Definite singular and plural formation

East Norwegian dialect speakers tend to use either one of two types of gender systems. There are dialect speakers that use three genders (masculine, feminine, and neuter), and those that predominantly use two genders (common and neuter) and only a few select feminine forms like kua ‘cow/the’. We choose to work with a two-gender system for simplicity of illustration and because feminine nouns behave no differently from masculine concerning accent assignment.

In the following, we refer to the definite singular article for the neuter -et and for the common gender -en. We assume that these articles are full syllables because of their behaviour with monosyllables ending in a vowel, e.g. 'treet1 ‘tree/the’, 'breen1, ‘glacier/the’. Similar to the plural suffix {-er}, the schwa of these articles also deletes when attaching to polysyllabic stems also ending in schwa, e.g. 'eple + et > 'eple-t2 ‘apple/the’, 'stjerne + en > 'stjerne-n2 ‘star/the’.

The definite plural morpheme is {-ne} and receives an initial epenthetic /e/ at the conjunction of the plural stem, when it is added to monosyllables (skip-e-ne ‘ships/the’).

Moreover, there is a special definite plural marker {-a}NEUTER, which a handful of nouns can alternatively take e.g. 'barnene1/'barna1 ‘the children’, 'årene1/'åra1 ‘the years’. The linear order for the definite in Standard East Norwegian is as follows.

(7) Linear order for definite singular and plural formation Definite singular: stem + DEFINITE {-et/-en}

Definite plural: stem + plural suffix + DEFINITE {-ne}

Note that the definite marker is always outside the number affix. Before giving our analysis of the definite and indefinite, let us look at the distribution of accent for nouns in the definite singular and plural. We start with monosyllabic neuter nouns that take a {-Ø} plural suffix.

(8) Monosyllabic singular and plural (neuter) both in the indefinite singular and plural, but disyllabic in the definite singular and plural (cf.

second and fourth columns). All forms have Accent 1. It is striking that, although the addition of the definite singular and plural articles creates new disyllabic trochaic environments, these nouns retain Accent 1 throughout the paradigm, for a reason that will be explained shortly. The next set of monosyllabic nouns we examine take the regular {-er} plural, therefore, they have monosyllabic indefinite singular and polysyllabic indefinite plural forms.

(9) Monosyllabic singular and disyllabic plural (common gender) Indefinite

41. Jan Terje Faarlund (p.c.) kindly pointed out that the plural of some monosyllabic neuter nouns such as (8e) brev ‘letter’ can take the regular unspecified plural suffix {-er} ('brever2 ‘letters’) for some speakers. The definite plural for these speakers we predict should also be Accent 2 ('brevene2

‘letters/the) like the nouns in (9) and this seems to follow. However, we would have to test this on a larger sample of speakers to be absolutely certain.

Monosyllabic common gender nouns only remain monosyllabic in the indefinite singular (column 1). The addition of the syllabic definite singular article {-en} in column 2 produces a disyllabic trochaic domain, yet analogous to the monosyllabic neuter nouns in (8), these disyllabic forms all have Accent 1. Common gender nouns usually take a syllabic plural suffix {-er} as in (9a-d), and have Accent 2 in both indefinite and definite plural forms, as can be seen in columns 3 and 4.

The next two examples below in (10) fot1 ‘foot’ and natt1 ‘night’ illustrate that for some common gender nouns, the syllabic plural suffix {-er} is accompanied by umlauting of the stem vowel and Accent 1, as we already saw in (5g). These umlauted plurals have Accent 1 in both indefinite and definite forms (columns 3 & 4).

(10) Monosyllabic singular and disyllabic plural with umlaut (common gender) Indefinite

(11) Polysyllabic singular and plural (neuter and common gender) Indefinite b. 'stjerne2 'stjernen2 'stjerner2 'stjernene2 star c. 'aksje1 'aksjen1 'aksjer1 'aksjene1 stock d. 'vindu2 'vinduet2 'vinduer2 'vinduene2 window e. 'lager1 'lageret1 'lagere1 'lagrene1 ware house f. 'hammer2 'hammeren2 'hamre(r)2 'hamrene2 hammer g. 'aksel1 'akselen1 'aksler2 'akslene2 shoulder h. 'doktor1 'doktoren1 dok'torer1 dok'torene1 doctor

In these examples in (11), Withgott & Halvorsen (1984, 1988) would claim, resides the evidence for the stability of the accent of polysyllabic stems. Polysyllabic stems never differ in accent from the indefinite singular to the definite plural. If we have an Accent-1 or Accent-2 singular form (ho'tell1 ‘hotel’, 'stjerne2 ‘star’), this accent is retained in the definite singular

(ho'tellet1 ‘hotel/the’, 'stjernen2 ‘star/the’), in the indefinite plural (ho'teller1 ‘hotels’, 'stjerner2

‘stars’), and in the definite plural (ho'tellene1 ‘hotels/the’, 'stjernene2 ‘stars/the’). However, we would be leading the horse by the tail if we assumed that these examples demonstrate the stability of polysyllabic stems, as Withgott & Halvorsen (1984, 1988) do. A brief look back at the monosyllables reveals a quite obvious pattern (cf. (8), (9)).

Looking back at the monosyllables in (8) and (9), we see that the stability actually lies in the accent of the indefinite. Whatever accent a noun has in the indefinite singular or plural, the addition of the definite article never changes it – which is a well-established fact (cf. Haugen 1963/1983:277f). This can be seen, on the one hand, by comparing the first two columns in (8) and (9). These forms, monosyllabic in the indefinite and disyllabic in the definite, are all Accent 1, i.e., skip1, 'skipet1 in (8c), hest1, 'hesten1 in (9c). The same generalisation applies, on the other hand, to the third and fourth columns. Whatever accent the indefinite plural has, the definite plural matches it (e.g. (8c) skip1, 'skipene1; (9c) 'hester2, 'hestene2).

The discrepancy in accent resulting from the addition of a syllabic definite article or a syllabic plural morpheme tells us that there is an essential difference between the definite singular suffixes {-et}, {-en} and the indefinite plural suffix {-er}. In both cases a syllable is added creating a disyllabic trochee when added to monosyllables. Yet the accent never changes from the indefinite to the definite singular as it does when the indefinite plural suffix {-er} is added, cf. (9a-d). The addition of the indefinite plural suffix {-er} changes the accent from a monosyllabic Accent-1 indefinite singular to a disyllabic Accent-2 indefinite plural everywhere (e.g. (9c) hest1 ‘horse’ – 'hester2 ‘horses’) – except where there is umlauting (e.g. (10a) fot

‘foot’, 'føtter1 ‘feet’). Going one step further, we see that the definite suffix does not change the accent of the plural form either, its accent always matches the accent of the indefinite plural ('hester2 ‘horses’, 'hestene2 ‘horses/the’; 'føtter1 ‘feet’, 'føttene1 ‘feet/the’). Thus, in concord with Haugen (1967/1983)), Kristoffersen (2000) and Riad (2003b) for Central Swedish, we too assume that the definite does not bear lexical accent.

“The fact that these [definite articles] are non-tonal marks the article as less intimately fused with the stem than the plural suffix (masculine and feminine), which is ‘-er’ (cf. neuter zero).” (Haugen 1967/1983:193f)⁴²

42. The grave accent mark before the plural suffix denotes Accent 2 in Haugen (1967/1983).

However, as Haugen (1967/1983)) hints at, the crucial difference between the definite articles and other inflectional affixes is that the definite article is not attached to the stem in the same way as other inflections, e.g. the indefinite plural. Indeed, we just saw that the definite never changes the accent as the regular plural suffix can. In Chapter 1, we mentioned that the definite article was historically a post-positioned demonstrative, the meaning of which was weakened with concomitant destressing at some point, and encliticized to the noun (Wessén 1970). Our analysis of the synchronic definite articles in Scandinavian in general is that they still are phonologically enclitics and are attached post-lexically after accent assignment. This is the reason why they appear to be invisible to accent assignment. One way of representing the difference between the plural affix {-er} and the definite marker {-en}/{-et} is to fully integrate the stem and the plural affix into one prosodic constituent that is the domain for stress assignment (and, thus, for accent assignment). The definite marker {-en}/{-et} then is represented as a weak syllable outside the prosodic domain for stress assignment.

(12) Derivations of 'hester2 and 'hesten1

φ

|

ω ω

| |

Foot Foot

/ \ |

σ σ σ σ

hest er ‘horses’ hest en ‘horse/the’

As can be seen in (12), the regular plural suffix becomes part of a disyllabic foot with /hest/, whereas the definite article does not.⁴³ The difference can also be represented as [hester] _ω vs.

[hest] _ωen] _φ. In both cases what we are trying to illustrate is that definite articles are outside of the domain of accent assignment and thus are invisible to it, a phenomenon that Inkelas (1989) and Lahiri, Jongman & Sereno (1990) also observed for other languages. Phonologically then the definite articles in Norwegian are acting like enclitics.

We admit that we are a bit uncomfortable using a term like “enclitic”. Clitics are not easily captured with a set of common characteristics, especially since they have morphological, syntactical as well as phonological features. Setting up a group of criteria that will

43. The Greek letters denote the following: φ (phonological phrase); ω (prosodic word), σ (syllable).

linguistically capture clitics, yet allow affixes to escape, is like trying to gather up the mercury from a broken thermometer. There will always be a language in which, for instance, something might be morphologically a prime example of a clitic, but behave phonologically like an affix.

That is why we explicitly would like to say that our decision to label something that attaches after accent assignment as a clitic is entirely based on phonological and diachronic evidence.