1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Functions of Language
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Dependent-marked anticausatives in Old Norse-Icelandic
PDF
EPUB

Abstract

The process of anticausativization is well known in the functional and typological literature as involving a morphological affix on the head, i.e. the verb. In this article, we introduce to the field a different type of anticausatives which are dependent-marked and not head-marked. That is, the subject of the intransitive carries the same morphological case, namely accusative, as the object of the corresponding transitive, while the verb remains unmarked in both alternants. This research is based on 119 causative–anticausative pairs of this type in Old Norse-Icelandic, of which 80 are presented in the literature for the first time. Since the head, the verb, is morphologically unmarked, the question arises as to the directionality of the alternation. We argue that the causative alternant is the basic one, while the intransitive anticausative is ‘derived’, due to both morphological and semantic considerations, in particular the fact that many accusative anticausatives have developed metaphorical meanings. We couch our analysis in the formalism of CxG, showing how changes in the productivity of the alternation may be modeled. While the data discussed here are mostly confined to Old Norse-Icelandic, the distinction between head-marking and dependent-marking anticausativization is clearly of relevance for general linguists, functionalists and typologists alike.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/fol.25004.bar
2026-05-12
2026-06-07

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/fol.25004.bar
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/fol.25004.bar/fol.25004.bar.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/fol.25004.bar&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Fritzner, Johan
    1886–1896 Ordbog over det gamle norske sprog, 2nd edn.Oslo: Feilberg & Landmarts forlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Norrøn ordbok = Leiv Heggstad, Finn Hødnebø & Erik Simensen
    1990 Norrøn Ordbog, 2nd edn. Oslo: Det Norske Samlaget.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. ONP = The dictionary of Old Norse prose
    ONP = The dictionary of Old Norse prose. University of Copenhagen. https://onp.ku.dk
  4. Zoëga, Geir T.
    1910 A concise dictionary of Old Icelandic. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Berkeley Framenet
    Berkeley Framenet. Available athttps://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/
  6. The NonCanCase Database
    The NonCanCase Database. Available athttps://www.noncancase.ugent.be/
  7. Alexiadou, Artemis
    2015 The causative alternation revisited: Constraints and variation. English Linguistics(). –. 10.9793/elsj.32.1_1
     https://doi.org/10.9793/elsj.32.1_1 [Google Scholar]
  8. Alexiadou, Artemis, Elena Anagnostopoulou & Florian Schäfer
    2006 The properties of anticausatives crosslinguistically. InMara Frascarelli (ed.), Phases of interpretation, –. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110197723.4.187
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197723.4.187 [Google Scholar]
  9. 2015 External arguments in transitivity alternations: A layering approach. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571949.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199571949.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  10. Anderson, Stephen R.
    1990 The grammar of Icelandic verbs in -st. InJoan Maling & Annie Zaenen (eds.), Modern Icelandic syntax, –. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004373235_010
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004373235_010 [Google Scholar]
  11. Arutjunova, Nina D.
    1999 Jazyk i mir čeloveka [Language and human world]. Moskva: Jazyki russkoj kul’tury.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Axel, Katrin
    2007 Studies on Old High German syntax: Left sentence periphery, verb placement and verb-second. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.112
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.112 [Google Scholar]
  13. Barðdal, Jóhanna
    2007 The lexical and semantic range of the ditransitive construction in the history of (North) Germanic. Functions of Language(). –. 10.1075/fol.14.1.03bar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.14.1.03bar [Google Scholar]
  14. 2008 Productivity: Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.8
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.8 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2011 The rise of dative substitution in the history of Icelandic: A Diachronic Construction Grammar account. Lingua(). –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2010.07.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.07.007 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2012 Predicting the productivity of argument structure constructions. Berkeley Linguistics Society(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. 2014 Syntax and syntactic reconstruction. InClaire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans (eds.), The Routledge handbook of historical linguistics, 1st edn., –. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. 2015 Valency classes in Icelandic: Oblique subjects, oblique ambitransitives and the actional passive. InAndrej L. Malchukov & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Valency classes in the world’s languages, –. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110338812‑016
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110338812-016 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2023 Oblique subjects in Germanic: Their status, history and reconstruction. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783111078014
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111078014 [Google Scholar]
  20. . Submitted. How to reconstruct case and argument structure for inconsistent correspondence sets across daughter languages: The case of ‘satisfy’, ‘satiate’, ‘suffice’ and ‘be satisfied’ in Germanic.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Barðdal, Jóhanna & Thórhallur Eythórsson
    2009 The origin of the oblique subject construction: An Indo-European comparison. InVit Bubenik, John Hewson & Sarah Rose (eds.), Grammatical change in Indo-European languages, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.305.19bar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.305.19bar [Google Scholar]
  22. 2020 How to identify cognates in syntax: Taking Watkins’ legacy one step further. InJóhanna Barðdal, Spike Gildea & Eugenio R. Luján (eds.), Reconstructing syntax, –. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004392007_006
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004392007_006 [Google Scholar]
  23. Barðdal, Jóhanna, Kristian E. Kristoffersen & Andreas Sveen
    2011 West-Scandinavian ditransitives as a family of constructions: With a special attention to the Norwegian ‘V-REFL-NP’ construction. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling.2011.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2011.002 [Google Scholar]
  24. Barðdal, Jóhanna, Leonid Kulikov, Roland Pooth & Peter Alexander Kerkhof
    2020 Oblique anticausatives: A morphosyntactic isogloss in Indo-European. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/psicl‑2020‑0015
     https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2020-0015 [Google Scholar]
  25. Barðdal, Jóhanna & Thomas Smitherman
    2013 The quest for cognates: A reconstruction of oblique subject constructions in Proto-Indo-European. Language Dynamics and Change(). –. 10.1163/22105832‑13030101
     https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-13030101 [Google Scholar]
  26. Bjarnadóttir, Valgerður
    2014 Oblique anticausative in Lithuanian: A comparative approach. Baltistica(). –. 10.15388/Baltistica.49.1.2211
     https://doi.org/10.15388/Baltistica.49.1.2211 [Google Scholar]
  27. Boas, Hans C.
    2003 A constructional approach to resultatives. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Borkovskij, Viktor I. & Petr S. Kuznecov
    1963 Istoričeskaja grammatika russkogo jazyka [A historical grammar of Russian]. Moskva: Izdatel’stvo Akademii nauk SSSR.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Byock, Jesse L.
    1998 The Saga of King Hrolf Kraki. London: Penguin.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Cennamo, Michela, Thórhallur Eythórsson & Jóhanna Barðdal
    2015 Semantic and (morpho)syntactic constraints on anticausativization: Evidence from Latin and Old Norse-Icelandic. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling‑2015‑0015
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2015-0015 [Google Scholar]
  31. Comrie, Bernard
    1981 Language universals and linguistic typology. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. 1985 Causative verb-formation and other verb-deriving morphology. InTimothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol. 3, Grammatical categories and the lexicon, –. Cambridge: CUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. 2006 Transitivity pairs, markedness, and diachronic stability. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/LING.2006.011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2006.011 [Google Scholar]
  34. Croft, William
    2001 Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: OUP. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  35. Diessel, Holger
    2023 The constructicon: Taxonomies and networks. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/9781009327848
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009327848 [Google Scholar]
  36. Dixon, R. M. W.
    1994 Ergativity. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511611896
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611896 [Google Scholar]
  37. Dixon, R. M. W. & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald
    2000 Introduction. InR. M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Yikhenvald (eds.), Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity, –. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511627750.002
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627750.002 [Google Scholar]
  38. Falk, Cecilia
    1997 Fornsvenska upplevarverb [Old Swedish experiencer verbs]. Lund: LUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay & Mary Catherine O’Connor
    1988 Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language. –. 10.2307/414531
     https://doi.org/10.2307/414531 [Google Scholar]
  40. Francis, Gill, Susan Hunston & Elizabeth Manning
    1996 Collins COBUILD Grammar Patterns 1: Verbs. London: Harper Collins.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Fried, Mirjam
    2004 Predicate semantics and event construal in Czech case marking. InMirjam Fried & Jan-Ola Östman (eds.), Construction grammar in a cross-language perspective, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.2.03fri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.2.03fri [Google Scholar]
  42. Gelderen, Elly van
    2013 Null subjects in Old English. Linguistic Inquiry(). –. 10.1162/LING_a_00127
     https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00127 [Google Scholar]
  43. Georgieva, V. L.
    1978 Bezličnye predloženija [Impersonal sentences]. InV. I. Borkovskij (ed.), Istoričeskaja grammatika russkogo jazyka: Sintaksis. Prostoe predloženie [Historical grammar of Russian: Syntax; Simple clauses], –. Moskva: Nauka.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995 Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. 2002 Surface generalizations: An alternative to alternations. Cognitive Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/cogl.2002.022
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2002.022 [Google Scholar]
  46. 2006 Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: OUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. 2019 Explain me this: Creativity, competition, and the partial productivity of constructions. Princeton, NJ: PUP.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Gyselinck, Emmeline
    2020 (Re)shaping the constructional network: Modeling shifts and reorganizations in the network hierarchy. InLotte Sommerer & Elena Smirnova (eds.), –. 10.1075/cal.27.03gys
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.03gys [Google Scholar]
  49. Haider, Hubert
    2001 How to stay accusative in Insular Germanic. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Haspelmath, Martin
    1987 Transitivity alternations of the anticausative type. (Arbeitspapier Nr. 5, Neue Folge). Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität zu Köln.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. 1993 More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. InBernard Comrie & Maria Polinsky (eds.), Causatives and transitivity, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.23.05has
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.23.05has [Google Scholar]
  52. Heltoft, Lars
    2012 Zero expression of arguments in Old Danish. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia(). –. 10.1080/03740463.2013.797649
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03740463.2013.797649 [Google Scholar]
  53. Hjartardóttir, Thóra Björk
    1987 Getið í eyðurnar: Um eyður fyrir frumlög og andlög í eldri íslensku [Filling the gaps: On subject and object gaps in older Icelandic]. Reykjavík: University of Iceland master’s thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Inglese, Guglielmo
    2022 Cross-linguistic sources of anticausative markers. Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Johnson, Cynthia A., Peter Alexander Kerkhof, Leonid Kulikov, Esther Le Mair & Jóhanna Barðdal
    2019 Argument structure, conceptual metaphor and semantic change: How to succeed in Indo-European without really trying. Diachronica(). –. 10.1075/dia.00014.bar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.00014.bar [Google Scholar]
  56. Jónsdóttir, Margrét
    2015 From accusative to dative (via nominative): The case of fjölga ‘increase’ and fækka ‘decrease’ in Icelandic. InMartin Hilpert, Jan-Ola Östman, Christine Mertzlufft, Michael Riessler & Janet Duke (eds.), New trends in Nordic and general linguistics, –. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110346978.181
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110346978.181 [Google Scholar]
  57. Jónsson, Jóhannes Gísli
    2001 Lists of quirky subject predicates in Icelandic. Reykjavik: Unpublished ms.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Keenan, Edward L.
    1972 Relative clause formation in Malagasy. InPaul M. Peranteau, Judith N. Levi & Gloria C. Phares (eds.), The Chicago which hunt: Papers from the relative clause festival, –. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Kleyner, Svetlana
    2018 What does not kill us, tears us apart: Accusative subject verbs in Russian. Paper presented at the51st Annual meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Tallinn, 29 August–1 September 2018.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Kulikov, Leonid
    2001 Causatives. InMartin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook, Vol 2, –. Berlin: Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Lander, Eric T. & Liliane Haegeman
    2014 Old Norse as an NP language: With observations on the Common Norse and Northwest Germanic runic inscriptions. Transactions of the Philological Society(). –. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12022
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12022 [Google Scholar]
  62. Letuchiy, Alexander
    2009 Towards a typology of labile verbs: Lability vs. derivation. InPatience Epps & Alexandre Arkhipov (eds.), New challenges in typology: Transcending the borders and refining the distinctions, –. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110219067.4.247
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219067.4.247 [Google Scholar]
  63. Levin, Beth
    1993 English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Levin, Beth & Malka Rappaport Hovav
    1994 A preliminary analysis of causative verbs in English. Lingua. –. 10.1016/0024‑3841(94)90337‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(94)90337-9 [Google Scholar]
  65. 1995 Unaccusativity: At the syntax–lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Lorenz, David
    2020 Converging variations and the emergence of horizontal links: To-contraction in American English. InLotte Sommerer & Elena Smirnova (eds.), –. 10.1075/cal.27.07lor
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.07lor [Google Scholar]
  67. Matasović, Ranko
    2013 Latin paenitet me, miseret me, pudet me and active clause alignment in PIE. Indogermanische Forschungen. –. 10.1515/indo.2013.118.2013.93
     https://doi.org/10.1515/indo.2013.118.2013.93 [Google Scholar]
  68. Meyer, Ronny
    2022 The noncausal/causal alternation in Muher (Ethiosemitic). Linguistique et Langues Africaines(). 10.4000/lla.4530
     https://doi.org/10.4000/lla.4530 [Google Scholar]
  69. Mitkovska, Liljana & Elini Bužarovska
    2012 An alternative analysis of the English get-past participle constructions: Is get all that passive?Journal of English Linguistics(). –. 10.1177/0075424211418978
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424211418978 [Google Scholar]
  70. Moreno Cabrera, Juan Carlos
    1985 Anticausatives: A typological sketch. InWilliam H. Eilfort, Paul D. Kroeber & Karen L. Peterson (eds.), Papers from the Parasession on Causatives and Agentivity at the Twenty First Regional Meeting, –. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Nedjalkov, Vladimir P. & G. G. Sil’nickij
    1969 Tipologija morfologičeskogo i leksičeskogo kauzativa. InAlexandr A. Xolodovič (ed.), Tipologija kauzativnyx konstrukcij: Morfologičeskij kauzativ, –. Leningrad: Nauka.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Nichols, Johanna
    1986 Head-marking and dependent-marking grammar. Language(). –. 10.2307/415601
     https://doi.org/10.2307/415601 [Google Scholar]
  73. Nichols, Johanna, David Peterson & Jonathan Barnes
    2004 Transitivising and detransitivising languages. Linguistic Typology(). –. 10.1515/lity.2004.005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2004.005 [Google Scholar]
  74. Ongenae, Tim A. F.
    2024 Permittito aperiat oculum: Typological considerations on P-lability and its interaction with morphosyntactic alignment in Latin medical texts. Folia Linguistica Historica. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Ottósson, Kjartan G.
    1988 A feature-based approach to thematic roles. InVictoria Rosén (ed.), Papers from the Tenth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, Bergen, June 11–13, 1987, Vol 2, –. Bergen: Department of Linguistics and Phonetics, University of Bergen.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. 1992 The middle voice in Icelandic. Lund: Lund University doctoral dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. 2013 The anticausative and related categories in the Old Germanic languages. InFolke Josephson & Ingmar Söhrman (eds.), Diachronic and typological perspectives on verbs, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.134.12ott
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.134.12ott [Google Scholar]
  78. Paducheva, Elena V.
    2003 Is there an “anticausative” component in the semantics of decausatives?Journal of Slavic Linguistics(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Pooth, Roland, Peter Alexander Kerkhof, Leonid Kulikov & Jóhanna Barðdal
    2019 The origin of non-canonical case marking of subjects in Proto-Indo-European: Accusative, ergative, or semantic alignment. Indogermanische Forschungen. –. 10.1515/if‑2019‑0009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/if-2019-0009 [Google Scholar]
  80. Ruppenhofer, Josef, Michael Ellsworth, Miriam R. L. Petruck, Christopher R. Johnson, Collin F. Baker & Jan Scheffczyk
    2016 FrameNet II: Extended theory and practice. Unpublished manuscript, Berkeley, CA: International Computer Science Institute.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Sandal, Catrine
    2011 Akkusative subjekt og antikausativitet i norrønt [Accusative subjects and anticausativity in Old Norse-Icelandic]. Bergen: University of Bergen master’s thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Schäfer, Florian
    2008 The syntax of (anti-)causatives: External arguments in change-of-state contexts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.126
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.126 [Google Scholar]
  83. 2009 The causative alternation. Language and Linguistics Compass(). –. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2009.00127.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00127.x [Google Scholar]
  84. Shibatani, Masayoshi
    1985 Passives and related constructions: A prototype analysis. Language(). –. 10.2307/414491
     https://doi.org/10.2307/414491 [Google Scholar]
  85. Siewierska, Anna
    1984 The passive: A comparative linguistic analysis. London: Croom Helm.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Sigurðardóttir, Sigríður Sæunn & Thórhallur Eythórsson
    2022 The emergence of oblique subjects: Oblique-case substitution and shift in anticausative strategy in Modern Icelandic. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Sigurðsson, Halldór Á.
    1989 Verbal syntax and case in Icelandic. Lund: Lund University doctoral dissertation.
     [Google Scholar]
  88. Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann
    1993 Argument drop in Old Icelandic. Lingua. –. 10.1016/0024‑3841(93)90054‑Z
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(93)90054-Z [Google Scholar]
  89. 2006 The Nom/Acc alternation in Germanic. InJutta M. Hartmann & László Molnárfi (eds.), Comparative studies in Germanic syntax: From Afrikaans to Zurich German, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.97.03sig
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.97.03sig [Google Scholar]
  90. Sommerer, Lotte & Elena Smirnova
    (eds.) 2020 Nodes and networks in Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.27
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27 [Google Scholar]
  91. Smirnova, Elena
    2021 Horizontal links within and between paradigms: The constructional network of reported directives in German. InMartin Hilpert & Bert Capelle (eds.), Modality and Diachronic Construction Grammar, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.32.07smi
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.32.07smi [Google Scholar]
  92. Švedova, Natalija Ju
    1964 Izmenenija v sisteme prostogo predloženija v russkom lit. jazyke XIX v. [Changes in the system of the simple sentence in the Russian literary language of the 19th Century]. InV. V. Vinogradov & N. Ju. Švedova (eds.), Očerki po istorii grammatiki russkogo literaturnogo jazyka XIX v. [Essays in the history of grammar of the Russian literary language of the 19th century], –. Moskva: Nauka.
     [Google Scholar]
  93. Sweetser, Eve
    1990 From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511620904
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904 [Google Scholar]
  94. Thráinsson, Höskuldur & Thóra Björk Hjartardóttir
    1986 Pro-drop, Topic-drop ...: Where do Old and Modern Icelandic fit in?InÖsten Dahl & Anders Holmberg (eds.), Scandinavian syntax, –. Stockholm: Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University.
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Tubino-Blanco, Mercedes
    2020 Causative/inchoative in morphology. Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics. https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-595. 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.595
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.595 [Google Scholar]
  96. Vázquez-González, Juan G. & Jóhanna Barðdal
    2019 Reconstructing the ditransitive construction for Proto-Germanic: Gothic, Old English and Old Norse-Icelandic. Folia Linguistica Historica(). –. 10.1515/flih‑2019‑0021
     https://doi.org/10.1515/flih-2019-0021 [Google Scholar]
  97. Viberg, Åke
    1984 The verbs of perception: A typological study. InBrian Butterworth, Bernard Comrie & Östen Dahl (eds.), Explanations for language universals, –. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110868555.123
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110868555.123 [Google Scholar]
  98. 2008 Swedish verbs of perception from a typological and contrastive perspective. InMaría de los Ángeles Gómez González, J. Lachlan Mackenzie & Elsa M. González Álvarez (eds.), Languages and cultures in contrast and comparison, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.175.09vib
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.175.09vib [Google Scholar]
  99. Viðarsson, Heimir Freyr
    2009 Tilbrigði í fallmörkun aukafallsfrumlaga: Þágufalls- hneigð í forníslensku? [Variation in the case marking of oblique subjects: Dative substitution in Old Norse-Icelandic]. Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræði. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  100. Walkden, George
    2013 Null subjects in Old English. Language Variation and Change. –. 10.1017/S0954394513000070
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394513000070 [Google Scholar]
  101. Westvik, Olaf Jansen
    1994 On the subjects of some nominativeless sentences in Old Germanic. InToril Swan, Endre Mørck & Olaf Westvik (eds.), Language change and language structure: Older Germanic languages in a comparative perspective, –. Berlin: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110886573.305
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110886573.305 [Google Scholar]
  102. Wood, Jim
    2015 Icelandic morphosyntax and argument structure. Heidelberg: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑09138‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09138-9 [Google Scholar]
  103. 2017 The accusative–subject generalization. Syntax(). –. 10.1111/synt.12138
     https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12138 [Google Scholar]
  104. Zaenen, Annie & Joan Maling
    1984 Unaccusative, passive, and quirky case. InMark Cobler, Susannah MacKaye & Michael T. Wescoat (eds.), Proceedings of the Third West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, –. Stanford, CA: Stanford Linguistics Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  105. Zehentner, Eva & Elizabeth Closs Traugott
    2020 Constructional networks and the development of benefactive ditransitives in English. InLotte Sommerer & Elena Smirnova (eds.), –. 10.1075/cal.27.05zeh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.27.05zeh [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.25004.bar
Loading
Dependent-marked anticausatives in Old Norse-Icelandic
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.25004.bar
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.25004.bar
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.25004.bar
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: anticausatives ; productivity ; argument structure ; event structure ; oblique anticausatives ; head vs. dependent marking ; accusative subjects ; case marking ; oblique subjects

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error