Page:The Journal of English and Germanic Philology Volume 18.djvu/476

 472 Flom to show what modes of expression are current, the unmixed dialect; he shows the differences that often exist between the two strata of society, between the older and the younger genera- tion, between those who wish to be thought to speak dannet (cultured) and those who pay no attention to that, things that belong especially to the speech of children, present tendencies, etc. As to the efforts at "finer" speech he finds that mostly among the women; the men he finds "have a more robust linguistic conscience." The syntax of the cases is first dealt with, pp. 7-16. As in Nw. 1 dialects in general, there is no distinction between the subjective and the objective, except in certain pronouns; in the 3 pi. one says, e.g., deem 'they,' whether it is subject or object, in this respect then as in ENw. Among some speakers, espe- cially women, de is used in both cases; this would seem to be a clear case of Bergen influence. On the other hand the nom. & is used after "del #," as det a bare a, 'it is only F; one cannot, as in ENw. dialects and in cultured Nw. say: 'det er mig,' 'it is me,' French 'c'est moi.' In this respect then Tr. agrees with WNw. (note, however, Bergen departs from WNw. here). Under the dative the author shows how vastly the use of preposi- tions has been extended, even beyond the condition in the dialects ;n general. This is due in considerable measure to the almost complete disappearance of the ethical dative, the dati- vus commodi, etc., and the considerable development of the use of prepositions with verbs. The genitive case remains prac- tically only in fixed combinations; as in the dialects and as extensively in Riksmaal it has been replaced by prepositions pa, i, te, especially, and with persons (possessive sense) by the pronouns sin and hannes. The use of sin is so common that it may be attached even to another possessive pronoun, thus (min sin). Whether this is to be regarded as an influence of Bergen dialect I am not sure; possibly not. In regard to the Article, pp. 16-21, it is first noted that the suffixed article has about the same scope as it has in Nw. in general. One peculiarity may be noted: its use in the plural form with patronymic signification. This is a striking develop- ment and a very interesting one. If one wishes to say 'Those children of Mr. Flod's one says De d&rre Flodan. In Norwegian dialects in general the definite pi. of a family name has reference to the family as a whole, parents and children (or several of them), just as in English. One can, however, not in Tr., use the sg. def. form for one of the children; here one says: han Flod- guten and ho Flod veikja. Presumably Floden would be used of the man himself, though this is not made clear. But we find 1 1 shall use certain well-established abbreviations (E Nw. = East Norwe- gian, etc.). Troms0 town dialect (Tromsfi bymaal) I shorten to Tr.