Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-h4f6x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-23T06:08:26.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cyclic cliticization in Icelandic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2019

Einar Freyr Sigurðsson  and
Jim Wood
Einar Freyr Sigurðsson*
Affiliation:
Department of Lexicography, The Árni Magnússon Institute for Icelandic Studies, Laugavegur 13, 101 Reykjavík, Iceland
Jim Wood*
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520USA
*
Emails for correspondence: einar.freyr.sigurdsson@arnastofnun.is and jim.wood@yale.edu
Emails for correspondence: einar.freyr.sigurdsson@arnastofnun.is and jim.wood@yale.edu
Get access

Abstract

This squib discusses the clitic DU (-du/-ðu/-tu) in Icelandic and compares it with other reduced forms of personal pronouns, such as ’ann (for hann ‘he’) and ’ún (for hún ‘she’). We show that there are various restrictions found on DU which are not found on other reduced forms of personal pronouns in Icelandic. We argue that whereas reduced forms such as ’ann and ’ún are morphophonologically conditioned, DU is syntactically conditioned; it is not only clause-bounded but also phase-bounded.

Keywords

cliticsdative subjectsIcelandicnominative objectsphasesphase extensionsyntax

Information

Type
Short Communications
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 42 , Issue 1 , May 2019 , pp. 111 - 127
Copyright
© Nordic Association of Linguistics 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Barðdal, Jóhanna. 2001. The perplexity of Dat-Nom verbs in Icelandic. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 24, 47–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna, Eythórsson, Thórhallur & Dewey, Tonya Kim. 2014. Alternating predicates in Icelandic and German: A sign-based construction grammar account. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 93, 51–101.Google Scholar
Bernódusson, Helgi. 1982. Ópersónulegar setningar [Impersonal sentences]. Cand. Mag.-thesis, University of Iceland.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan & Moshi, Lioba. 1990. Object asymmetries in comparative Bantu syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 21, 147–185.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna & Shlonsky, Ur. 2004. Clitic positions and restructuring in Italian. Linguistic Inquiry 35, 519–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Kenstowicz, Michael (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cuervo, Mara Cristina. 2003. Datives at Large. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Dehé, Nicole. 2008. To delete or not to delete: The contexts of Icelandic Final Vowel Deletion. Lingua 118, 732–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
den Dikken, Marcel. 2007. Phase extension: Contours of a theory of the role of head movement in phrasal extraction. Theoretical Linguistics 33, 1–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Einarsson, Stefán. 1949. Icelandic: Grammar, Texts, Glossary. Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
Eythórsson, Thórhallur & Barðdal, Jóhanna. 2005. Oblique subjects: A common Germanic inheritance. Language 81, 824–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansson, Gunnar Ólafur. 1999. ‘When in doubt…’: Intraparadigmatic dependencies and gaps in Icelandic. In Tamanji, Pius N., Hirotani, Masako & Hall, Nancy (eds.), Proceedings of NELS 29, 105–119. Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.Google Scholar
Ingason, Anton Karl & Wood, Jim. 2017. Clause-bounded movement: Stylistic fronting and phase theory. Linguistic Inquiry 48, 529–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jónsson, Jóhannes Gísli. 1996. Clausal Architecture and Case in Icelandic. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Jónsson, Jóhannes Gísli. 1997–1998. Sagnir með aukafallsfrumlagi [Verbs with oblique subjects]. Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði 19–20, 11–43.Google Scholar
Jónsson, Jóhannes Gísli. 2003. Not so quirky: On subject case in Icelandic. In Brandner, Ellen & Zinsmeister, Heike (eds.), New Perspectives on Case Theory, 127–163. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Kissock, Madelyn. 1997. Middle verbs in Icelandic. American Journal of Germanic Linguistics 9, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 1993. Implications of asymmetries in double object constructions. In Mchombo, Sam A. (ed.), Theoretical Aspects of Bantu Grammar, 113–151. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
McFadden, Thomas. 2004. The Position of Morphological Case in the Derivation: A Study on the Syntax-Morphology Interface. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
McGinnis, Martha. 2008. Applicatives. Language and Linguistics Compass 2, 1225–1245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orešnik, Janez. 1972. Morphophonemic notes on the Modern Icelandic imperative singular. In Firchow, Evelyn S., Grimstad, Karen, Hasselmo, Nils & O’Neil, Wayne A. (eds.), Studies for Einar Haugen, 450–459. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Pullum, Geoffrey K. & Zwicky, Arnold M.. 1985. Cliticization vs. inflection: English n’t . Language 59, 502–513.Google Scholar
Rögnvaldsson, Eiríkur. 1996. Frumlag og fall að fornu [Subjects and case in Old Icelandic]. Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði 18, 37–69.Google Scholar
Schäfer, Florian. 2008. The Syntax of (Anti-)Causatives. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigurðsson, Einar Freyr. 2017. Deriving Case, Agreement and Voice Phenomena in Syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann. 1989. Verbal Syntax and Case in Icelandic: In a Comparative GB Approach. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Lund. [Reprinted by Málvísindastofnun Háskóla Íslands, Reykjavík, 1992. Available online: http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/002361]Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann. 1992. Um beygingarsamræmi og málkunnáttu [On agreement and language knowledge]. Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði 14, 63–87.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann. 1996. Icelandic finite verb agreement. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 57, 1–46.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann. 2006. The Nominative Puzzle and the Low Nominative Hypothesis. Linguistic Inquiry 37, 289–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann. 2012. Minimalist C/case. Linguistic Inquiry 43, 191–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann & Holmberg, Anders. 2008. Icelandic dative intervention: Person and Number are separate probes. In D’Alessandro, Roberta, Fischer, Susan & Gunnar Hrafnbjargarson, Hrafn (eds.), Agreement Restrictions, 251–280. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann & Maling, Joan. 2010. The Empty Left Edge Condition. In Putnam, Michael (ed.), Exploring Crash-Proof Grammars, 59–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smári, Jakob Jóh. 1920. Íslenzk setningafræði [Icelandic Syntax]. Reykjavík: Bókaverslun Ársæls Árnasonar. [Reprinted by Málvísindastofnun Háskóla Íslands, Reykjavík, 1987.]Google Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 2007. The Syntax of Icelandic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Jim. 2015. Icelandic Morphosyntax and Argument Structure. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, Jim & Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann. 2014. Let-causatives and (a)symmetric DAT-NOM constructions. Syntax 17, 269–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold M. 1977. On Clitics. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold M. 1985. Clitics and particles. Language 61, 283–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar