Studia Islandica - 01.06.1994, Blaðsíða 108

106
usage, he maintains, is by no means limited to the medieval
sagas, but has been adopted by modern writers of novels,
novellas and short stories seeking a somewhat “folksy”
effect.1 If this understanding is correct, then extensive use
of the historical present does not necessarily indicate close
relationship with oral narrative, as has been postulated by
Sprenger (who subtitled her work “Ein Beitrag zur Frage
Freiprosa-Buchprosa”).
Forklaringen má da snarest være den, at præs. er et af de ele-
menter fra den folkelige fortælling, som skrivende forfattere kan
overtage til deres brug i den hensigt at popularisere deres frem-
stilling eller ligefrem at give deres værk et falsk skin af oprindelig
mundtlighed. (Rokkjær 1963:211)
Having demonstrated that the mixing of past and present
tense is by no means an innovation of the sagas, Rokkjær
then examines what sort of use is actually made of the his-
torical present where it does occur. He concludes that, as a
general rule, descriptions of incidents that are repeated
make use of the preterite, while single episodes are report-
ed in the present tense. The verbs most likely to be used in
the present are the speech tags segja, svara, spyrja (but
excluding mœla, which almost never appears in the pre-
sent) and what Rokkjær terms “bevægelses- og over-
gangsverber” (including drífa, fara, hlaupa, höggva, koma,
róa, ríða, sigla, etc.) especially where they are accompa-
nied by a time adverb or adverbial phrase (such as síðan,
þar næst, eptir þat, etc.).2
In conclusion, Rokkjær proposes that we make a dis-
tinction between dramatic and historical present. The for-
mer can be found in works which make extensive use of the
1 Rokkjær quotes numerous examples from Blicher’s Brudstykker af en
Landsbydegns Dagbog and De tre Helligaftner, Staffan Björck refers to sev-
eral instances of Strindberg’s use of the historical present, while van den
Toorn mentions examples from Thackeray.
2 See Appendix VI for tallying of individual chapters.