The present paper discusses a possible correlation between the placement of pronominal objects with non-nominal antecedents in Norwegian, and the use of the pronouns es ‘it’ and das ‘that’ in German. For Norwegian object shift (OS), it has been shown that while pronominal objects with non-nominal antecedents generally do not shift, this is not the case when these elements take on the discourse function of continuing topics. In this paper, we show that a very similar pattern can be observed in German. However, this is not related to whether object pronouns scramble or not, but rather to which pronominal form is used to refer back to the clausal antecedent. In German, das is generally used to refer back to non-nominal antecedents, however, es is also sometimes an option. In this study, we find parallels between the use of OS and es, on the one hand, and lack of OS and das, on the other, and propose that the former is preferred when the proposition the proform refers back to is part of the common ground in the discourse. This ties in nicely with previous research on Norwegian OS, as in order for a proposition to constitute a continuing topic in the discourse, it has to be established as part of the interlocutors’ common ground.

本文讨论了挪威语中代词宾语与非名词性先行词的放置以及德语中代词es 'it' 和das 'that' 的使用之间可能的相关性。对于挪威语宾语转移（OS），已经表明，虽然具有非名词性先行词的代词宾语通常不会发生转移，但当这些元素承担连续主题的话语功能时，情况并非如此。在本文中，我们表明在德语中也可以观察到非常相似的模式。然而，这与宾语代词是否乱序无关，而与使用哪种代词形式来指代从句先行词有关。在德语中，das通常用于指代非名词性先行词，但有时也可以使用es 。在这项研究中，我们一方面发现了 OS 和es的使用，另一方面缺乏 OS 和das之间的相似之处，并建议当形式引用的命题是命题的一部分时，首选前者。谈话中的共同点。这与之前对挪威操作系统的研究很好地结合在一起，因为为了使一个命题构成话语中的一个持续主题，它必须被确立为对话者共同基础的一部分。