Om diminutivet i norsk

Open access

Abstract

The article offers a concise overview of diminution in Norwegian. Diminutives belong to the domain of evaluation and are produced by means of various derivational processes that are studied under the label ‘evaluative morphology’ (Körtvélyessy, 2015). Some languages exhibit elaborated systems of evaluative markers (e.g. Polish, Italian or Dutch), whereas other (Norwegian, Swedish or Danish) have weak evaluative morphology. The article explores the possibilities for prefixal and suffixal diminutive derivation in Norwegian and discusses the semantics of evaluative morphology with reference to the works by Jurafsky (1996) and Dressler/Merlini Barberesi (1994). Periphrasis, a diminutivizing device in Norwegian that requires further study, is briefly mentioned.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Borowiak M. (2010). Diminutiver i polsk tysk og norsk. Et forsøk på en kontrastiv analyse. En upublisert masteroppgave. Poznan: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza.

  • Dressler W. U. Merlini Barbaresi L. (1994). Morphopragmatics: Diminutives and Intensifiers in Italian German and Other Languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Faarlund J. T. Et al.. (1997). Norsk referansegrammatikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

  • Farø K. Schoonderbeek Hansen I. (2009). Den lille forskel? Diminutiver i tre germanske systemer - set fra dansk. I: I. Schoonderbeek Hansen P. Widell (red.): 13 Møde om Udforskningen af Dansk Sprog Århus Universitet 9.-10. oktober 2008. Århus: Nordisk Institut Aarhus Universitet143-153.

  • Farø K. Schoonderbeek Hansen I. (2010). Småt er godt! - om diminutiver her og der. Mål og mæle 3 7-11.

  • Grandi N. Montermini F. (2005). Prefix-suffix neutrality in evaluative morphology. I: G. Booij et al. (red.) Morphology and Linguistic Typology On-line Proceedings of the Fourth Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (MMM4) Catania 21-23 September 2003 143-156.

  • Hasselrot B.. (1972). Étude sur la vitalité de la formation diminutive française au XXe siècle. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.

  • Jurafsky D. (1996). Universal Tendencies in the Semantics of the Diminutive. Language Vol. 72 No. 3 533-578.

  • Klimaszewska Z. (1983). Diminutive und augmentative Ausdrucksmöglichkeiten des Niederländischen. Deutschen und Polnischen. Eine konfrontative Darstellung. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk.

  • Körtvélyessy L. (2015). Evaluative Morphology from a Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

  • Møller K. (1943). Diminutiver i moderne Dansk. Produktive (levende) dannelser. Udvalg for Folkemaal’s Publikationer Serie A. Nr. 4. København: Ejnar Munksgaard.

  • Scalise S. (1984). Generative Morphology. Dordrecht: Foris.

  • Stump G. (1993). How Peculiar is Evaluative Morphology? Journal of Linguistics 29 1-36.

  • Whorf B. L. (1939). The Relation of Habitual Thought and Behavior to Language. I: L. Spier et al. (red.). Language culture and personality; essays in memory of Edward Sapir. Menasha: Sapir Memorial Publication Fund.

  • Wierzbicka A. (1991). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics. The Semantics of Human Interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Åkerblom S. (2013). Om betydelsekategorin ’diminutiv’ i svenskan. Nordlund 32 101-127.

Search
Journal information
Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 169 50 6
PDF Downloads 300 151 13