). Photographic facsimiles appear in the series Corpus codicum norvegicorum medii xvi (fol. ser. 1950-, qv. ser. 1952-). Gustav Indreb0 (1927b, 1929) has commented on the language of cadastral rolls from the sixteenth century, one of the main sources of information about the language during that period, and shows how Danish steadily gained the upper hand. E. Vägslid (1930) has reviewed the language of medieval legal letters, and Marius Haegstad (1934) has commented on the five different hands at work in the MS of Pidreks saga, which was written c. 1250 by a Norwegian in Bergen on the basis of Low German verses and tales brought to that city by Hanseatic merchants. Some of the most important philological work in recent years has been done by Per Nyquist Gr0tvedt. Grotvedt has attempted to fill in the lacuna left by Hagstad's omission of material from eastern Norway. Grotvedt (1938) has given a survey of some of the most significant features of diplomas from southeastern Norway from c. 1300-1350. Some of these features are younger u-umlaut; u>o>x and a>% in weakly stressed position; vowel harmony; monophthongization of the Common Sc diphthongs; y>iu before rd, rt, I; tl>ll; kn>gn. He then (1939b) surveyed the linguistic relations between southeastern Norway and Bohuslän and concluded that this area represented a transitional area, a fact indicated by previous scholars. Having outlined the distinctive features of the medieval language of this area, he then compiled a tripartite work in which he subjected the textual material from Borgartings lag (0stfold, Vestfold, and Telemark) and the Oslo area to a detailed philological investigation. The three parts of this work are: 1) Lydverket i lovhändskrifter fra Borgartingslag 1300-1350 (1939a), 2) Studier over malet i lagmannsbrev fra Oslo 1350-1450 (1948), 3) Skriftspräktradisjon ved Hallvardskirken og Mariakirken i Oslo 1350-1450 (1954b). Throughout these works Gratvedt stresses the differences between the spoken and the written language, and his major thesis is that the written language failed to keep pace with the rapid changes in the spoken language. Therefore, Gratvedt asserts, the written language became a fossilized relic which was not readily comprehensible and, accordingly, it fell into disuse. Such a theory finds little empirical support, and one should stress the fact that Danish influence post c. 1450 was the main cause for the abandonment of a Nw written language. Then, too, when the changes reflected in letters from c. 1450 are compared with developments in the dialects, it becomes obvious that, had it not been for the onset of the use of Danish as the dominant Kanzleisprache, southeastern Nw probably would have developed into a written language similar to that now spoken in the dialects in Vestfold, 0stfold, and Akershus. Grotvedt says next to nothing about syntax, and M. Nygaard's Norron syntax (1905, reprinted 1966) and HjalmarFalk and AlfTorp's Dansk-norskens syntax (1900) remain the standard works in this area, but both are outdated in view of the philological work completed subsequently. Gr0tvedt (1954a) has also investigated letters from Vestfold c. 1400 and reasserted his thesis on the gap between the spoken and written

82

NORWEGIAN

languages. The only comprehensive survey to date of Nw paleography is D. A. Seip's Paleografi in Nordisk Kultur (1954c). This volume includes a complete listing of ONw and Old Icelandic MSS and resumes of the paleographic features (ligatures, abbreviations, new graphemes, etc.) found in the individual MSS. It is an indispensable reference manual for the philologist and reflects greater care in composition than some of Seip's earlier works. Here Seip makes greater allowance for the influence of English scribal practice on the development of Nw script than he does in Norsk sprdkhistorie, and he makes frequent references to Wolfgang Keller's Angelsächsische Paleographie (1906). Seip appears to regard the difference in usage of p-d as a Nw development, but this feature must be due to insular practice. It is, however, doubtful that Old English influence swept the country at once; it must have penetrated different areas at different times, probably having its effect wherever and whenever a scriptorium was formed around an English cleric. The proof of English influence is reflected in architecture, for the oldest stone churches in eastern Norway, as well as in Trandelag, bear the imprint of Anglo-Saxon influence. One might do well to compare the plans of the Norwegian cloisters and priories with those in East Anglia before one draws any hard and fast conclusions about the extent of English influence on the development of Nw script.

3.8 Dialectology The work of Amund B. Larsen (1849-1928) spelled the beginning of the modern period of research in Nw dialectology (Seip 1929, Iversen 1929, Hoff 1950). Strictly speaking, only his last great work, Sognemälene (1926), falls within the limits of our period. The first portion of Sognemälene consists of an introduction in which Larsen discusses the problem of the proper graphic representation of the phones in various dialects in Sogn and describes their geographical and dialectal relationships. In phonological matters Larsen was influenced by the Rousselot school of phoneticians in Paris, as well as the phonetic studies of J. A. Lundell in Sweden. Larsen attempted to provide an adequate graphic representation for each phonetic (allophonic) variant in the Sogn dialects. He noticed that each cardinal sound has a wide latitude of variation and that, accordingly, it was sometimes difficult to distinguish between minute variants within this latitude (Larsen 1926:41). The core of Sognemälene consists of tabular lists of words from the various dialect areas in Sogn; the citation form for each word is the ONw equivalent of the dialect variant. The amount of dialect information in Sognemälene has been considered so extensive by Norsk mälforearkiv (NMA) as to make a modern synopsis of the dialects in this area unnecessary. The dialect work of Larsen's greatest contemporary, Marius Haegstad (1850-1927) was limited to a few articles, for Haegstad's major accomplishments were careful, exhaustive analyses of older Nw dialects as they are revealed in medieval texts. In his two major works, Gamalt trondermaal (1899) and Vestnorske maalfore (1906-42),

NORWEGIAN

83

Hasgstad sought to reveal dialect features in Nw, Faroese, and Icelandic before c. 1350. His main corpus consisted of medieval texts composed in various dialect areas. Haegstad attempted to relate the various dialect features revealed in these texts to corresponding features in the modern dialect areas where the medieval texts had been composed. Hsgstad's procedure was, of course, somewhat circular. Having isolated dialect features (variants) in medieval manuscripts, he then asserted that these variants bore witness to sound changes. He matched these variants with corresponding variants in a dialect area which was the same as the provenience of the medieval text. From this he concluded that a sound change had taken place in the medieval period. In some cases, however, variants in medieval texts simply lacked equivalents in the modern dialects. The classic instance of this was the lack (older texts) vs. presence (modern dialects) of so-called younger «-umlaut in Tr0ndelag. A scholarly debate over this discrepancy arose between Larsen and Hasgstad after the publication of the latter's Gamalt trendermaal. The Larsen-Haegstad debate clearly exposes one of the essential tenets of the earlier period of Sc dialectology. Generally speaking, Sc dialectologists believed that isolated dialects conserved linguistic features long after they had been lost in the national language (written or spoken), and this was the prevailing view throughout Europe at the time. This static view, while essentially correct, sometimes led to the erroneous conclusion that older texts could be localized on the basis of dialect material alone. True enough, dialects often preserve older variants, but 'the present area of a form may even fail to include the point at which this form originated. It is a very naive error to mistake isoglosses for the limits of single linguistic changes. The results of dialect geography tell us of linguistic borrowing' (Leonard Bloomfield, Language, 1933:480). Though D.A. Seip was not primarily a dialectologist (1915), he also applied the variant hypothesis to dialect geography and in his history of the Nw language (1931). In a series of articles Seip attempted to relate variants in medieval texts to equivalent variants in the modern East Nw dialects (1934, 1954b). Seip uncovered evidence for variants in medieval southeast Nw which he used to ascribe features of Old East Nw to ONw. However, Seip appears to have dated many phonological changes too early. Subsequent research has shown that the state of affairs in modern southeast Nw dialects by no means confirms the existence of all of the Old East Nw features Seip claimed to have uncovered. For example, in her study of the dialects of the eastern Oslofjord (1946), Ingeborg Hoff has shown that the dialects in this area do not essentially deviate from ONw as it was recorded in the rest of the country (see also Kolsrud 1932). These dialects have undergone the oldest sound changes (w-umlaut, breaking, etc.) in the normal West Sc manner. Seip contested this view (1949), and his objections produced a response from Ingeborg Hoff (1949a). Ragnvald Iversen (1882-1959) produced the first work on the syntax of one dialect (1918). Under the direction of Larsen and Haegstad a number of monographs describing the phonology of a particular dialect began to appear. Thus Nw dialectology embarked upon a monograph era similar to that which had been launched in Sweden

84

NORWEGIAN

by the publication in 1877 of Adolf Noreen's Fryksdalsmälets ljudlära. The format for the Norwegian monographs was nearly the same as that used in the Swedish monographs. ONw or Old Icelandic forms were cited as base forms from which dialect variants were derived; as: ONw steinn >dial. sten. Sound changes were couched in the traditional terms of the nineteenth century and the categories of changes were arranged according to traditional grammatical principles; i.e. according to the order of elements in the word and paradigm grammars of the standard handbooks. Though these descriptive monographs were sometimes called grammars, they were hardly grammars in the true sense of the word, for they were only concerned with phonology. Morphology and syntax were rarely discussed. The principal works of Olai Skulerud are prime examples of such descriptive monographs. Other examples are as follows: Helga Home on Aksent og kvantitet i Vaagaamaalet (1917); Vilhjelm Riksheim, Ljodvoksteren i Vefsnmaalet (1921); Mikjel S0rlie, Hedalsmälet (1943); Halvor Dalene, Lydverket i Solumsmslet (1953). Skulerud's dissertation, Telemaalet i umriss (1918), discussed the historical and geographical background, as well as the phonology, of the conservative dialects of eastern Telemark. His most distinguished work was Tinnsmaalet (1922, 1938), the most exhaustive description of the phonology of a Nw dialect to date. Skulerud had originally planned Tinnsmaalet as a four part work. Only the first part, Ijodlsere (phonology) has so far been published. The final three parts, morphology, texts, glossary, were left in manuscript. The wealth of material in Tinnsmaalet is somewhat inaccessible, as an index has never been published for the first two volumes (one is available at NMA). Skulerud's work on Nw dialects was not restricted to Telemark alone, and he published several monographs on other dialects (Norderhov 1926, Adal 1927). In 1920 Marius Haegstad was succeeded in the chair of professor of the Nw language and dialects by Sigurd Kolsrud (1888-1957). Sixteen years later Kolsrud founded NMA and initiated the systematic collection of Nw dialect material. During the years 1931-41 he directed work on the Norsk ordbok (Hellevik 1966). In addition to writing descriptive monographs of the type mentioned earlier, Kolsrud also wrote an important article entitled "Nokre overgangar i indre Austlandsmäl" (1927), in which he attempted to show that the dialects of the inner portion of East Norway had originally been related to the dialects of the Midland. Kolsrud also published a concise survey of Norwegian dialects, Nynorsken i sine mälfore (1951) which, together with Larsen's Oversigt over de norske bygdemaal (1897, 2nd ed. 1948), are the only general surveys of Nw dialects to date. Larsen's Oversigt contains one map, but Kolsrud's Nynorsken i sine mälfore is completely devoid of maps, and in this respect, as well as in clarity of presentation, Hallfrid Christiansen's unfinished Norske dialekter (1946-48), which contains a number of maps and tables of dialect variants, is by far the best general introduction to the study of Nw dialects. Both Kolsrud and Larsen divided Nw dialects into two major groups, East and West Nw, with a secondary peripheral group called North Nw. Kolsrud suggested that the distinctive features of vowel balance and metaphony served to demarcate

NORWEGIAN

85

these major dialect areas, while he employed older administrative boundaries to demarcate smaller dialect areas. In 1951 Kolsrud founded the Norwegian Dialect Atlas of which he served as a director until 1957. Work on this atlas is presently in progress at NMA, though the atlas has still to appear in print. Other dialectologists who have distinguished themselves are O.T. Bei to, Hallfrid Christiansen, and J. Reitan. Reitan (1906) described the phonology and morphology of his native dialect in Aalen, as well as the supra-segmental features of dialects in Trendelag (Reitan 1910), a problem to which he later returned in his doctoral dissertation, Nytrondsk ordforkortning og betoning (1922), in which he treated the problems of apocope, metaphony, and circumflex accent. Reitan also described the phonology and morphology of dialects in Tynnset (1926), Vemdal (1930), and R0ros (1932). The latter is perhaps the best Nw description to date of an urban speech community. R0ros, an important mining community, was founded in 1644, and speakers from various dialect areas were attracted to this area to work in the mines. In Rerosmälet Reitan retraced the history of the settlement of this community and attempted to unravel the strands of the phonological systems which had been fused together. R0ros has preserved some phonological features, such as unmonophthongized au, which have been lost in the surrounding area, and the study of this dialect has thus provided valuable insights for the reconstruction of phonological developments. O.T. Beito, who succeeded Kolsrud as professor in 1958, has been chiefly interested in morphology and syntax. He has written on the feminine /--declension in R-boygning (1942), in which he presents a wealth of dialect material. The corpus of the material he presents could have been considerably clarified by the use of maps. Nevertheless, this work is the first extensive study of a morphological problem since Aasen. Beito has also written on gender shifts in Genusskifte inynorsk (1954), and he has presented an extensive description of the phonology, morphology, and syntax of his native Valdres dialect in Valdres-mälet (1958b). He has also been interested in the simplification and mixture which results when dialect speakers come in contact with the standard language and has described these phenomena as represented by speakers from different age groups in a study of the conservative dialect of Hallingdal (Beito 1958a). Most recently Beito has provided an invaluable research aid with the publication of Norske mälforetekster (1963), which contains representative dialect texts in phonetic and normalized script from the whole of the country. With the publication of an article entitled, "Phonologie et geographie linguistique" (TCLP 4.228-34, 1931), N.S. Trubetzkoy apparently became one of the first linguists to advocate the application of phonemic theory to dialectology. As a brief excursus we may here note an interesting chapter in the history of modern linguistics. The Prague School, founded in 1928, did not adhere to the phonological principles which had earlier been laid down by Adolf Noreen, but rather to the views of the Polish linguist, Baudouin de Courtenay. Consequently, few of the leading Swedish linguists

86

NORWEGIAN

in the 1930s accepted phoneme theory as formulated in Prague School terms. For example, note the eminent Swedish linguist Björn Collinder's (1938) rejection of phoneme theory as cited by Trubetzkoy in his Principes. This pernicious rejection on the part of Swedish linguists soon cut them off from active participation in the development of structural linguistics during the 1940s and 1950s and probably serves to explain why they have failed to apply structural approaches in dialect research. However, such a rejection was not made by Nw and Danish linguists and dialectologists. Two years after his article appeared, Trubetzkoy's suggestions were put into practice by Hallfrid Christiansen (1886-1965) in her doctoral dissertation, Gimsey-malet, fonologi og orddannelse (1933), which has been characterized as 'the work of a pioneer seeking to bring new points of view and material' (Haugen 1948). Indeed, Gimseymälet, which presents a synchronic and diachronic structural analysis of a dialect in Lofoten in northern Norway, was regarded as revolutionary when it appeared. Sigurd Kolsrud, ever a traditionalist, regarded the synchronic portion as superfluous (1952), though this is the very section which formed the basis for her epochmaking explanation of apocope. In Norske dialekter (1948:193^4) she gave an account of apocope in which she showed that in dialects in which apocope was less extensive the very suprasegmental and analogical conditions existed which her critics had dismissed as purely theoretical. Hallfrid Christiansen has also made a systematic collection of dialect material from northern Norway, and this material, presently located at NMA in the form of c. 80,000 dictionary slips, was intended to appear as a Northern Nw dialect dictionary, but this plan has never been realized. In Ranvzringsdialekten (1966) she described a southern North Nw dialect area which has recently become an industrial center. This dialect, which has eastern Nw features, may be designated as the most northerly of East Nw dialects. Hallfrid Christiansen (1954) objected to Kolsrud's and Larsen's division of Nw dialects into two major (East-West) groups and proposed a four-way division into East, West, Trendelag, and North Nw dialects. Though several objections can be raised to this division and the criteria upon which it is based, it seems quite sound in terms of historical and linguistic facts. Perhaps it is best to embrace a compromise with the suggestion that Trandelag be regarded as a transitional area between North, East, and West Nw dialect areas. Hallfrid Christiansen's research not only spanned dialectology proper, but also word geography, historical linguistics and place-name studies. In reality she never strictly adhered to any one school of thought and was often entirely eclectic in methodology, selecting the approach which seemed best to serve her purposes and thereby achieved some outstanding results. One of the ancillary sciences to dialectology is experimental phonetics, a field that was developed in Norway by E.W. Selmer, who also made significant contributions to dialectology. Selmer has investigated apocope and circumflex (1930), vowel balance and tonemicity in the dialect of Tynnset (1950), and tonemicity generally (1954). These studies offer a firm basis for the objective description of the phenomena in question, for they contain kymographic pictures which provide new insights as to

NORWEGIAN

87

their acoustic nature. Selmer has also employed the so-called tonhöjdsmätare which had been developed by E.A. Meyer, who introduced experimental phonetics to Sweden in Uppsala, to measure shifts of tonal peaks. Eilert Mo (1923) also employed experimental phonetic techniques to describe the nature of the musical accent in his native Rindal dialect in Nordmore. Dialect research in Norway has often been conducted by provincial school teachers who are either intimately familiar with or native speakers of the dialects spoken in the areas in which they teach. Their expert knowledge of the dialects they describe makes their work invaluable, though it may often lack technical polish. Examples of such works are: Eilert Mo, Todalsmaalet (1922), and Lars L. Soreide, Nordfjordmdlet (1930). Technically speaking, one of the best of such studies is that by Hans Rypdal (1919) in which he describes a dialect in Romsdal, though he also presents data from other dialects in the area. In addition to monographs on the phonologies and morphologies of individual dialects by provincial teachers, mention should also be made of the ever growing number of dialect dictionaries which they have compiled. Examples of such works are: Ola J. Rise, Opdalsmäl (1933), Hans Reynolds, Porsgrunnsmaal (1952), Ludvik Enmo, Ordliste til mälet i Budal i S0r-Tr0ndelag (1957), Ole Brävoll, Vestfoldmäl (1963), and Johan Hveding, Hdloygsk ordsamling (1968). Provincial teachers have often been extremely helpful in collecting and contributing dialect material to the various dialect archives in Norway. For example, the present author was astounded when he received over 250 responses to his questionnaire recently distributed by NMA. Thus, in recent years both NMA and the dialect archive in Bergen, founded in 1924 and presently attached to Institutt for Nordisk Filologi ( = INF), which houses collections of material collected by, among others, Per Thorson and Gunnvor Rundhovde, have grown enormously. The principal Nw journals for the dissemination of dialect information are Maal og Minne (Oslo 1909-) and Norsk tidsskrift for sprogvidenskap (Oslo 1928-). An index of articles published in MM from 1909 through 1960 is found in vol. 52 (1961). Older texts and more popular accounts of dialects have appeared in Syn og Segn and Fram dd frendar, as well as in the various so-called bygdeboker, parish histories, which are devoted to local history and folklore. Then, too, several articles have appeared in Den norske turistforenings drbok; representative examples are: R. Iversen, "Litt om Trandermäl" (1930), D. A.Seip, "Romsdalsmalet" (1933b), O.T.Beito, "Mälog namn" (1939), Per Tylden, "Sognemälet"(1944), D.A.Seip, "S0rlandsk"(1954b), but these articles rarely offer new material. As we have mentioned earlier, the application of modern linguistic methods to dialect problems was not altogether neglected by Nw dialectologists during the initial stages of the development of phoneme theory. Nevertheless, although these methods were applied in the area of general linguistics and in investigations of foreign languages, they were not ordinarily applied in Nw dialectal studies. Before discussing some recent advances in synchronic descriptions, we should mention the more traditional studies by Per Thorson and Einar B. Skänlund. Skänlund has made a detailed

88

NORWEGIAN

study of the Salta dialect in Saltamdlet (1933) in which phonemic oppositions, though not so termed, are brought out by means of minimal pairs, e.g. sou sg. (sheep) vs. sSu pi. Nevertheless, Skänlund's work is essentially traditional in scope. Thorson's Malet i Nordaust Ryfylke (1929) is distinguished by his careful attention to detail and his solid understanding of phonetics. These attributes are also revealed in his investigation of the affrication of velar consonants (Thorson 1954). In Skjetvemdlet (1946), a study of a dialect area in 0stfold, Ingeborg Hoff discusses some instances of phonemic merger, but this work is otherwise couched in traditional terms. Further information about dialects in 0stfold is provided by Reidar Myhre in Vokalismen i Iddemälet (1952) in which he discusses the second major dialect area of 0stfold and its relationship to neighboring Swedish dialects. This work, too, falls into the category of traditional monographs, and Myhre has often merely uncritically accepted many of Ingeborg Hoff's explanations in her earlier work (Hoff 1946). In her description of the dialect of Numedal (1949b) Ingeborg Hoff has taken the further step of proposing a reconstruction of an older state of the dialect. Ivar Skre has described the dialect of Fana, a neighboring parish to Bergen, in Fanamälet (1957) in which he establishes the phonemic inventory of the Fana dialect, as well as of the dialects in the surrounding area, and presents them in tabular form and on maps. Gunnvor Rundhovde (1964) has made an extensive survey of the dialect of Hamre in Nordhordland, wherein distinctions are made in terms of age groups and local variations with phonetic inventories for each. The oldest speakers were shown to have thirteen vowel phonemes and three diphthongs, while the youngest have but nine. Cases of loss and merger are discussed extensively in this work which definitely ranks as one of the finer accomplishments of recent work in Nw dialectology. It is one of the few works in which the relation between phonemic and phonetic presentation is determined purely on phonetic grounds, given knowledge of contrast. On the morphological level, Kjell Venäs has treated the conjugation of strong verbs in the dialects in a traditional manner in his doctoral dissertation, Sterke verbi norske mälfere (1967). Venäs has undertaken the enormous task of investigating the inflectional variations of all the strong verbs in the language, but he has seldom referred to Swedish or Danish developments when doing so might have provided the correct explanation. For example, in his discussion of the /-less forms of bli, an analysis of the Swedish material would have shown that bi probably spread to Eastern Norway from Central Sweden and that bli>bi is due to its frequent occurrence in weakly stressed position. Nevertheless, when used with caution, this work should serve as a valuable reference manual for future research. Recent interest in dialect syntax has been stimulated by O.T. Beito, while Einar Lundeby (1965) has described the development of the use of the double definite with substantives from the ONw period through the modern dialects by making use of ballads, as well as dialect material. Another study in which linguistic differences are described in terms of age groups is Anders Steinsholt's Mälbryting i Hedrum (1964), which was written as early as 1938.

NORWEGIAN

89

Steinsholt has shown that urban folk speech has had greater influence on dialect speakers than the standard language. A brief study of the colloquial speech in the industrialized urban area of Odda in Hardanger has been made by Mikjel Sarlie (1959). Here it is shown that, although influence from Bergen speech is clearly discernible on the phonological level, morphological and syntactic features are firmly rooted in the local dialect. This suggests that Albert Dauzat's (Les Patois, 1927:49— 55) thesis that syntax and morphology, in that order, are least susceptible to external influence is correct. Andreas Bjorkum (1968) has reviewed the speech of a new industrial area in Ardal in Sogn and indicated important differences in speech between various age groups and recent settlers vs. native inhabitants. Scholars who have applied structural methods have devoted a great deal of attention to suprasegmental features. In an extremely informative article Magne Oftedal (1952) has convincingly shown that Accent 1 in the umlauted comparative must be secondary. Einar Haugen and Martin Joos (1952) have investigated tone and intonation patterns. They have divided the sentence into stress measures and rejected word accent. Irina Efremova, K. Fintoft, and H. Ormestad (1965) have conducted phonetic experiments and shown that many East Nw informants were able to determine the presence of Accent 2 after having heard the first mora of stressed syllables. Haugen (1954) has studied the musical accent of the dialect of Oppdal in Tr0ndelag and established phonetic conformity between circumflex accent and Accent 1. For other studies see the account above (3.2). The phonetician Arne Vanvik (1966) has made a phonetic-phonemic analysis of the speech of Trondheim in which he maintains that vowel quality is distinctive in long syllables. Vanvik's interpretation of Trondheim speech, based on his own idiolect, and a recent study by Even Hovdhaugen (1967) of the Venabygd dialect are the only full-scale structural descriptions of Nw dialect phonology to date. The only attempt at a comparative structural study of the dialects is by Haugen (1942a). Haugen (1942b) has also made a structural analysis of the clusters sl/tl and suggested an explanation for their coalescence in the dialects. Finally, Kenneth Chapman has attempted to explain the many linguistic similarities between West Nw dialects and Insular Nordic (Icelandic, Faroese, and the remnants of Norse found on Shetland, the Orkneys, and the Hebrides ('Norn')) in his dissertation, Icelandic-Norwegian linguistic relationships (1962). He weighs and considers the two theories that have often been advanced for these similarities: dependent vs. independent development, and concludes that the former has the greater explanatory power. His analysis is presented in structural terms, but a number of errors have vitiated his conclusions. Nevertheless, his basic thesis must be taken into account as one explanation of the striking similarities between these areas. In 1931 the Nw linguists Seip and Selmer spent a semester in the United States gathering materials on Nw dialects in exile. None of their work has been published, but the task of investigating the emigrant dialects was undertaken by Haugen, a pupil of George T. Flom, who had pioneered in this field. Haugen's studies were summed

90

NORWEGIAN

up in The Norwegian language in America (1953) and Bilingualism in the Americas (1956). His recordings of American Nw speech are preserved in the language archives of Indiana University and in the archives of the Scandinavian Program at Harvard University. In summary we can conclude that Nw dialectologists have generally been concerned with descriptions in traditional terms of the morphologies and phonologies of specific dialects or dialect areas. They have not, at least to the extent that their Swedish colleagues have, turned their attention to word geography and the use of dialect data in the solution of historical problems. However, unlike Swedish dialectologists, they have begun to apply modern descriptive methods to dialect investigations. They have not made extensive use of maps to illustrate the distributional patterns of dialect phenomena. Bandle (1967) has shown the possibilities by his mapping of terms for domestic animals in Norwegian, Faroese, and Icelandic. The increased use of maps, together with further application of modern methods, seems to be the area in which future work needs to be done. For further details the reader is referred to critical surveys by Haugen (1948), Bandle (1962), and Hoff (1968).

3.9 Place Names The modern era of place-name research in Norway began with the work of Oluf Rygh (1833-1899), whose major contribution was the planning, writing, and editing of the monumental work, Norske Gaardnavne (1897-1936). During his lifetime Rygh managed to publish or prepare for publication three and a half volumes plus the introduction to this series. The series had been proposed in the Norwegian parliament in 1878, and eight years of collecting material passed before the first volume appeared in 1897 (Indreb0 1927a). After Rygh's death in 1899 the editing of the series was taken over by, among others, Rygh's brother, Karl (1839-1915). With the publication of an index in 1936 the series was finally completed. Norske Gaardnavne is the main source of information about Nw place names. Rygh's introduction (1897) is, in terms of clarity of presentation and the wealth of material presented, absolutely essential reading for anyone embarking upon the study of Nw place names. Norske Gaardnavne served as the model for Danmarks Stednavne and the Swedish series of volumes of place names from particular areas (above 2.9). After Rygh the most distinguished student of place names in Norway was Magnus Olsen. Building on Rygh's work, he devoted himself particularly to the study of theophoric place names. In his first major work (1915) he presented evidence concerning pagan cults in the Nw place names. In his next study (1926), available in English translation (1928), he worked his materials into a coherent account of the social history of the pre-Christian era. In a detailed study of the place names of Land, a community in eastern Norway (1929), he uncovered one layer after the other as he proceeded backward in time to the oldest level of settlement, using linguistic, topo-

NORWEGIAN

91

graphic, and textual evidence. Olsen's ingenious interpretations of individual place names and his discussions of methodology are embodied in a series of shorter articles, some in Arkiv and others in Maal og Minne. His early Stednavnestudier (1912) presents interpretations of individual place names in a format that might be useful as a reference guide for the beginning student. Norske Gaardnavne was also an important source of information for the place-name research of Alexander Bugge (1870-1929), and this is particularly noticeable in his important study, "Tingsteder, gilder og andre gamle midtpunkter i de norske bygder" (1920). The importance of place names in uncovering cultural history has also been the subject of a number of articles by Anton Espeland. Many other place-name scholars have followed in the footsteps of Alexander Bugge and Magnus Olsen in making important contributions to the study of the history of religion and local institutions in the light of place-name evidence. Among such scholars Halvdan Koht, Asgaut Steinnes, and Gustav Indreb0 are particularly worthy of mention. Morphology in place names has been discussed by Arnfinn Brekke in his study of the use of prepositions (1918). Much has also been written about nature names, a type of place name left largely uninvestigated by Rygh. Leiv Heggstad has written on field names in Hordaland (1925) and Gustav Indrebe has collected all the names in a single community with the help of the school children (1921), while Erling Eriksen has written on names in the province of Troms (1931). The place names of the Norwegian colony on the island of Man have been the subject of a long article by Marstrander (1932), and the name of Trondheim was the subject of acrimonious debate in the early 1930s (Indrebo 1930, Kvälen 1931). The main source for articles on Nw place names is the journal Maal og Minne, which had Magnus Olsen as its first editor. In 1921 a place-name archive {Norsk stadnamnarkiv) was founded in Oslo for the collection of place-name material (MM 1927). The archive is now located at Oslo University at Blindem and is under the direction of Per Hovda. The most accessible introduction to and survey of Nw place-name research through 1939 is that written by Magnus Olsen in Ν ordisk kultur (1939). The post-war period saw the steady growth of interest and research in place-name studies in Norway, and major contributions were made by a younger group of scholars. For example, Olav T.Beito has written about outfarms (1944), while Per Hovda has been chiefly interested in river names (1966). In Norske fiskemed (1961) Hovda has discussed a neglected type of place name. The word med (ON mid) means 'fishing bank'. Each man determined his personal fishing bank in the local bay by taking sights (also called mid) from prominent geographical features on the shore-line, and the fishing bank took its name from these features. Interestingly enough, this method of determining fishing banks was probably common to all Sc countries, and it is practiced even today in Shetland. In Stadnamn ρά Voss (1949) Leiv Heggstad has analyzed the place names of a particular area, as does Sigurd Dahl Midttun in Stad-

92

NORWEGIAN

namti i Ärdal i Sogn (1958), as well as Lars Ekxe in Stadnamn frä

Midt-Jotunheimen

(1960). In a series of studies Eivind Vägslid has proposed etymologies of place names. In the most recent of these he presents a detailed investigation of names in -aide {-old, -elde) and -ivle (1958, 1963).

4

FAROESE

4.0 General

As the smallest literary language community in Scandinavia the Faroe Islands tend to be overlooked, even inside Scandinavia. This neglect is augmented by its political dependence on Denmark, which for a long time looked on the Faroese (Fa) as colonials destined to be completely Danicized. This was indeed the opinion of Svabo, the eighteenth-century investigator of Fa; nevertheless he did yeoman work in rescuing the language: he transcribed its precious ballads from the Middle Ages and made its first dictionary. Today, however, Fa is taught in the schools as the first language, alongside the Danish of the central government. The first grammarian to call attention to Fa was Rasmus Rask, who included it in his 1811 grammar of Icelandic and (mistakenly) sketched it as a dialect of that language (Skärup 1964:3). Fa was firmly established as a distinct language by the creation in 1846 of a historically-oriented orthography, the work of V. U. Hammershaimb. After him, the chief native linguists have been Jakob Jakobsen (1864-1918) and Christian Matras (1900-), who have made numerous contributions to the exploration of Fa. Matras was the only professor of Fa, having held this position at Copenhagen since 1951; in 1965 he transferred to Torshavn, where a chair was established for him at the new Faroese Academy (Frodskaparseti). Since 1952 a scientific journal has been published annually by the Foroya Frodskaparfelag under the title of Frodskaparrit (13 vols, by 1964), in which articles on the Fa language are included. In Copenhagen an irregular series of Fxroensia has been published since 1943 by Selskabet til Udgivelse af faroske Kildeskrifter og Studier. As the following account will show, the present generation of scholars in Fa includes a number of non-native speakers, who have been drawn to the study of the language by its unique form and fate. One of these is the German Otmar Werner, who has performed a signal service to scholarship by summing up in Orbis (1964a, 1965) the entire body of Fa linguistics. The present survey is heavily indebted to him; readers wishing a fuller account should turn to his articles.

94

FAROESE

4.1

Normalization

There is no official norm of Fa, but we may regard the dictionary of M. A. Jacobsen and Christian Matras (1927-28) as having established the prevailing norm. This represents the end result of a long discussion of principles, in which V. U. Hammershaimb and Jakob Jakobsen were the main participants. Jakobsen tried to modify Hammershaimb's norm in the direction of spoken Fa, but with little success (Jakobsen 1957:23-54). The written norm is in many respects fashioned after Icelandic, though Fa pronunciation is even farther away from Old Norse than is Icelandic. The reason for the success of an etymological norm is the usual one of its supralocal nature, Fa being dialectally very diverse: besides, as pointed out by O'Neil (1964), it reflects more adequately the morphophonemic structure of the language. Hammershaimb also had in mind its visual resemblance to the other Nordic languages (Werner 1964a: 487). The spelling problems thereby created for Faroese children are reflected in the list of Ί000 difficult words' by J. P. Sigvardsen (1962). Danish continued to be virtually the sole language of school instruction until 1912; in 1938 Fa was put on an equal footing, and in 1948 (when home rule was established) it became the chief language. The development of Fa orthography has been discussed by Christian Matras (1951, 1954) and Lockwood (1956). The most complete survey of its history is that of Djupedal (1964a).

4.2

Phonology

The standard transcription of Fa in phonetic symbols was invented by Jakob Jakobsen and presented in 1891 in his (and Hammershaimb's) Fserosk Anthologi, from which it was adapted for the first edition of Jacobsen and Matras' dictionary (1927-28). Lockwood created a new transcription on the principles of the IPA (1951) and gave it general currency in his English textbook of Fa (1955). While Naert (1958) called for a narrower transcription, Matras in the second edition (1961) of his dictionary moved in the opposite direction by employing only a broad, supposedly phonemic transcription, keyed to a phonetic description in the introduction by Jorgen Rischel. Rischel has continued his work on Fa in the first and so far only spectroscopic analysis (1964), in which some of the vowels are diagrammed. A kymographic study by Selmer (1924) established the absence of word tones in Fa, a result confirmed by Martin Kloster Jensen (1961) through the use of listening tests. Most of the interest shown in Fa phonology by other non-Fa scholars has been devoted to organizing the rather unusual vowel system according to some set of general linguistic principles. This began in 1949 with the attempt by M. Bjerrum to apply glossematics, resulting in an extreme reduction of the vowel phonemes which took into account not only their phonetic quality but also their morphophonemic alternation (so that e.g. /ö/ was identified with /ou/ because they alternate in related

FAROESE

95

grammatical forms). In 1960 she applied a similar technique to the consonants as well, as did Skärup (1960). American structuralist theory rejected morphophonemic alternation as a basis for phonemic interpretations, e.g. in C. F. Hockett's criticism of Bjerrum {IJ AL 18.92^1,1952) and in Chapman's (1962) and Werner's (1963) analyses. Finally, O'Neil (1963a, 1964) has applied generative principles, with results that show extensive agreement with the historical and orthographic systems of Fa. S. Anderson (1969) has analyzed rule ordering in the Faroese (and Icelandic) vowel system. The short monophthongs are easily analyzable as forming a symmetrical seven-vowel system (3 + 3 + 1) containing / i y u + e 0 o + a/; Bjerrum's analysis into six (1960:40) is erroneous, as is Chapman's identification of /y/ (orthographic u) as /o/ (1962:131). The evidence for the seven-vowel system is neatly displayed in Rischel (1964:107-9). The major problem is the relation of these to the long vowels, which tend (as in English) to be diphthongal and are not easily identifiable with their short counterparts in a one-to-one relationship, as in most other Sc languages. There are thirteen long vowel nuclei and they can be divided into either opening /ee 00 00 ea oa/ or closing, with either a front-unrounded glide /ij ej aj oj uj/ or a back-rounded glide /yw uw ow/. (For a slightly different notation see Rischel 1967-68.) If one includes loanwords, an /aa/ may be added. But how one relates these depends entirely on the importance one attributes to morphological information in the solution of phonological problems. The same applies to the consonant system, in which Werner (1963) has considered the role of aspiration and devoicing in Fa and concluded (contrary to this writer's 1958 analysis of Icelandic — see ICELANDIC) that voiceless aspirates are phonemic. He has also accepted the questionable notion that vowel quantity, not consonant quantity, is phonemic (contrary to Hreinn Benediktsson's analysis of Icelandic = 1963d ICELANDIC). These problems are still open to discussion and further research.

4.3

Grammar

A grammatical survey by Krenn (1940a) is little more than a German translation of the standard Fa grammar by Jäkup Dahl (1908). Lockwood's Introduction (1955) is an original work and admirably suited for learning Fa, although (or perhaps because) it is entirely traditional in its structure. The phonology is thin, but the coverage of inflections and syntax is entirely adequate for the beginner. The book concludes with a short reader and a glossary. There have been virtually no monographic studies of the grammar of spoken Fa, which often differs widely from the restorations of the literary language. One such study is Hamre's analysis of the genitive (1961), which shows the extent to which this 'lost' case actually exists in speech and in modern writing. 4.4

Lexicology

Fa was fortunate in getting an early start on the collection of its vocabulary by the

96

FAROESE

massive dictionaries of J.C. Svabo (1746-1824), which are only now being edited for publication by Matras. Svabo's glossary to the ballads was printed in 1943 and the first volume of his great dictionary appeared in 1966. The entries are in a virtually phonemic transcription and are provided with grammatical information as well as translation into Danish and Latin (see review by Haugen in ScS 40.159-63, 1968). M.A. Jacobsen and Chr. Matras prepared the first modern dictionary in 1927-28, with pronunciation, grammatical information, and translations into Danish. The aims of the dictionary were practical and its approach normative, since one of its functions was to demonstrate the viability of Fa as a literary language. The second edition (1961) was greatly expanded in coverage and somewhat less puristic. Among the scholarly needs are a dialect dictionary, an etymological dictionary, and dictionaries from other European languages into Fa. This last need is to some extent met by J. av Skaröi's Danish-Fa (1967) dictionary and J. viö Anna's dictionary (1961) of Fa replacements for Danish words, but its goals are puristic rather than lexical (see below).

4.5

Stylistics

Although a modest literature has sprung up in Fa since the turn of the century, with a number of able writers, there is not yet any study of stylistic problems. Fa speech is strongly Danicized, as one might expect, and in attempting to create a worthy language of literature most of the effort has been aimed at replacing the Danish words with native ones, often created on the model of corresponding Icelandic words. An interesting analysis by Djupedal (1964b) of the language in Schröter's 1823 translation of the Gospel of St. Matthew demonstrates some of the problems faced by Fa writers when they attempted themes that went beyond the requirements of everyday conversation. The folkloristic, chiefly ballad, texts that had previously been almost the only Fa writing provided no adequate replacements for the well-inculcated Danish vocabulary. This was to come only with Hammershaimb and his followers, who have step by step 'purified' the language as far as this can reasonably be expected. The activity has been intensified since Fa became a school language. In 1937 a society called Foroya Mdlfelag published a list of occupational names; in 1944 one Hanus viö Ä put out a list of postal terms. In 1960 Johannes av Skaröi published a list of administrative and governmental terms. A really massive attack on the problem was the 'unFaroese-Faroese' dictionary of Jogvan viö Anna which began appearing in 1961 and purported to give good Fa equivalents for the commonly used Danish words. The author's admitted model was a similar 'un-Norwegian-Norwegian' dictionary by Knud Knudsen in 1881. While the point of view is unrealistically puristic, the book is useful for its many citations of older literature. Meanwhile the Fa authorities have succeeded in gaining for their countrymen a complete Bible, which appeared in 1961, after the New Testament of 1937.

FAROESE

97

A first attempt at a structural analysis of literary style is O'Neil's study of a poem by Djuurhuus (1963b).

4.6 Ijmguage History The most extensive survey of Old Fa morphology and phonology to date is that by Marius Haegstad in his Vestnorske maalferefyre 1350 11:212 (1917:63-173). In lieu of early textual material, Haegstad turned to more modern texts in an attempt to reconstruct the language of the earliest period, and, accordingly, many of the forms he cites are hypothetical. On the basis of comparison with older Norwegian sources, Haegstad derived Fa from southwest Norwegian. Häkon Hamre (1941) has investigated u-umlaut in Fa and concluded that Fa originally had w-umlaut, which was later lost due to influence from Danish in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and then reintroduced from the 'genuine' provincial speech in which umlauted forms had lived on from the earliest period. Hamre's theory has been criticized by Gun Widmark (1959:315-16), who contends that the fluctuation between umlauted and unumlauted forms is due to reciprocal influence between Norwegian and insular Nordic, and she suggests that Fa consistently reacted against unumlauted forms. Hamre has also investigated Fa in the early modern period in Fxreymälet i tiden 1584-1750 (1944) in which he attempted to date the various distinctive phonological developments, such as affrication, which serve to set Fa apart from standard Danish and Icelandic. Hamre showed that most of these changes must have taken place quite early, though it remains an open question whether or not they took place during the Middle Ages. One of the difficulties Hamre encountered was the nature of his corpus, which is so overladen with Danicisms that it is often hard to distinguish between Fa and Danish forms. For example, if we find Horn ~ Hodri, Hottn, then we know, on the basis of the modern dialects, that the latter are Fa while the former is Danish. As early as 1924 Marius Kristensen had shown that innovations such as lenition, affrication, Verschärfung, loss of initial A, and certain vocalic mergers, do not mark Insular Sc alone, but comprise a larger West Sc area. Kristensen had also discussed peculiarly Fa phonological and morphological features in his Folkemaal og Sproghistorie (1933). In addition to his review (1946a) of Hamre's Fzreymälet, Pierre Naert (1946b) wrote an article on the phonotactics of distinctive Fa changes such as p>h; pn, tn>kn; m>w before I, n,r;rn> dn. Arguing that the last change had not taken place over nn, Naert subsequently (1956) reinvestigated the shift rn>(r)dn. Matras (1952) has taken up the subject of Fa Verschärfung (cf. OIc brii and Fa briigv) which is comparable to Verschärfung in Proto-Sc and Gothic (cf. OIc tveggja, Gothic twaddje and Crimean Gothic add). This topic has recently received a thorough investigation by Harold Roe (1965). Matras (1953) has also studied the c h a n g e f n > d n (k0fna>k6dna). Synchronic-diachronic studies of weakly stressed final vowels in Fa have been made by Bengt Hesselman in Huvudlinjer (1948-53), Hagström (1961, 1967), and

98

FAROESE

Werner (1964b). Matras (1960) has compiled a short historical phonology in Fssrosk sprog. Amundsen (1964) has made a first attempt to order the rules of development of the vowel system. One of the classical problems of the historical development of Fa has been that of whether these innovations are attributable to contact with other Sc languages, primarily Norwegian. Chapman (1962) has argued that the many similarities between Fa and Western Norwegian dialects are to be explained in terms of later sustained contact, rather than parallel developments. 4.7

Philology

Our main sources of knowledge of the Fa language from c. 1250 to the Reformation are diplomas and legal texts from this period, few of which have been preserved. Much of this material has been collected and edited by Jakob Jakobsen in Diplomatarium Fxroense (1907), and C. Baerentzen has published a collection of legal documents in yEldre Love og Bestemmelser om Landboforhold paa Fsereerne (1911) in which the author presents a thorough introduction to legal terms and glosses. In his monumental work, Vestnorske maalfere fyre 135011:2/2 (1917:63-4), Marius Haegstad has given a list of medieval Fa texts. In view of the paucity of sources our knowledge of the language during this period is necessarily limited, and it is not certain whether any of this material actually represents Fa or Norwegian as written by Fa scribes. On the basis of vowel harmony, w-umlaut, and other phonological criteria Marius Kristensen (1925) has asserted that hand 2 in Hauksbok (post 1300) may represent a Fa scribe who lived in Norway. It has also been suspected that Lund 12, a legal codex written before 1314 in Bergen, was composed by a Fa scribe. M. Sorlie has attempted to confirm this assertion in his thorough study of this manuscript, Fxroysk tradisjon i norront τηάΐ (1936a), in which he goes so far as to assert that the scribe was a cleric from Sandoy. In a short article (1936b), S0rlie has attempted to identify persons associated with the most important Fa codices, and he has summarized his results in "Biskop Arnes lovbok, Eit faerosk bokverk frä midalderen" (1938). Jon Helgason (1951,1952) has interpreted the barely legible Fa glosses and additions to the legal text, Stockholm 4to Nr. 33. J. Agerholt (1959) has studied the sources, as well as the language, of Sauebrevet, one of the most famous of Fa texts, which Häkon Magnusson had composed for the Faroes in 1289. From the sixteenth century on we are in possession of a number of texts and diplomas which reveal Fa under a layer of Danish graphemic and syntactic features. A collection of documents and letters from the sixteenth century has been published by Evensen under the title: Savn tilforoyingasogu i 16. eld(1908— 14), which forms a supplement to Diplomatarium Fxroense. Anton Degn (1938) has published with commentary a number of previously unpublished diplomas from the period 1534-1639. From 1584 onward we have Jordebeger og jordebogsregnskaber, from 1614+ Lagtingsprotokoller, from 1655+ Vartingsprotokoller and from 1722+ Matrikelboker, none of which have been published.

FAROESE

99

The most extensive post-Reformation and pre-modern sources for Fa are the monumental manuscripts of Jens Cristian Svabo (1746-1824). His collections of Fa ballads (kvxdi), which have their roots in the Middle Ages and reflect older stages of the language, are of interest to the linguist and the literary historian alike. Christian Matras has published Svabo's collection of kvxdi from 1781-82 as Svabos fxreske visehaandskrifter (1939a). Jon Helgason has made a detailed study of these and other kvxdi in "Den eldste optegnelse av faereiske kvad"(1924). Matras has published J.H. Schröters optegnelser af Sjüröarkvxöi (1951-53), and he has also edited the most extensive collection of Fa ballads to date in Foroya kvxdi, Corpus carminum Fxroensium a Sv. Grundtvig et J. Bloch comparatum (1941-54). M. S0rlie has made a philological investigation of an early transcription of ballads from Sandoy in Om malet i Johannes Klemensens kvxdeoppskrifter (1966), and he has shown that some dialectal features (e.g. 0 > e) have subsequently been lost in this area.

4.8

Dialectology

Although the Faroes and Iceland were largely settled by the same peoples, Icelandic has few dialectal variants, while Fa presents an entirely different picture, with widespread and distinctive dialect cleavage. This distinction between Iceland and the Faroes may be due to the fact that, while Iceland had a more or less standard written language throughout the Middle Ages, the Faroes did not. Another reason may be the quite different nature of Faroese settlement, which is typically in fishing villages, while that of Iceland was on isolated farms. The average Faroese is often in doubt as to 'correct' spelling and usually writes the standard language with an admixture of features from his own dialect. To date no extensive, systematic survey of Fa dialects has been made, and there is no dialect atlas of the islands. Roughly speaking, the main dialect areas are: 1) southern Streymoy (including Hestur and Koltur), 2) Torshavn, 3) Suöuroy and Sandoy, and 4) the northern islands, particularly Fugloy and Svinoy. Erik Petersen's (1934) unpublished examination paper constitutes the first modern dialectal survey with maps and a discussion of variants. The Austrian scholar Ernst Krenn attempted to describe some of the major dialectal differences in "Isländische Sprachfarbungen und föroyische Mundarten" (1940b), but his description is filled with inconsistencies and unreliable information. Hagström (1967) has made a detailed study of the dialect geography of the final weakly stressed phonemes in an effort to determine the extent to which /i/ and /u/ have merged. Hagström is careful to make allowance for place, generation, speech situation, phonemic environment, grammatical category, and influence from the written language. His detailed maps are the best dialect maps to date of the islands. He also comments briefly on the effects of this merger on the morphological system. Wayne O'Neil (1963a) has made a preliminary survey of Fa dialects in which he applies a transformational approach. O'Neil's paper is little more than an argument for the explanatory adequacy of genera-

100

FAROESE

tive phonology, but this article, together with his "Faroese vowel morphophonemics" (1964), will surely prove useful as methodological guides for future investigators. Thus, though the whole gamut of modern methods has been applied to the study of Fa dialects and though specific problems have received scholarly attention, there is at present no definitive over-all view of Fa dialects, nor even a detailed introduction of a more fundamental nature. 4.9

Place Names

Due to the lack of an extensive corpus of older place-name material, Fa place-name studies have generally been conducted on a synchronic-comparative basis. Haegstad (1917:168-70) showed that many Fa place names had counterparts in southwestern Norway, the presumed Urheimat of Fa. In his doctoral dissertation, Stednavne paa de fxroske Norduroyar (1932), Matras investigated the place names of the six northeastern islands in the first systematic survey of Fa place names. In a shorter study, "Papyli ί Feroyum" (1934), Matras addressed himself to the problem of whether or not traces of the early Celtic monks were to be found in place names, such as Papurshdlsur, and concluded that such names were found in the Faroes, as well as in Iceland and in the Gaelic-speaking areas of the OSc possessions in the British Isles (Shetland, Orkney, the Hebrides, Man). Matras has also presented a survey of Fa place-name studies in Nordisk Kultur (1939). The Swedish scholar K.G. Ljunggren (1955) has written on Kirkjubeur and Torshavn and, by adducing parallels outside the Faroes, he concluded that Torshavn was originally the harbor for the main, formerly heathen, settlement at Kirkjubaur, later superseded by a Christian settlement. Ljunggren (1956) has also collected and written on the names of two parishes in an attempt to discover the naming systems of Fa. With the aid of place-name evidence Matras (1957) has shown that some of the Fa settlers may have come from Rogaland, Sogn, and Hordaland in Norway, and he has discussed the original meaning of Faroe and shown that it must be derived from fier 'sheep' (Matras 1959). M. Nols0e (1959) has investigated names in -irtga and shown that many names with this ending were formerly names in -enda. Matras has taken up the subject of Celtic place names in the Faroes in Some Celtic words in Faroese place names (1956b), which is a summary of his earlier investigations of this subject. He showed that the place-name element, argir- < xrgi 'outfarm,' is identical to Celtic aigre which has a similar meaning and that this place name is found throughout the British Isles wherever Norsemen had settled. Matras (1963) has recently shown that four nature names, Fjallid Mikla, Äin ί Dal, Milium Fjarda, and Urd Mans, are examples of types of place names which are found not only in the Faroes, but also in Iceland, the Shetlands and the Orkneys, and in western Norway, as well as in the Gaelic speaking areas. He suggested that this construction was due to a common Sprachgefühl in the areas in which such forms are found.

5

ICELANDIC

5.0 General The founding of the University of Iceland at Reykjavik in 1911 with Björn Μ. Olsen as its first professor of Icelandic (Ic) provided a solid base for the development of a native Ic linguistics. Prior to this time most of the active scholars were either nonIcelanders or Icelanders residing abroad, primarily in Copenhagen, where the great collections of Ic manuscripts were to be found. The last half century and particularly the period since World War II (when Iceland became independent, in 1944) has seen the founding of important lexicographical institutions and the development of a generation of scholars who have made basic contributions to our understanding of Ic. Among these may be mentioned Alexander Johannesson, Halldor Halldorsson, Björn Guöfinnsson, Jakob Benediktsson, and Hreinn Benediktsson. Of those who remained abroad we should mention primarily Stefan Einarsson at Johns Hopkins, J0n Helgason in Copenhagen, and Sveinn Bergsveinsson in Berlin. Ic has excited a lively interest on the part of non-Icelandic scholars from the days of Rask to the present, but usually only as an incidental part of their studies of the old language, variously known as Old Icelandic (OIc) or Old Norse (ON). The Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Iceland publishes a series devoted to Ic studies, including linguistics, under the title of Studia Islandica—tslenzk frzöi (1937-). Since 1959 six volumes of a linguistic journal entitled Lingua Islandica— tslenzk tunga have been published. The sponsor of this journal is Felag islenzkra frxda, which holds regular meetings with lectures and discussions on Icelandic topics, including linguistics (H. Benediktsson 1965a). A collection of linguistic essays by Ic scholars appeared (1964a) under the editorship of H. Halldorsson. In the summer of 1969 an international conference on Nordic and General Linguistics was held at Reykjavik on the initiative of H. Benediktsson. Within the circle of Sc languages Ic holds a special position because of its extraordinary retentiveness of grammar and lexicon, one so great as to have misled Rask into thinking it was the mother tongue of all Sc. While it can be shown that Ic has changed extensively in pronunciation, the change has been sufficiently systematic so

102

ICELANDIC

that a small set of spelling conventions (esp. the use of accents on the vowels) has preserved its virtual orthographic identity with OIc. At the same time Ic has developed its own resources so that it has become a fully modern language with only a minimum of lexical borrowing, and with virtually no dialectal variation. Among the reasons cited for these developments are the relatively late settlement, the literary tradition, geographical isolation, and inner cohesion (Hermannsson 1919). 5.1

Normalization

An official orthography for Icelandic schools was not adopted until 1918, the year of Iceland's home rule (within a union with Denmark) (J. A. Jonsson 1959). In its essentials this followed an orthography adopted in 1897 by the Society of Journalists, after more than a century of discussion among teachers and students of Ic. Two points of view clashed in this discussion, the etymological as represented especially by Rasmus Rask and the phonetic as represented especially by Björn Μ. Ölsen. The problem was essentially how far modern Ic could or should go in adopting OIc spellings which reflected obsolete phonemic distinctions, e.g. y/y vs. ifi, e vs. je, simple vs. complex vowel before ng, ζ vs. s, pt vs. f t , gt vs. kt, single vs. geminated consonant before consonantal affixes, and -r vs. -ur. The orthography of 1918 represented a compromise which was not acceptable to teachers and professors of Ic, among whom Alexander Johannesson and Siguröur Nordal were the most notable. Through their influence a new orthography was established in 1929, which in all essentials is still in effect, though of course individual authors are free to depart from it (e.g. Laxness continues to write complex vowels before ng: saung for söng 'song', leingi for lengi 'long'). In this orthography morphemic (and therefore etymological) considerations have largely prevailed over phonemic ones, so that e.g. /je/ is written e except after g and k (ser 'sees' vs. ger 'do', ker 'vessel'), and /i/ is written y if there are umlaut-related stems containing ύ or jo (bydur 'offers' from bjoöa vs. bidur 'waits' from bida). The disadvantages for learners of this orthography are held to be outweighed by the support it gives to the morphological structure; at the same time it reduces the gap that might otherwise arise between modern and old Ic and enables the modern Icelanders to read their medieval literature with greater ease than any other European people. B. Guöfinnsson wanted to go still further and establish a standard pronunciation based on the orthography (1947). 5.2 Phonology The first, and still useful, comprehensive treatment of the modern Ic sound system was by Jon Ofeigsson in an introduction to Blöndal's Ic-Danish dictionary (1920-24: xiv-xxvii). After consultation with Jespersen and Haegstad he devised a system of transcription which was used throughout the dictionary. Stefan Einarsson, who also had worked on the dictionary, became Kemp Malone's informant for the latter's highly idiosyncratic and impenetrable study of Ic phonology (1923). Einarsson went

ICELANDIC

103

on to pioneer in the application of instrumental methods to Ic, presenting two sets of kymographic analyses, chiefly dealing with quantity and voicing (1927, 1931). Later, as a professor of Ic (and English) at Johns Hopkins he made many contributions to Ic studies, including his indispensable manual Icelandic (1945), in which a transcription resembling that of Öfeigsson is used. Further painstaking analyses of the sounds were made by Sveinbjörnsson (1933) and Kress (1937). Bergsveinsson applied the methods of phonometric analysis, as developed by E. Zwirner, in his dissertation on the intonation patterns (1941). Basing himself on two recordings of his own reading, he carefully measured the pitch and quantity of the utterances in order to find the linguistically relevant units. He embodied the conclusions in a transcription which may be called phonemic, though he did not use this word. In 1952 Malone presented the first consciously phonemic interpretation of the Ic sounds (revised in 1953). A lively discussion of this topic ensued, with Haugen (1958, 1962), H. Benediktsson (1959, 1963d), Bergsveinsson (1960), and Steblin-Kamenskij (1960) as the chief contributors. As usual in such discussions, the solutions differed according to the theoretical presuppositions of the participants, since there was no longer much question about the phonetic data involved. In 1967 the first application of generative methods was undertaken in a Harvard dissertation by Sigrid Valfells. The result is an analysis which in some degree recapitulates the historical development of the sound system. Ic has a consonant system in which aspiration and voicelessness play a large part; it has been extensively discussed whether preaspiration should be interpreted as a feature of the following stops or as an allophone of /h/ (Haugen 1940, 1958). In stressed syllables vowel length is inversely correlated with consonant length, as in Faroese, Norwegian, and Swedish; the problem is whether one should regard one of these as phonemic, with the other allophonic (H. Benediktsson 1963d, adducing a morphological criterion, favors phonemic consonant length, or rather gemination). In Faroese, the vowel system offers problems in the relationship of the monophthongs with the diphthongs; in addition to this Ic has short diphthongs, which makes a monophonemic interpretation virtually mandatory, though they can easily be decomposed into short vowels plus glides. Since historical /u/ has been fronted to /y/ and /y/ has been unrounded to /i/, the old phonetic relationship of umlaut vowels no longer holds; in fact, Icelanders have trouble keeping y and y apart from i and i, since the phonetic distinction is gone and only a morphophonemic relation is left (which does not always solve the problem, e.g. with the word skrytinn 'funny' which can also be spelled skritinri).

A handbook of descriptive and historical phonology for beginners was prepared by Ä. Böövarsson (1953). 5.3

Grammar

There is no major Ic grammar that is based on scientific research with the application of modern methods. Kress (1963) is an attempt in this direction, but hardly fulfills

104

ICELANDIC

one's expectations. For native learners there are two textbooks by Halldorsson, one presenting phonology and grammar (1950) and the other syntax (1955), both intended as practical handbooks for the schools. The syntax of dependent clauses is analyzed, with historical and linguistic commentary, by H. Matthiasson (1959). There are similar texts for foreigners, e.g. S. Jonsson (1927) and Glendening (1961) in English, Blöndal and Stemann (1943) in Danish, Eskeland and Stefänsson (1963) in NewNorwegian. But the major volume for anyone who wishes to study Ic is Einarsson (1945), in spite of some slightly archaic usages. There are few studies of specific grammatical problems. A. Johannesson has collected and analyzed compounds (1929). A type of compound which is highly productive and characteristic of Ic was first studied by Einarsson (1952) and given the name of mannskratti-compounds (mannskratti 'wretch of a man', lit. 'man-wretch'). Einarsson's analysis of this as an inverted compound was corrected by Grönke (196162). Grönke has also written a dissertation at Göttingen on Ic diminutives (1954). Söur has considered the Ic infinitive in -i (1962). An early modern Ic grammarian, Runolfur Jonsson, has been analyzed in an American dissertation by Ann Royal Arthur (1964).

5.4

Lexicology

Ic is blessed with one of the best dictionaries in Scandinavia, the result of more than twenty years of devoted labor by Sigfiis Blöndal and his wife Björg (Blöndal 1920-24: vii-xiii). Not only is it comprehensive in coverage, but it is also detailed and accurate in the information it gives on meanings and usages, with an abundance of citations. While it includes a number of loanwords, it puristically marks some of them as 'unacceptable in writing'. A supplement edited by H. Halldörsson and J. Benediktsson appeared in 1963; in this were included many of the new technical terms created in modern times, as well as other words appearing in books printed since 1920. At the University of Reykjavik a project is under way for a complete dictionary of the Ic language from 1540, the date of the first Ic printed books, down to the present; the director is Jakob Benediktsson (1955). A monolingual Ic dictionary has been prepared by Ärni Böövarsson (1963) in a handy one-volume format. Several bilingual dictionaries have appeared, largely based on Blöndal: Lejström, Magnusson, and Jansson's Isländsk-svensk ordbok (1943, 2nd ed. 1955), Berkov's Islenzk-rüssnesk oröabök (1962), Boots' tslenzk-frönsk oröabök (1950), Viglundsson and Lehmann, Islandsknorsk ordbok (1967). The only Ic-English dictionary (by Zoega 1904, 3rd ed. 1942) is hopelessly inadequate and out of date. A comprehensive if somewhat erratic etymological dictionary is available in A. Johannesson's massive work (1956) printed in Berne. An important study of loanwords in the printed literature of sixteenth century Iceland by Westergaard-Nielsen (1946) shows how Ic might have been if the purists of the eighteenth century had not

ICELANDIC

105

gotten to work on the language. A word count to assist the makers of textbooks in spelling was made by Ä. Sigurösson (1940). Slang is a grossly neglected field, and only a non-Icelander like Oscar Jones (1940a and b) has so far ventured to tackle it. A specialized but significant field of lexical study is that to which H. Halldorsson has devoted himself, the collection and explanation of proverbs and idioms (1954, 1958). Most recently he has begun publishing a dictionary of current expressions (1968). 5.5

Stylistics

In the late Middle Ages and early modern times Ic was subject to extensive outside influence, chiefly from Danish. A movement sprang up in the eighteenth century to purify at least the written language from these elements, a movement which had rather more success than similar ones elsewhere. The attention paid to Ic by foreign scholars like Rask added to the pride of Icelanders in their tongue, and the dream of a restored independence made the preservation of pure Ic a political necessity (Hermannsson 1919, Helgason 1954). The methods used are the usual ones of giving old words new meanings (simi 'thread' > 'telephone') or making up new derivatives and compounds, often calqued on foreign words (J>ota 'jet',framleidni 'productivity'); and if a loanword is unavoidable, adapting it (to the point of unrecognizability) to the Ic sound system (bill 'automobile', berkill 'tubercle'). The problem of getting new terms accepted has often been crucial; several words have been tried out before one was accepted, and in some cases the old words carry on, at least in spoken Ic (Halldorsson 1964b). Some authors, especially in the last generation, have broken with the more extreme form of purism (e.g. Eorbergur i»oröarson, Η. Κ. Laxness); even a scholar like Helgason (1954) can allow himself to have some doubts about the wisdom of purism. Problems of technical terminology were first raised by the Society of Icelandic Engineers, who appointed a committee to investigate the problem in 1918. Their work resulted in the publication of two collections of technical terms in 1927 and 1928. A proposal made in 1950 to establish an Ic language academy was lost in parliament, but in the following year money was appropriated for the collection of new words under the direction of the University (above 5.4). A Committee on Lexicography undertook the work and in the course of the years 1953 to 1956 published four collections of Nyyröi (New Words), edited by Sveinn Bergsveinsson (vol. 1) and Halldor Halldorsson (2-4); in addition they published a technical Ic-English wordlist by Siguröur Guömundsson (1959). On the recommendation of this committee the Ministry of Education in 1964 established an Icelandic Language Commission ([Islenzk mdlnefnd), replacing an earlier Committee on New Words (Nyyrdanefnd). Like the other Nordic language commissions, this one should speak for its country at Nordic language councils. The three members were to include two professors of Ic, one of them a linguist; at latest report the commission was at work preparing a wordlist in the field of economics (Halldorsson 1963-65). A wordlist in the field of electrical engineering was published as Raftsekni- og Ijdsordasafn (1965).

106

ICELANDIC

No special study of Ic literary style has been made, except for casual references in the biographies of authors and occasional critical articles, and the above-mentioned study of dependent clauses by H. Matthiasson (1959).

5.6 Language History Among the standard historical grammars the following may be singled out for special mention. Andreas Heusler's Altisländisches Elementarbuch (1913, 5th ed. 1962) still contains the best concise survey of OIc syntax that has appeared. R. C. Boer's Oudnoorsch handboek (1920) contains a detailed account of phonological developments with many striking insights. Alexander Johannesson's tslenzk tunga i fornöld (192324) contains little that is new, but it affords the English-speaking student a view of what an Icelander considers important aspects in the history of his language. Adolf Noreen's Altisländische und Altnorwegische Grammatik (4th ed. 1923) still remains unsurpassed for its detailed treatment of phonology and morphology. Ragnvald Iversen's Norron Grammatik (1923) and Wolfgang Krause's Abriss der Altwestnordischen Grammatik (1948) are commendable reference grammars, and Siegfried Gutenbrunner's Historische Laut- und Formenlehre des Isländischen (1951) is the only reference grammar to date which contains an easily accessible survey of runic inscriptions as an integral part of the text. Then, too, Gutenbrunner's grammar gives the Gothic equivalents of the Proto-Sc and OIc forms and is doubly valuable in this respect. Elias Wessen's Isländsk grammatik (1958,2nd ed. 1962) is remarkable for the amount of material it manages to compress into a small space, but it is doubtful that this grammar will ever replace those mentioned above. Steblin-Kamenskij's Drevneislandskij jazyk (1955) provides some new insights into phonological and morphological developments, and his account of phonological changes, u-umlaut, and breaking, can be supplemented with his article on these changes in Voprosy germanskogo jazykoznanija (1961). Johan Fritzner's Ordbog over det gamle norske Sprog Vols. 1-3 (1883-96, reprinted 1954) is still the standard dictionary. For the English-speaking student GeirT. Zoega's A concise dictionary of Old Icelandic (1910, reprinted 1961) unfortunately still remains the best short reference dictionary, while Cleasby and Vigfusson's IcelandicEnglish dictionary (1874, 2nd ed. 1957 with a supplement by William A. Craigie) is the most complete dictionary in English. For skaldic literature we have Sveinbjörn Egilsson and Finnur Jonsson's Lexicon poeticum antiqux lingux septentrionalis Vols. 1-3 (1913-16,2nd ed. 1931, reprinted 1966). For those interested in the study of loanwords in the early modern language we have Chr. Westergaard-Nielsen's Läneordene i det 16. ärhundredes trykte islandske litteratur (1946). For the etymologist there are: Ferdinand Holthausen, Vergleichendes und etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altwestnordischen (1948), Alexander Johannesson, Isländisches etymologisches Wörterbuch (1951-56), and Jan de Vries, Altnordisches etymologisches Wörterbuch (1961, 2nd ed.

ICELANDIC

107

1962). As a companion volume to Lexicon poeticum, we have the first volume of Walter Baetke's Wörterbuch zur altnordischen Prosaliteratur [A-L] (1965). Frank Fischer's Die Lehnwörter des Altwestnordischen (1909) is still the most serviceable reference dictionary for those interested in the foreign element in the Ic vocabulary. Den Arnamagnxanske Kommissions Ordbog is, of course, still in progress, as is the tslenzk ordabok, which is being completed at the University of Iceland. When completed this dictionary will correspond to the ODS and the SAOB and present a picture of the growth and development of the lexicon throughout the ages. For a survey of the lexical and grammatical material at Landsbokasafnid, see George S. Lane (1968). Recently Arbeitstelle Strukturelle Grammatik an der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin has begun work on a dictionary of Old and Modern Ic in generative form with dictionary entries in the form of distinctive features. Pardee Lowe (1968) has written a critique of ON lexicography in which he condemns the form of most ON dictionaries in terms of information retrieval and simplicity criteria. The real problem in dictionary making is, as Lowe points out, the proper selection of base" forms to enable the user to locate rapidly the form he is seeking. Recent work in word studies has been generally limited to notes on individual words, such as Äsgeir Blöndal Magnüsson's (1960, 1961-62) notes in tslenzk tunga. One of the major works in this field is Halldor Halldorsson's Örlög oröanna (1958), in which the author comments on a number of Ic words and phrases and their use through the ages. Halldorsson has long been a source of neologisms, the most recent of which is hverfulegamdlfrxdi, 'transformational grammar', and he has distinguished himself as the leading Ic etymologist. Representative earlier works in this field are as follows: Guömundur Finnbogason (1928) has surveyed loanwords in OIc texts, concluding that there are c. 1,450 foreign words, of which c. 58% have survived in the modern language. A.M. Sturtevant (1942a and b, 1946) has written a series of studies on words in the Elder Edda. Alf Sommerfeit (1958) has noted that OFr curteisie appears in Ic from c. 1220 and is not due to literary tradition. Among dictionaries of a more specialized nature, mention must be made of Ε. H. Lind's Norsk-isländska dopnamn ockfingerade namn frän medeltiden (1905-15, Supplement 1931) and Norsk-isländska personbinamn fran medeltiden (1920-21), which are indispensable aids for place-name research. The history of Ic diachronic linguistics is still to be written. While the grammars mentioned above cover the earliest periods and the classical period (c. 1150-1350), there is still no general grammar for Middle Ic (c. 1350-1540) and Modern Ic (c. 1540-present). Jon Helgason (1931) has written a brief, popular outline of the development from Oddur Gottskalksson's New Testament (1540) through the nineteenth century. Helgason stresses that Oddur's translation, which was based on earlier Ic translations of religious prose, formed the model for subsequent Ic religious literature and broke with the patterns of classical prose. He notes that distinctive innovations in the translation are the use of the interrogative pronoun as a relative, the reflexive instead of the periphrastic passive, the present participle in imitation of the Latin

108

ICELANDIC

gerundive. Helgason also outlines the struggle through the centuries to keep the language pure from Middle Low German and Danish influence. He cites Arngrimur Jonsson's (1568-1648) Crymogaea (1609) as the most important source for knowledge of seventeenth-century Ic. Helgason also made a thorough study of Oddur's translation in ΜάΙϊό iNyja Testamenti Odds Gottskälkssonar (Helgason 1929), which not only contains a detailed account of morphology and syntax, but also a dictionary showing the influence of Luther's Bible on Oddur's lexicon. A series of radio lectures given by Ic linguists during the first half of 1963 were edited by Halldor Halldorsson and published (1964a) as Pxttir um islenzkt mal. These lectures, though in popular format, cover the fields of phonology, dialectology, and word formation and form an excellent introduction to recent developments in diachronic linguistics. We are badly in need of many more surveys of this type, but we are particularly in need of a definitive grammar of Middle Ic and Modern Ic. Johannes L.L. Johannsson (1924) is the only comprehensive survey of Ic phonological developments c. 1300-1600. Johannsson presents an enormous corpus of material excerpted from texts from this period, and he cites the earliest and later attestations of the changes which take place. He discusses such innovations as g, k>gj, kj; rounding before ng,nk; ό>ύ; 0>t; ll>rl; and the alternation of ö ~ e. He also takes up a few morphological changes, such as -id, -uö > -it, -ut in the 2nd pers.pl. in the fourteenth century, and points out that northern Iceland was the source of many innovations. He also shows that rn [ddn] for nn dates from the first half of the fourteenth century. One of the most distinctive changes between classical and Middle Ic is the insertion of a palatal glide between m, /, and e (lit > Ijet), which Johannsson dates to c. 1340. He appears to have dated hv>kv too early, as the earliest known example of this change is kvomaöi in Hallgrimur Petursson's Sldtturrima from the first half of the seventeenth century. Although Johannsson's book sometimes lacks accuracy, it is a generally reliable reference manual. As a critique of Johannsson's interpretation of e>je, Björn Κ. i>0rolfsson (1929a) demonstrates that we find examples of this change in the thirteenth century, while ie is in free variation with έ in the fourteenth century. He also comments on the delabialization of y, y, ey > i, i, ei, and concludes that this change began in the thirteenth century, becoming common after c. 1500. It is shown to be an innovation from the western part of the country. Guömundur Finnbogason (1929) commented briefly on the most important Ic phonological changes and attempted to assign phonetic explanations to these innovations. Björn Κ. I>0r0lfsson (1929b) investigated what is generally known as the Ic quantity shift. By detailed analysis of sixteenth and seventeenth century verse he showed that this change may have taken place in the late fifteenth or early sixteenth century. Subsequent to the shift, vowel quantity was regulated by the following phonemes so that initial syllables were always long, whereas prior to the shift, initial syllables were always short if they consisted of a short vowel followed by a short consonant. E»0rolfs-

ICELANDIC

109

son also convincingly showed that the shift began in the west, apparently reaching the eastern half of the country after c. 1550. H. Benediktsson (1968) has analyzed the significance of the shift in the development of the Ic phonemic system. In a short article G.T. Flom (1934) discussed the question of whether or not OIc had vowel harmony, one of the classical questions of Ic historical phonology. The normal result of vowel harmony is -ej-o after e, o, 0, and a and -ij-u after all other vowels. Vowel harmony, when it does occur in Ic MSS, is generally ascribed to Norwegian influence. The chief problems associated with vowel harmony in OIc are whether or not -ij-u ~ -ej-o was due to dialectal variation in the older period with eventual leveling in favor of -i/-u, and whether or not -ej-o was restricted to the written language due to Norwegian influence, while the spoken language had -ij-u. Bengt Hesselman (1948-53:203-9) has also taken up these problems. He notes that the result of hiatus reduction does not permit us to posit -ij-u alone for the older period, since the datsing. of kne must have been knee and not knei. He also shows that, as Old Norwegian MSS and some conservative dialects have -ij-o, the Ic written language cannot have had -ej-o while the spoken language had -ij-u. Steblin-Kamenskij (1965) has written a short note on the phonemic status of /