# Norwegian: bokmål and nynorsk [differences?]



## franknagy

<< Topic:  What are the differences of bolmal and landsmal Norvegian? >>


I mean structure, vocabulary.


----------



## mexerica feliz

_Bokmål
_-feminine gender optional:  absent in Bergen Bokmål; used only in a handful of words in ''moderate'' Aftenposten/VG Bokmål : in words_ jenta, hytta, kua _and _øya_
-many spoken/dialectal forms technically allowed but discriminated against in ''neutral written use'' 
(like generalized feminine for all feminine words including forms like _kvinna_, _virkeligheta _; -a for past tense of 1st conjugation verbs: _jeg kasta;_ -a form of definite neutral plurals: _dyra, husa, i mine øra_;  so ''exceptions''  used in neutral Bokmaal like _barna _and _bena _are taught as irregular definite plurals even though they're 100% regular, just the pattern is Norway-originated rather than Denmark-imported)
-favoring noun-heavy expressions, this is called _substantivsjuke, _and it's a heritage taken from Danish which had taken it from written German (Chancellorese style).
-using -s genitive
-using -s passive, but less than Swedish
-relying heavy on prefixes like  an- , be-, het- and the suffix -else; when used -ning is preferred over simple -ing (_rettskriv*ning*en _vs _rettskriv*ing*a_).
_
Nynorsk_
-it has (more) Western diphthongs:_ aust, fleire, meire _etc.
 -feminine gender compulsory for all feminine words, and allowed for some originally masculine words like dialekt, as according to new spelling reform (ei/en dialekt - dialekta/dialekten)
-favoring verbal expressions over noun use, and thus avoiding _substantivsjuke http://sprak.journalisten.no/node/262
-_avoiding -s genitive, but allowing garpgenitive 
-avoiding an- , be-, heit-, -else or keep it to minimum
-all infinitives can optionally end in -a:  elska 'love, like',  fylgja 'follow' etc.
-1st person plural can be ME instead of VI: me dansa  'we danced'
-verta verb is frequently used in the sense of ''become'', and bli is kept for the sense of ''remain''.
-vocabulary-wise words in Nynorsk many abstract nouns are shorter: Nynorsk _medvit _= Bokmaal _bevissthet_, Nynorsk _røynd_ = Bm. _virkelighe_t,  Nn. _løyndom= *Bm*._ _hemmelighet_
-sociolinguistically, unlike in Bokmaal, both conservative and radical forms can be equally used without penalties from general public, unlike in Bokmaal, whose users may say  ''husa'' or ''dyra''  or ''kvinna'' or ''har kasta'' are not Bokmaal; users of Nynorsk can write within their own subnorm without problem: So, you can write ''We like to swim'' like 
_''Me likar å symja'' __(traditional/Western) or 
'__'Vi liker å   svømme'' _(_samnorsk/Eastern_) are treated equally.

So, in this sense, Nynorsk is more tolerant of within-Nynorsk variation than Bokmaal which in 90% of cases prefers the most conservative/''Danish'' forms.
90% of Norwegians use in their speech forms like ''har kasta'' yet this is practically never used in writen Bokmaal (as in laws, newspapers, essays) so many people say ''this is not Bokmaal''
even though it's in the normative dictionary of Bokmaal. And seeing other allowed forms in Bokmaal in print, like _kvinna, fjella_ or _dyra _is pure fiction. Nynorsk used to
be more puristic than Bokmaal, but now the situation has reversed, Bokmaal as seen in Aftenposten and VG is as conservative as it was in 1900, because conservative
forms in Bokmaal are nowadays classy and fashionable, and spoken forms are ''ugly''  https://www.hf.uio.no/iln/om/organisasjon/tekstlab/kurs/oppgaver/Ims_hovedoppgave.pdf

Nynorsk is used more and more by people who reject to write in conservative _Bokmål_, but now when radical _Bokmål _is practically dead in writing,
many users switch to _Bokmål_-_close _(radical) Nynorsk in which you can write  ''Vi har dansa'' just fine without shocking editors-in-chief.
By the way, it has been proven the quality of life is better in Nynorsk-using regions of Norway: http://framtida.no/articles/lever-lengre-i-nynorskland


----------



## Ben Jamin

franknagy said:


> I mean structure, vocabulary.


You mean *bokmål*?


----------



## Ben Jamin

mexerica feliz said:


> _Bokmål
> _-feminine gender optional:  absent in Bergen Bokmål; used only in a handful of words in ''moderate'' Aftenposten/VG Bokmål : in words_ jenta, hytta, kua _and _øya_
> -many spoken/dialectal forms technically allowed but discriminated against in ''neutral written use'' (like generalized feminine for all feminine words including forms like _kvinna_, _virkeligheta _; -a for past tense of 1st conjugation verbs: _jeg kasta;_ -a form of definite neutral plurals: _dyra, husa, i mine øra_;  so ''exceptions''  used in neutral Bokmaal like _barna _and _bena _are taught as irregular definite plurals even though they're 100% regular, just the pattern is Norway-originated rather than Denmark-imported)
> -favoring noun-heavy expressions, this is called _substantivsjuke, _and it's a heritage taken from Danish which had taken it from written German (Chancellorese style).


 You mean maybe "Chancery style"?

Today's bokmål allows actually almost anything. The actual choice of allowed forms is made by the user himself, not by any "language police".

Substantiv-syke is an individual (bad) style, not a feature of the language norm.




mexerica feliz said:


> -relying heavy on prefixes like  an- , be-, het- and the suffix -else; when used -ning is preferred over simple -ing (_rettskriv*ning*en _vs _rettskriv*ing*a_).



"relying heavy" and "simple -ing" is just a matter of (your?) individual taste.



mexerica feliz said:


> _
> Nynorsk_
> -favoring verbal expressions over noun use, and thus avoiding _substantivsjuke http://sprak.journalisten.no/node/262
> -_avoiding -s genitive, but allowing garpgenitive


Substantivsjuke is an individual (bad) style, not a feature of the language norm.
Never seen an -s genitive in a Nynorsk text.




mexerica feliz said:


> -avoiding an- , be-, heit-, -else or keep it to minimum


They are actually banned.



mexerica feliz said:


> -all infinitives can optionally end in -a:  elska 'love, like',  fylgja 'follow' etc.
> -1st person plural can be ME instead of VI: me dansa  'we danced'
> -verta verb is frequently used in the sense of ''become'', and bli is kept for the sense of ''remain''.
> -vocabulary-wise words in Nynorsk many abstract nouns are shorter: Nynorsk _medvit _= Bokmaal _bevissthet_, Nynorsk _røynd_ = Bm. _virkelighe_t,  Nn. _løyndom= *Bm*._ _hemmelighet_
> -sociolinguistically, unlike in Bokmaal, both conservative and radical forms can be equally used without penalties from general public, unlike in Bokmaal, whose users may say  ''husa'' or ''dyra''  or ''kvinna'' or ''har kasta'' are not Bokmaal; users of Nynorsk can write within their own subnorm without problem:


Actually Nynorsk is much more restrictive than Bokmål, but many people don't care about the Nynorsk norm and write what they consider their own individual norm




mexerica feliz said:


> So, you can write ''We like to swim'' like
> _''Me likar å symja'' __(traditional/Western) or
> '__'Vi liker å   svømme'' _(_samnorsk/Eastern_) are treated equally.



_"Vi liker å svømme" _is not Samnorsk! How did you get it? 



mexerica feliz said:


> So, in this sense, Nynorsk is more tolerant of within-Nynorsk variation than Bokmaal which in 90% of cases prefers the most conservative/''Danish'' forms.



Actually it is just the opposite.



mexerica feliz said:


> 90% of Norwegians use in their speech forms like ''har kasta'' yet this is practically never used in writen Bokmaal (as in laws, newspapers, essays) so many people say ''this is not Bokmaal''
> even though it's in the normative dictionary of Bokmaal. And seeing other allowed forms in Bokmaal in print, like _kvinna, fjella_ or _dyra _is pure fiction.


Do you write about the language norm or about the individual choices of writers?



mexerica feliz said:


> Nynorsk used to
> be more puristic than Bokmaal, but now the situation has reversed, *Bokmaal as seen in Aftenposten and VG is as conservative as it was in 1900,
> *


I think your source must be at least 50 years old.



mexerica feliz said:


> *
> because conservative *f*orms in Bokmaal are nowadays classy and fashionable, and spoken forms are ''ugly''* https://www.hf.uio.no/iln/om/organisasjon/tekstlab/kurs/oppgaver/Ims_hovedoppgave.pdf



Obsolete. Where did you get it from? It is just the opposite nowadays.



mexerica feliz said:


> Nynorsk is used more and more by people who reject to write in conservative _Bokmål_, but now when radical _Bokmål _is practically dead in writing,
> many users switch to _Bokmål_-_close _(radical) Nynorsk in which you can write  ''Vi har dansa'' just fine without shocking editors-in-chief.
> By the way, it has been proven the quality of life is better in Nynorsk-using regions of Norway: http://framtida.no/articles/lever-lengre-i-nynorskland



You contradict yourself in the last paragraph.

Your post is strongly biased, it is like a panegyric for Nynorsk.
Actually Nynorsk is continually loosing ground to Bokmål and to non-normed writing.


----------



## mexerica feliz

If  you ever read a Bokmål text, you could easily see it's the conservative norm that reigns.
I've never ever seen VISS, KVINNA or JEG KASTA in a Bokmål-text,
even children books use HVIS, KVINNEN and JEG KASTET.
It's a lie to say that all those who write KVINNEN and JEG KASTET are from Bergen,
this would mean 90% of Norwegians are from Bergen.


Take a look what Gjert Kristoffersen said in his introductiory chapter of ''Phonology of Norwegian'' (Oxford University Press):



> In other cases, variants have equal status, in the sense that for example
> textbook authors can choose the one they prefer. The result of this policy is that both norms can be
> further subdivided into what are often called radical and conservative subnorms. *But the fact that a given
> form is listed in the dictionaries does not in itself mean that it is in widespread use*. Most users of
> Bokmål tend to use a moderately conservative norm, while most users of Nynorsk seem to avoid the
> most salient conservative as well as radical forms.
> 
> [...]
> 
> *Today the radical forms are rarely seen*; as mentioned above, most Bokmål users will use a slightly conservative form, usually
> called moderat Bokmål:
> 
> (1) (a) Danish: Vi kast-ede bog-en
> (b) Moderate Bokmål: Vi kast-et bok-en
> (c) Radical Bokmål: Vi kast-a bok-a



Even Riksmål forms like  _elskede _have been revived in the last couple of years, and have been added to the normative dictionary of Bokmål in 2005 becase most people say and write _ 
Min elskede_ and not _Min elska_.

In Oslo, most affluent and influential people prefer _boken _to _boka_:  http://ingermerete.blogg.no/1312126486_samtale_fra_normalite.html
And it's what you read in VG: _boken _and not _boka_.
Google "a endelser" and see the ongoing debates.


----------



## franknagy

Thank you for the detailed answers.
You have written about *four* dialects:
*Landsmål
*Moderate Bokmål
*Radical Bokmål
*Nynorsk.

Can I bound them to 
a) different *parts of Norway* 
b) or are they languages of different *classes of the society*?
In case a) can me send me a map?
In case b) can me list examples of famous scientist and writers publishing in 
Landsmål and Bokmål respectively?

What is present stage and the historical process of spreading one dialect against the others?


----------



## raumar

First, "landsmål" is an outdated term for Nynorsk. The word "Landsmål" was officially replaced with "Nynorsk" in 1929. 

Second, Nynorsk and Bokmål are _*not*_ dialects, but written language standards. People use their dialects when they speak, but they write either Bokmål or Nynorsk. There is a geographical division here: Nynorsk is used in Western Norway. You will find more information, including a map, on Wikipedia: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_language

Third, it is important to know that both Bokmål and Nynorsk have a great variety of _*optional forms*_. You may think of the Norwegian language as a continuum, ranging from a conservative Bokmål through modernized versions of both languages to conservative Nynorsk. The difference between radical, or modernized, versions of both languages may be smaller than differences within each of the standards. Having said that, most people prefer to write a distinct Bokmål or Nynorsk, not something in-between. 

I would like to add that the distinction between Moderate and Radical Bokmål, as explained in the book that Mexerica refers to, is much less clear-cut in practice. The distinction between "Vi kastet boken" and "Vi kasta boka" is used as an example -- but many people, including myself, would rather write "Vi kastet boka". 

I have to agree with Ben: Mexerica seems to have some prejudices against Bokmål. And it is simply wrong that "Bokmaal as seen in Aftenposten and VG is as conservative as it was in 1900". 30-40 years ago, Aftenposten used a very conservative Bokmål, with "nu" and "efter" instead of "nå" and "etter". That is not the case any more. 

Basically, Bokmål and Nynorsk are very similar. There are some differences in the use of genitive, and in the use of words with the prefixes an- and be-, and the suffixes -het and -else, as Mexerica mentioned. But apart from that, it is basically the same language with some differences in spelling. 

An example may be useful. Here are two versions of the same text --  a Bokmål and a Nynorsk version -- taken from the website of the Norwegian tax authorities. You may compare them, and see the similarities and differences yourself:

Bokmål


> Det er vi i Skatteetaten som er ansvarlig for et fullstendig og oppdatert folkeregister. Folkeregisteret omfatter nøkkelopplysninger om alle personer som er eller har vært bosatt i Norge. Registeret danner grunnlaget for blant annet skattemanntallet, valgmanntallet og befolkningsstatistikken. Et korrekt folkeregister er en forutsetning for at alle borgere skal motta informasjon fra offentlige myndigheter, og at deres rettigheter og plikter blir ivaretatt. Både offentlige og private virksomheter bruker opplysninger fra folkeregisteret. Tilgangen er imidlertid begrenset.



Nynorsk:


> Det er vi i Skatteetaten som er ansvarlege for eit fullstendig og oppdatert folkeregister. Folkeregisteret omfattar nøkkelopplysningar om alle personar som er eller har vore busette i Noreg. Registeret dannar grunnlaget for mellom anna skattemanntalet, valmanntalet og folketalsstatistikken. Eit korrekt folkeregister er ein føresetnad for at alle borgarar skal få informasjon frå offentlege myndigheiter, og for at rettane og pliktene deira skal bli varetekne. Både offentlege og private verksemder nyttar opplysningar frå folkeregisteret. Tilgjenget er likevel avgrensa.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

No, no, no! There is a persistent myth that there is something called "radical" and "moderate" bokmål. It is simply not the case. There is no such thing. And, this is not "class language". There is no such thing in Norwegian. I make my living researching, teaching and describing the Norwegian language, and I can assure you this is simply the perpetuation of a myth as well.

We should not overthink this. There are TWO official forms of Norwegian today - bokmål and nynorsk - and only two. Riksmål and høgnorsk are NOT official. However, both nynorsk and bokmål have a lot of wiggle-room pertaining to their written standards. You can write the same text in nynorsk in very different ways, and the same is the case with bokmål. As a matter of fact, there is more overlap between the two written standers than differences.

I will break it down:

1)      Bokmål today is closer to nynorsk than it has ever been. Feminine is more prevalent now than before, not only in spoken language, but also in writing. A study in Aftenposten revealed that only 11% of Norwegians only use the two-gender system. Which means that Feminine has bounced back in bokmål.
2)      Nynorsk is not a collection of natural dialects. It is a constructed language meant to be a modern version of Norse. The claim that nynorsk represents the true Norwegian language better than bokmål is false. Its creator, Ivar Aasen, did not take into account that modern day Norwegian is made up of two branches of Scnadinavian. Eastern and Mid-Norwegian dialects are Eastern Scandinavian, whereas Southern, Western and (largely) Northern dialect are Western Scandinavian. Therefore, Eastern Norwegian has traditionally been closer to Swedish dialects, and Western Norwegian gave rise to among other Faroese.
3)      Norwegian, Swedish and Danish are actually variants of the same language, not separate languages. They have always been close. However – bokmål is not Danish. Bokmål is largely based on the Eastern and Central dialects of Norwegian.
4)      Bokmål is far more flexible than nynorsk. Bottom line, the intention of bokmål is to represent the way Norwegian is actually spoken (i.e. descriptive), whereas nynorsk is based on how tha language ought to be (i.e. prescriptive).


----------



## raumar

I agreee with most of your comments, NorwegianNYC, but I think this one is exaggerated:



NorwegianNYC said:


> There is a persistent myth that there is something called "radical" and "moderate" bokmål. It is simply not the case. There is no such thing. And, this is not "class language".



If your point just is that there are no official standards called "radical" or "moderate" Bokmål, you are of course right. (And it was a bit odd that the Wikipedia article described Høgnorsk and Riksmål almost on equal terms with Bokmål and Nynorsk. That is simply confusing. I should have mentioned that, when I posted that link).

But, on the other hand, people use different versions of Bokmål (and Nynorsk) when they write. There are, as we know, many optional forms, and people don't use these forms randomly. Some prefer to write "Vi kastet boken", others prefer "Vi kasta boka", and others "Vi kastet boka". ("Vi kasta boken" seems inconsequent, at least to me.) There are certain patterns here. I am not a linguist, but I thought that a task for linguists would be to search for such patterns and classify them. We then need labels for the different categories. Radical, mainsteam/moderate and conservative (i.e. Riksmål) Bokmål are useful labels, from my point of view. I use them myself, for example if I want to characterize the writing style of a specific novelist. 

Regarding "class language": The distinction between Bokmål and Nynorsk is a matter of geography (but originally linked to the political conflict between centre and periphery), not social class. And in most parts of the country, social class does not affect how people write. However, the situation may be somewhat different in cities like Oslo. There is a well-known division between Western and Eastern Oslo, with different sociolects, related to social class. I would be surprised if that division didn't affect people's choice of optional forms when they write -- I expect, for example, feminine forms such as "boka" to be less used in Western Oslo than in Eastern Oslo. Of course, the language division in Oslo is much weaker than it used to be -- but it has not disappeared.

But even if some optional forms may be more used by people with high social status, that does not necessarily mean that these optional forms, as such, have high status. Different people may view these optional forms in different ways.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Ok - I am with you on that. But, the "radical" and "moderate" category simply does not exist. 95% of all bokmål is somewhere in between. Which is the strength of bokmål. It adopts more features from the actual spoken language than nynorsk, and is therefore more flexible.

As for sociolects - they probably exist, but they are dying rapidly. I cannot think of a single place in Norway (Kalfaret in Bergen being a possible exception) where a modern-day sociolect is alive and thriving.


----------

