Finite adjunct clauses are often assumed to be among the strongest islands for filler–gap dependency creation cross-linguistically, but Kush, Lohndal & Sprouse (2019) found experimental evidence suggesting that finite conditional om-adjunct clauses are not islands for topicalization in Norwegian. To investigate the generality of these findings, we ran three acceptability judgment experiments testing topicalization out of three adjunct clause types: om ‘if’, når ‘when’ and fordi ‘because’ in Norwegian. Largely replicating Kush et al. (2019), we find evidence for the absence of strong island effects with topicalization from om-adjuncts in all three experiments. We find island effects for når- and fordi-adjuncts, but the size of the effects and the underlying judgment distributions that produce those effects differ greatly by island type. Our results suggest that the syntactic category ‘adjunct’ may not constitute a suitably fine-grained grouping to explain variation in island effects.

中文翻译：

---

附属岛屿的变化：挪威的案例

有限附加从句通常被认为是跨语言创建填充-间隙依赖的最强岛屿之一，但 Kush, Lohndal & Sprouse (2019) 发现实验证据表明有限条件唵- 附加从句不是挪威语主题化的孤岛。为了调查这些发现的普遍性，我们进行了三个可接受性判断实验，测试了三种附加从句类型的主题化：唵'如果'，纳尔“何时”和福迪挪威语中的“因为”。很大程度上复制了库什等人。（2019），我们发现证据表明没有强烈的岛屿效应与局部化唵-所有三个实验中的辅助物。我们发现岛效应纳尔- 和福迪-辅助，但影响的大小和产生这些影响的基本判断分布因岛屿类型而有很大差异。我们的结果表明，句法类别“附加”可能不构成一个适当的细粒度分组来解释岛屿效应的变化。