Every learner meets mér finnst ("I think / it seems to me") and is told that mér — a dative — is "the subject." It is a strange claim: how can an object-case pronoun be a subject? This page is the proof. Icelandic quirky subjects are not a teaching simplification; they are the single most cited piece of evidence in all of syntactic theory that grammatical subjecthood and case-marking are two independent things. A noun can be the subject — occupy the subject position, behave like a subject in every structural test — while wearing dative or accusative case. The argument is built from a battery of subjecthood tests: position in the verb-second clause (including what happens under inversion), raising, control of an infinitive, and subject-oriented reflexive binding. We run each test here, with the case carefully preserved in every position. The basic which-verb-takes-which-case facts live on the overview; the deep machinery of raising and control on complex/raising-and-control; the reflexive itself on complex/binding-sig. This page connects those threads to the one conclusion: mér really is a subject.
The setup: the verb does not give it away
First, dispose of the obvious objection — "if mér were the subject, the verb would agree with it." In Icelandic it does not: with a quirky subject the verb agrees with the nominative element (the theme) if there is one, or defaults to 3rd-person singular. So agreement cannot be used to find the subject here; it points at the nominative theme, not the experiencer. That is exactly why the other tests matter. (Agreement basics: overview.)
Mér líkar þessi bíll.
I like this car. — dative subject mér; the verb líkar (3sg) agrees with the NOMINATIVE theme þessi bíll, not with mér.
Mér líka þessir bílar.
I like these cars. — same dative subject mér, but now the verb is plural líka, agreeing with the plural nominative þessir bílar. The experiencer never controls agreement.
Hold onto this: agreement tracks the nominative, so the four subjecthood tests below have to do the work of locating the real subject. They all converge on mér.
Test 1 — Subject position in V2, and case under inversion
Icelandic is verb-second: in a plain declarative the subject normally sits first, and the finite verb second (see syntax/v2-word-order). The quirky NP behaves exactly like a subject: it sits first, before the verb, in the canonical subject slot.
Mér finnst þetta skrýtið.
I find this strange. — the dative mér occupies the first/subject slot; finnst is second (V2). Mér behaves positionally as the subject.
The sharper test is inversion. When you front something else — turn the sentence into a yes/no question, or open with an adverb — the subject is the constituent that lands immediately after the finite verb. Run that test, and the quirky NP is the thing that inverts to post-verbal position — and it keeps its oblique case there. In a yes/no question the order is Verb – Subject – …, so a nominative subject would surface as Finnst þú… (nom.) — but the quirky subject surfaces as finnst mér, dative, sitting in precisely the post-verbal subject position:
Finnst þér þetta skrýtið?
Do you find this strange? — yes/no question: the finite verb finnst is first, and the SUBJECT inverts to second position — but it is the DATIVE þér, not nominative þú. The quirky subject keeps its case in the post-verbal subject slot.
Í gær fannst mér þetta skrýtið.
Yesterday I found this strange. — fronted adverb í gær triggers V2; the verb fannst comes second and the subject inverts behind it — again the dative mér, not ég. Case is preserved under inversion.
Núna langar mig í kaffi.
Now I want a coffee. — fronted núna → V2 inversion; the accusative subject mig sits right after the verb langar, exactly where a nominative subject would. Quirky case survives inversion.
This is the test the brief flags as the everyday one English speakers get wrong: they expect the post-verbal noun to be an object because it carries object case, so they hunt for a hidden nominative subject (or wrongly insert one). There is none. The dative/accusative noun is occupying the subject position — first in declaratives, immediately post-verbal under inversion — and it carries its lexical case in every position, including finnst mér, langar mig.
Test 2 — Raising, with case preservation
A raising verb (virðast "seem," sýnast "appear," reynast "turn out") has no subject of its own; it pulls up the subject of the clause below it. Only a subject can be raised. So if the quirky NP raises into virðast, it must be a subject — and the clinching detail is that it arrives at the top still wearing its lexical case. A raising verb assigns no case (there is nothing to assign it to until raising happens), so the case the quirky noun shows up top can only be the case the lower verb gave it, carried up. This is case preservation under raising, the most famous single fact in the Icelandic syntax literature. (Full treatment, with ECM and control contrasted: complex/raising-and-control.)
Honum virðist líka maturinn.
He seems to like the food. — raising: honum is the DATIVE subject of líka, raised to be the subject of virðist. virðist assigns no case, so the dative can only come from líka, carried up. NOT nominative hann.
Mér virðist leiðast í þessum fyrirlestri.
I seem to be bored in this lecture. — the dative mér (subject of leiðast) raises into virðist and stays dative. The embedded verb is the infinitive leiðast.
Henni virðist hafa líkað gjöfin.
She seems to have liked the gift. — the dative henni raises across virðist + the perfect infinitive hafa líkað, still dative; gjöfin is the nominative theme of líka. Quirky case survives the longer climb.
And the test still works under inversion stacked on raising — front an adverb and the raised quirky subject inverts behind virðist, dative intact:
Þessa dagana virðist honum líka maturinn vel.
These days he seems to like the food. — fronted adverbial → V2; the raised subject honum (dative) inverts behind virðist. Raising + inversion, and the dative is preserved in both operations at once.
The logic is airtight. honum is the highest argument of the whole sentence, sitting where the subject of virðist must sit; virðist could not have made it dative; therefore honum got its dative lower down from líka and raised as a subject. A fronted object could never do this. Case preservation under raising is the argument that quirky NPs are genuine subjects.
Test 3 — Control of PRO
In a control structure (reyna "try," vona "hope," byrja "begin," ákveða "decide" + að + infinitive), the infinitive has a silent subject, PRO, obligatorily coreferent with the matrix subject. Crucially, only a subject can control PRO, and only a subject can be PRO. Both directions work for quirky NPs, which is two more subjecthood arguments in one.
First, a quirky NP can be the controller — the matrix subject controlling the lower PRO:
Mér tókst að klára verkefnið á réttum tíma.
I managed to finish the project on time. — takast ('manage') takes a DATIVE subject; mér is the matrix subject and controls PRO, the silent subject of klára ('finish'). The one who finishes is necessarily me — only a subject can control PRO.
Second — and this is the more striking diagnostic — a quirky-case verb can appear as the controlled infinitive, with PRO as its quirky subject. PRO is silent, but the case it would carry surfaces on any predicate or floated element agreeing with it, and the construction is grammatical only because PRO occupies the subject slot of the quirky verb:
Hún vonast til að leiðast ekki í veislunni.
She hopes not to be bored at the party. — control: leiðast ('be bored') takes a dative subject; here its subject is the silent PRO, controlled by hún. PRO sits in leiðast's (dative) subject slot — proof that the quirky verb's subject position can host the controllee.
Ég reyni að láta mér ekki leiðast á fundum.
I try not to let myself get bored in meetings. — reyna ('try') controls PRO; the embedded mér (dative) is the experiencer of leiðast inside the causative láta. The quirky dative surfaces overtly inside the controlled infinitive.
Þau ákváðu að vanta ekkert á ferðalaginu.
They decided to lack for nothing on the trip. — control with the accusative-subject verb vanta ('lack/need') in the infinitive; PRO, controlled by þau, is the (accusative) subject of vanta. Only a subject position can be the silent controllee.
If the quirky NP were merely an object, it could neither control PRO nor have its slot filled by PRO. Both are subject-only privileges, and the quirky construction passes both.
Test 4 — Subject-oriented reflexive binding (sig/sér/sinn)
Icelandic's reflexive sig / sér / sín and the possessive sinn are subject-oriented: they must be bound by a subject, never by an object. So whatever can antecede sér / sinn is, by definition, a subject. Quirky NPs can bind them — which makes them subjects on this test too. (The reflexive system, including its long-distance behaviour, is owned by complex/binding-sig; here we use binding only as a subjecthood diagnostic.)
Honum þykir vænt um börnin sín.
He is fond of his (own) children. — þykja vænt um ('be fond of') takes a DATIVE subject honum; the possessive sín ('his own') is subject-oriented and is bound by honum. Only a subject can antecede sín — so honum is the subject.
Henni leiddist í eigin veislu.
She was bored at her own party. — the dative subject henni binds eigin ('own', the reinforced reflexive possessive). Object case, subject behaviour.
Mér finnst ég hafa svikið sjálfan mig.
I feel I have betrayed myself. — within the embedded clause the nominative ég binds the reflexive; but note the matrix quirky subject mér launches the whole report. Quirky and nominative subjects pattern alike for binding.
The diagnostic is decisive: sinn / sér refuse object antecedents, so the only way honum þykir vænt um börnin sín can be grammatical is if honum is the subject. It is.
Putting the tests together
The same dative or accusative noun passes every subjecthood test at once, while a true object passes none of them. Lay them side by side:
| Subjecthood test | Quirky NP (mér / mig / honum) | A real object |
|---|---|---|
| Occupies first/subject slot in V2 | yes — mér finnst… | no |
| Inverts to post-verbal subject slot (keeping case) | yes — finnst mér? | no |
| Raises, preserving its case | yes — honum virðist líka… | no |
| Controls PRO / can be PRO | yes — mér tókst að…, …að leiðast ekki | no |
| Binds subject-oriented sér / sinn | yes — honum þykir vænt um börnin sín | no |
| Controls verb agreement | no (agreement tracks the nominative) | n/a |
Five subject tests say "subject"; only agreement abstains (it follows the nominative theme instead). The conclusion the Icelandic data forced on the field: subjecthood is a cluster of structural properties — position, raising, control, binding — that is logically independent of case. A noun can have all the subject properties and still be dative. This is the phenomenon, and naming it is what this page does that a learner-facing "mér finnst" note never will.
Why this is hard for English speakers
English has subjects, raising, control, and reflexives too — but English never shows case on full noun phrases and shows only a crude nominative/objective split on pronouns, so the case and the subjecthood never visibly come apart. "He seems to like it" (raising), "He tried to leave" (control), "He likes his children" (binding) all have a bland nominative "he," and the learner concludes that subject = nominative, full stop. Two transfer errors follow directly. First, the learner sees the object-looking case on mér / mig and assumes the noun is an object, then either mistranslates or goes hunting for a nominative subject that does not exist. Second — the inverse error — the learner, feeling the "missing" nominative, inserts a dummy nominative where the quirky subject already fills the slot, producing things like \það finnst mér þetta skrýtið with an intrusive expletive, or worse *ég finnst. The cure is to stop equating subject with nominative: ask which noun passes the *position / inversion / raising / control / binding tests, and let its case be whatever the verb lexically assigns. (The expletive það and where it is and isn't allowed: syntax/dummy-thad.)
Common Mistakes
❌ Finnst þú þetta skrýtið?
Case error — finnast takes a DATIVE subject, and the subject keeps its case under question inversion: 'finnst þér…?', not nominative þú.
✅ Finnst þér þetta skrýtið?
Do you find this strange? — the dative subject þér inverts behind the verb and keeps its case.
Under inversion the post-verbal noun is still the subject, and a quirky subject stays oblique there: finnst *mér / þér, langar mig / þig*, never nominative.
❌ Hann virðist líka maturinn.
Raising error — líka assigns DATIVE to its subject, and raising preserves it: 'Honum virðist líka maturinn', not nominative hann.
✅ Honum virðist líka maturinn.
He seems to like the food. — the dative honum raises into virðist and stays dative; maturinn is the nominative theme.
A raised quirky subject keeps the lower verb's case. líka wants dative, so even at the top of the sentence it is honum, never hann.
❌ Það finnst mér þetta skrýtið.
Dummy-insertion error — the quirky subject mér already fills the subject slot, so an expletive það is not licensed here. Just: 'Mér finnst þetta skrýtið'.
✅ Mér finnst þetta skrýtið.
I find this strange. — the dative subject occupies first position; no dummy needed.
Do not paper over the "missing nominative" with an expletive það. The quirky NP is the subject and already holds the slot; an intrusive það is ungrammatical.
❌ Honum þykir vænt um börnin hans.
Binding error — within his own clause, 'his own children' must use the subject-oriented reflexive sín (bound by the subject honum), not the plain possessive hans (which would mean someone else's children).
✅ Honum þykir vænt um börnin sín.
He is fond of his own children. — the quirky dative subject honum binds the reflexive sín, proving it is a subject; hans would point to a different person.
Because sín is subject-oriented and the quirky dative binds it, using hans instead both breaks the binding and changes the meaning (someone else's children).
Key Takeaways
- Icelandic quirky subjects are the canonical evidence that grammatical subjecthood and case are independent: a dative/accusative noun can have every subject property while never going nominative.
- Agreement abstains — the verb tracks the nominative theme or defaults to 3sg — so subjecthood is shown by other tests.
- Position / inversion: the quirky NP sits first in declaratives and inverts to the post-verbal subject slot in questions and after fronting, keeping its case (finnst mér, langar mig).
- Raising: it raises into virðast and preserves its lexical case (honum virðist líka maturinn) — the famous "case preservation under raising," since the raising verb assigns no case.
- Control: it can control PRO (mér tókst að klára) and a quirky verb's subject slot can be the controlled PRO (…að leiðast ekki) — both subject-only privileges.
- Reflexive binding: it binds subject-oriented sér / sinn (honum þykir vænt um börnin sín), which only a subject can do.
- For English speakers the traps are reading the oblique noun as an object (it is the subject) and inserting a dummy nominative where the quirky subject already sits. Stop equating subject with nominative; run the tests.
Now practice Icelandic
Reading grammar gets you part of the way. The exercises are where it sticks — free, no signup needed.
Start learning Icelandic→Related Topics
- Quirky (Oblique) Subjects: OverviewA2 — Icelandic's flagship feature: a large class of verbs whose logical subject — the experiencer — stands in the accusative, dative, or genitive instead of the nominative, with the verb frozen in 3rd-person singular. mér finnst, mig langar, mér er kalt: why 'I' is so often mér or mig, not ég.
- Raising, ECM, and ControlC1 — The three infinitival constructions that organise Icelandic complementation: subject-to-subject RAISING (virðast 'seem' — the lower subject moves up and keeps its case, so a quirky dative stays dative), Exceptional Case Marking / accusative-with-infinitive (ECM: telja 'believe' assigns accusative to the embedded subject — tel hann vera góðan), and CONTROL (a silent PRO coreferent with a matrix argument — lofa að koma). Case preservation under raising is the clinching evidence for quirky subjecthood and the centrepiece of the Icelandic syntax literature.
- V2: The Verb-Second RuleA2 — The foundational rule of Icelandic main clauses — the finite verb is always the SECOND constituent, so fronting anything other than the subject forces verb-subject inversion (Í dag fer ég, Þetta veit ég ekki), unlike English which keeps the subject first.
- Long-Distance Reflexives: the Famous sigC1 — The construction that made Icelandic central to syntactic theory: the reflexive sig / sér / sín can be bound NON-LOCALLY — by the subject of a higher clause, across one or more clause boundaries — provided the intervening clauses are SUBJUNCTIVE. An indicative complement blocks the long-distance link and leaves only the local reading. The subjunctive, Icelandic's other flagship feature, is the licenser; one generalisation ties the two together.
- Verbs and the Case of Their ObjectsB1 — Icelandic verbs assign a fixed case to their object that you cannot predict from meaning: most take the accusative (sjá hann), a sizable cluster take the dative (hjálpa honum), a few take the genitive (sakna hennar), and ditransitives take dative-then-accusative (gefa honum bók) — why object case is lexical, and the high-frequency dative-governing verbs to memorise.
- The Dummy Subject það (Expletive)A2 — The expletive það that fills the obligatory first slot when nothing else is fronted — weather (það rignir), existentials (það er köttur í garðinum), and presentationals (það kom maður) — and how it vanishes the moment any other phrase takes first position, while the verb agrees with the real subject.