Non-Nominative Subjects in Old and Middle Danish

Gunnar Hrafn Hrafnbjargarson
XVIth ICHL
(University of Aarhus) København, August 11, 2003
Non-Nominative Subjects in Old and Middle Danish £
1 Introduction
One of the central features in the syntactic development of the Mainland Scandinavian languages
(MSc), i.e. Danish, Norwegian and Swedish, is the loss of a differentiated morphological
case system. The Insular Scandinavian languages (ISc), Faroese and Icelandic, both have
preserved a morphological case system, that still differentiates between the four cases that
can also be found in the common Scandinavian (Ancient Nordic) rune inscriptions, namely
nominative, accusative, dative, and genitive. The standard MSc languages have not lost all differentiated
cases; in the pronominal system, there still is a difference between nominative and
non-nominative (accusative or dative, henceforth oblique; glossed OBL) 1 (Jørgensen 2000).
Another difference between the two language groups is that the two ISc languages have
oblique subjects, whereas the MSc languages have nominative subjects exclusively. Various
subjecthood tests show that the subject in Icelandic sentences such as (1) is not essir ’these’,
even though it is marked for nominative, but honum ’him’, even though it is marked for dative.
Likewise, the subject in the Faroese sentence in (2) is not hesar ’these’, that is marked for
accusative, but honum ’him’, even though it is marked for dative:
(1) Ic. ... a honum líka essir
... that him-DAT like-3PL these-NOM
’... that he likes these’
(2) Fa. ... at honum dámar hesar
... that him-DAT likes-3SG these-ACC
’... that he likes these’
Even though the MSc languges only have nominative subjects, this has presumably not always
been so. An example such as (3) shows that the verb drømme ’dream’ has not always assigned
£ I would like to thank Marita Akhøj Nielsen at the Old Danish Dictionary for her kind help, and for allowing
me to use the dictionary for collecting data. I would also like to thank the audience at University of
Aarhus/MUDS 9 (October 2002) where an earlier version of this paper was presented. This research was
supported by the Danish Research Council for the Humanities (SHF), Grant 25-01-0467, as a part of the
Ph.D. project “Case developments in Scandinavian and English”.
1 In some Norwegian dialects, there is no difference between nominative and non-nominative, except for first
person singular, which is distinctive in all dialects. The normal case is not to have distinction in second person
singular and plural, which implies that there is no distinction made in third person, Marit Julien p.c.
1of12

G. Hr. Hrafnbjargarson XVIth International Conference on Historical Linguistics
nominative case to its subject in Danish:
(3) OD. Drømde mik en drøm i nat ...
Dreamt me-OBL a dream in night
’I dreamt a dream tonight ...’ (1300, RUNEV, Brøndum-Nielsen 1932:14)
To show that Old Danish (OD) and Middle Danish (MD) did have oblique subjects, I will
make use of the subjecthood tests that have been used to argue for the existence of oblique
subjects in Icelandic and Faroese (cf. Andrews 1976, Thráinsson 1979, and Sigursson 1989),
on data I have collected at the Old Danish Dictionary. The examples I have collected include
the verbs behage ’please’ drøme ’dream’, dughe ’be fit’ gaghne ’be useful’ græmje ’grieve’,
like ’like’, lithe ’suffer’, sjune ’seem’ and thykje ’think / seem’.
I collected 139 examples from the period 1200-1515 where either the subject, or the object,
or both the subject and the object are pronouns. Not all of the subjecthood tests can be used
for Danish but the tests that can be used, e.g. subject position and reflexivization show that the
majority of the examples (107 of 139, 77%) have oblique subjects.
Around the year 1450, the probability of finding sentences (with the nine verbs mentioned
above) with oblique subjects becomes less than the probability of finding sentences with a
nominative subject and an accusative object.
2 Subjecthood tests
There are various ways of testing subjecthood. Subjects have special positions in embedded
clauses, reflexive pronouns can only be bound by subjects and subjects have a special position
in ECM constructions. An infinitive cannot check case on its subject, instead, the matrix verb
assigs and checks oblique case on the subject in the embedded clause (for example: She saw
[me read the book]). There are eight subjecthood tests (for a more detailed discussion and a
slightly different division of the tests, see Thráinsson 1979, Sigursson 1989:204-209, Rögnvaldsson
1996, and Bardal 2000):
1. Position 4. ECM 7. Control
2. Reflexivization 5. Raising 8. Cliticization
3. Conjunction Reduction 6. Heavy Subject Shift
Some of the eight tests are rather difficult to carry out, as for instance ECM construction,
because it is rare to have a verb that assigns oblique case to its subject embedded under verbs
like se ’see’, høre ’hear’, føle ’feel’, bede ’ask’, and lade ’let’. A test like Heavy Subject Shift
København, August 11, 2003 2 of 12

G. Hr. Hrafnbjargarson XVIth International Conference on Historical Linguistics
is also hard to carry out because differences in case can only be found within the pronominal
system and pronouns are not “heavy” enough to undergo this type of movement.
For the Germanic languages, control, conjuntion reduction and reflexivization are considered
to be the main subject properties (Eythórsson & Bardal 2003:147 and references there).
2.1 Position
Subjects have a specific position in the clause. In the unmarked case, where a subject has been
topicalized, it is positioned immediately before the finite verb, i.e. CP-Spec: 2
(4) MD. Meg synes eij blomster lystelig
Me-OBL seems-SG not flowers beautiful
’I do not think that flowers are beautiful’ (1509, FLOR.1321)
(5) Da. Jeg har måske læst bogen
I-NOM have maybe read book-the
’I have maybe read the book’
If the subject is not topicalized, its usual position is the position immediately after the finite
verb, i.e. IP-Spec. In (6a) and (7a), an adverbial has been topicalized, (6b) and (7b) are examples
of inversion in a yes/no question and (6c) is a V1-declarative: 3
(6) MD. a. thij synthes meg thet ynkelicke
therefore thought-SG me-OBL it miserable
’Therefore, I thought it was miserable’ (1509, FLOR.v1404)
b. synes thek ey so at være
thinks-SG you-OBL not such to be
’Do you not think that it is such’
(1500, SUSO)
c. syntis honum som the komo til et
thought-SG him-OBL as they-NOM came-3PL to a
stort
big
vatn
lake
’He thought that they had come to a big lake’
(1425, SJTR)
(7) Da. a. Derfor har jeg læst
Therefore have I-NOM read
’Therefore, I have read the book’
b. Har du ikke læst
Have you-NOM not read
’Haven’t you read the book’
bogen
book-the
bogen
book-the
In embedded clauses, the subject immediately follows the complementizer:
2 Like Modern Danish, Old and Middle Danish were V2 languages.
3 V1-declaratives are not possible in Modern Danish.
København, August 11, 2003 3 of 12

G. Hr. Hrafnbjargarson XVIth International Conference on Historical Linguistics
(8) OD. um them thickir swa
if they-OBL thinks-3SG such
’if they think such’
(9) MD. tho at thek synes annær ledhes
though that you-OBL think-SG other wise
’Though you think it is otherwise’
(1200, SKLOV)
(1450, SØNDEV)
(10) Da. a. ... hvis de ikke
... if they-NOM not
’... if they have not read the book’
b. ... selvom du aldrig har
... though you-NOM never have
’... though you have never read the book’
har læst bogen
have read book-the
læst bogen
read book-the
I found no examples of topicalization of objects in embedded clauses with verbs that assign
oblique case to their subjects, i.e. the word order complementizer – object – verb Ò – subject
– verb ÑÒ :
(11) a. *om det
if it
b. *...
...
havde
had
dig syntes
you thought
selvom bogen havde
though book-the had
du læst
you read
Examples such as (8) are relevant because if them ’them’ in (8) were an object following a
complementizer, then examples such as (11a) should also exist.
2.2 Reflexivization
In modern Scandinavian (MSc and ISc), reflexive pronouns can only be bound by subjects:
(12) Da. a. Hun i fortalte
She-NOM told
ham j en
him-OBL a
selv i/*j
SELF
’She told him a story about herself’
b. Han i gik sig i en tur
He-NOM walked REFL a tour
’He took himself a stroll on the beach’
historie
story
på stranden
on beach-the
om sig
about REFL
According to Mikkelsen (1911:258-267), this also holds for the older stages of Danish. Therefore,
honum ’him’ in (13) must be the subject:
København, August 11, 2003 4 of 12

G. Hr. Hrafnbjargarson XVIth International Conference on Historical Linguistics
(13) MD. Honum thøkte [ sek vara i en
Him-DAT thought REFL be in a
’He thought that he was in a wonderful town’
lysteligen
wonderful
stath ]
town
(1425, SJTR)
2.3 Conjunction Reduction
In modern Scandinavian (MSc and ISc), the subject in the last of two conjoined sentences can
be omitted. In such context, the object cannot be omitted:
(14) Da. a. I dag læste
Today read
jeg en
I-NOM a
brev
letter
’Today, I read a book and wrote a letter’
bog og [e] skrev et
book and wrote a
b. *Denne bog fandt jeg og [e] købte jeg med
This book found I-NOM and bought I-NOM with
det samme
the same
If Old and Middle Danish behaved in the same way as Modern Danish, i.e. that only subjects
can be omitted, oss ’us’ in (15) must be the subject for both lighe ’like’ and noghe ’be content
with’: 4
(15) MD. ... ladæ [ oss lighe ok [e] noghæ meth thet ]
... let us-OBL like and be content with it
’... let us like it and be content with it’ (1407) 5
This example is however not completely unproblematic. First of all, it is inconvenient
that the subjects of both conjoined clauses are oblique subjects. It is known from German
(cf. Eythórsson & Bardal 2003:174 and references there) that subject-like datives and accusatives
can be omitted in the last of two conjoined sentences if there is a subject-like dative
or accusative in the first of two conjoined sentences. According to Eythórsson & Bardal
(2003:175) the same holds for nominative subjects in German, i.e. nominative subjects can
only be omitted if the subject of the first clause is nominative. Eythórsson & Bardal (2003)
take this fact not to weaken Conjunction Reduction as a subjecthood test, rather they take it to
proove the existance of oblique subjects in German.
4 The verb nøjes ’be content with’ also assigned oblique case to its subject:
(i)
Da. Hun har alt det, mig kand nøje
She has all that me-OBL can be content with
’She has everything that I can be content with’
(1648, ASC I.178)
5 26/2 1407 (Rosk,Rep.4882;i vid, 25/5 1414 kanc.).(bisp el.)kanc.;
København, August 11, 2003 5 of 12

G. Hr. Hrafnbjargarson XVIth International Conference on Historical Linguistics
The second inconvenience about example (15) is that the verb lade ’let’, which is an ECM
verb, allows for topicalization of the object. This will become clear in the next section.
2.4 ECM constructions
In ECM constructions, the subject position is the first position of the embedded clause. The
verb in the embedded clause is an infinitive and it cannot check case on the subject of the
clause. Therefore, the matrix verb (usually a perception verb such as se ’see’, høre ’hear, bede
’ask’, føle ’feel’ or lade ’let’) checks case on the subject.
I found no examples of oblique case assigning verbs in ECM constructions but such examples
can be found: 6
(16) MD. ... och lodh sigh møghit tycke atwære cloogh
... and let REFL-OBL much think to be clever
vdi loghen
about law-the
(1450-1500, Mirakel om Biskop Dunstanus)
’... and let himself make the impression as if he knew much about the law’
This test might however not be suitable for Danish. As mentioned above, one of the ECM
verbs, the verb lade ’let’, allows the object to be topicalized:
(17) MD. oc lada honum cristna af pafvan
and let him-OBL Christianize of pope
’and let him be Christianized by the pope himself’
sælfom
self
(1425, SJTR)
2.5 Raising
In raising, the subject of the embedded clause raises to the subject position of the matrix clause.
Usually, the subject is assigned nominative case by the matrix verb but inherent oblique case
(potentially assigned by the infinitive) overrides nominative case assignment and the inherent
case surfaces in the matrix clause.
I found no cases of raising with oblique case assigning verbs in the Old Danish Dictionary
but cases of raising have been cited in the literature (Bardal 2000:37). Bardal’s (2000:37)
three examples from Middle Danish all include modal verbs. She cites two examples with the
modal kunne ’can’, and one with the modal må ’may’, shown in (18), Bardal (2000:37, (24)):
(18) MD. them i motthæ [ t i ther foræ grwæ ]
them.OBL might that for disgust
’They should be disgusted by that’ (1450, Rimkrønikken, Nielsen 1895-1911:71)
6 Example (16) is cited in Bardal (2000:35, (16)), who cites Diderichsen (1931-1937:170). Here, it is in my
translation.
København, August 11, 2003 6 of 12

G. Hr. Hrafnbjargarson XVIth International Conference on Historical Linguistics
In the Old Danish Dictionary, I found three such examples, one with the modal skulle ’shall’
and two with the modal må ’may’.
This depends on the assumption that modals are raising verbs. It would be less controversial
if the example had the verb forekomme ’seem’ instead of the modal. I have however not found
any such examples.
2.6 Heavy Subject Shift
In modern Danish, heavy pronominals that behave like full DPs can be found, for example
du og jeg ’you and I’ or ham med den grimme Volvo ’him with the ugly Volvo’ but they do
not necessarily have to undergo Heavy Subject Shift (Jørgensen 2000:72-76, and Mikkelsen
1911:593-596). 7
(19) Da. a. *Da kørte lige ind i tankstationen ham
Then drove right in in petrol station-the him
med den grimme Volvo
with the ugly Volvo
b. Da kørte ham med den grimme Volvo lige
Then drove him-OBL with the ugly Volvo right
ind i tankstationen
in in petrol station-the
’Then, the one with the ugly Volvo crashed right into the petrol-station’
Because I only collected examples with pronominals, I found no examples with oblique case
assigning verbs that show Heavy Subject Shift in the Old Danish Dictionary. I have not found
examples of Heavy Subject Shift in the corpus Dansk Sprog- og Stilhistorisk Database (Ruus
2001) either.
Furthermore, the status of Heavy Subject Shift as a subjecthood test for Danish is not clear,
cf. that e.g. Vikner (1995:206) considers Heavy Subject Shift to be ungrammatical in Danish,
even with heavy NP subjects.
2.7 Control
Control infinitives are embedded infinitival clauses where the subject has been omitted. They
are called control infinitives because the subject of the matrix clause controls, and allows for
the omission of the subject in the embedded clause. In the Modern Danish sentence in (20),
the subject han ’he’ controls the subject gap in the embedded clause. The subject gap is filled
7 Ken Ramshøj Christensen, p.c., has told me that (19a) is very archaic, if not ungrammatical, and that most
people would prefer (19b) over (19a).
København, August 11, 2003 7 of 12

G. Hr. Hrafnbjargarson XVIth International Conference on Historical Linguistics
with PRO. PRO can only be controlled by a subject, and PRO is always coreferent with the
subject in the matrix clause:
(20) Da. Han i håber [ at PRO i behage sin svigermor ]
He-NOM hopes to please POSS mother-in-law
’He hopes to please his mother-in-law’
Sigursson (1989:207) shows that PRO is case marked in Icelandic. PRO can show up with
both verbs that assign nominative to their subject as well as verbs that assign dative and accusative
to their subjects. I found no examples of control infinitives in the Old Danish Dictionary,
but I have found examples in Dansk Sprog- og Stilhistorisk Database (Ruus 2001). The
verb bør ’ought’, which embeds a control infinitive, used to assign an oblique case to its subject.
In (21a), PRO is controlled by the oblique thek ’you’ and in (21b), PRO is controlled by
the oblique teg ’you’. Both holde ’keep’ and gøre ’do’ assign nominative case to their subject:
(21) MD. a. thæn edhin bør thek i ingelund [ at PRO i
that oath ought you-OBL in no way to NOM
halda ]
keep
’You ought not keep this oath in any way’
(1425, SJTR)
b. men tenck thu huad teg i bør [ att PRO i gøre ]
but think you what you-OBL ought to NOM do
’But think what you ought to do’ (1534, En kristen Fyrstis Lære)
Likewise, PRO could show up in control infinitives with oblique case assigning verbs. The
verbs undre ’be surprised’ and lide ’like’ had oblique subjects in Old and Middle Danish.
Note that in (22b), Christum ’Christ’ is marked for dative (cf. also section 2.5):
(22) MD. a. Men [ een god furste ] i bør icke att PRO i
But a good prince ought not to OBL
wndre paa the thing
surprise over those tings (1534, En kristen Fyrstis Lære)
’But a good prince ought not to be surprised over those things’
b. Burde det ikke Christum i [ at PRO i lide det ] ...
Ought it not Christ-DAT to OBL like it ...
’Ought Christ not like it ...’ (1638, Jesper Brochmands Huus-Postill)
2.8 Cliticization
According to Brøndum-Nielsen (1965:48), clitics are “especially common in accusative and
show up in texts that are affected by the spoken language” (my translation). In Old Danish,
han ’him-ACC’ had the clitic form -an/-æn, or-n and hana ’she-ACC’ had the clitic form
København, August 11, 2003 8 of 12

G. Hr. Hrafnbjargarson XVIth International Conference on Historical Linguistics
-ana/-(æ)na. I found no examples of cliticization. The reason might be that the clitics have
been replaced by full pronouns in later versions of the same text (Brøndum-Nielsen 1965:48).
3 Summary
In Icelandic, oblique subjects pass all the eight subjecthood tests. In Old and Middle Danish,
oblique subjects pass subjecthood tests like position, reflexivization, conjunction reduction,
raising, and control. In Old and Middle Danish, oblique subjects show up in the same positions
as nominative subjects in matrix clauses, embedded clauses and in sentences where something
else than the subject has been topicalized.
With respect to reflexivization and conjunction reduction, oblique subjects behave in the
same way as nominative subjects in Old and Middle Danish. Reflexive pronouns could be
bound by oblique subjects and it was possible to omit an oblique subject in the last of two
conjoined sentences.
Examples of raising can also be found in Old and Middle Danish. In all examples the matrix
verb is a modal verb and in all cases the subject preserves the oblique case assigned to it by
the infinitive in the embedded clause. Control infinitives with oblique subjects also existed in
Old and Middle Danish. As I have shown, oblique case marked PRO could be controlled by
a nominative subject and a PRO marked for nominative could be controlled by an oblique
subject.
I have not found any examples of cliticization of oblique subjects in Old and Middle Danish.
Like in Modern Danish, only pronouns were marked for morphological case in Old and Middle
Danish. I have not found examples of Heavy Subject Shift in Old and Middle Danish but this
test might not be suitable as a subjecthood test for Danish.
Another test, ECM construction, is also not suitable for Danish. At least one of the ECM
verbs, lade ’let’, allows for topicalization of the object.
København, August 11, 2003 9 of 12

G. Hr. Hrafnbjargarson XVIth International Conference on Historical Linguistics
4 Conclusion
I have shown that Old and Middle Danish had oblique subjects. This conclusion is drawn from
the fact that oblique subjects in Old and Middle Danish pass five of the eight subjecthood
tests, position, reflexivization, conjunction reduction, raising, and control. Three of the tests
that oblique subjects in Old and Middle Danish pass, are the tests that are considered to be the
main properties of subjects in the Germanic languages, namely reflexivization, conjunction
reduction, and control.
Texts used
OLD DANISH DICTIONARY
ASC Astree Siunge-Choer. Dated 1648.
FLOR Flores og Blanseflor, Ghemen-tryk. Dated 1509.
SJTR Sjælens Trøst. Cod.Ups. C 529, Cod.Holm. A 109. Dated ca. 1425.
SKLOV Skånske lov. Cod.Holm B 74. Dated ca. 1200.
SUSO Henrik Susos Gudelig Visdoms Bog, AM783,4 Dated 1500.
SØNDEV Tillæg til Søndags-Evangelier, GkS1390,4. Dated 1450
Examples (21) and (22) are taken from Ruus (2001).
Additional information on manuscripts, editions, and published versions of the texts is available
online at the Old Danish Dictionary web pages (http://www.dsl.dk/go_kildeliste.html).
København, August 11, 2003 10 of 12

G. Hr. Hrafnbjargarson XVIth International Conference on Historical Linguistics
References
Andrews, Avery (1976): The VP Complement Analysis in Modern Icelandic. In: Proceedings
of NELS 6. pp. 1–21.
Bardal, Jóhanna (2000): “Oblique Subjects in Old Scandinavian”, North-Western European
Language Evolution 37, 25–51.
Brøndum-Nielsen, Johannes (1965): Gammeldansk Grammatik. Vol. V, Akademisk Forlag,
København.
Brøndum-Nielsen, Johannes, ed. (1932): Danske Sprogtekster til Universitetsbrug. Vol. I, 2
edn, J. H. Schultz forlag, København.
Diderichsen, Paul, ed. (1931-1937): Fragmenter af gammeldanske Håndskrifter. J. H. Schultz
Forlag.
Eythórsson, Thórhallur & Jóhanna Bardal (2003): “Oblique Subjects: A Germanic Inheritance!”,
Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 71, 145–202.
Jørgensen, Henrik (2000): Studien zur Morphologie und Syntax der festlandskandinavischen
Personalpronomina. Aarhus University Press, Århus.
Mikkelsen, Kristian (1911): Dansk Ordföjningslære. Lehman & Stage, København. Republished
1975 by Hans Reitzels Forlag, København.
Nielsen, Holger, ed. (1895-1911): Den danske Rimkrønike. H. H. Thieles Boktrykkeri.
Rögnvaldsson, Eiríkur (1996): “Frumlag og fall a fornu”, Íslenskt mál og almenn málfræi
18, 37–69.
Ruus, Hanne, ed. (2001): Dansk Sprog- og Stilhistorisk Database. CD-ROM published by the
Department of Nordic Philology, University of Copenhagen.
Sigursson, Halldór Ármann (1989): Verbal Syntax and Case in Icelandic. PhD thesis, Lund
University.
Thráinsson, Höskuldur (1979): On Complementation in Icelandic. Garland Publishing, New
York.
Vikner, Sten (1995): Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages. Oxford
University Press, New York.
København, August 11, 2003 11 of 12

Gunnar Hrafn Hrafnbjargarson
Aarhus Universitet
Institut for Nordisk Sprog og Litteratur
DK–8000 Århus C
Denmark
norhrafn@hum.au.dk
http://www.hum.au.dk/nordisk/norhrafn/index_en.htm
12 of 12