No abstract

The article reviews various definitions of adjectival category in Norwegian, and shows that although they define it in different ways, the core of the definitions is always the same. However, there are some classes of adjectives, which are treated diversely by the Norwegian linguists because of the unlike set of criteria they use in their classifications. In my Ph.D. project, I analyze acquisition of Norwegian adjective agreement by Polish L1 speakers of L2 Norwegian. The aim of the present paper is to propose my own definition of adjective, which is based on prototypical and peripheral meanings. The definition shows a Norwegian prototype adjective (that is not unlike the adjectives presented by the Norwegian grammarians) and discusses the more peripheral cases. The definition focuses on the Norwegian adjectives, but also the Polish are mentioned.

This paper deals with the topic of lexical modality in Norwegian as a second language. Basing on data obtained from the ASK-corpus-The Norwegian Language Learner Corpus containing second language texts written in a language examination, the authors analyse the use of two modal particles, jo and nok, by three groups of Norwegian as a second language writers: English, Polish and German. The focus of the study is on analysing lexical patterns for co-occurrence of the modal particles. The patterns used by the learners are compared with the ones used by the native speakers of Norwegian and between the learner groups. The discrepancies found in the data are discussed within the broader framework of second language development and second language writing. The findings suggest that the second language writers' use of modal particles is influenced by several factors, such as general interlanguage tendencies, transfer from the learners' first languages and the perception of textual norms.

In this article we give a brief summary of how Norwegian and Polish sentences are classified in the widely acknowledged grammar books. Therefore, we review the definitions of sentences in both languages, and compare the various classifications applied in Norwegian and Polish. Additionally, much focus is given to classification of sub clauses, which happen to be differently characterized in the respective languages. We would claim that there is a significant bias regarding features that determine classification of sub clauses in Norwegian and Polish. While in Norwegian a lot of emphasis is put on structural features, focusing on how particular units are organized within a sentence, the Polish classifications seem more semantic-oriented. As far as grammatical terms are concerned, Norwegian is featured by far more notions that might yield intransparency for a Polish learner or grammarian. On the other hand, the Norwegian classifications seem far more transparent. Due to a lack of 1-1 relation between terms used in Norwegian and Polish, we cater for this need by providing terms applicable for both languages. We believe that this may come into useful for all who try to systematize their knowledge about sentences in both languages.

No abstract