256 Jennifer Herriman
- Conclusion
This comparison of the extraposition of subject clauses in two samples of English
and Swedish has found a more frequent usage of extrapositions in the Swedish
sample. This can be attributed, on the one hand, to the V2 constraint and the
absence of an equivalent of the gerund -ing form in Swedish and, on the other, to
the greater prominence of the subject function in English, both when it comes to
semantic scope and to tolerance of new information, all of which makes it pos-
sible for more information to be packed in preverbal position in English. Swedish,
in contrast, often uses extraposition to postpone informational content to a later
position in the message. Thus, although extraposition, like other thematic varia-
tions, such as clefts and existential constructions, is ostensibly similar in English
and Swedish, it is used more frequently in Swedish. The overuse of extraposition
by Swedish advanced learners students of English found in Boström Aronsson’s
study (2005) is, therefore, as was expected at the outset of this investigation, due
to the transfer of a more frequent usage in their first language. It may also be due
to the learners’ lack of familarity with -ing gerund forms in English. Evidence of
this is seen in their overuse of extrapositions of infinitival clauses with attributes
expressing dynamic modality, e.g. it is hard/easy/possible etc., and evaluations such
as amazing, interesting (Boström Aronsson 2005: 92). In English these attributes
may occur with -ing gerund forms which, because of their nominal character, are
less often extraposed.
The interpersonal function of extraposition is the explicit expression of attitu-
dinal meaning. An overly frequent usage may therefore contribute to an emphatic
and persuasive style of writing. This has been found to be one of the typical char-
acteristic features not only of Swedish (Boström Aronsson 2005:197) but also of
other advanced learners’ interlanguage (Lorenz 1998). Differences in the usage of
extraposition may thus provide a further explanation why some advanced learn-
ers’ English, though grammatically correct, is nevertheless somewhat ‘non-native’
sounding.
Finally, the comparison has also found a greater number nonextrapositions
in Swedish, i.e. a more frequent usage of subject clauses in general. This can be
explained by what appears to be a greater tendency for process meanings to be
nominalised in English. This tendency has been noticed earlier by Nordrum (2007:
139, 200) who, in a comparison of nominalisations in English, Norwegian and
Swedish, found more nominalisations in the English source texts than in their
Norwegian and Swedish translations. Nordrum also found that heavy nominal
Themes in English often correspond to finite clauses with the generic subject
man (‘one’) (ibid. 110). Nordrum points out that att-clauses in Swedish have a
higher degree of nouniness than that-clauses in English, and are therefore more