# Norwegian: hvilke filmer som



## janesaddiction

Hi, 

How would you translate this?

"Her kan du se hvilke filmer og teaterstykker som går denne uken."

Here you can see _which_ films and plays _which_ are this week. 
There seems to be one "which" too many here. Am I missing something?


----------



## flukså

I would translate it into something like "Here you can see which films and shows that are shown/played this week".


----------



## janesaddiction

flukså said:


> "Here you can see which films and shows that are shown/played this week".



Thanks, but it still seems gramatically incorrect.


----------



## Grefsen

janesaddiction said:


> How would you translate this?
> 
> "Her kan du se hvilke filmer og teaterstykker som går denne uken."


If this is something that you read online it would be very helpful if you could provide a link.  *Tusen takk!  *


----------



## Dan2

janesaddiction said:


> Thanks, but it still seems gramatically incorrect.


Well, you're right that a basically word-for-word translation into _English _would be grammatically incorrect, but every language has its own rules!
(In other words, the Norwegian sentence bothers me too, but I'm more cautious about calling sentences in other people's languages ungrammatical. )

janesaddiction's "complaint" leads me to the following question.

Original sentence (slightly simplified by omitting the second noun):
1. "Her kan du se hvilke filmer som går denne uken."
In order to make this sentence "correct" from the _English _perspective, it should be
either
2. "Her kan du se hvilke filmer går denne uken."
or
3. "Her kan du se hvilke er filmer som går denne uken."

I'd be interested to hear how native speakers compare these three sentences.  Thanks!


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Only the first one is correct. The confusion here is around "which". This word has two very different properties in English, but Norwegian uses two different terms. "Which" is either an interrogative or a relative pronoun. In "Her kan du se hvilke filmer som går denne uken" there are two which-es: _hvilken_ as an interrogative and _som_ as a relative pronoun.


----------



## Dan2

Hi NNYC...
I understand very well that "hvilke" and "som" are two different "which"es and serve two different purposes (and I'm sure that janesaddiction does too).  Our problem is that in English you can't say
_Here you can see which (interrog pronoun/determiner) films which/that (rel pron) are playing this week.
_In German you can't say
_Hier sehen Sie welche (interrog) Filme, die (rel pron) diese Woche laufen
_In French you can't say
_Vous voyez ici quels (interrog) films, qui (rel pron) passent cette semaine
_In Spanish you can't say
_Aquí se puede ver cuáles (interrog) __películas que (rel pron) ponen esta semana
_And I expect janesaddiction would tell us that the equivalent Polish sentence is also impossible.

The problem is that in these languages, if something is not acceptable as a free-standing sentence (_Here you see which films)_ then it doesn't become an acceptable sentence by hanging a relative clause off it (_that are playing this week_).
In contrast,
_Here you see which films there are __(_acceptable as a free-standing sentence, so no problem adding a relative clause: _which/that are playing this week_)

The other alternative in English and these other languages is to allow the first part to be a non-sentence...
_Here you see which films, _but then use "which films" as subject of the clause, which means no rel pron:
_Here you see which films that are playing this week.
_
That seems to be the logic in most non-Scandinavian European languages, and so this Norwegian construction (which I've seen before) seems "illogical" to me (and apparently to other people, like janesaddiction).

EDIT: NNYC, you've confirmed that the OP sentence is _correct_. Could you now please help us by explaining in what way these sentences are _wrong_:
2. "Her kan du se hvilke filmer går denne uken." (Or simply: 2a. "Her kan du se hva går denne uken.") (I know, these usually have "som", but what's wrong _without_ "som"?)
3a. "Her kan du se hvilke filmer er det som går denne uken."
3b. "Her kan du se hvilke er filmene som går denne uken."
(All these are sentences that conform to English "logic".)
Thanks.


----------



## myšlenka

Dan2 said:


> The problem is that in these languages, if something is not acceptable as a free-standing sentence (_Here you see which films)_ then it doesn't become an acceptable sentence by hanging a relative clause off it (_that are playing this week_).
> In contrast,
> _Here you see which films there are __(_acceptable as a free-standing sentence, so no problem adding a relative clause: _which/that are playing this week_)


Your analysis is wrong here. [Here you see which films] is a main clause and is generally unacceptable in Norwegian too while [Here you see [which films are playing this week]] is a main clause with an embedded question. The crucial point is that the syntactic element _which films_ is in two very different syntactic positions in these two cases. In the former it's part of the main clause whereas in the latter it's part of the embedded clause so the parallel you are trying to draw between them is not valid.

What makes Norwegian different is that embedded questions where the wh-phrase is the subject, requires _som._ If _som_ is not there, the sentence is ungrammatical.


Dan2 said:


> 2. "Her kan du se hvilke filmer går denne uken." (Or simply: 2a. "Her kan du se hva går denne uken.") (I know, these usually have "som", but what's wrong _without_ "som"?)
> 3a. "Her kan du se hvilke filmer er det som går denne uken."
> 3b. "Her kan du se hvilke er filmene som går denne uken."
> (All these are sentences that conform to English "logic".)
> Thanks.


 2. Here _som_ is required because we have an embedded question where the wh-phrase is the subject.
3a. Embedded questions are not subject to V2 word order. That's why this sentence is wrong.
  3b. Embedded questions are not subject to V2 word order. If we fix this by switching the words to the right positions, we end up with "hvilke filmene er som..." and this is problematic for two reasons. First of all, _hvilke_ is incompatible with definite forms. Second, if _som_ follows a form of _å være_ like that, it ceases to be a relative subjunction.


----------



## willem81

janesaddiction said:


> "Her kan du se hvilke filmer og teaterstykker som går denne uken."



My observation here is that _hvilke_ functions in this sentence exactly like an indicative pronoun '_those_':

_Here you can see those films and plays that are shown this week._

A corresponding Norwegian phrase will look like:
_Her kan du se de filmene og de teaterstykkene som går denne uken._ Will it be equivalent to the original sentence?


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Yes, they are more or less interchangeable. However, "hvilke" adds a different element.
1) _Her kan du se de filmene som går denne uka._ = Here you can find/see the movies that are running this week (i.e. all the movies that are running in a compiled list)
2) _Her kan du se hvilke filmer som går denne uka._ = Here you can find/see the various movies that are running this week (i.e. a selection of movies to chose from)


----------



## willem81

NorwegianNYC said:


> 2) _Her kan du se hvilke filmer som går denne uka._ = Here you can find/see the various movies that are running this week (i.e. a selection of movies to chose from)



This really clarifies the meaning of '_hvilke_' here. It can be translated here as '_any_' as it seems:

Her kan du se _hvilke_ filmer _som_ går denne uka.
Here you can see _any_ films _that_ are running this week.


----------



## myšlenka

_Her kan du se de filmene og de teaterstykkene som går denne uken._ 

This sentence is ambiguous in a way in which the other isn't. _Her_ can refer to the building where all the screenings take place.


----------



## Dan2

Dan2 said:


> The problem is that in these languages,...





myšlenka said:


> Your analysis is wrong here.


I was trying to explain why "You see which movies that are playing" (and its German, etc equivalents) is ungrammatical.  The fact that the sentence is ungrammatical means that _every _analysis is wrong.  I also suggested some ways that the English sentence could be modified to make it correct.


myšlenka said:


> [Here you see [which films are playing this week]] is a main  clause with an embedded question. The crucial point is that the syntactic element _which films _(is  here) part of the embedded clause


I agree that this is a correct analysis, but it's a correct analysis of one of my English sentences _modified_ to make it grammatically correct.  Syntactically it doesn't correspond to the Norwegian sentence because it lacks "that" or "which" (Norw. "som").

But your specifying this structure is helpful.  In the grammatical English sentence
1. Here you see [which films are playing]
"which films" is the subject of the embedded sentence (as you said).
In the other type of grammatical English sentence that I suggested
2. Here you see [the films [that are playing]]
the outer brackets enclose a noun phrase (object of "see") and the inner brackets a relative clause whose subject is the relative pronoun "that".

But by the rules of English grammar, there's no way to generate
3. You see which films that are playing.

3a. You see [which films that are playing]
is bad because the subject position in the bracketed clause is doubly filled.

3b. You see [which films [that are playing]]
is also not a possible analysis, because (as I was trying to say in the previous post), relative clauses are optional, so if 3b were possible, then
3c. You see [which films]
would have to be grammatical.  But unlike "You see the films" (compare 2.), 3c is not grammatical.

I hope it's clear that I fully accept that the Norwegian construction is grammatical in Norwegian.  What I've been trying to do is to explain why it's not grammatical in English, German, etc.  In addition, I'd like to see a syntactic analysis of the Norwegian construction so we can say in exactly what way the syntax of the languages differs.


myšlenka said:


> What makes Norwegian different is that embedded questions where the wh-phrase is the subject, requires _som._


And this "som" is ...?  The subject position of the embedded clause is already filled (with the wh-phrase), as you yourself say.  So this is not the same "som" as in "mannen som går", where "som" is the one-and-only subject of the relative clause.


----------



## Alxmrphi

Page 448, "The Syntax of Icelandic" by Höskuldur Þráinsson:



> _8.3.2_ _Extra complementizer elements
> _
> Another difference between Icelandic on the one hand and the rest of Scandinavian on the other has to do with the 'extra' elements in the complementizer position of _wh_-clauses: in Danish, Norwegian and Swedish, a wh-phrase introducing an indirect question must be followed by 'an extra element' when there is a subject gap in the _wh_-clause, but otherwise it is usually ungrammatical (sources given).
> 
> Han spurte _hvilken buss_ *sem* gikk til sentrum      (Norwegian)
> [Examples from other Scandinavian languages omitted]
> 
> The 'extra element' corresponds to relative complementizers in these languages.



Thought maybe this might be relevant to your discussion (as already hinted at earlier by others).


----------



## myšlenka

Dan2 said:


> I hope it's clear that I fully accept that the Norwegian construction is grammatical in Norwegian.  What I've been trying to do is to explain why it's not grammatical in English, German, etc.  In addition, I'd like to see a syntactic analysis of the Norwegian construction so we can say in exactly what way the syntax of the languages differs.


 The only difference is that embedded questions where the wh-phrase is the subject, require* _som_. I have no idea why this is a requirement but you can draw a parallel to the behaviour of relative complementizers in Norwegian (and English) in real relative clauses where the complementizer is compulsory if the relativized noun is the subject of the relative clause.

*This requirement is generalized in many dialects so that even matrix questions behave the same way, resulting in different word orders for matrix questions depending on the syntactic status of the wh-phrase 


Dan2 said:


> And this "som" is ...?  The subject position of the embedded clause is already filled (with the wh-phrase), as you yourself say.  So this is not the same "som" as in "mannen som går", where "som" is the one-and-only subject of the relative clause.


Norwegian _som_ is a subjunction (or if you prefer: complementizer). The older term was "relative pronoun", but _som_ does not share the syntactic distribution of pronouns. Besides, _som_ affects the word order which clearly suggests that it's different from pronouns. This also means that _som_ cannot be the subject of any clause as subjecthood is reserved for (pro)nouns.

So yes, the occurences of _som_ in "_Her kan du se hvilke filmer som går_" and "_Mannen som går_" are the same.


----------



## Dan2

So, myšlenka, to confirm, your analysis of "Du ser hvilke filmer som går" is
_Du ser [hvilke filmer som går]
_where within the brackets "hvilke filmer" is the subject and "som" is a complementizer or subjunction.  Norwegian would differ from English, then, in allowing the sequence SUBJ COMP in clauses (in fact _requiring _COMP where the subject of the subordinate clause is a wh-phrase (hv-phrase!)).

If I understand correctly, you would also say that altho "You see the man who walks" and "Du ser mannen som går" _appear _to have the same structure, in fact the first is
_You see [the man [who walks]]_, where the inner brackets contain subject-relative-pronoun + verb, while the second is
_Du ser [mannen som går]_, where the brackets contain subject + complementizer + verb.  Is that right?

Thanks for your patience!


----------



## myšlenka

Dan2 said:


> "Du ser hvilke filmer som går" is _Du ser [hvilke filmer som går]
> _where within the brackets "hvilke filmer" is the subject and "som" is a complementizer or subjunction.  Norwegian would differ from English, then, in allowing the sequence SUBJ COMP in clauses (in fact _requiring _COMP where the subject of the subordinate clause is a wh-phrase (hv-phrase!)).


Yes, that's right.


Dan2 said:


> If I understand correctly, you would also say that altho "You see the man who walks" and "Du ser mannen som går" _appear _to have the same structure, in fact the first is
> _You see [the man [who walks]]_, where the inner brackets contain subject-relative-pronoun + verb, while the second is
> _Du ser [mannen som går]_, where the brackets contain subject + complementizer + verb.  Is that right?


I think I will have to modify my earlier claim a little. The two occurrences of _som_ are the same in that they occupy the same position in the structure and that they both affect the word order in the same way. However, in _Her ser du [hvilke filmer som går_] involves something that appears to be a relative clause but it's not because the relativized nominal phrase is overt, i.e. the subject is still part of the embedded clause. In _Du ser [mannen [som går]]_ we are dealing with a real relative clause because the subject of the relative clause appears outside it, i.e. in the matrix clause.

Thus, the former is an embedded question requiring a COMP, making it look like a relative clause whereas the latter is a relative clause and should be analyzed the same way as in English.


----------



## Ben Jamin

It is still not clear for me what meaning difference there is between:
"Her kan du se *hvilke* filmer og teaterstykker som går denne uken".
and 
"Her kan du se filmene og teaterstykkene som går denne uken".
The information conveyed in each of these sentences seems quite equivalent for me.


----------



## willem81

Ben Jamin said:


> It is still not clear for me what meaning difference there is between:
> "Her kan du se *hvilke* filmer og teaterstykker som går denne uken".
> and
> "Her kan du se filmene og teaterstykkene som går denne uken".
> The information conveyed in each of these sentences seems quite equivalent for me.



The difference is that the sentence _"Her kan du se filmene og teaterstykkene som går denne uken_" allows two different interpretations:
1. Here you can see which films are running this week.
2. You can watch here (e.g. in this particular cinema) the films that are running this week.

Whereas the first sentence is unequivocal. That's how I understood the difference between them.


----------



## Ben Jamin

willem81 said:


> The difference is that the sentence _"Her kan du se filmene og teaterstykkene som går denne uken_" allows two different interpretations:
> 1. Here you can see which films are running this week.
> 2. You can watch here (e.g. in this particular cinema) the films that are running this week.
> 
> Whereas the first sentence is unequivocal. That's how I understood the difference between them.


Yes, it sounds right. But I am wondering whether this sentence structure also must be used in other contexts, where the ambiguity does not occur.
I found some quotations in the Internet, for example:
"_Her kan du se hvilke_ tidsskrifter du har lagt i handlevognen."
"_Her kan du se hvilke_ personopplysninger din vertsorganisasjon har lagret om deg."
Are these correct?


----------



## willem81

_Her kan du se hvilke tidsskrifter du har lagt i handlevognen._

That's interesting. As far as I understand, according to this thread, this sentence lacks a 'som' after 'tidsskrifter'. Or perhaps here some other rule applies.


----------



## myšlenka

Ben Jamin said:


> I found some quotations in the Internet, for example:
> "_Her kan du se hvilke_ tidsskrifter du har lagt i handlevognen."
> "_Her kan du se hvilke_ personopplysninger din vertsorganisasjon har lagret om deg."
> Are these correct?





willem81 said:


> _Her kan du se hvilke tidsskrifter du har lagt i handlevognen._
> 
> That's interesting. As far as I understand, according to this thread, this sentence lacks a 'som' after 'tidsskrifter'. Or perhaps here some other rule applies.


Why shouldn't these sentences be correct without _som_?
_Hvilke tidsskrifter_ and _hvilke personopplysninger_ are the direct objects in the embedded clause while _som_ is required if and only if the wh-phrase is the subject.


----------



## willem81

That is rather a tricky rule, as it seems. So, 'som' would be required if the sentence were like this:

_Her kan du se hvilke tidsskrifter som er i handlevognen. _Here the hv-phrase is the subject, right?


----------



## myšlenka

Ben Jamin said:


> It is still not clear for me what meaning difference there is between:
> "Her kan du se *hvilke* filmer og teaterstykker som går denne uken".
> and
> "Her kan du se filmene og teaterstykkene som går denne uken".
> The information conveyed in each of these sentences seems quite equivalent for me.


They can be used interchangeably to a considerable extent, but as NorwegianNYC points out in #10, there is a meaning difference (if we abstract away from the locative reading of _her_ that I mentioned in #12).
_Her kan du se (de) filmene som_... - the set of movies is open.
_Her kan du se hvilke filmer som_... - the set of movies is restricted.


----------



## myšlenka

willem81 said:


> That is rather a tricky rule, as it seems. So, 'som' would be required if the sentence were like this:
> 
> _Her kan du se hvilke tidsskrifter som er i handlevognen. _Here the hv-phrase is the subject, right?


Exactly


----------

