# All Nordic languages: Possessive pronoun placement



## Dan2

With respect to the placement of possessive pronouns ("my", "your", etc):

In Norwegian, both before the noun (min venn, mitt hode) and after the noun (vennen min, hodet mitt) seem extremely common.  I know very little about Swedish, but I am under the impression that after-the-noun (huvudet mitt) is less common than in Norwegian.

For Norwegian: Is there a meaning difference between the two orders?  Is "after-the-noun" more associated with either bokmål or nynorsk or is it about the same in both?

For Swedish speakers: How do you view "after-the-noun"?  Is it used only in special cases?  Also, since it is so common in Norwegian, do you associate it with Norwegian?

For other Scandinavians: What is the situation in your language?

Thanks!

(My first post - please forgive me if I've broken any rules!)

Dan - USA


----------



## Alxmrphi

In Icelandic I've only ever seen it after the noun, I'm not sure if it's possible to use it before the noun being referred to, it's the same with the definite article, that can be used before the noun but in the vast amount of cases it's not.

i.e. vinur minn / húsið mitt / dýnurnar mínar / epli mín etc etc, there are 12 different words for 'my' in Icelandic depending on case / gender of the noun.


----------



## Lars H

Hej



Dan2 said:


> For Swedish speakers: How do you view "after-the-noun"?  Is it used only in special cases?  Also, since it is so common in Norwegian, do you associate it with Norwegian?



In Swedish "vännen min" sounds archaic, but I would not be surprised to see it in old or contemporary poetry or song texts. It is not yet stone dead.

I think there could be - or has been - a difference in meaning, even if it is weak. The first word is determing what's most important. ""Min vän" is my friend, not necessarily a friend of Erik's or Lisa's.
"Vännen min" is my friend, not my neighbor or supervisor. 

But if "vännen min" is a bit old fashioned, how to express this meaning in more modern Swedish? In text I am really not sure, I suppose it would be given by the context. In speech clearly by intonation, more stress on "vän".

About your second question. No. "Vännen min" and similar expressions are in Sweden not associated with Norwegian.


----------



## hanne

I Danish you can't reasonably put the pronoun after the noun in any case I can think of.

And even though I know the Norwegians do it, I don't think I'd associate it with Norwegian if I heard it - not if there weren't other indicators as well.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

hanne said:


> I Danish you can't reasonably put the pronoun after the noun in any case I can think of.


How about in song lyrics or poetry - Gasolin's _Kvinde min_ comes to mind... 

I agree with Lars H about Swedish - you would normally only find possessive pronouns placed after their nouns in poetry or song lyrics these days. I used to believe you would mainly do it to make rhyming easier, but that's probably not the whole story. 

In Swedish, as in Norwegian, there is a difference in declension, too, depending on what goes first:

The normal case is *possessive pronoun + noun in indefinite form*: min vän/min venn
The other case is *noun in definite form + possessive pronoun*: vännen min/vennen min. 

I'll be interested to find out what the difference is in Norwegian between the two placements.


----------



## vestfoldlilja

In regards to Norwegian, bokmål, and I think nynorsk as well; I think the general rule is that when the pronoun comes before the noun the meaning is to specifically point out ownership to the feeling expressed. 
  Han er min venn og ikke din  - He is my friend and not yours
  - This usage to highlight that he is my friend as oppose to someone else’s.  
  Det er Karl, og han er vennen min – That’s Karl, and he’s my friend.
   -This usage to say that he’s a friend of mine. 
  Hodet mitt verker fordi hun slo meg– my head hurts because she hit me.
  Det er mitt hodet som verker og ikke hennes – it is my head that hurts, and not hers. 



I hope I managed to make myself clear


----------



## hanne

Wilma_Sweden said:


> How about in song lyrics or poetry - Gasolin's _Kvinde min_ comes to mind...


Poetry isn't "reasonable" 

Seriously though, on your comment on definite/indefinite form of the noun, I was considering what would be the case for Danish, and I simply cannot make up my mind, it just sounds plain wrong to my ears either way. (Kim Larsen obviously went for indefinite.)


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

vestfoldlilja said:


> I hope I managed to make myself clear


I'm not sure... Let's try these contexts:

a) You drive off the road, and your car gets smashed. You escape unhurt. You tell your friends afterwards: My car was completely smashed, but I didn't even get a scratch. Bilen min or min bil (I think bilen min)?
In Swedish, we would simply put word stress on the car and I in speech:
_Min* bil* blev totalkrashad, men *jag* fick inte en skråma._

b) Driving in your car, you collide with another car. Your car gets smashed, while the other guy's car only gets a few dents. You tell your friends afterwards: My car was smashed, and his one was just slightly dented. Bilen min or min bil (I think min bil?

In Swedish, my gets word stress, as well as his:
_*Min* bil blev totalkraschad, och *hans* blev bara lite bucklad._

(We would probably put it differently in writing in Swedish, replacing the word stress with other phrases.)

I hope I've understood you correctly.


----------



## vestfoldlilja

Wilma_Sweden said:


> a) You drive off the road, and your car gets smashed. You escape unhurt. You tell your friends afterwards: My car was completely smashed, but I didn't even get a scratch.





Wilma_Sweden said:


> Bilen min or min bil (I think bilen min)?
> 
> In Swedish, we would simply put word stress on the car and I in speech:
> _Min* bil* blev totalkrashad, men *jag* fick inte en skråma._




*    You’re right, bilen min would be used here. 

 _Bilen min ble totalskadet, men jeg fikk ikke en skramme. 

_In this sentence _min_ will, at least in spoken speach, often be left out since it is not needed to make the sentence understandable (seeing as there was only one car involved in the accident and it's made clear in the telling of the story who the car belongs to). 
 


Wilma_Sweden said:


> b) Driving in your car, you collide with another car. Your car gets smashed, while the other guy's car only gets a few dents. You tell your friends afterwards: My car was smashed, and his one was just slightly dented.





Wilma_Sweden said:


> Bilen min or min bil (I think min bil?
> 
> In Swedish,  my gets word stress, as well as his:
> _*Min* bil blev totalkraschad, och *hans* blev bara lite bucklad._




 You’re correct here as well, min bil would be used.

_Min bil ble totalskadet, og bilen hans ble bare litt skadet. 

_ _Better alternatives: The sentence as I wrote it, but with men instead of og, or min bil ble totalskadet, mens bilen hans ble (bare) litt skadet._ 


You woudn't use _min bil_ if both cars where wrecked; so in the sentence it highlights that it was my car and not the other person's car that was wrecked. 

If both cars where wrecked you could say: Bilen min, og bilen hans ble begge totalskadet. (My car, and his (car) were both completely wrecked.)



Wilma_Sweden said:


> I hope I've understood you correctly.



 Seems you have


----------



## Sepia

hanne said:


> Poetry isn't "reasonable"
> 
> Seriously though, on your comment on definite/indefinite form of the noun, I was considering what would be the case for Danish, and I simply cannot make up my mind, it just sounds plain wrong to my ears either way. (Kim Larsen obviously went for indefinite.)


 

No, but it proves that it used to be OK - like sombody said up thread: Archaic.

I also would have mentioned the Gasolin song and the old children's song "Danse, danse, dukke min". So you could probably speak like that about a century ago, but not any more.


----------



## Tech12

I think that, in Norwegian, putting the pronoun first makes the sentence sound a lot more formal.

1. Jeg dro dit med min mann.
2. Jeg dro dit med mannen min.

1. Kan du hente min bil?
2. Kan du hente bilen min?

1. Jeg snakket med min venn.
2. Jeg snakket med vennen min.

I don't know what other Norwegians think, but to me 1 sounds way more formal than 2.


----------



## Dan2

Jeg vil gjerne takke alle som svarte på mitt spørsmål.
Jag vill gärna tacka alle som svarat på min fråga.

I had a sense that the "vennen min" form might be possible in archaic English, but couldn't think of a specific example.  I just found something in Shakespeare:
Thou, brother mine, ...
But even in Shakespeare (circa 1600) it seems to be very rare.


----------



## JohanIII

På engelska kan man också säga "of mine" - This old heart of mine (Rod Stewart-låt), that silly brother of mine. I think that's not (only?) archaic, but more of a set phrase.

Angående kvinde min är det tilltal, svenska: "kvinna min"; inte mycket använt, utom just så, i en låt, eller för utsmyckning, "hördu, kvinna min". Kvinna_n_ min är (3:e person?).


----------



## Dan2

JohanIII said:


> På engelska kan man också säga "of mine".


Correct.  In at least one context it's extremely common in both spoken and written modern English.  You can think of the following paradigm (singular, plural):
Definite without possessor: the friend, the friends
Indefinite without possessor: a friend, friends
Definite with possessor: my friend, my friends
Indefinite with possessor: a friend of mine, friends of mine

Just wanted to complete JohanIII's observation. I shouldn't be discussing my non-Nordic Germanic language here...


----------



## kirsitn

Tech12 said:


> I think that, in Norwegian, putting the pronoun first makes the sentence sound a lot more formal.



Agreed! Formal and slightly old-fashioned as well.


----------



## kms

kirsitn said:


> Agreed! Formal and slightly old-fashioned as well.


I agree. "Jeg må hjem til kjæresten min" sounds much better than "Jeg må hjem til min kjæreste". The latter is more formal / old-fashioned.

It is of course often used when the pronoun is important, such as "Det er din skyld" and "Det er min tur til å betale".


----------



## Dan2

Several people have commented on how the "vennen min" word order is more current and informal than the "min venn" word order.  Interestingly however, when I do Google searches on the two orders, the pronoun-first order invariably produces more hits (for ex., 150,000 for "mitt hus" vs 62,000 for "huset mitt").

A possible significant confusing factor is that many of the hits may be Danish. To do this "experiment" right, one should choose nouns for which the Norwegian and Danish spellings differ.

Anyway, I just thought I'd mention this for anyone who wants to investigate further.


----------



## kirsitn

Dan2 said:


> To do this "experiment" right, one should choose nouns for which the Norwegian and Danish spellings differ.



Or simply restrict the search to Norwegian sites: 

"mitt hus" site:no gives 12 500 hits
"huset mitt" site:no gives 26 700 hits


----------



## Elektrisk564

As a Swedish speaker, I never put the pronoun after the noun. I will always say, for example, "Mitt hus", not "Huset mitt".


----------

