# Icelandic: declension after 'halda'



## Alxmrphi

Hi all,

I was watching a film subtitled in Icelandic and had a question about a certain line, the woman says "_I think (that) my marriage is over_" and the subtitle is "_Ég held að hjónabandi mínu sé lokið_". My question is about the dative use of the noun _marriage_. I thought the að was starting a new clause and things go back into being the nominative again, like in a sentence such as:

_Ég vona að* þú* geti komið - I hope you can come_.

So I'm not too sure why the dative case is used here, it's sort of like the case assignment passes over into the subordinate clause and affects the first element, but that would mean that only [_hjónabandi mínu_] is affected, when it's the whole [_hjónabandi mínu sé lokið_] which is the complement of the verb. Is there some thematic relationship going on, whereas it's nominative if that is the agent of an action, whereas a marriage isn't "capable" of doing anything and is being put in the dative because it's the receiver of some action?

Arghhhhhhhhhhh, ég er að brjóta heila um þetta.

Takk fyrirfram.


----------



## Tjahzi

Hm, are you sure that it's _sé _and not_ sé*r*_?

My spontaneous reaction would bee that she-(subject, nom.) sees (predicate, verb) her marriage (object, dat.) over (past particle). 

Actually, that latter part makes sense, since it would mean the translation would go _I think that I "see" my marriage "to be over"__._


----------



## Alxmrphi

Tjahzi said:


> Hm, are you sure that it's _sé _and not_ sé*r*_?



Yep, what makes you think it could be *sér*?


----------



## Alxmrphi

> My spontaneous reaction would bee that she-(subject, nom.) sees  (predicate, verb) her marriage (object, dat.) over (past particle).
> 
> Actually, that latter part makes sense, since it would mean the translation would go _I think that I "see" my marriage "to be over"__._


I don't understand, it's just the subjunctive of *vera (to be)*, right? Because the verb that was used is "halda" (to think), that's what the English translation says anyway.


----------



## Tjahzi

Wow. Either I'm on deep water. Or you.

Right back!

Does _halda_ demand subjunctive?


----------



## Alxmrphi

Tjahzi said:


> Nothing, anymore.



Ah, just seen your strikeout, woops!


----------



## sindridah

I wish I could answer but I just can't function, But am I then allowed to comment?? I don't know!  

Anyway I can try to read it again and focus more! !! Koma svo sindri, þú getur þetta !! , Ok and lets see what will happen! unless some other native genius can help! 


I WILL BE POPULAR!!!


----------



## NoMoreMrIceGuy

Sé = is, not see


----------



## Tjahzi

Ok, if _sé _is indeed [3.rd-subjunctive-BE] then I don't understand how the dative can be used. (I wanted it to be [1.st-indicative-SEE].)

And Sindri, don't rub it in!


----------



## Alxmrphi

NoMoreMrIceGuy said:


> Sé = is, not see



Do you have any idea on the hjónabandi mínu part ?
@Sindri: it's ok, try to have a think and see if anything becomes clear! 



> Ok, if _sé _is indeed [3.rd-subjunctive-BE] then I don't understand how the dative can be used. (I wanted it to be [1.st-indicative-SEE].)


I know, it's something that just stuck out when I read the subtitle, and I picked up my pen and shouted "TO WORDREFERENCE!!" 
Now I see why you expected the 'r', as for requiring subjunctive, yeah if it has the meaning "think".


----------



## Tjahzi

Actually... it could be that the subject of the subclause is impersonal and that the logical subject (which governs the predicate), _the marriage_, takes the dative because it's the object of the action, that is, the act of closing/ending.

Yes, I think so. The marriage is not over, it has _been ended_.

Hm, I assume Icelandic, like Danish and German (and Norwegian?) use _to be_ (rather than _to have_) as the copula for the paste tense when a change of state has been undergone?


----------



## Alxmrphi

I see what you mean, but the predicate is governed by *halda*, as can be shown with its need to be in the subjunctive. The grammatical subject (marriage) is connected to the subject complement (over) and is not really in that relationship where the subject would get its case information from the end verb, because it's not really the verb, it's the lýsingarháttur (i.e. participle used as adjective).

So this is what makes the dative subject even more confusing.
It's describing the state, not the action of the verb.
I see what you were saying though.

I think now this calls for more examples to investigate with, and the Icelanders can then tell us what's correct and hopefully we can draw some good explanations.

What would the translation of the following sentences be (envisaging that the verb is still _halda_ for _think_).
_
I think my cat is lost.
I think my shoes are dirty.
I think my car is broken.
_
What would the translations be?

Just seen your addition:


> Yes, I think so. The marriage is not over, it has _been ended_.



That is another good guess, but it really doesn't fit the logic of the story, two people trying to keep something alive but keep arguing, it's her realisation that no matter how hard they try, it has fizzled to nothing, it is a state of being over, rather than the action "being ended", at least that's the way it seems to me. That's why I chose the examples to see similar possibilities.


----------



## Tjahzi

I don't think that _halda_ has any other effect than turning the verb of the subclause subjunctive. What matters is the semantic relationships of the subclause.

Although this distinction is ambiguous in English, it can be made, even in your examples:

_(I think) my cat is in the state of being lost/has been lost be someone. 
(I think) my shoes are __in the state of being __dirty/have been dirtied be someone.
(I think) my car is __in the state of being__ broken/has been broken by someone._

As such, given the fact that the marriage is not the subject (which it obviously can't be since it's dative), it must be the object, meaning the subject is not present/non-existent/impersonal, which, neatly enough, makes the verb take the 3rd.-subjunctive. 

Or?


----------



## NoMoreMrIceGuy

Since actual grammar is not my strong suite I'lll throw up a couple of examples and hope that they are useful.

First, translations:

_I think my cat is lost.
Ég held að kötturinn minn sé týndur.

I think my shoes are dirty.
Ég held að skórnir mínir séu skítugir.

I think my car is broken.
Ég held að bifreiðin mín sé biluð._

Would the sentence make more sense if it was simply a statement:
_Hjónabandi mínu er lokið._
Similarly:
_Lífi mínu er lokið._


----------



## Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham

This is my attempt to explain this:
When a verb that takes dative like the verb að stela to steal the object is almost always in dative.
For example, I think this sentence could be right:
*Öllum bókunum mínum var stolið.*
The words "all my books" are in dative because they are the object of the verb að stela. The singular *"var - was"* is used instead of *"voru - were"* because the books are the object and not the subject. The singular neuter *"stolið"* and not the plural feminine referring to the books *"bækur f pl"* because it's impersonal. It's like *"mér er heitt/kalt - I am hot/cold"*. However, when you are describing the books as being stolen you can say *"allar bækurnar mínar voru stolnar"*. That means that they were stolen books but not stolen from you. The verb loka To close also is like this.
For example:
*Ég held að búðin hafi verið lokuð*
vs.
*Ég held að búðinni hafi verið lokað.*
The first sentence means that the store was closed, that is, not open. The second sentence means that the store was physically closed by somebody.
The verb *ljúka* does not act this way. It always takes the dative. You have to say *Leiknum er lokið and not leikurinn er lokinn*.
Could somebody please confirm whether these sentences are correct?
I hope this helps!


----------



## Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham

This can also be with the verb týna, I think.
For example:
Ég held að kötturinn minn hafi verið týndur. (að kötturinn minn hafi týnst)
and also
Ég held að kettinum mínum hafi verið týnt. (að einhver hafi týnt kettinum mínum)
Is this right?


----------



## Tjahzi

If that was not what I said, that's what I meant!


----------



## Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham

Alxmrphi said:


> _Ég vona að* þú* geti komið - I hope you can come_.



I think it should be:
Ég vona þú geti_*r*_ komið.
The present subjunctive of geta is like this
ég geti
*þú getir*
hann/hún/það geti
við getum
þið getið
þeir/þær/þau geti


----------



## Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham

Here are some more examples:

Dative:
að gleyma (forget) Öllum sögunum var gleymt. (All the stories were forgotten)
að treysta (trust) Þremur börnum var treyst fyrir peningunum. (Three children were entrusted with the money)
að lofa (promise) Mér var lofað verðlaunum. (I was promised a reward)
að vagga (rock) Barninu var vaggað. (The child was rock)
að feykja (blow away) Laufunum var feykt. (The leaves were blown away)
að óska (wish) Mér var óskað góðs gengis. (I was wished success)
að skella (slam) Hurðinni var skellt. (The door was slammed)

Ég held að...
...öllum sögunum hafi verið gleymt.
...þremur börnum hafi verið treyst fyrir peningunum.
...mér hafi verið lofað verðlaunum. 
...barninu hafi verið vaggað.
...laufunum hafi verið feykt.
...mér hafi verið óskað góðs gengis.
...hurðinni hafi verið skellt.

Genitive:
að sakna (miss) Konunnar var saknað. (The woman was missed)
að gæta (look after) Barnsins var gætt. (The child was looked after)
að biðja (ask for) Bókanna var beðið. (The books were asked for)
að spyrja (ask) Margra spurninga var spurt. (Many questions were asked)
að krefjast (demand) Svars var krafist. (An answer was demanded)
að óska (wish) Góðs gengis var óskað. (Success was wished)
að leita (look for) Fólksins var leitað. (The people were looked for)

Ég held að...
...konunnar hafi verið saknað.
...barnsins hafi verið gætt.
...bókanna hafi verið beðið.
...margra spurninga hafi verið spurt.
...svars hafi verið krafist.
...góðs gengis hafi verið óskað.
...fólksins hafi verið leitað.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Hey Braut,

I know you asked for a confirmation of your earlier sentences, does that mean everything in the last post is also an attempt, or a definitely correct sentence?


----------



## Brautryðjandinn í Úlfsham

Alxmrphi said:


> Hey Braut,
> 
> I know you asked for a confirmation of your earlier sentences, does that mean everything in the last post is also an attempt, or a definitely correct sentence?


Hi Alxmrphi!
All the sentences are attempts and I would like confirmation on them. I'm not quite sure whether they are all correct but I do think that many of them are.


----------



## sindridah

I think my confirmation would be suitable, Or I hope so! 

But yeah, Braut: I can't see nothing wrong your attempts, they all sound perfectly good to me


----------



## Alxmrphi

I've just finished watching a lesson about vocabulary and about school in Icelandic.
At the end of the lesson the teacher said:

*Orðaforða kaflans um skólann er þá lokið*.

Is this the same thing we've been talking about, *ljúka* always having its (grammatical, not semantic) subject in the "is finished/over" construction in the dative?


----------



## kepulauan

Alxmrphi said:


> *Orðaforða kaflans um skólann er þá lokið*


Well this is wrong unless there was something in front of it.

"_orðaforðakaflanum_(dat) _um skólann er þá lokið_" / "_fyrsta hluta_(dat) _orðaforðakaflans um skólann_ _er þá lokið_"

I haven't read this thread carefully but I might add some examples of ljúka always causing dative: "eigum við að ljúka þessu"; "ljúka mér af". _Vera_ turns it around: "þessu er lokið"; "mér er öllum lokið". The tense of _vera_ does not matter: dat + er lokið, dat + væri lokið, dat + sé lokið, dat + var lokið.

Thus "Ég held að(subjunctive trigger) [hjónabandi(dat) mínu + sé(subjunctive receiver) lokið]"

I hope I'm not talking about something else.


Edit::
I just noticed _orðaforða_ is also dative. Woops.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Ah, we moved on to talking about _ljúka_ in a "marriage is over" way, that *by itself* it causes the dative, so it's nothing to do with the effects of "halda" preceding it (which was what confused me at first), but what she says is:

Well, the text can be found here (last line of p. 171, top line of p.172), or the video can be found here (18:17).
Is she wrong? She's an Icelandic teacher, if she is I've lost all hope! 

Maybe I need to clarify my question, I just wanted to know if the -a in the orðaforð*a*, was the same thing that caused hjonaband to be in the dative in the first example, i.e. it was used with_ljúka_ in the same way.

Just a quick Q: What does "mér er öllum lokið" mean?


----------



## kepulauan

Note my edit. No it's not wrong.

Yes it is the same: "ljúka orðaforðanum".


quick A: Ehm... something like "overwhelmed by the dysfunctionality or stupidity of something".


----------



## Alxmrphi

Cool 

Thanks, I got the confirmation I was hoping for.
Wow, what a translation, I'm definitely writing that one down somewhere, I think I'll challenge myself to find a context at some point in my life to say that to someone


----------

