
Abstract This paper investigates the apparent near-optionality of the perfect auxiliary ha (‘have’) in Swedish. Restrictions on the near-optionality of ha-omission are typically recognized in the previous literature as lexical or structural. The paper scrutinizes the viability of these restrictions by means of corpus data. Most of these restrictions are shown not to hold. Instead, the paper defends the view that the optionality of the perfect auxiliary ha in Swedish is linked to whether the clause it occurs in requires a finite feature or not, and whether ha is the only element that can supply a value for this feature. The phenomenon of ha-omission is accounted for in the syntactic frame work LFG. It is shown that ha can only be omitted if another element in the clause can provide a value for the finite feature.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
