Sanajärjestyksen variaatiosta suomenoppijoiden teksteissä
On the variation of word order in written L2 Finnish

Summary/Abstract: Finnish word order is known to be syntactically relatively free, but it also has many discourse-conditioned functions (Vilkuna 1989: 9) that form part of the linguistic competency of Finnish native speakers. For those learning Finnish as a second language, it can be difficult to recognize which word order is neutral (unmarked) and what interpretation would be triggered using another, rarer (marked) word order in a specific context. In this paper, I concentrate on the Finnish existential (‘there is’) sentences,which were gleaned from the so-called Ceiling corpus (cf. Martin at all. 2010)containing texts written by two groups: adults and school children. %e texts in this corpus were judged as being of levels A1–C2 (adults) and levels A1–B2 (school children) with regard to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). The most typical word order of the existential sentences is that in which the theme position of the sentence is occupied by a local or possessive adverbial and the subject of the sentence is post-verbal (AVS for short). %e theme position can also be empty (VS). Both of these word orders are also unmarked. First, I analyzed the variation of the (A)VS word order statistically. %e marked variations of the (A)VS word order become more common, as the writing skills(according to CEFR levels) increase. Statistically highly significant differences were found between the levels A & B as well as between the levels B & C in the adult group. %e variation in the school children group was not statistically significant. I then analyzed more closely the use of the marked SV-order in text context, using the so-called field description of word order (‘sanajärjestyksen kenttäkuvaus’) as presented in the ISK (2004: 1306–1345). (Cf. Vilkuna 1989 for the nearest equivalent of this model in English.) %e unmarked VS-order sentence is sometimes considered as being “theme less” since the theme field is not occupied. If the theme field is empty, the subject in the SV-type sentence could occupy the theme field. But also the so-called pre-field preceding the theme field could be occupied by the subject if the theme field were not really empty. This might seem marginal but could also have an influence on the interpretation of the sentence in context. The text samples reveal that a suitable theme can o(en be found for the empty theme slot – at least in the case of SV-order – in the text preceding this sentence. In this case, the “empty” theme field could be occupied by this continuous theme, and the subject theme) would be in the pre-field. %is word order is clearly marked and brings a contrastive or a convincing tone to the text. The text samples show that at least some of the higher-level L2 Finnish learners are able to use the marked SV order in texts this way quite correctly.The subject of the existential sentences is normally interpreted as a rhemeor “new information”. In some cases, however, the text samples show that the the subject of the existential SV sentence is not actually always a theme in the pre- field: it has been at least indirectly mentioned in the text before and perhaps that is why it rather seems to occupy the themed slot in some SV-order existential sentences. %ere are also some specific verbs with which the SV-order in the existential sentences seems to be well-established without necessarily being the marked order. This, as well as some learning-related issues of word order, requires further investigation.

• Details
• Contents