There are some useful crossovers between language learning and ‘full on’ linguistics, as I think of it, where the one helps your knowledge of the other. I’ve been looking at language change recently, digging into a few papers on a Norwegian and Swedish trend that can add a really authentic-sounding twist to your speech.
The phenomenon is called ha-dropping. No, not h-dropping, which might ‘elp your English sound more colloquial, but ha, or have, in both Norwegian and Swedish – specifically, the have of the perfect tense.
If you’ve spent some time reading and listening to these languages, it’s something that can throw you off the first time you hear it. In short, ha can simply go missing where you’d expect to hear it in English:
De burde solgt det (they should have sold it – Norwegian)
The variant with ha still exists, of course – de burde ha solgt det – and it’s still considered correct. These days, however, it tends to sound a little bookish or formal.
Sounding too correct
It looks like a classic case of redundancy leading to loss. The context is obvious from the use of the past participle, so why bother with ha? It reduces a three-verb construction to just two verbs, and the meaning is still completely recoverable.
But what surprised me most was that it’s not a recent trend (as if young speakers needed any further blame shame for language-changing innovations). One paper traces ha-dropping in Swedish right back to the 17th Century, although the circumstances it occurs in may be extending. In Norwegian, it’s restricted on the whole to ha after modal verbs, and seems pretty stable where it is.
Apart from the fact that it’s a fascinating change in itself, it also highlights one of those cases where you can sound too correct as a non-native speaker. Ha-dropping is intuitively odd for first-language speakers of English, but working it into your Scandi convo might make you sound that little bit more fluent.