Otto Jespersen

Jens Otto Harry Jespersen (; 16 July 1860 – 30 April 1943) was a Danish linguist who worked in foreign-language pedagogy, historical phonetics, and other areas, but is best known for his description of the grammar of the English language. Steven Mithen describes him as "one of the greatest language scholars of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries."

Early life

Otto Jespersen was born in Randers in Jutland, to Jens Bloch Jespersen (1813–70) and Sophie Caroline Bentzien (1833–74). He was one of nine children. As a boy, he was inspired by works of the Danish philologist Rasmus Rask and the biography of Rask by ; and with the help of Rask's grammars taught himself some Icelandic, Italian, and Spanish.

Academic life and work

Jespersen entered the University of Copenhagen in 1877 when he was 17, initially studying law but not abandoning his language studies. In his first year at university, he attended a lecture course by on the history of Evolutionism since the Greeks; this introduced him to the ideas of Herbert Spencer, and later in life he looked back on the course warmly. Jespersen taught languages in a lower secondary school, and from 1880 to 1887 was a stenographer for the Rigsdag (Danish parliament). The income from these allowed him in 1881 to shift his focus completely to languages. Following the introduction of a new degree, ''Skoleembedseksamen'', Jespersen switched to this, choosing French as the major subject and English as the second minor subject, the first compulsorily being Latin (a language that he hated from then on). He was one of a large number of students who appealed for Latin to be made voluntary, but the appeal was unsuccessful. Jespersen studied under the linguists Karl Verner, Hermann Möller and particularly Vilhelm Thomsen; and beyond linguistics, under Harald Høffding: it was thanks to Høffding that Jespersen was further exposed to the writings and ideas of Darwin, Mill and Spencer, and to introspective psychology.

In 1887 he passed ''Skoleembedseksamen''. For French, he chose to be examined on Diderot, from a lasting enthusiasm for the ideals of the French Revolution and the Age of Enlightenment. Throughout his life Jespersen remained faithful to the ideals and methods of his early teachers. Positivist and evolutionary attitudes, physiological and psychological methods in their classical form, and finally, liberal humanism were essential to his character.

Jespersen's views on language owed less to theoretical considerations than to a practical and thus largely functional conception of language; as a language theorist, Jespersen could remain tethered to reality thanks to the common sense fundamental to his character. Even when making such bold proposals as that of the "progress" of a language, he could avoid extremes.

In 1887–1888, Jespersen traveled to England, Germany and France, meeting linguists like Henry Sweet in England and Paul Passy in France, and studying for some time in Berlin. Following a tip from his mentor Vilhelm Thomsen that after a few years there would be a vacancy for a specialist in English, he returned to Copenhagen in August 1888 and began work on his doctoral dissertation on the English case system, a dissertation that he defended in 1891. His doctorate entitled Jespersen to teach in the university without pay as a ''Privatdocent''; he took this opportunity to teach classes on Chaucer and Old English, thereby adding to his qualifications for the expected vacancy; he also wrote a book on Chaucer.

On the resignation of George Stephens as ''Docent'', the newly vacant position was upgraded to that of Professorship of English language and literature. Jespersen was one of four applicants; the others were and Jón Stefánsson (both regarded as rather lacklustre), and William Craigie (then very young). This was "a no-holds-barred contest", during which Jón Stefánsson even published a book charging Jespersen with plagiarizing Georg von der Gabelentz. (Gabelentz himself denied this.) Up to date in English philology, familiar with English literature, and " peakingEnglish perfectly", Jespersen was chosen.

Jespersen was a professor of English at the University of Copenhagen from 1893 to his retirement in 1925. This was not such a comfortable position: in 1911 he published an article in the newspaper '' Politiken'' describing poor conditions for academic work (serious underfunding, and the lack of a compulsory retirement age for professors), and also how he had got his wife to promise to shoot him if he failed to retire at 65. He remained something of a radical, in a magazine article published in 1914 he made further recommendations: that Denmark should have more than one university (its second would only arrive in 1928), that a Faculty of Divinity did not belong in a modern university, that there should be financial incentives for students to proceed to postgraduate work, and more. However, although Jespersen succeeded in having Latin removed as a compulsory minor, it can be inferred that he backed the compulsory inclusion of Chaucer, Spenser and Milton in the English course.

Jespersen was Dean of the Faculty of Arts from November 1904 to November 1906; and Rector (vice-chancellor, or president) of the university from November 1920 to November 1921. Among his engagements while Rector was an address at the inauguration in March 1921 of the Institute of Theoretical Physics (later renamed Niels Bohr Institute). Another was a speech welcoming new students in September 1921: "he exhorts hemto absorb the scholarly and scientific tradition (to the extent of being critical of their professors!), the only genuine hallmark of academics".

Language teaching

At the end of the 19th century the teaching in Denmark of contemporaneous foreign languages was ossified, and very similar to that of long-dead classical languages. This was despite the belief of , expressed decades earlier, that pupils should be encouraged to acquire a second language as they had acquired their first, and indeed despite the writings of Jan Amos Comenius in the 17th century.

In 1886, Jespersen, and Johan August Lundell cofounded a Scandinavian group for a revitalization of language teaching, naming the group "Quousque Tandem" after Wilhelm Viëtor's pseudonym as author of the 1882 pamphlet ''Der Sprachunterricht muss umkehren!'' ("Language teaching must start afresh!"). The group opposed the use of theoretical grammar and translation exercises, advocating in its place the teaching of a language in its spoken and living form by the "direct" method, informed by phonetics:

The pupils should begin by recognizing words and short sentences by ear, and repeating them, and only then should they learn to read them. A correct pronunciation should be secured with the help of phonetic transcription.

As a campaigner, Jespersen was an extremist: Hjelmslev writes that this was an area where his normal moderation and common sense were counterbalanced by a revolutionary fervour, and that he was a "Jacobin" among linguists.

Jespersen's first book (1884) was a Danish translation, ''Praktisk Tilegnelse af Fremmede Sprog'' ("Practical acquisition of foreign languages"), of ''Die praktische Spracherlernung'', by Felix Franke. Both Franke (also born in 1860) and Jespersen first assumed that the other was much older than himself, but from its start in 1884 their correspondence quickly became a lively discussion (about two hundred letters and postcards survive) of such matters as second language education and phonetic scripts; it was cut short in 1886 when Franke succumbed to tuberculosis.

In an article published in 1886 (and elaborated in his 1901 book ''Sprogundervisning'', translated as ''How to Teach a Foreign Language'', 1904), Jespersen argued for the following principles in language teaching:
# Teaching should be based on spoken rather than written language. To this end, at early stages of language teaching, only a phonetic script should be used, and this script should be clear and precise.
# Material for reading should not consist of unrelated sentences. It should instead constitute coherent texts, preferably designed so that the meanings of unfamiliar words can be inferred from their contexts.
# At early stages the teaching of grammar should be minimized, and the pupils encouraged to infer grammatical patterns for themselves. Grammar may be examined and practised later, but time should not be spent on grammatical curios, and form and function should not be separated.
# Exercises in translating the second language into the first should not be emphasized; exercises in translating the first into the second are of very little utility.

Jespersen followed his 1884 translation of Franke with ''Kortfattet engelsk Grammatik for Tale- og Skriftsproget'' (1885), ''Fransk Læsebog efter Lydskriftsmetoden'' (1889), and (with ) ''Engelsk Begynderbog'' (1895): books which, together with those written by others that similarly used the " direct method", soon took over from the " grammar–translation" material against which Jespersen and Quousque Tandem had rebelled.

For some years Denmark saw a heated contest between proponents of the grammar–translation method and those of the direct method, but the latter won, as recognized by the Secondary Schools Act of 1903.

Phonetics

Jespersen's interest in phonetics was prompted by Henry Sweet's ''Handbook of Phonetics'' (1877), and the lectures of Vilhelm Thomsen. In the 1880s, inspired by Melville Bell and other British phoneticians, Jespersen developed what he first called an "analphabetic" system – which, in order "to avoid ridicule", he later termed an "antalphabetic" system – that used a series of three variables for any phone: lowercase Roman for the passive articulator, lowercase Greek for the active articulator, and numerals and more for "the degree and shape of the aperture at a place of constriction". Jørgen Rischel points out that a given "anatomical feature" can be labelled according to its use: thus rather than simply "uvular", the role of the uvula can be described as "a passive articulator in uvular consonants but an active articulator in nasalized sounds".

In June 1886, he became a member of the Phonetic Teachers' Association, later renamed the International Phonetic Association (IPA). The idea of creating a phonetic alphabet that could be used by every language was first put forward by Jespersen in a letter he sent to Paul Passy. In a supplement on the cover, "A short history of the Association Phonétique Internationale". Jespersen's transcription system for English, used in 's ''Engelsk–Dansk–Norsk Ordbog'' = ''A Dictionary of the English and Dano-Norwegian Languages'' (1902–1907), is very close to that of Daniel Jones, which it preceded by some years. Language-specific systems were not unusual at the time ( Johan A. Lundell published a Swedish dialect alphabet in 1879, Johan Storm devised Norvegia for Norwegian in 1884); and Jespersen devised a system, Dania, for the phonetic transcription of Danish (1890), which has remained in use for philological, dialectological and lexicographic work in Danish. Jespersen was sceptical of a single phonetic transcription system for universal application, and did not use the IPA's International Phonetic Alphabet.

With continued encouragement by Thomsen and a new friendship with Paul Passy, whom he met in Paris, Jespersen was well informed on phonetics. His own major work on this was ''Fonetik'', published in 1897–1899. In it, Jespersen bases his descriptions on his observations of his own production of sounds in a variety of languages, where this production satisfies native speakers. Jespersen was keen to supplant metaphorical and impressionistic terms with those that described the vocal tract, and had considerable success. Jørgen Rischel calls ''Fonetik'' "a landmark in Danish phonetics because of its terminology", much of which has lasted. Stripped of content specific to Danish, but updated, it was published in German translation in 1904.

The Danish-specific material within ''Fonetik'' was republished in 1906 within the booklet ''Modersmålets Fonetik'' ("Phonetics of the mother tongue"). This treated not only the sounds of Danish but also its prosody, an area in which Jespersen was a pioneer. Repeatedly reprinted, the booklet was long used as a standard textbook.

Two books, ''Phonetische Grundfragen'' ("Phonetics essentials") and ''Lehrbuch der Phonetik'' ("Textbook of phonetics"), presented portions of ''Fonetik'' to readers of German in 1904. Jespersen hoped for an English translation, and plans were made for a translation by Hans Jørgen Uldall, and later for a revision by Uldall; however, no English translation ever appeared.

Rischel writes that: "It is Jespersen's amazing breadth in is studies of phonetics paired with his never failing linguistic intuition as a safeguard against errors or downright nonsense, which impresses the reader today." In Eli Fischer-Jørgensen's estimate (1979), Jespersen was not a great innovator, but was unusually adept at the pronunciation and description of articulatory phonetics, and also aware of the importance of contrast.

espersen'stheory of the syllable is an original contribution for which he has not always been given sufficient recognition. Here he maintains that speech sounds have an inherent force called sonority, that sounds can be ranked according to sonority, and that syllables correlate with peaks of sonority. . . . emphasized the ability of sounds to distinguish meanings. In this respect Jespersen can be considered a forerunner of phonemic theory.

Although not a phonologist himself, Jespersen was the first to propose a conceptual distinction between ''phonetics'' and ''phonology'' that is commonly observed today.

Early dialectological and other fieldwork on East Slesvig and North Jutland dialects, Faroese, and West Greenlandic work was indebted to Jespersen's methodology (although for the last, the researcher William Thalbitzer "did not live up to Jespersen's standards at all").

'' Stød'', "a particular kind of laryngealisation (creaky voice) characterizing some Danish syllables" had been studied since the mid-18th century (by Jens Høysgaard), but Jespersen's synchronic study of ''stød'' and of its morphology and also his study of the relationship between the Danish ''stød'' and "the Norwegian and Swedish tonal ('musical') accents" were major advances from the work done by Rasmus Rask, Karl Verner, and Henry Sweet.

Hans Basbøll evaluates Jespersen as "a true pioneer in his analysis of stress" saying that:

he developed a whole system of types of stress and described it in detail: both syntactic principles of stress reduction (unitary stress, or unit accentuation), of compound stress, of value stress (different types of emphatic stress), and so on.

Basbøll has coined the term "New Jespersen School" (''Ny-Jespersenianerne'') for "the main editors of 'Den store danske Udtaleordbog'' (a major pronunciation dictionary for Danish) namely, , Jørn Lund and Steffen Heger, and their collaborators and pupils"; their major achievement aside from ''SDU'' has been Brink and Lund's two-volume historical phonetics work ''Dansk Rigsmål'' (1975).

Jespersen's early work focused primarily on language teaching reform and on phonetics, but he would soon branch out:

There was hardly any field of linguistics that Jespersen did not touch upon or develop. He was a diachronic linguist, an excellent phonetician, an equally good descriptive syntactician, both in theory and practice, and one of the founders of sociolinguistics, although he never referred to it as such.

Concentration on English

While still regarding himself as less of a scholar of English than a scholar of French, Jespersen published ''Kortfattet engelsk Grammatik for Tale- og Skriftsproget'' ("A concise English grammar for the spoken and written language") in 1885. Most unusually for a grammar book, this employed phonetic script. Inge Kabell comments: "All other grammars of English published in Denmark were for many, many years to come modelled on it and all middle-aged Danes have been taught English according to the principles found in it."

Jespersen continued to study in Paris (especially under Gaston Paris), England, Berlin (under Julius Zupitza), and Leipzig. Particularly important were his friendships with Paul Passy and Henry Sweet. Sweet's views on phonetics, grammar, and historical linguistics, and his concentration on English, had a great influence on Jespersen. Jespersen's choice of the case system of English as the subject of his doctoral dissertation was probably also prompted by advice from Vilhelm Thomsen to prepare for a chair in English at the University of Copenhagen that would soon be vacant upon the retirement of George Stephens. He successfully defended his dissertation in 1891. Once installed as chair, Jespersen devoted most of his energy to the study and teaching of English, but he retained his broader interests. His prolific output was of great importance for the linguistic study of all aspects of English, for linguistics in general, and to a lesser degree for Nordic philology. Jespersen was the first great linguist to hold the chair of English at the Copenhagen, while his friend had much the same role for the university's chair of French.

Jespersen continued as chair of English until he retired in 1925, following his resolve not to continue after reaching 65, in order to help make way for younger scholars.

General syntax

Jespersen advanced the concepts of ''rank'' in two papers: "Sprogets logik" (1913) and "De to hovedarter af grammatiske forbindelser" (1921); and in the latter, '' nexus'' as well. In this theory of ranks, Jespersen removes the parts of speech from the syntax, and differentiates among what he names primaries, secondaries, and tertiaries; for example, in ''well honed phrase'', the primary is ''phrase'', this being defined by a secondary, ''honed'', which itself is defined by a tertiary, ''well''. The term ''nexus'' is applied to sentences, structures similar to sentences, and sentences in formation, in which two concepts are expressed in one unit; e.g., ''it rained, he ran indoors''. This term is qualified by a further concept called a ''junction'' which represents one idea, expressed by means of two or more elements, whereas a nexus combines two ideas. ''Junction'' and ''nexus'' have had a mixed reception. Hjelmslev finds the distinction between them confused, and Jespersen's theory of them in need of revision: a contrast to his refinement in "Tid og tempus" (1914) of Sweet's distinction between '' tense'' (Danish ''tempus'') and ''time'' (Danish ''tid'').

Jespersen's work helped point the way towards linguists' current understanding of a grammatical ''head''.

In Hjelmslev's opinion, ''Negation in English and Other Languages'' (1917) offers a great number of observations and considerable food for thought, but fails to constitute a general examination of negation, for which purpose it would have to be based on more solid materials, from a greater variety of languages (the overwhelming majority of the examples examined are from the Indo-European languages of west Europe). Jespersen coined the terms '' paratactic negation'' and ''resumptive negation'' (negation with an element added to the end of the sentence to strengthen the already negative meaning of the sentence); he also advanced understanding of '' negative concord''.

In ''The Philosophy of Grammar'' (1924) Jespersen challenges the accepted views of common concepts in grammar and proposes corrections to the basic definitions of case, pronoun, object, voice etc., and further develops his notions of ''Rank'' and ''Nexus''. In the 21st century this book is still used as one of the basic texts in modern structural linguistics.

With ''The Philosophy of Grammar'' particularly in mind, Noam Chomsky remarked in 1975: "I think it is fair to say that the work of recent years tends generally to support the basic ideas that Jespersen outlined 50 years ago, and extends and advances the program that he outlined."

Late in his life Jespersen published ''Analytic Syntax'' (1937), in which he presents his views on syntactic structure using an idiosyncratic shorthand notation.

Evolution and progress of languages

From his doctoral dissertation of 1891 onwards, Jespersen maintained that language did not merely evolve over time but ''progressed'', a notion originally inspired by Spencer's ideas on the progress of language. He wrote "That language ranks highest which goes farthest in the art of accomplishing much with little means, or, in other words, which is able to express the greatest amount of meaning with the simplest mechanism." Jespersen considered the efficiency of a language's phonology, lexicon and grammar, his view of efficiency in grammar being a reaction to contrasting estimates of " synthetic" and " analytic" inflectional languages held by the brothers August Wilhelm Schlegel and Friedrich Schlegel, and Wilhelm von Humboldt.

August Schleicher was a conspicuous proponent of the idea that older languages such as Latin had attained a synthetic optimum, and languages that derived from these tended to degrade via the analytic towards an " isolating" extreme, the degree of degradation of a language increasing with "the richness and eventfulness of its speakers' history". Jespersen proposed the reverse, criticizing the needless complexities of synthetic grammar, and ascribing Schleicher's evaluations to "a grammar-school admiration, a Renaissance love of atin and Ancient Greekand their literatures".

Whereas Schleicher conceived language as a biological phenomenon, and thus subject to processes such as maturation, ageing and death, linguists of the mid 19th century such as Georg Curtius, Johan Nikolai Madvig and William Dwight Whitney emphasized language as a human-developed tool for communication. By the end of the century this became the received conception of language.

Jespersen thought of the uses of language as needing a balance between two factors: the ''ease'' of the speaker's expression of ideas, and the ''distinctness'' of that expression (and thus the ease of comprehension for the listener). The proximate sources of the pair were Georg von der Gabelentz's ''Bequemlichkeitstrieb'' ('drive to comfort') and ''Deutlichkeitstrieb'' ('drive to distinctness', although by ''Deutlichkeit'' Gabelentz meant something broader than Jespersen's early formulations of ''distinctness''). Although Jespersen later recognized that distinctness should include playfulness, vividness and other factors, the ability to communicate retained its primacy.

As for the mechanism of grammatical change, a major interest of Jespersen's was the diachronic loss from Old English of both case inflections and freedom of word order. He showed that fixed word order did not arrive to make up for the loss of case inflections: word order became fixed before rather than after this loss. Rather, the degree of syncretism in inflection had meant that inflection had lost much of its earlier helpfulness. A later change Jespersen discussed was the disappearance of the exclusively singular second-person ('' thou, thee, thy, thine''), which, he wrote, had merely maintained a "useless distinction" between polite and familiar terms of address or reference.

Unlike Gabelentz, Jespersen was interested in extending the concepts of analyticity and efficiency to international auxiliary languages. Within negotiations among the Delegation for the Adoption of an International Auxiliary Language aimed at deciding which constructed language should receive the international backing of scholars, the greatest supporter of Jespersen's principles was the chemist Wilhelm Ostwald, who had his own theory of ''Energetik'' ('energetics'), and for whom "Language was . . . a domain of culture calling out to be optimized through deliberate intervention". Thus for Jespersen, progress towards communicative efficiency is anyway inevitable, but can also be assisted by language engineering.

Hjelmslev criticizes the ambiguity of "efficiency" and "effort"; and adds that even if these are understood only loosely, there have been counter-examples. He concludes that, as propounded by Jespersen, the thesis is far from convincing, but that it is put forward vividly and has aroused considerable interest.

Jespersen's conception of evolution soon came to differ from Spencer's. Whereas Spencer believed that increased heterogeneity – synonymy, and the generation of new word classes, dialects and even languages – indicated progress, Jespersen found progress in simplicity and uniformity and:

Jespersen praised the "'noiseless' machinery" of English, the modern European language furthest down the analytic path, and the language most despised by Schleicher precisely for what he regarded as this analytic degeneracy.

In a review of ''Efficiency in Linguistic Change'', Bernard Bloch was forthright in saying that while linguists, like anyone else, were entitled to their private opinions on the relative merits of languages, judging the utility or attractiveness of a language was not part of their job. But although Bloch was an American structuralist, largely following Leonard Bloomfield, his reaction was much more extreme than that of Bloomfield, who thought that tackling questions such as relative efficiency was not improper, but instead better postponed until the factors involved were better understood.

A very different kind of opposition to Jespersen's conception came from Charles Bally, whose stylistics concerns led him to concentrate on the affective dimension of language, for which processes such as polysemy and clipping are important, and thus to reject efficiency as an ideal. Bally's objections to received opinions on language evolution extended beyond this: for example, he claimed that the change from "synthetic" to "analytic" was at times reversed (as Hermann Möller had pointed out to Jespersen as early as 1891).

Hans Frede Nielsen has criticized Jespersen's lack of consistency in, for example, approving the development of new, periphrastic (and, thanks to ''ing'', inflectional) tenses for allowing new distinctions and nuances that enriched English, while also approving the loss in English of the subjunctive and thus the distinctions and nuances that it had enabled.

From the 18th down to the mid 19th century, the origins of language had been an unusually contentious subject, based on little more than speculation – to the point where in 1866 the Société de Linguistique de Paris banned the issue from its meetings. The ban had an influence far beyond the Société but seems to have done little to deter Jespersen.

Jespersen argued that none among the " bow-wow" theory (that protolanguage imitated sounds in nature), the "pooh-pooh" theory (derivation from interjections), and the "yo-he-yo" theory (from field hollers and similar) should be dismissed because of its inability to explain the distant origin of this or that "part" of language. Rather, each of the three may explain certain parts, "and not even the most important parts – the main body of language seems hardly to be touched by any of them".

Jespersen's version of the bow-wow theory in particular may seem farfetched:

Humboldt held the view . . . that the origin of language lies in the natural urge to produce art. . . . he idea, whichoriginated most probably with Vico . . . lived on till the beginning of the 20th century. Jespersen . . . emphatically denies, against all evidence, the romanticist background of this theory, etstill defends the thesis that language originated in song, in love play and otherwise. . . . Nowadays his viewis entirely forgotten.

However, Salikoko Mufwene suggests that such speculations by Jespersen are less important than his belief that study of early, prelinguistic communication by infants – "cooing, babbling, and gestures" – may illuminate the origins of language.

Mufwene points out that Jespersen's conception of the long-term evolution of language is opposed to that published decades later by Derek Bickerton, for whom the protolanguage was very simple and "had minimal syntax, if any":

While Bickerton sees in pidgins fossils of that protolan­guage and in creoles the earliest forms of complex grammar that could putatively evolve from them, Jespersen would perhaps see in them the ultimate stage of the evolution of language to date. Many of us today find it difficult to side with one or the other position.

Jespersen's writing on these matters can be unpalatable:

Rather outrageous is Jespersen's claim that languages of "savages" in Africa and the Americas could inform us about the origins of language, not only because they have longer words (with complex morphology), but also because they use difficult sounds such as clicks and rely on tones, which, according to him, suggests that their speakers are "passionate". "Primitive languages" were accordingly sung, po­etic, and figurative.

Richard C. Smith considers ''Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin'' to be Jespersen's "masterpiece".

Jespersen advanced the study of the Great Vowel Shift, and was the first to present it in diagram form; he also coined its name.

Child language

Jespersen's work that addresses child language most extensively is ''Nutidssprog hos Børn og Voxne'' ("Today's language in children and adults", 1916), and its second edition, ''Børnesprog: En Bog for Foraldre'' ("Children's language: A book for parents", 1923). Their content, and that of ''Sproget: Barnet, Kvinden, Slægten'' (1941) is summarized within ''Language: Its Nature, Development, and Origin'' (1922). Jespersen distinguishes himself, as a linguist, from psychologists and educationalists such as Wilhelm Wundt, William Stern, and , criticizing them for faults such as the ambiguity of estimates of vocabulary when what are counted are ill-defined, and criticizing Wundt in particular for his belief that children participate only passively in what is largely an environmental generation of language.

Jespersen writes of three major stages in first language acquisition: screaming (perceived as language-like by the addressee, if not by the producer), babbling, and talking; and of talking as itself having two stages: own language and common language. He observes that production of speech comes later than understanding (although it can be hard to gauge understanding when not accompanied by production). He deals with issues of lexical semantics, and "a child's acquisition of his mother tongue is, ''in general'', a complex process of guessing, supposing and inventing, not only in the field of language but also in the fields of reality and conception". Children's inventiveness encompasses conversion and blending. Taking the use of prepositions to illustrate the acquisition of syntactic structure, Jespersen points out that what linguists now regard as preposition phrases first appear as formulas (thus ''to'' might first appear in "go ''to bed''") and only later in novel combinations.

Jespersen emphasizes the role of young children's linguistic awareness: although they lack the ability to talk about language, awareness can be observed from the signs they make of awareness of errors by others, from their hesitations, and from their playful alterations of language.

Jespersen also considered the relationship between meanings of words in child language and the concepts held by those children; he suggested that the influence could work in either direction.

International auxiliary languages

Jespersen applied both his theories on grammar and his ideas of efficiency of expression into the quest for an international auxiliary language.

It is true that towards the end of his life Jespersen expressed some qualms about the time and energy he had invested in [ artificial languages; but his] interest in the matter covered practically his whole life, from his rejection of Volapük in his student days to suggested reforms in his own creation Novial a few years before his death.

In 1907 Louis Couturat called a meeting of the Delegation for the Adoption of an International Auxiliary Language to decide on a single language for recommendation for international use. As an Anglicist, Jespersen might have been expected to back English for this role, but he rejected such a notion on the grounds that:

* a deliberate choice of any one ationallanguage for such a purpose would meet with unsurmountable difficulties on account of international jealousies
* each of them is several times more difficult than a constructed language need be

As for constructed languages, these had either of two goals. There were languages primarily designed to encourage clarity of thought, and those primarily based on (but simplifying) existing, widely spoken languages. Volapük, which had approached the former (and whose words were built on unrecognizable roots), had suffered a recent and rapid eclipse in speaker population by Esperanto, which did not. Thus the favourites for endorsement by the Delegation were Esperanto (which had regular morphology and was largely based on Romance languages), and Idiom Neutral (which had less stress on regularity and was based on what was already shared by the most prominent languages of Europe). Of the two, Idiom Neutral was more to Jespersen's liking.

A complex and shady process involved the sudden nomination by somebody using the pseudonym "Ido" of a newly conceived revision of Esperanto. Despite learning of the deception made by or for the pseudonymous reviser, and despite his anger over this deception, Jespersen believed candidate languages should be judged purely on their merits, and that this revision (which came to be called Ido) was a significant improvement over Esperanto in its state at the time. However, L. L. Zamenhof, Esperanto's creator, was opposed to it, as was the Esperantists' Lingva Komitato, and it became a rival of Esperanto. Jespersen collaborated with Louis Couturat and others on ''International Language and Science'' (1910), a book advocating its adoption; and became president of an Ido academy. But although a significant increase in its number of speakers would have required Ido to mobilize its speakers and evangelize, such a project did not attract Jespersen, who wanted "a language for the brain, not for the heart".

In 1925 Jespersen met Alice Morris, a wealthy cofounder (and lasting financial supporter) of the International Auxiliary Language Association (IALA). " like its counterparts in the international auxiliary language movement in Europe, there was in IALA little of the fanaticism, the eccentricity, and even the mysticism that accompanied the promotion of languages such as Esperanto." Through Morris and the IALA, Jespersen also met Edgar de Wahl, creator of the language Occidental and others with whom he could discuss the possibilities for constructed languages.

Jespersen's active participation in the IALA included chairing an IALA-funded conference, the Meeting of Linguistic Research, held in Geneva in spring 1930; but perhaps more important to IALA was the prestige he brought. Before the involvement in IALA, and later the formal association with it, of American scholars such as Edward Sapir, Earle Babcock, Henry A. Todd, and John L. Gerig, and the Europeans W. E. Collinson and Jespersen, many in academia thought international auxiliary languages pointless and a waste of time; but now "the organization and the movement could – and did – claim scholarly legitimacy for its linguistic research".

Morris viewed the issues involved in constructing a language to be mainly those of the lexicon. She and Jespersen (writing in a 1929 article, "Nature and art in language") were not unusual:

The proponents, the creators, and the analysts of artificial languages all concentrated on lexicon and derivational morphology. Syntax warranted no special attention. Being 'natural', it would take care of itself, or so it seemed to many of the enthusiasts most responsible for actually constructing auxiliary languages.

Jespersen believed that constructed languages, Ido included, were still more complex than needed, and still differed more than necessary from widely spoken national languages. He therefore set out to create an improved language, Novial (''Nov'' 'new' + ''IAL'' 'International Auxiliary Language'). His significant publications here include ''An International language'' (1928); ''Novial Lexike'' (a dictionary, 1930); and "A new science: Interlinguistics" (1931). Novial got a mixed reception (the Esperantist Gaston Waringhien found it particularly unsatisfactory), and Jespersen was hobbled by the mutual incompatibility of regularity and perceived naturalness as goals. Oddly, Novial also lacked some of the features that Jespersen had praised in English, such as consonant-ending monosyllabic words, and conversion without a need for inflection.

Larsen urges his readers:

But rather than judge rojects such as Novialby their actual or potential contribution to international communication, we are better advised . . . to see espersen'slife-long preoccupation with auxiliary languages and his creation of Novial not as a heroic failure but as a revealing application of his linguistic thought.

The English language

Jespersen's specialism for the longest period was the English language. His most celebrated work, and easily his most expansive, was '' A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles'', published in six "parts" (volumes) during his lifetime, from 1909 to 1942, and a seventh, posthumous part in 1949. The first part is devoted to phonetics (much of it historical), the sixth to morphology (both derivational and inflectional). Five of the seven parts are devoted to syntax, which Jespersen particularly enjoyed.

Writing in Jespersen's obituary, Helmslev calls ''A Modern English Grammar'' a "monumental work", one that "will maintain its immense value for an incalculable future thanks to the rich documentation of facts it provides".

In his own work '' The Syntactic Phenomena of English'' (1988), James D. McCawley attributes various of his analyses, or the insights pointing towards them, to Jespersen: raising; "worthwhile criticism of traditional systems of parts of speech" and classification of what are traditionally termed " subordinating conjunctions" (as in "You must look at this ''before you leave''") as prepositions with sentential objects; and more specifically, classification of ''that'' in relative clauses (as in "The necktie ''that he bought'' was polyester") not as a relative pronoun but as a complementizer. Asked how the 20th-century Dutch grammarians of English Hendrik Poutsma, Etsko Kruisinga and R. W. Zandvoort compared with Jespersen, McCawley replied: "Of course, Jespersen is in a class by himself. He was a fantastically original, broad, and deep thinker."

''Growth and Structure of the English Language'' (1905, and reprinted at numerous times thereafter) is a broad history of the English language. It won Jespersen the Prix Volney. In 1989, Hans Frede Nielsen wrote that:

tcan be read as the homage paid by an Anglophile to the English language which is praised for its business-like, virile qualities, its conciseness, logic and sobriety — to say nothing of its noble, rich, pliant and expressive character. . . . No wonder that he bookbecame so popular in the English-speaking world and among Anglophiles elsewhere.

He described it as "probably the most widely read introduction to the history of the English language ever written".

''Essentials of English Grammar'' (1933), primarily intended for university teaching, is for the most part synchronic. W. Nelson Francis described it as "arguably espersen'smost familiar and popular book".

Terms related to English that were introduced by Jespersen and are still widely used today include '' cleft sentence'', '' content clause'', '' light verb'', ''mass noun'', ''quantifier'', and '' yes-or-no question''. Jespersen's writings have also influenced today's conceptions of '' existential sentence''.

Robert I. Binnick calls Jespersen "one of the greatest students of the English language . . . , at once the last of the traditional grammarians and the first modern linguist–grammarian".

Women's language

Jespersen has been cited as "a pioneer in the study of women's language ndoften quoted for his views on what he believed to be the biologically determined nature of women's usage" – although " product of his own day and age".

Linguists since Jespersen have been less patient with the content of "The woman", chapter 13 within his book ''Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin'' (1922): "he manages to include every stereotype about women that was current at the time"; " he chapter offersa compendium – and a grim one for that matter, filled with prejudices and misogyny – of long-standing commonplaces on women's contribution to the development of language."

Margaret Thomas writes:

Jespersen's Chapter 13 is now read as the prime early example of conventional stereotypes and preconceptions about women's language that consider it inherently defective relative to men's language. As such, Jespersen's text is introduced into accounts of the history of language and gender studies in tones that range from detached amusement to derision.

Thomas continues by summarizing how Deborah Cameron reprints what she calls "Jespersen's notorious chapter" ''in toto'', Kira Hall describes it as "infamous", Patrick Mahony demonstrates how it exhibits "androcentric ideology" and "chauvinism", Jennifer Coates makes multiple references to ''Language, Its Nature, Development and Origin'' as a whole.

Chapter 13, "The woman", is one of five chapters making up "Book III" of ''Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin'', a Book in which "Jespersen describes and speculates about the influence of what he considers three other major factors in language change": multilingualism and language contact, pidgins and creoles, and women. While claiming that the differences between women's and men's language contribute to such change, his descriptions of these differences tend to make limited concessions to claims made by others, downplaying their scope or significance Thomas summarizes Jespersen's judgments as made in a tone "not so much distasteful, much less scornful, toward women and women's language as it is indulgent and condescending"; "Jespersen's assessment of women's language overall cannot be represented as disparaging"; he "does not seem to present women's language as a deformed version of men's language"

On its first publication (1922), numerous, mostly favourable reviews were published of ''Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin''. But its chapter 13 "received scant attention from contemporary readers". Thomas finds only one review that comments substantively on the chapter: that in '' The Modern Language Review'' by W. E. Collinson. This did not criticize Jespersen's methodology (quite inadequate from today's perspective, normal in its time); nevertheless, "Collinson alone took Jespersen's claims seriously, but downplayed them as inaccurate and overblown."

Thomas sees Jespersen's "The woman" (taken together with the Danish-language versions: the 1907 article and the 1941 book) as "an essentially singular, isolated, text that had little precedent ''or'' following for another fifty years". But the rediscovery of (societal) gender differences in language as a subject for study, led in the mid-1970s by Robin Lakoff and Cheris Kramer, brought considerable commentary in feminist linguistics, based on descriptions of the chapter ranging from accurate, to simplifying, to distorting. Thomas approvingly quotes Deborah Cameron: "If you read the whole chapter in which Jespersen expounds on the subject of 'The Woman', it becomes clear that he is adopting a view of languages as ideally balanced between 'masculine' and 'feminine' elements".

Influences and allegiances

During the decades of his activity, Jespersen followed what other, younger linguists were doing but refrained from unreservedly welcoming any advance, let alone from aligning himself with any new approach. He remained individualistic, but "there was a conservative streak in his radicalism" as he seemed to take seriously only the standpoints that had influenced him in his youth and to interpret newer work as mere repetition of this or that older theory.

Jespersen's main interest was not that of seeking patterns and explanations of the ''langue'' behind ''parole'', but rather its opposite, the major concern of the phonetics and semantics of his youth: "the psychophysiological fact of ''parole''".

Travels and honours

Jespersen visited the United States twice: he lectured at the Congress of Arts and Sciences in St. Louis in 1904, and in 1909–1910 at both the University of California at Berkeley and Columbia University (New York). While in the United States, he studied its education system. His autobiography (''En Sprogmands Levned'') was first published in English translation (''A Linguist's Life'') as recently as 1995.

After his retirement in 1925, Jespersen remained active in the international linguistic community. As well as continuing to write, he convened and chaired the first International Meeting on Linguistic Research in Geneva in 1930, co-chaired the first International Congress of Linguists in The Hague in 1928, and presided over the fourth in Copenhagen in 1936.

Jespersen received honorary degrees from Columbia University (1910), the University of St Andrews in Scotland (1925), and the Sorbonne in Paris (1927). He was one of the first six international scholars to be elected as honorary members of the Linguistic Society of America. He was elected a foreign member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1931.

Books by Jespersen

Even Hovdhaugen et al. describe Jespersen's output:

espersen'stextbooks and numerous other books gave readers balanced, although not uncritical, information on what was going on in the field of linguistics. Jespersen had a broad theoretical orientation, was interested in all subsystems of language, and invoked examples from many different languages in a way that made him a precursor of language typology.

* ''Praktisk Tilegnelse af fremmede Sprog'' ("Practical acquisition of foreign languages"). translation of Felix Franke, ''Die praktische Spracherlernung auf Grund der Psychologie und Physiologie der Sprache dargestellt von Felix Franke''.Copenhagen: Carl Larsen, 1884. .
* ''Kortfattet engelsk Grammatik for Tale- og Skriftsproget'' ("A concise English grammar for the spoken and written language"). Copenhagen: Carl Larsen, 1885. . (Also later editions.)
* ''Fransk Læsebog efter Lydskriftsmethode'' ("A French reader using the phonetic method"). Copenhagen, 1889.
* ''The Articulations of Speech Sounds Represented by Means of Analphabetic Symbols''. Marburg: N.G. Elwert, 1889.
At the Internet ArchiveAgain at the Internet Archive

* ''Studier over engelske Kasus. Med en Indledning om Fremskridt i Sproget'' ("Studies on case in English: With an introduction on progress in language"). espersen's doctoral dissertation.Copenhagen: Kleins Vorlag, 1891. .
** ''Progress in Language: With Special Reference to English.'' London: Swan Sonnenschein & Co., 1894.
At the Internet Archive
New York: Macmillan & Co. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 1993; with an introduction by James D. McCawley. , . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2006. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2013. . espersen's adaptation of his doctoral dissertation.
** ''Chapters on English.'' London: George Allen & Unwin, 1918. . '' Selected Writings.'' 1960. Pp. 153–346. ''Selected Writings.'' 2010. Pp. 81–165. xcerpted from ''Progress in Language.''* ''Chaucers Liv og Digtning'' ("Chaucer's life and poetry"). Studier fra Sprog- og Oldtidsforskning. Copenhagen: Klein, 1893. .
* With . ''Engelsk Begynderbog'' ("English primer"). 1895. . (Often later reprinted.)
* ''Fonetik: En systematisk Fremstilling af Læren om Sproglyd'' ("Phonetics: A systematic presentation of the study of the sounds of language"). Copenhagen: Schubotheske Forlag, 1899. .
** ''Phonetische Grundfragen'' ("Phonetics essentials"). Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1904. . erman translation by N. Andersen and Hermann Davidsen of portions of ''Fonetik''; with additions written by Jespersen.** ''Lehrbuch der Phonetik'' ("Textbook of phonetics"). Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1904. . (Also later editions.) erman translation by Hermann Davidsen of portions of ''Fonetik''.* ''Sprogundervisning'' ("Language teaching"). Copenhagen: Det Schubotheske forlag, 1901. . 2nd ed. ("revised, less polemical"). Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel, 1935. .
**''How to Teach a Foreign Language''. Translation by Sophia Yhlen-Olsen Bertelsen of ''Sprogundervisning.'' London: George Allen & Unwin, 1904. . London: S. Sonnenschein & Co., 1904
1904 printing
an
1928 printing
at the Internet Archive. Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2007. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2010. .
* ''The England and America Reader.'' Copenhagen, 1904.
** ''A British Reader: Nybearb. af "The England and America Reader".'' 1931. . Edited by and H. Helweg-Møller.
* ''Growth and Structure of the English Language.'' Leipzig: B.G. Teubner; New York: G.E. Stechert, 1905. . New York: Free Press, 1968.
Free Press edition
Chicago: University of Chicago Press; Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1982; with a foreword by Randolph Quirk. , , .
* ''Modersmålets Fonetik'' ("Phonetics of the mother tongue"). Copenhagen: Schubotheske, 1906. . (Revised and augmented in later editions.)
* ''John Hart's Pronunciation of English (1569 and 1570).'' Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1907. Anglistische Forschungen, Heft 22.
At the Internet Archive
John Hart's ''An Orthographie'' (1569) and ''A Methode or Comfortable Beginning for All Vnlearned, Whereby They May Bee Taught to Read English'' (1570).]
* '' A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles.'' Seven "parts" (volumes), 1909–1949. Earliest parts first published by Carl Winter, Heidelberg, later parts by Ejnar Munksgaard, Copenhagen and George Allen & Unwin, London. Parts 5–7, issued without series title, have imprint: Copenhagen, E. Munksgaard, 1940–49; Imprint varies: Parts 5–6: London: George Allen & Unwin; part 7: Copenhagen: Munksgaard, London: George Allen & Unwin.
* ''Engelsk Fonetik.'' Copenhagen: Nordisk, 1912. Edited by H. Helwig-Møller. .
** ''English Phonetics: A Handbook for Scandinavian Students.'' Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1950. . Revised and translated by Bengt Jürgensen.
* ''Sprogets Logik'' ("The logic of language"). Copenhagen: J. H. Schultz, 1913. .
* ''Nutidssprog hos Børn og Voxne'' ("Today's language in children and adults"). Copenhagen: Nordisk forlag, 1916. .
** ''Børnesprog: En Bog for Foraldre'' ("Children's language: A book for parents"). Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1923. . A revision of ''Nutidssprog''.
* ''Negation in English and Other Languages.'' Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab: Historisk-filologiske Meddelelser I, 5. Copenhagen: Andr. Fred. Høst og søn, 1917.
At the Internet Archiveat the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
'' Selected Writings.'' 1960. Pp. 1–152. ''Selected Writings.'' 2010. Pp. 2–80.
* ''Rasmus Rask i Hundredåret efter hans Hovedværk'' (" Rasmus Rask a hundred years after his major work"). Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1918.
At Danskernes Historie Online

* ''De to Hovedarter av grammattiske Forbindelser'' ("The two main types of grammatical relations"). Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab: Historisk-filologiske Meddelelser IV, 3. Copenhagen: Andr. Fred. Høst og søn, 1921.
At the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters

* ''Language: Its Nature, Development, and Origin.'' London: George Allen & Unwin, 1922.
At the Internet Archive
London: George Allen & Unwin, 1968. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2007. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2013. .
* ''Sprogets Udvikling og Opstaaen'' ("The development and origin of language"). Copenhagen: V. Pio, 1926. .
* ''The Philosophy of Grammar.'' London: George Allen & Unwin, 1924.
At the Internet Archive
New York: Henry Holt, 1924. . New York: W. W. Norton, 1965. . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992; with an introduction by James D. McCawley. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2006. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2010. .
* ''Mankind, Nation and Individual: From a Linguistic Point of View.'' Oslo: H. Aschehoug, 1925. .
At the Internet Archive
Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2006. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2013. .
* ''Et Verdenssprog: Et Forsøg på Spørsmålets Løsning'' ("A world language: An attempt to solve the question"). Copenhagen: V. Pios, 1928. .
* ''An International Language.'' London: George Allen & Unwin, 1928. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2006. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2013. . S.l.: Feedbooks, n.d
Archived
by the Wayback Machine on 21 August 2018. he introduction of the Novial language.">Novial_language.html" ;"title="he introduction of the Novial language">he introduction of the Novial language.* ''Novial Lexike: International Dictionary = Dictionnaire international = Internationales Wörterbuch.'' Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1930. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2006. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2013.
Text file edition
blahedo.org (Don Blaheta). [Novial to English, French and German dictionary.]
* ''Tanker og Studier'' ("Thoughts and studies"). Copenhagen: Gyldendalske Boghandel, 1932. . [Collection of papers in Danish.]
* ''Linguistica: Selected Papers in English, French and German.'' London: George Allen & Unwin; Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaard, 1933.
At Internet Archive
College Park, Maryland: McGrath, 1970. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2015. , , , , , .
* ''Essentials of English Grammar.'' London: George Allen & Unwin, 1933. (And later impressions.) . Tokyo: Kaitakusha (), 1943. 2nd ed. 1944. . University of Alabama Press, 1965. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2006. . Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge, 2013. . reatly condensed derivative of ''A Modern English Grammar''.* ''Analytic Syntax: A System of Expressing Grammatical Formulae by Symbols.'' London: George Allen & Unwin, 937 . Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaard, 1937. . New York: Rinehart & Winston, 1969. . Tokyo: Senjo, 1971. . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984; with an introduction by James D. McCawley. .
* ''En Sprogmands Levned'' ("A linguist's life"). Copenhagen, 1938. . espersen's autobiography.**''A Linguist's Life: An English Translation of Otto Jespersen’s Autobiography with Notes, Photos and a Bibliography.'' Translated by David Stoner, edited by Arne Juul, Hans Frede Nielsen and Jørgen Erik Nielsen, foreword by Paul Christophersen. Odense: Odense University Press, 1995. ()
* ''Sproget: Barnet, Kvinden, Slægten'' ("Language: Child, woman, family"). Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1941. .
* ''Efficiency in Linguistic Change''. Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab. Historisk-filosofiske Meddelelser 27, 4, 1941. 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1949. 3rd ed. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1969
At the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
'' Selected Writings.'' 1960. Pp. 381–466. ''Selected Writings.'' 2010. Pp. 190–231.
* ''Selected Writings.'' London: George Allen & Unwin; Tokyo: Senjo, 1960.
At the Internet Archive
London: Routledge, 2010. , .

Personal life

As a student, Jespersen enjoyed chess and reading French and English literature.

Jespersen married Ane Marie Djørup on 13 April 1897; the couple, later together with their son (Frans, lived in Frederiksberg (distinct from Copenhagen but geographically part of it), until their move in 1901 to Ermelundsly, a large house in Jægersborg, near Gentofte. In 1934 they again moved to a large house, Lundehave, in the outskirts of Helsingør, provided by the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters for a distinguished academician.

Ane Marie died on 30 March 1937. Jespersen became ill in December 1942; he died on 30 April 1943, and his urn was interred in a cemetery at Helsingør.

See also

* Interlinguistics
* Jespersen's Cycle
* Prosiopesis

Notes

References

Works cited

*
*
**
**

*

*
*

* Reprint of
* Reprinted within Also reprinted within
* (Als
preprint
)

*
*
*
*
*
**
**
**
**
**
**
**

*

* Volume 1: and . Volume 2: and .
*

*

* (Also and .)
* (Postprint also available: )

*

Further reading

* Andersen, Alsing; Vilhelm Andersen; ; Harald Bohr; Niels Bohr; Viggo Brøndal; Torsten Dahl; Niels Haislund; Chr. Nielsen; Valdemar Poulsen; Valdemar Østerberg, eds. ''Hilsen til Otto Jespersen på Firs-aarsdagen 16. juli 1940'' ("Greetings to Otto Jespersen on his eightieth birthday, 16 July 1940"). Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1940.
* Bøgholm, Niels; Aage Brusendorff; and , eds. ''A Grammatical Miscellany offered to Otto Jespersen on His Seventieth Birthday.'' Copenhagen: Levin & Munksgaard; London: George Allen & Unwin, 1930. .
* Cerbasi, Donato. ''Introduzione ad Otto Jespersen.'' Rome: Nuova Cultura, 2011. .
* (; et al). (''O. Jespersen''). . Tokyo: Nan'undō, 1964. .
* (Miyahata, Ichirō). (''Jespersen kenkyū''). Tokyo: Kobian Shobō, 1985. , .
* Nielsen, Jørgen Erik; and Arne Zettersten, eds. ''A Literary Miscellany: Proceedings of the Otto Jespersen Symposium April 29–30, 1993.'' Copenhagen: Department of English, University of Copenhagen, 1994. .

External links

*
*
*
*
*
Otto Jespersen Online Bibliography
, ''International Auxiliary Languages.''
*
Otto Jespersen
, ''Encyclopædia Britannica''

{{DEFAULTSORT:Jespersen, Otto
*
Linguists of English
1860 births
1943 deaths
Academic staff of the University of Copenhagen
Alumni of the University of Oxford
Constructed language creators
Corresponding fellows of the British Academy
Danish autobiographers
Idists
Members of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
19th-century Danish linguists
Novial
People from Frederiksberg
People from Gentofte Municipality
People from Helsingør
People from Randers
Phoneticians
Rectors of the University of Copenhagen
Syntacticians
20th-century Danish linguists
University of Copenhagen alumni