7

(Disclaimer: I am not a linguist.)

I am learning Norwegian now, and they have some verb form when you attach -s to the end. It is often called passive voice (used in Present tense and in infinitive only, I guess). For example:

  • å møte 'to meet': vi møter 'we meet (someone else)', vi møtes 'we meet (each other)'
  • å kalle 'to call (by name)': jeg kaller 'I call (someone or something)', jeg kalles 'I am called'

I know that similar construction exists in Swedish.

I am a native Slavic speaker and we have the verbs ending with -ся (się in Polish) which have almost the same meaning. In Slavic languages, the origin of this kind of endings is clear, it means 'oneself'. For example, учиться 'to study' literally means учить себя 'to teach oneself'. So I started thinking that Norwegian and Swedish verbs maybe have some similar origins.

But does anyone know for sure?

  • 1
    Well, that's what people say, but people say more than they really know. britannica.com/topic/Scandinavian-languages/Phonology, members.unine.ch/martin.hilpert/GIGL.pdf, but I guess after looking for hard text evidence, it might just be a story. There is apparently a semantic story about medio-passives, but I haven't seen any hard evidence like old texts. I guess I'm agnostic at this point, given how hard it is to find solid evidence. – user6726 Dec 21 '19 at 5:49
  • 2
    Old Norse had a passive in -sk, which lends credence to the theory. – Colin Fine Dec 21 '19 at 11:11
  • 2
    "Att lära sig" is very literally "to teach (one)self", there aren't other murkier possibilities about what the sig may come from, since it changes depending on the actual person: jag lär dig svenska (I teach you Swedish), jag lär mig svenska (I learn Swedish, lit. I teach me/myself Swedish). – LjL Dec 22 '19 at 20:58
  • 1
    @LjL it's an anglo-saxon or low-german loan, where it was likely exclusively privative, "sick sülwst" (for himself), according to W. Schulz, Gotica, 1909, in: Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung auf dem Gebiet der Indogermanischen Sprachen, 42. Bd, 3/4 H. (cf p 319, footnote 1). There's also laisjan sik in the Gothic bible translating AGr manthenein. Hence I found the above reference. I also found doubt about Pokorny's etymology to *leys. – vectory Dec 23 '19 at 3:37
  • 3
    @user6726 IMO there is no PIE sigmatic mediopassive, so -s < -sk < -sik < sik looks fairly plausible and attested in other languages. – Eleshar Dec 23 '19 at 12:27
0

Well, my guess is that it comes from the -sk ending in Old Norse (modern Icelandic -st ending). As found in the famous Vǫlospá verses:

Brœðr munu BERJASK (Modern Icelandic: Bræður munu BERJAST),

Meanining "Brothers will fight EACH OTHER".

Indeed, Swedish and Norwegian are related, both come from Old Norse, which divided itself in two branches:

• Old West Norse (Icelandic, faroese, norwegian);

• and Old East Norse (Swedish, Danish);

Norwegian, however, was very influenced by Denmark for a long time, leading the language to become more similar to its East Norse cousins.

I hope it answer you well! :)

|improve this answer|||||
  • 1
    I think OP asks about the relation to Slavic (and Baltic) reflexive suffixes -ся, -сь, -się, -s. Not just Scandinavian ones. – J-mster Dec 22 '19 at 18:45
  • 2
    @J-mster I think they're making a comparison and a (widely held, actually) hypothesis that both may come from an original reflexive pronoun, but I don't think they're wondering whether they're actually related to the Slavic equivalents. – LjL Dec 22 '19 at 21:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.