{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023870417732310314, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0068201193520886615, 'mean_word_length': 4.644230769230769, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Pronominal case in Västerbottnian

ABSTRACT In this article, I consider the use of seemingly old nominative forms (ONF) in object position. The phenomenon is noted for the dialects of Västerbotten (in Northern Sweden) by several authors. Earlier works imply that the phenomenon is rather recent (early 1900s) and that the phenomenon is in more common usage in the inland rural areas than by the more urban coast. I discuss the structural analysis presented by Holmberg in the 1980s, which involves a restriction on “subject forms” to noun phrases that are assigned Case and Theta role from different heads. I present both theoretical and empirical reasons to doubt that account. Instead, I opt for a phonological account, which claims that the ONFs are used, if and only if they are strong (stressed). The suggestion is corroborated by new data from a few informants. I end the paper by giving the details of case forms for strong and weak first- and second-person pronouns in the old and modern dialects. The modern dialect is claimed to have lost its strong object forms and now resorts to using the only available strong forms (ONFs) in both subject and object position.