An email from Joan lists a bunch of mistakes we should correct.
Here are notes from her, and attached is a list of examples:
1. og brast niður ís undir öllum saman þar er vatnfall var undir og djúp.
Brast is the preterite of bresta ‘crack, break’; it is not a middle. Moreover, ís ‘ice’ is surely not accusative in this clause, but nominative.
2. og undruðust ákafliga fegurð hennar
I don’t understand the annotations. The verb is middle/reflexive, but there’s no overt ACC subject ….does (NP-SBJ con-A) mean that it is conjoined with an ACC subject in the preceding clause? But one can do “conjunction reduction” even if the clauses have different subject cases. The verb undruðust is 3rd. pl. so there has to be a nominative argument someplace. Fegurð ‘beauty’ is a feminine noun, as far as I know, it’s grammatically singular, and it could be accusative as well as nominative. So my best guess is that the elided subject is nominative plural, and fegurð is accusative.
3. og undruðust spekt hennar. Exactly the same as for #2.
4. og öngvan hefir þessa fýst fyrr að brjóta hauginn.
Fýst is not a middle, but the past participle of fýsa, which has an impersonal use with an ACC experiencer subject and an ACC object (meaning ‘to long for, to die for’).
5. Slíkum hor hafði Brandur ekki vanist.
Venjast ‘get used to’ is indeed a middle which governs DAT, but Brandur is a nominative proper name.
6. Nú girnist hann engis annars en ryðja sér til ríkis með oddi og eggju.
Girnast ‘wish, long for’ is a reflexive verb taking a nominative subject. The personal pronoun hann ‘he’ is the same in both nominative and accusative; I see no reason to gloss it as accusative in this clause.
7. og þessa í bland minntist þessa áðurnefnda dauða barns, sem í brunninum fannst með kvennabandi um hálsinn, segjandi ei skyldi það komið af húsi þeirra hálærðu og etc.
Minnast ‘recollect, remember’ is a reflexive verb taking a NOM subject and GEN object in modern Icelandic.
The demonstrative þessa is three ways ambiguous: m.sg. G; m.pl. A; f.sg.A.
Note: another version of the text has íbland as one word (with the preposition incorporated as a prefix) – so that [þessa íbland] is a NP, but it still looks like it ought to be accusative to me! I need Cleasby-Vigfússon!
Finnast ‘to be found’ is a common middle verb taking a NOM subject.
DATIVE subject + GENITIVE object
Active voice:
8. En þess er oss leitanda, hvað helst sé það, er engill vitraðist á Gyðingalandi féhirðum að bornum lausnera órum.
Oss is the accusative/dative form of vér, an honorific formal 1pl. pronoun (vor is the genitive).
Some versions give this clause without the oss: þess er leitanda.
The verb leita ‘seek’ takes a NOM subject and GEN object in modern Icelandic. Dative is perhaps an optional benefactive adjunct?
9. Þá fékk henni mikils, meyjunni.
The verb fá ‘get’ would take a NOM subject and ACC object in modern Icelandic, but the arguments are clearly DAT and GEN. Check Cleasby-Vigfússon.
10. Fjárins ann yður en mér frægðarinnar.
The verb unna ‘allow, grant’ would nowadays take a NDG case frame. But it seems pretty clearly to be taking a DG case frame here, so I would also have assumed that the datives (yður, mér) are grammatical subjects. The verb is elided in the second conjunct.
11. Með slíkum hætti aflar stýrimanninum áhyggju þeim, er lengi hefir siglt blíðan byr og hagstæðan, ef hann sér þvert veður að fara skipinu með miklum stormi.
Like unna, the verb afla ‘get’ now takes a NDG case frame. The weak fem. noun áhyggju could be any oblique case.
12. Hingað til hafi þér einskis beðið í mínu nafni.
Bíða ‘await’ takes a NG case frame.
Beðið could also be the past participle of biðja ‘ask, request’ which takes a NAG case frame. This second meaning makes more sense to me in the context: ‘Until now you have not requested anything in my name’
Þér here might not be the dative sg. of 2nd sg. þú ‘you’ but rather the nominative 2nd plural of the honorific form of address (A/D = yður, G = yðar), which is now outdated. I would have expected the present auxiliary to be hafið; perhaps the final ð deleted before the initial thorn of þér?
Passive:
13. og var honum eigi margra hæginda leitað.
The verb leita ‘seek’ takes a NG case frame in modern Icelandic, but here seems clearly DAT GEN. See #8 above.
But this makes more sense in the passive, where GEN on the object would be preserved.
Middle
14. En sumum fékkst mikils.
Fást ‘be available’ is a reflexive middle, which would take a nominative subject in modern Icelandic. Mikils is unambiguously genitive. Check Cleasby-Vigfússon for genitive case in OIce. There seem to be textual variants.
Íslendinga sögur apparently has fékkst henni mikit alternating with fékkst henni mikils. (OI mikit > mikið, which is either N or A)
Orðasambönd - Leit
www.lexis.hi.is/.../osamb.pl?...
1402, það fæst/fékkst upp úr <honum, henni>. 1403, það fæst/hefur .... 1486, <þetta> fær/fékk <honum, henni> () hugarangurs.
Lexix.hi.is gives examples of the NDG case frame for fá [Þetta fær mér undrunar, Þetta fær/fékk honum hugsorgar/hugarangurs,etc.] but not with fást as far as I can see.
I would be inclined to analyze the dative as an optional benefactive, with dative supplied by the middle construction itself. [Note: when used as a ditransitive, the verb fá ‘give’ occurs in a NDA case frame; fékkst could also be a nonmiddle 2nd sg. preterite of fá, but not in #14]
IcePAHC possibly_wrong_constructions Schaetzle.txt
An email from Joan lists a bunch of mistakes we should correct.
Here are notes from her, and attached is a list of examples:
1. og brast niður ís undir öllum saman þar er vatnfall var undir og djúp.
Brast is the preterite of bresta ‘crack, break’; it is not a middle. Moreover, ís ‘ice’ is surely not accusative in this clause, but nominative.
2. og undruðust ákafliga fegurð hennar
I don’t understand the annotations. The verb is middle/reflexive, but there’s no overt ACC subject ….does (NP-SBJ con-A) mean that it is conjoined with an ACC subject in the preceding clause? But one can do “conjunction reduction” even if the clauses have different subject cases. The verb undruðust is 3rd. pl. so there has to be a nominative argument someplace. Fegurð ‘beauty’ is a feminine noun, as far as I know, it’s grammatically singular, and it could be accusative as well as nominative. So my best guess is that the elided subject is nominative plural, and fegurð is accusative.
3. og undruðust spekt hennar. Exactly the same as for #2.
4. og öngvan hefir þessa fýst fyrr að brjóta hauginn.
Fýst is not a middle, but the past participle of fýsa, which has an impersonal use with an ACC experiencer subject and an ACC object (meaning ‘to long for, to die for’).
5. Slíkum hor hafði Brandur ekki vanist.
Venjast ‘get used to’ is indeed a middle which governs DAT, but Brandur is a nominative proper name.
6. Nú girnist hann engis annars en ryðja sér til ríkis með oddi og eggju.
Girnast ‘wish, long for’ is a reflexive verb taking a nominative subject. The personal pronoun hann ‘he’ is the same in both nominative and accusative; I see no reason to gloss it as accusative in this clause.
7. og þessa í bland minntist þessa áðurnefnda dauða barns, sem í brunninum fannst með kvennabandi um hálsinn, segjandi ei skyldi það komið af húsi þeirra hálærðu og etc.
Minnast ‘recollect, remember’ is a reflexive verb taking a NOM subject and GEN object in modern Icelandic. The demonstrative þessa is three ways ambiguous: m.sg. G; m.pl. A; f.sg.A. Note: another version of the text has íbland as one word (with the preposition incorporated as a prefix) – so that [þessa íbland] is a NP, but it still looks like it ought to be accusative to me! I need Cleasby-Vigfússon!
Finnast ‘to be found’ is a common middle verb taking a NOM subject.
DATIVE subject + GENITIVE object Active voice:
8. En þess er oss leitanda, hvað helst sé það, er engill vitraðist á Gyðingalandi féhirðum að bornum lausnera órum.
Oss is the accusative/dative form of vér, an honorific formal 1pl. pronoun (vor is the genitive). Some versions give this clause without the oss: þess er leitanda. The verb leita ‘seek’ takes a NOM subject and GEN object in modern Icelandic. Dative is perhaps an optional benefactive adjunct?
9. Þá fékk henni mikils, meyjunni.
The verb fá ‘get’ would take a NOM subject and ACC object in modern Icelandic, but the arguments are clearly DAT and GEN. Check Cleasby-Vigfússon.
10. Fjárins ann yður en mér frægðarinnar.
The verb unna ‘allow, grant’ would nowadays take a NDG case frame. But it seems pretty clearly to be taking a DG case frame here, so I would also have assumed that the datives (yður, mér) are grammatical subjects. The verb is elided in the second conjunct.
11. Með slíkum hætti aflar stýrimanninum áhyggju þeim, er lengi hefir siglt blíðan byr og hagstæðan, ef hann sér þvert veður að fara skipinu með miklum stormi.
Like unna, the verb afla ‘get’ now takes a NDG case frame. The weak fem. noun áhyggju could be any oblique case.
12. Hingað til hafi þér einskis beðið í mínu nafni.
Bíða ‘await’ takes a NG case frame. Beðið could also be the past participle of biðja ‘ask, request’ which takes a NAG case frame. This second meaning makes more sense to me in the context: ‘Until now you have not requested anything in my name’
Þér here might not be the dative sg. of 2nd sg. þú ‘you’ but rather the nominative 2nd plural of the honorific form of address (A/D = yður, G = yðar), which is now outdated. I would have expected the present auxiliary to be hafið; perhaps the final ð deleted before the initial thorn of þér?
Passive:
13. og var honum eigi margra hæginda leitað.
The verb leita ‘seek’ takes a NG case frame in modern Icelandic, but here seems clearly DAT GEN. See #8 above. But this makes more sense in the passive, where GEN on the object would be preserved.
Middle
14. En sumum fékkst mikils.
Fást ‘be available’ is a reflexive middle, which would take a nominative subject in modern Icelandic. Mikils is unambiguously genitive. Check Cleasby-Vigfússon for genitive case in OIce. There seem to be textual variants. Íslendinga sögur apparently has fékkst henni mikit alternating with fékkst henni mikils. (OI mikit > mikið, which is either N or A) Orðasambönd - Leit
www.lexis.hi.is/.../osamb.pl?... 1402, það fæst/fékkst upp úr <honum, henni>. 1403, það fæst/hefur .... 1486, <þetta> fær/fékk <honum, henni> () hugarangurs.
Lexix.hi.is gives examples of the NDG case frame for fá [Þetta fær mér undrunar, Þetta fær/fékk honum hugsorgar/hugarangurs,etc.] but not with fást as far as I can see.
I would be inclined to analyze the dative as an optional benefactive, with dative supplied by the middle construction itself. [Note: when used as a ditransitive, the verb fá ‘give’ occurs in a NDA case frame; fékkst could also be a nonmiddle 2nd sg. preterite of fá, but not in #14] IcePAHC possibly_wrong_constructions Schaetzle.txt