Certain recently-attested varieties of Germanic V2 languages are known to deviate from the strict V2 requirement characteristic of the standard. This is the case, for example, for Kiezdeutsch, a new German dialect, as well as urban vernacular varieties of Danish, Norwegian and Swedish: descriptively speaking, in these varieties, subject-verb inversion may be absent under certain well-defined conditions. In this article I outline those conditions and the type of syntactic analysis required to account for them, claiming that an articulated left periphery is needed to account for the findings. The similarity of the V3 patterns found in these new varieties, which are geographically isolated from each other but which share a characterization in terms of the demographics of their speaker groups, invites a diachronic account in terms of language contact. I argue that transfer cannot account for V3, but that a scenario of sequential simplification and complexification is able to do so. Finally, turning to Old English, which exhibits similar (though not identical) V2/V3 alternations, I argue that a similar synchronic analysis can be upheld and that its diachronic origins may well also have been similar—a case of using the present to inform our approach to the past.

中文翻译：

---

新旧日耳曼语种的语言接触和 V3

已知某些最近证明的日耳曼 V2 语言变体偏离了标准的严格 V2 要求特征。例如，对于新的德国方言 Kiezdeutsch 以及丹麦语、挪威语和瑞典语的城市白话变体来说就是这种情况：描述性地讲，在这些变体中，在某些明确定义的条件下可能不存在主谓倒置。在这篇文章中，我概述了这些条件以及解释它们所需的句法分析类型，声称需要一个清晰的左边缘来解释这些发现。在这些新变种中发现的 V3 模式的相似性，它们在地理上彼此隔离，但在其说话者群体的人口统计方面具有共同特征，因此需要在语言接触方面进行历时性说明。我认为转移不能解释 V3，但顺序简化和复杂化的场景能够做到这一点。最后，转向表现出相似（尽管不完全相同）V2/V3 交替的古英语，我认为可以支持类似的共时分析，并且其历时起源也很可能相似——一个使用现在时来告知的情况我们对过去的态度。