In the recently published Lexicon Grammaticorum (Stammerjohann 1996), the very first place is occupied by the Norwegian linguistic scholar and language planner Ivar Aasen (1813-96). This survey of all significant linguists of the world is lexicographically arranged, so his place of prominence says nothing about possible scholarly eminence. It was the result of alphabetical necessity, the first two characters of his surname being Aa. All the same, in his native country Norway some persons, such as the present writer, might see something significant or symbolic in the fact that Ivar Aasen received first place among linguists in the very year they were engaged in commemorating the centenary of his death. A proof of Aasen's place in Norway is that the proposal to give 1996 the official name 'Ivar Aasen Year' was readily accepted by the Ministry of Culture on behalf of the government even if it meant that some financial grants had to be made. During all the year, and all over the country, there were more or less official arrangements celebrating Aasen's life and work. Many books were published on this occasion, among them no less than three voluminous biographies.
As a matter of fact, Aasen was not just a linguist and language planner. He was also a poet who wrote rhymed verse that was set to music and became beautiful songs which for more than a century have touched the hearts of nearly all Norwegians. Suffice it to mention Aasen the poet, as he is not mentioned by Linn in the book under review, the subject of which is Scandinavian linguistic historiography and Aasen's two grammars on Norwegian. Just to add one more ability of this gifted man Ivar Aasen: he was even a composer.
Andrew Linn's book on Aasen the grammarian was published in 1997, but was not just one more book written for the Ivar Aasen Year and only appearing one year after the event. Already in 1994, as a doctoral dissertation, it was presented to the rather restricted forum of the examiners at the University of Cambridge. After that, the author reworked it to make it more readable to a broader audience of historians of linguistics. In the preface to the printed work, the author states that in preparing the book he has added much background information on the history and language of Norway and on Aasen himself. Not knowing the original form of the dissertation, readers of the book are not in the position to judge how much has been done to give the work a new shape. In the preface, however, the author uses the characterizing word "reader-friendly" to indicate what he wanted to achieve by rewriting it.
What the reader can do is to assess the book as it actually is according to the author's declared intentions of making it reader-friendly. In the opinion of the present reviewer is that the author has indeed succeeded. English-speaking readers who are not well acquainted either with Aasen himself or with the Norwegian language situation have in this book an excellent opportunity to remedy that deficiency. They get to know Aasen, his background and scene of action little by little, having the new knowledge served out to them in suitable proportions. In the first chapter, they have the first glimpse of the young Aasen as part of a wider context, which includes a presentation of the book itself and an outline of the historiography of Scandinavian linguistics.
Chapter 2 deals with the history of vernacular grammar writing in Denmark/Norway, provided as a necessary background for Aasen's activity in that field. After that, the readers meet Aasen again in chapter 3, and from there on, he is the main character in the rest of the book, most decisively in chapters 6 and 7, which are devoted to analysing and comparing the two grammars Aasen wrote.
That brings us to the title of the book, which is Constructing the Grammars of a Language. Ivar Aasen was both a grammarian and a lexicographer. However, this second field of interest is not treated by Linn. Aasen published two grammars and two dictionaries on the varieties of Norwegian that were orally transmitted from Old Norse. In addition, he treated his own Sunnmøre dialect grammatically, but this third grammar falls outside the scope of Linn's interest, and accordingly, it will not be our concern either. The country-wide books were published in two pairs corresponding to each other, in 1848 the grammar and in 1850 the dictionary of the vernacular language (in Aasen's word the Folkesprog), in 1864 the grammar and in 1873 the dictionary of his new-shaped standard language (in book titles called Norsk 'Norwegian'). Aasen's main works, both pairs of grammar and dictionary, were also essential to the standardisation process, notably the last pair.
The exact wording of the title of Linn's book deserves some comment. The words "the Grammars" might refer to the grammatical system of a certain corpus, such as a language, or to the embodiment of the grammatical system in a book (and even to the book itself as a physical object). The last sense must apply in this case, noting that "grammar" is used in the plural. One must ask if Aasen's two grammars of Norwegian were really the grammars of the language as the title says. If that were not meant, the implication might be that Aasen wrote one grammar for each of two corpora: first the dialects, then the standard; but "language" in the title does not match that interpretation, as "language" must needs refer to the Norwegian that Aasen collected and standardized. Other grammars might also have been written for the Norwegian language, so the meaning might have been more adequately expressed by leaving out the article "the", and using the indefinite form of the noun: Constructing Grammars of a Language.
The headings of the first and the last chapter of Linn's book are somewhat peculiar and they are therefore explained in the text. They also cry out for a comment on the part of the reviewer, as I think they say something important both about Aasen the man and scholar as also about the author who has chosen the headings. His intention must have been that they should illustrate something that he considers essential to his own project.
Chapter 1 is headed by a rhymed statement that looks rather cryptic: "The world possesses its ancient devices: as one descends so another rises". This is a quotation, the translation of a Norwegian proverb, taken from a collection published twice by Aasen, in 1856 and 1881. By quoting the proverb, Linn clearly wants to shed some light on the scholarly activity like grammar writing in general and on Aasen's two grammars and the historiography of linguistics in Scandinavia in particular, and also on Linn's own concern writing this book. The truth encapsulated in it is used as an introduction to the book. The proverb heading the last chapter is perhaps less cryptic, as it just runs "Let him who has enough be satisfied". By this Linn is thinking of an author's need to put an end to a process of study, writing and rewriting that might otherwise have been endless, saying to himself that I must stop this work somewhere and at some time, and that must be here and now. Both the quoted proverbs function as meta-comments, as they serve to characterize Linn's work, and generally the scholarly activity of writing.
Chapter 2 presents the history of vernacular grammar-writing in Denmark/Norway before Aasen. One section treats pedagogical grammars; another - the longest one - is concerned with the codification of Danish grammar, Peder Syv and Jens Høysgaard being the main figures in that process. In both sections Linn has drawn on writings by other authors, but he has also himself gone ad fontes and has been able to integrate what he found there in his own account. One definite remark at the end of the rather lengthy presentation of Høysgaard's work shows that Linn has been anxious about the relevance of all this to the nineteenth-century Norwegian grammarian Ivar Aasen whose name is mentioned in the subtitle. An anxiety of going astray is understandable for a scholar writing a doctoral thesis on a definite subject, but is less motivated for a book like the present one. The author composes himself in two ways: 1) by stating that Høysgaard and his contemporaries were engaged in creating a standard just as Aasen did, and 2) by saying that it should not be necessary to apologize for including such an important person in the history of linguistics as Høysgaard. I think his excuse and apology are good enough.
The question of Høysgaard's possible influence on Aasen might be examined by searching for Høysgaard's name in Aasen's writings. I have looked for it in the indices of the three-volume edition of Aasen's diaries and letters and I have not found it there. In Aasen's grammars and dictionaries Høysgaard is certainly not mentioned. But as his work was extremely important to a long row of authors of school grammars, and such grammars were studied by Aasen, the inclusion by Linn of Høysgaard and his intellectual environment is undoubtedly justified.
The headings of chapters 3 and 4 are "Aasen and nineteenth-century Norway" and "Aasen and nineteenth-century Norwegian". The first deals with the reception of Ivar Aasen, the historical context, Nationalism and Romanticism. Another section, headed "The real Ivar Aasen?", is biographical, concentrating on his intellectual and professional development and also addressing a question which has been asked by many writers on Aasen: Was he, at the bottom of his heart, a peasant or a bourgeois? We know that he came from the countryside and was a peasant by birth and upbringing, but that his intellectual mind-set and pursuits made him a town dweller, so the question is real enough. After having quoted statements by strong spokesmen of both persuasions, Linn gives his own viewpoint, which in my opinion is a wise one: Aasen was more complex than some biographers have allowed, having differing sides to his character. His veneration of country and peasant life was genuine, although with a romantic flavour in it, but as time passed he was still more a product of the life he led, in which books and intellectual pursuits, streets and town activities were indispensable ingredients. Linn has overlooked this complexity when in one connection, reminding his readers of a certain remark of Aasen, he states as a fact that "Aasen despised the lives, habits and attitudes of many of his informants" (p. 134). Statements by Aasen to this effect are surely to be found, but they should not be used as the basis for generalizations of Aasen's character or point of view.
In the chapter about Aasen and the Norwegian of his day (ch. 4) Linn introduces a comparison between the two grammars that he will develop further in chapters 6 and 7. He does so by emphasizing Aasen's quite dissimilar situation and standing when working on the two grammars. The first was written in a hurry when Aasen was just an apprentice in the trade of grammar; the second was the object of intense preoccupation for many years by an established and highly respected scholar, this in spite of the fact that it was built on the first one and in some places simply repeats the wording of the earlier book.
Chapter 5 deals with Aasen and contemporary grammatical work of different kinds, such as pedagogical grammars, grammars of Icelandic and the ancient languages of Scandinavia, German/Germanic grammars and grammars of other languages. One very interesting section discusses Aasen's references, both in the grammars and in records of literature made to help the memory. Linn is able to point out one clear difference between the two grammars: there are many more references to grammarians and other sources in the first grammar than in the second one. He looks upon this differing practice as an expression of Aasen's different attitude towards the two kinds of language that the grammars represent. The examples and paradigms of the vernacular grammar of 1848 consisted of series of parallel dialect forms, whereas in the grammar of 1864 the pattern forms were compulsory, the grammar appearing as an embodiment of the Norwegian language. It had no need of getting strength by being placed in any relationship to Aasen or other time-bound beings of this perishable world. It simply existed as a fact outside of time and place. - It is possible that Linn himself would not accept this rendering of his thoughts on the point of comparison.
Chapters 6 and 7 present a final analysis of the grammars and a comparison between them. They account for two modes of action in the process of constructing Norwegian grammar: one through books (ch. 6), the other through the language (ch. 7). In chapter 6 the study of titles, chapter headings and scene settings (introductions, opening sentences) in the two grammars are given one section each. The philosophy underlying this approach is that the grammatical framework involves not only the content structure of grammar, but also such more or less rhetorical devices as those just mentioned, because they are all utilized in some way in the presentation of the material.
Three selected but far-reaching and important elements of the language dealt with in the grammars are the objects of the analysis of chapter 7. They are Norwegian phonetics, inflectional morphology and syntax. In the section on phonetics Linn renders Aasen's descriptions of vowel articulation rather closely, i.e. his distinction between hard and soft vowels, between three points of articulation and three degrees of closure. One observation seems appropriate on Linn's interpretation of the three points of articulation. Aasen says that the vowels /æ, e, i/ are "deepest or least advanced", /a, ø, y/ "more advanced" and /aa, o, u/ "most advanced". According to Linn, Aasen is hereby referring to "degrees of lip-rounding". This seems to imply that Linn was not aware how much this particular analysis of Aasen has been discussed. A number of phoneticians have exerted themselves in grasping his meaning, and opinions have differed more than usual among linguistic scholars. In my opinion, the problem was solved by another scholar originally coming from Aasen's home district, the Bergen Germanist Ulvestad (1966), who made a forceful argument in favour of taking Aasen at his word: Aasen really was of the opinion that /æ, e, i/ was least, /a, ø, y/ more and /aa, o, u/ most advanced, an idea stemming from his sense of kinaesthetics.
The real aim of the chapters 6 and 7 was to compare the two grammars in order to find possible differences and explain the reasons for those differences. By close reading, Linn is able to show that the differences reside in the very purpose of the grammars. That of 1848 had as its object to present dialect material, that of 1864 was designed to be the backbone of the standard language.
Linn has not seen it as his task to assess Aasen's choice of forms for the standard, but to ascertain the means which Aasen employed to make the chosen forms into a standard. In my opinion he has been able to do that. Occasionally, he may step beyond the limits he has set himself and make what seems to be comments on the choice of forms or at least suggestions as to Aasen's reason for choosing some form. In my opinion, Linn is too prone to use Aasen's predilection for Old Norse as an explanation of his choice of forms, and is correspondingly liable to underrate the need Aasen felt to create connections within paradigms and between roots and derived words. This applies for instance to the etymologizing tendency and the non-linguistic concern Linn finds in Aasen's choice of plural forms in feminines (p. 179f.). Some times his explanation of this or that may be too subtle or too far-fetched. Two examples of can be taken from the comparison of Aasen's different choice of word examples illustrating something (p. 184f.). In 1864 Aasen left out the noun skrivar 'writer' from his 1848 examples, which Linn explains as an ideological reaction based on the fact that a writer at that time would have been a Dane. I think, however, that by skrivar Aasen did not mean 'writer' but a special kind of judge, the chief magistrate of a rural district. Another example: I don't think that the verbal forms fæstede, væltede and hærdede were chosen because of the emotive content of the verbs; they were all well known and frequently used.
That having been said, I should add that Linn generally makes sound judgements and displays sound familiarity with Norway, Norwegian and the Norwegian background both in the present and the past. The wealth of information he has collected from the history of Scandinavian linguistics is no less impressive. Some instances displaying lack of factual or professional knowledge are of course to be found. He is not familiar with Jan Prahl (1858), calling his treatise Ny Hungrvekja "a novel" (p. 96). He makes a mistake in saying that Christen Jensøn wrote his dictionary for the benefit of Danish officials. Jensøn's aim was the opposite: he wrote it for his compatriots and did not look to Danish officials at all (p. 56). If Linn had studied Indrebø (1951), he would have known that. Also his study of the development of Aasen's standard would have profited by adding Indrebø to his references and by drawing more on Haugen (1933). We generally say that Aasen's first land roving lasted for four years, so it is startling to read here of three years (p. 86). Linn's comments make it clear, however, that he knows the facts. Even so, in one place he confounds the two places Lærdal and Sogndal (p. 134), which is understandable from Aasen's text, and at least twice he mixes up two persons of the name Bugge, writing "S.B. Bugge" instead of "F.M. Bugge" (pp. 109, 142).
Aasen, Ivar. 1848. Det norske Folkesprogs Grammatik. Kristiania: Werner & Comp.
Aasen, Ivar. 1850. Ordbog over det norske Folkesprog. Kristiania: Werner & Comp.
Aasen, Ivar. 1864. Norsk Grammatik. Kristiania: Malling.
Aasen, Ivar. 1873. Norsk Ordbog. Kristiania: Malling.
Indrebø, Gustav. 1951. Norsk Målsoga. Bergen: A.S John Griegs boktrykkeri.
Jensøn, Christen .1915. Den norske Dictionarium eller Glosebog. Ved Torleiv Hannaas. (ÆLdre norske sprogminder III) Kristiania.
Haugen, Einar. 1933. "The linguistic development of IvarAasen's new Norse". Publications of the Modern Language Association of America. 48:558-597.
Prahl, Jan.1858. Ny Hungrvekja. Bergin.
Stammerjohann, Harro (ed.) 1996. Lexicon Grammaticorum. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Ulvestad, Bjarne. 1966. "Vokalsystematikken til Ivar Aasen". Maal og Minne 35-52.
Kjell Venås, Oslo