• Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
Show full table of contents
6.3. Supplementive use of the adjective
quickinfo

This section discusses the supplementive use of adjectives, subsection I starts by pointing out some differences between complementive and supplementive adjectives. These involve the semantic relation between the adjective and the verbal predicate, the noun phrase the adjective is predicated of, and the position of the adjective within the clause, subsection II continues by briefly discussing how supplementives can be distinguished from manner adverbs, subsection III goes on to show that the supplementive adjectives must be divided into two groups on the basis of both semantic and syntactic criteria, subsection IV concludes with a discussion of the restrictions on the supplementive use of the adjective.

readmore
[+]  I.  Differences between complementives and supplementives

Complementive and supplementive adjectives are both predicated of noun phrases, which typically function as the subject or the direct object of their clause. For supplementives this is illustrated in (119a) and (119b), respectively; the predication relation is indicated by italics.

Example 119
a. Jan ging dronken naar huis.
  Jan went  drunk  to home
  'Jan went home drunk.'
b. Marie zet de fles leeg in de kast.
  Marie puts  the bottle  empty  into the cupboard
  'Marie is putting the bottle into the cupboard empty.'

The examples in (120) show that the supplementive cannot be predicated of an indirect object or a prepositional complement: in (120a) the supplementive may be predicated of the subject Jan but not of the indirect object Marie, and (120b) has no interpretation at all.

Example 120
a. *? Jan gaf Marie de fles dronken.
  Jan gave  Marie  the bottle  drunk
  'Jan gave Marie the bottle drunk.'
b. * Marie keek naar de fles leeg.
  Marie looked  at the bottle  empty

Note, however, that the unaccusative constructions in the primeless examples of (121) also contain an indirect object; cf. Section V2.1.3. Although judgments are a bit unclear, examples like these seem to give rise to a better result than example (120a). The examples improve even further if the supplementive is placed in clause-initial position, as in the primed examples.

Example 121
a. ?? Er verschijnen haar/Marie dronken altijd roze olifantjes.
  there  appear  her/Marie  drunk  always  pink elephants
  'When sheʼs drunk, pink elephants always appear to her/Marie.'
a'. ? Dronken verschijnen er haar/Marie altijd roze olifantjes.
b. ? Er zijn Peter/hem dronken nog nooit ongelukken overkomen.
  there  are  Peter/him  drunk  yet never  accidents  happened
  'While he was drunk, accidents never happened to him/Peter.'
b'. Dronken zijn Peter/hem nog nooit ongelukken overkomen.
c. ? De argumenten van de dokter bevallen mij ziek altijd beter.
  the arguments of the doctor  please  me  ill  always  better
  'When Iʼm ill, the arguments of the doctor always please me more.'
c'. Ziek bevallen de argumenten van de dokter mij altijd beter.

Supplementive and complementive adjectives differ in various respects. Some of these differences are discussed in Subsections A-C; Subsection IV will discuss the differences with respect to the types of adjectives that can be used in complementive and supplementive functions.

[+]  A.  The relation between the adjective and the verbal predicate

The most conspicuous difference between supplementives and complementives is that the former can be freely added to almost any clause that contains an activity verb (cf. Subsection IV), whereas the latter occur only with a restricted set of verbs (cf. Section 6.2). Further, the optionality of the supplementive adjectives in (122) suggests that they can be appropriately characterized as adjuncts.

Example 122
Supplementive use of the adjective
a. Jan vertrok (kwaad).
  Jan left   angry
b. Jan ging (dronken) naar huis.
  Jan went   drunk  to home
  'Jan went home drunk.'
c. Jan zong (vrolijk) een liedje.
  Jan sang   merry  a song
  'Jan sang a song, merry.'

The complementive adjectives in (123a-c), on the other hand, are obligatorily present, which suggests that they act as complements of the verb. The obligatoriness of the complementives is due to the fact that they are needed to license the noun phrases de hond/het gras. The fact that the complementive is optional in (123d) is of course due to the fact that the noun phrase de hond can be licensed either as the subjectof the complementive or as the patient argument of the transitive verb slaan'to hit'. See Section 6.2.1, sub II, for more detailed discussion.

Example 123
Complementive use of the adjective
a. De hond is *(dood).
  the dog  is    dead
b. Marie vindt de hond *(aardig).
  Marie considers  the dog     nice
c. Peter loopt het gras *(plat).
  Peter walks  the grass     flat
d. Jan slaat de hond (dood).
  Jan  beats  the dog   dead

The bond between the complementive adjective and the verb is thus much stronger than between the supplementive adjective and the verb, which is also reflected in that the meaning of the supplementive constitutes a substantial part of the core proposition expressed by the clause. The semantic contribution of the supplementive, on the other hand, is often assumed to be “supplementary" with respect to the core proposition: the semantic relation between the supplementive and the remainder of the clause is often described by means of the loose notion of “simultaneousness". In (122a), for instance, it is expressed that the event of leaving and the state of being angry apply simultaneously to the referent of the noun phrase Jan. Crucially, neither of the two predicates is really dependent on the other: the supplementive merely provides additional information about the subject or the direct object.

[+]  B.  The noun phrase the adjective is predicated of

Complementive and supplementive adjectives are predicated of either the subject or the direct object of their clause. With complementives, the predication relation is always unambiguously determined. When there is no accusative object, as in the copular construction in (123a), the complementive is predicated of the subject of the clause. However, if an accusative object is present, the complementive must be predicated of this object: example (123b) cannot be interpreted in such a way that it is Marie that is considered kind; (123c) expresses that the grass becomes flat.
      The examples in (124), on the other hand, show that ambiguity may arise with supplementive adjectives. Example (124a), for example, can express either that Marie is drunk or that the guests are drunk (but not both). Although some speakers may prefer one of the two readings, we can readily demonstrate that we are dealing with a genuine case of ambiguity by replacing one of the animate arguments by an inanimate one: the supplementive must be predicated of the subject in (124b), but of the object in (124c).

Example 124
Predication by supplementive adjectives
a. dat Marie de gasten dronken naar huis bracht.
  that  Marie the guests  drunk  to home  brought
  'that Marie brought the guests home, while she/they was/were drunk.'
b. dat Marie de boeken dronken naar huis bracht.
  that  Marie the books  drunk  to home  brought
  'that Marie brought the books home, while she was drunk.'
c. dat de taxi de gasten dronken naar huis bracht.
  that  the taxi  the guests  drunk  to home  brought
  'that the taxi brought the guests home, while they were drunk.'

The examples in (125) provide two more cases, in which meaning determines whether the supplementive is predicated of the subject or the object.

Example 125
a. dat Marie zulke dingen alleen dronken zegt.
  that  Marie such things  only  drunk  says
  'that Marie says such things only if sheʼs drunk.'
b. dat Marie die fles leeg in de kast zet.
  that  Marie that bottle  empty  into the cupboard  puts
  'that Marie puts that bottle into the cupboard empty.'

      The examples in (126) show that he supplementive adjective must follow the noun phrase it is predicated of: although (126a) is fully acceptable, it differs from (124a) in that dronken cannot be predicated of the direct object de gasten; it is Marie that is drunk. The examples in (126b&c) further show that whereas the supplementive adjective may precede the direct object in (125a), in which it is predicated of the subject, this is not possible in (125b), in which it is predicated of the object.

Example 126
a. dat Marie dronken de gasten naar huis bracht.
  that  Marie drunk  the guests  to home  brought
b. dat Marie zulke dingen alleen dronken zegt.
  that  Marie such things  only  drunk  says
c. * dat Marie leeg die fles in de kast zet.
  that  Marie empty  that bottle  into the cupboard  puts

Another difference between complementives and supplementives is that the noun phrase the adjective is predicated of can only be left unexpressed in the latter case. For example, if we passivize example (125a), as in (127a), the supplementive adjective dronken can be felicitously used regardless of whether the passive door-phrase is present or not. This is, however, only possible if the supplementive cannot be predicated of the subject of the passive construction for semantic reasons; example (127b) cannot be interpreted in such a way that it is the implied agent who is drunk.

Example 127
a. dat zulke dingen (door Marie) alleen dronken worden gezegd.
  that  such things   by Marie  only  drunk  are  said
  'that such things are only said (by Marie) drunk.'
b. dat de gasten dronken naar huis werden gebracht.
  that  the guests  drunk  to home  were  brought
  'that the guests were brought home drunk.'
[+]  C.  The position of the adjectives within the clause

In the northern varieties of Dutch, complementives are immediately left-adjacent to the verbs in clause-final position in the unmarked case; cf. Section 6.2.2, example (58). The examples in (124) show, however, that this does not hold for supplementives; their position can be more to the left. Furthermore, if a clause contains both a supplementive and a complementive adjective, they are always strictly ordered: the examples in (128) show that the former must precede the latter. The number sign in (128b') indicates that this examples may receive the—in this context irrelevant—interpretation in which ergerlijk acts as modifier of dronken: “drunk in an annoying way".

Example 128
a. dat Jan dronken al gauw ziek is.
  that  Jan drunk  already quickly  sick  is
  'that Jan tends to get sick, when drunk.'
a'. * dat Jan al gauw ziek dronken is.
b. dat ik Jan dronken al snel ergerlijk vind.
  that  Jan drunk   already quickly  annoying  consider
  'that I tend to consider him to be annoying, when heʼs drunk.'
b'. # dat ik Jan al snel ergerlijk dronken vind.
c. dat hij zijn overhemden altijd nat glad strijkt.
  that  he  his shirts  always  wet  smooth  irons
  'that he irons his shirts smooth, while they are wet.'
c'. * dat hij zijn overhemden altijd glad nat strijkt.

In some cases, such as (128a&b), the supplementive adjective must precede not only the complementive adjective, but also adverbial phrases like al gauw'already quickly' and al snel'already quickly'.

Example 129
a. * dat Jan al gauw dronken ziek is.
  that  Jan already quickly  drunk  sick  is
b. * dat ik Jan al snel dronken ergerlijk vind.
  that  Jan already quickly  drunk  annoying  consider

In other cases, however, the supplementive can follow the adverbial phrase. In (128c), for example, the supplementive nat'wet' follows the adverb altijd'always'. In some cases, the supplementive is not even able to precede the adverbial phrase, as in (130). The factors that determine the relative position of these adverbial phrases and supplementives are discussed in Subsection III.

Example 130
a. dat Jan al weken ziek in bed ligt.
  that  Jan for weeks  ill  in bed lies
  'that Jan has been lying ill in bed for weeks.'
b. * dat Jan ziek al weken in bed ligt.
[+]  II.  Differences between supplementives and manner adverbs

Supplementives can easily be confused with adverbially used adjectives, like the ones given in (131), which should be distinguished from the supplementives on semantic grounds; whereas the supplementives are predicated of noun phrases, manner adverbs specify the manner in which the action denoted by the verb (phrase) proceeds. The adverbially used adjectives beleefd'politely', voorzichtig'carefully' and snel'quickly', for example, are not predicated of the noun phrase Jan (Jan may be rude, careless or slow in various respects), but indicate the way in which the action denoted takes place. More differences between supplementives and manner adverbs are discussed in Section 8.2.2.

Example 131
Manner adverbs
a. Jan spreekt zijn begeleider beleefd aan.
  Jan addresses  his supervisor  politely  prt.
  'Jan addresses his supervisor politely.'
b. Jan pakte zijn boeken voorzichtig op.
  Jan took  his books  carefully  up
  'Jan picked up his books carefully.'
c. Jan liep snel weg.
  Jan walked  quickly  away
  'Jan walked away quickly.'
[+]  III.  Two types of supplementives

This subsection shows that there are two types of supplementives, which exhibit differences in meaning, distribution and syntactic behavior. For lack of a better alternative we will refer to the two types as supplementive-I and supplementive–II.

[+]  A.  Supplementive-I and –II: their position in the clause

The relation between the supplementive adjective and the clause is generally described as one of “simultaneousness"; cf. Haeseryn et al. (1997:1184). This notion correctly suggests that (132a) is interpreted in such a way that the event of going home and the state of being satisfied apply to the referent of the noun phrase Jan at the same time, and that (132b) is interpreted in such a way that the event of being ironed and the state of being wet simultaneously apply to the shirts.

Example 132
a. Jan gaat tevreden naar huis.
  Jan goes  satisfied  to home
  'Jan goes home and he is satisfied.'
b. Jan strijkt zijn overhemden nat.
  Jan irons  his shirts  wet
  'Jan irons his shirts, while theyʼre wet.'

Sometimes, however, the term simultaneousness seems to be less appropriate. Consider the examples in (133). The most natural interpretation of (133a), for instance, does not seem to be that the activity of speaking incomprehensible nonsense and the state of being drunk apply to Jan simultaneously at one particular time. The supplementive and the clause are instead in a conditional relationship, in which the supplementive (and the noun phrase it is predicated of) acts as the antecedent (= the when-part) and the clause as the consequent (= the then-part): when Jan is drunk, then he talks garbage. The same thing holds for (133b), as is indicated by means of the English paraphrase.

Example 133
a. Jan kraamt dronken onbegrijpelijke onzin uit.
  Jan speaks  drunken  incomprehensible nonsense  prt.
  'Whenever heʼs drunk, Jan talks incomprehensible nonsense.'
b. Jan eet ziek pap.
  Jan eats  ill  porridge
  'Whenever heʼs ill, Jan eats porridge.'

Note that the notion of simultaneousness is also retained in examples such as (133), given that the English rendering involves the temporal connectives when ..., then ...; the purely conditional paraphrase if ..., then ... is not appropriate. In Dutch, this distinction between the two types of conditional clauses cannot be made as easily; both involve the connectives als ..., dan ...
      The semantic difference between the examples in (132) and (133) is associated with various other differences. The first involves the intonation patterns of the examples: the supplementive adjectives in (133) are followed by a rise in the intonation contour, whereas this is impossible in (132a).
      Second, when we add clausal adverbs like waarschijnlijk'probably' or altijd'always' (cf. Section 8.2.1), it becomes clear that the difference in interpretation between (132) and (133) correlates with a difference in word order. The examples in (134) show that the supplementive adjectives tevreden and nat from (132) must follow the adverb (although one could imagine situations in which the orders that are marked ungrammatical are possible in a conditional reading).

Example 134
Position of supplementive-II with respect to clausal adverbs
a. Jan gaat <*?tevreden> altijd <tevreden> naar huis.
  Jan goes     satisfied  always  to home
  'Whenever Jan goes home, heʼs satisfied.'
b. Jan strijkt zijn overhemden <*nat> altijd <nat>.
  Jan irons  his shirts      wet  always
  'Whenever Jan irons his shirts, they are wet.'

The examples in (135), on the other hand, show that the supplementives dronken and ziek from (133) preferably precede the clausal adverbs (the unacceptable word orders may be marginally possible if the supplementive is explicitly represented as belonging to the new information of the clause, e.g., as an answer to the question: Wanneer kraamt Jan altijd onbegrijpelijke onzin uit?'When does Jan always talk incomprehensible nonsense?').

Example 135
Position of supplementive-I with respect to clausal adverbs
a. Jan kraamt <dronken> altijd <*dronken> onbegrijpelijk onzin uit.
  Jan speaks    drunken  always  incomprehensible nonsense  prt.
  'Whenever heʼs drunk, Jan talks incomprehensible nonsense.'
b. Jan eet <ziek> altijd <*ziek> pap.
  Jan eats    ill  always  porridge
  'Whenever heʼs ill, Jan eats porridge.'

For ease of reference, we will refer to the supplementive adjectives in (135), which precede the clausal adverbs, as supplementive-I, and to the supplementive adjectives in (134), which follow them, as supplementive-II.
      The addition of the clausal adverb altijd in (134) excludes the simultaneity reading of the examples in (132): the examples in (134) are instead interpreted as conditionals also, although the logical implications of (134) are of a different nature than those of (135): whereas the clause acts as the consequent in (135), it acts as the antecedent in (134). The respective implications are represented in (136) and (137), in which ⇒ and ⇏ are interpreted as “always implies" and “does not imply", respectively.

Example 136
Logical implications of supplementive-II in (134)
a. Jan goes home ⇒ Jan is satisfied
a'. Jan is satisfied ⇏ Jan goes home
b. Jan irons his shirts ⇒ his shirts are wet
b'. his shirts are wet ⇏ Jan irons them
Example 137
Logical implication of supplementive-I in (135)
a. Jan talks nonsense ⇏ Jan is drunk
a'. Jan is drunk ⇒Jan talks nonsense
b. Jan eats porridge ⇏ Jan is ill
b'. Jan is ill ⇒ Jan eats porridge

A minimal pair is given in (138): in (138a), the adjective precedes the clausal adverb altijd'always' and we are therefore dealing with a supplementive-I, which is also clear from the validity of the logical implication in (138a''); in (138b) the adjective nat follows the clausal adverb altijd and we are therefore dealing with a supplementive-II, which is also clear from the validity of the logical implication in (138b'). Note that the adjective glad is not a supplementive, but a resultative adjective.

Example 138
a. Jan strijkt zijn overhemden nat altijd glad.
supplementive-I
  Jan irons  his shirts  wet  always  smooth
  'Whenever his shirts are wet, Jan irons them smooth.'
a'. Jan irons his shirts smooth ⇏ his shirts are wet
a''. his shirts are wet ⇒ Jan irons his shirts smooth
b. Jan strijkt zijn overhemden altijd nat glad.
supplementive-II
  Jan irons  his shirts  always  wet  smooth
  'Whenever Jan irons his shirts smooth, they are wet.'
b'. Jan irons his shirts smooth ⇒ his shirts are wet
b''. his shirts are wet ⇏ Jan irons his shirts smooth

Observe that replacement of the universally quantified adverb altijd'always' in (134) and (135) by an adverb like meestal'generally' would have the semantic effect that the implications in (136) and (137) do not always hold but only generally. In other words, the arrow is then interpreted not as “always implies" but as “generally implies". In our representations, the semantic contribution of the clausal adverb is thus captured in the interpretation of the arrow; a formal semantic representation would involve an operator quantifying over time. In the examples below, we will generally make use of the adverb altijd, because this enable us to keep the semantic representations of these examples as simple as possible, that is, as simple material implications without making use of modal operators and possible worlds in the sense of predicate logic.
      The examples in (138) also show that supplementive-I and supplementive-II both precede the complementive, in this case the adjective glad'smooth'. The examples in (139) show that they also precede prepositional complements of the verb (unless the latter is assigned focus and moved leftward).

Example 139
a. Jan praat dronken altijd over zijn problemen.
supplementive-I
  Jan talks  drunk  always  about his problems
  'Whenever heʼs drunk, Jan talks about his problems.'
b. Jan praat altijd tevreden over zijn carrière.
supplementive-II
  Jan talks  always  satisfied  about his career
  'Whenever Jan talks about his career, he is/sounds satisfied.'

      Summarizing the discussion above, we may say that the use of supplementive-II, that is, placement of the adjective after the quantified adverb altijd, implies that if the proposition expressed by the verbal part of the clause is true, the predicate expressed by the adjective also applies (but not vice versa), whereas supplementive-I implies that the reversed situation holds.

[+]  B.  Co-occurrence of supplementive-I and -II

Supplementive-I and supplementive-II may co-occur within one clause. As is to be expected on the basis of the examples in the previous subsection, the former necessarily precedes the latter. Some examples are given in (140). The fact that supplementive-I and -II may co-occur suggests that they are not two different applications of one and the same grammatical function, but instantiations of two different grammatical functions. For completeness’ sake, the primed examples in (140) provide the valid implications; the reversed implications do not hold.

Example 140
Co-occurrence of supplementive-I and supplementive-II
a. Jan gaat dronken (altijd) ziek naar bed.
  Jan goes  drunk   always  sick  to bed
  'When drunk, Jan always goes to bed sick.'
a'. Jan is drunk ⇒ Jan goes to bed sick
b. Jan gaat ziek (altijd) humeurig naar kantoor.
  Jan goes  ill   always  bad.tempered  to office
  'When ill, Jan always goes to his office bad-tempered.'
b'. Jan is ill ⇒ Jan goes to his office bad-tempered

In (140), supplementive-I and –II are both predicated of the nominative subject Jan. The examples in (141) show that it is also possible that the two supplementives are predicated of different arguments in the clause. In (141a), supplementive-I nat'wet' is predicated of the direct object de overhemden'the shirts', whereas supplementive-II opgewekt'cheerful' is predicated of the subject Jan. In (141b), it is supplementive-I that is predicated of the subject, and supplementive-II that is predicated of the direct object.

Example 141
a. dat Jan de overhemden nat altijd opgewekt glad strijkt.
  that  Jan the shirts  wet  always  cheerful  smooth  irons
b. dat Jan de overhemden opgewekt altijd nat glad strijkt.
  that  Jan the shirts  cheerful  always  wet  smooth  irons

It is however not possible to have two supplementives-I referring to two different arguments in the clause. The (a)-examples in (142) are uninterpretable. It is less clear whether the same thing holds for supplementive-II: although the (b)-examples are marked, they are certainly better than the (a)-examples.

Example 142
a. * dat Jan de overhemden opgewekt nat altijd glad strijkt.
a'. * dat Jan de overhemden nat opgewekt altijd glad strijkt.
b. ? dat Jan de overhemden altijd opgewekt nat glad strijkt.
b'. ?? dat Jan de overhemden altijd nat opgewekt glad strijkt.

Note that (142a) improves if the supplementive opgewekt is followed by an intonation break, which is indicated in (143a) by means of a dash, but nat then seems to be interpreted as a supplementive-II. Perhaps this is due to the fact that frequency adverbs need not be interpreted as clausal adverbs, but can occasionally also be interpreted as VP-adverbs; cf. Section 8.2.2, sub III. Example (142a') also seems to improve somewhat if nat is followed by an intonation break.

Example 143
a. ? dat Jan de overhemden opgewekt — nat altijd glad strijkt.
  'When Jan is cheerful, he always irons his shirt smooth while wet.'
b. ?? dat Jan de overhemden nat — opgewekt altijd glad strijkt.
  'Whenever the shirts are wet, Jan irons them smooth cheerful.'
[+]  C.  Distribution of the two supplementive types

The distribution of supplementive-II and supplementive-I may depend on certain properties of the clause they are part of. These will be discussed in the following two subsections.

[+]  1.  Position of the event on the time axis

The examples in the previous subsections are all given in the present tense. It should be noted, however, that the present tense in these examples refers to an undetermined time interval and not to a specific point on the time axis (the “now"). When we revise these examples such that a punctual time reading is forced, e.g., by adding the adverb of time nu'now', it turns out that only supplementive-II can be used. This is illustrated in (144) by adding nu'now' to the examples in (132a) and (133a) from Subsection A.

Example 144
a. Jan gaat nu waarschijnlijk tevreden naar huis.
  Jan goes  now  probably  satisfied  to home
  Impossible: 'Probably, when Jan goes home now, heʼll be satisfied.'
  Available: 'Probably, Jan will be going home now, while heʼs satisfied.'
b. * Jan kraamt nu dronken waarschijnlijk onbegrijpelijke onzin uit.
  Jan speaks  now  drunk  probably  incomprehensible nonsense  prt.

As the English paraphrase in (144a) indicates, only the simultaneity reading is available for supplementive-II. In accordance with this, the conditional reading for the supplementive-I dronken in (144b) is also blocked, and the example is unacceptable as a result. This shows that whereas supplementive-II is compatible with both a simultaneity and a conditional reading, supplementive-I has only a conditional reading. Note that this also correctly predicts that the two supplementive phrases cannot be combined if nu'now' is present. This is illustrated in the examples in (145), which sharply contrast with those in (140).

Example 145
a. * Jan gaat nu dronken (waarschijnlijk) ziek naar bed.
  Jan goes  now  drunk   probably  sick  to bed
b. * Jan gaat nu ziek (waarschijnlijk) humeurig naar kantoor.
  Jan goes  now  ill   probably  bad-tempered  to office
[+]  2.  Modification

Modification of the verb (phrase) seems to be relevant, too. The examples in (146a&b) show that a VP like naar bed gaan can be combined both with supplementive-II and with supplementive-I: in (146a) the supplementive follows, and in (146b) it precedes the quantified adverb altijd'always'. However, as is demonstrated in the primed examples, if the VP is modified by an adverb like vroeg'early' or snel'quickly', the use of supplementive-II leads to a degraded result.

Example 146
a. Jan gaat altijd tevreden naar bed.
supplementive-II
  Jan goes  always  satisfied  to bed
  'Whenever Jan is going to bed, heʼs satisfied.'
a'. *? Jan gaat altijd tevreden vroeg naar bed.
  Jan goes  always  satisfied  early  to bed
b. Jan gaat dronken altijd naar bed.
supplementive-I
  Jan goes  drunk  always  to bed
  'Whenever Jan is drunk, he goes to bed.'
b'. Jan gaat dronken altijd vroeg naar bed.
  Jan goes  drunk  always  early   to bed
  'Whenever Jan is drunk, he goes to bed early.'

Something similar holds if we modify a resultative adjective. Consider again the examples in (138a&b), repeated here as (147a&b), which show that both types of supplementive can co-occur with the resultative adjective glad'smooth'. However, if we modify the resultative by the degree adverb erg'very', the use of supplementive-II becomes impossible. The same thing holds if we use the comparative form gladder (or the other degrees of comparison like het gladst/even glad als'the smoothest/as smooth as'). This is illustrated in the primed examples.

Example 147
a. Jan strijkt zijn overhemden altijd nat glad.
supplementive-II
  Jan irons  his shirts  always  wet  smooth
  'When Jan irons his shirts smooth, they are always wet.'
a'. * Jan strijkt zijn overhemden altijd nat erg glad/gladder.
  Jan irons  his shirts  always  wet  very smooth/smoother
  Intended: 'When Jan irons his shirts very smooth/smoother, they are always wet.'
b. Jan strijkt zijn overhemden nat altijd glad.
supplementive-I
  Jan irons  his shirts  wet  always  smooth
  'When his shirts are wet, Jan always irons them smooth.'
b'. Jan strijkt zijn overhemden nat altijd erg glad/gladder.
  Jan irons  his shirts  wet  always  very smooth/smoother
  'When his shirts are wet, Jan always irons them very smooth/smoother.'

      Although more research is needed before we can draw any firm conclusions, the contrasts between the (a)- and (b)-examples of (146) and (147) might be related to the fact that the modification of the VP and the resultative implicitly results in the comparison of two states of affairs. The primeless examples in (146), for instance, do not imply that Janʼs going to bed is an exceptional event, that is, something that only occurs under special conditions, whereas the primed examples in (146) at least suggest that Janʼs going to bed early is something special. Possibly, this implicit comparison forces a reading in which the state expressed by supplementives is the condition under which the exceptional event takes place, that is, that the implication is as given in (148a&b). The infelicity of (146a') may therefore be due to the fact that the actual implication relation associated with supplementive-II is instead the inverse one shown in (148a'). The acceptability of (146b'), on the other hand, follows from the fact that the supplementive adjective dronken'drunk' does express the condition under which the exceptional event of going to bed early may take place; cf. (148b&b').

Example 148
a. required interpretation of (146a'): Jan is satisfied ⇒ Jan goes to bed early
a'. actual interpretation of (146a'): Jan goes to bed early ⇒ Jan is satisfied
b. required interpretation of (146b'): Jan is drunk ⇒ Jan goes to bed early
b'. actual interpretation of (146'): Jan is drunk ⇒ Jan goes to bed early

Note that this account of the unacceptability of (146a') does not imply that supplementive-II can never be combined with a VP adverb: a manner adverb is blocked only if this results in implicit comparison. This seems to be correct, given the acceptability of example (149), which contains the intensifier flink'very'.

Example 149
Marie heeft hem boos flink uitgescholden.
  Marie has  him  angry  very  called.names

      A similar account for the contrast between the two primed examples in (146) can be given for the contrast between the primed examples of (147), that is, the fact that erg glad and gladder can only be combined with supplementive-I. Example (150a) shows that in the case of the comparative gladder'smoother' in (147b'), the alternative of the supplementive nat can made explicit by means of a dan-phrase. Observe that (150b) is not synonymous with (150a): whereas (150b) seems to imply that (150c) is true, this does not necessarily follow from (150a).

Example 150
a. Jan strijkt zijn overhemden nat altijd gladder dan droog.
  Jan irons  his shirts  wet  always  smoother  than  dry
  'When they are wet, Jan irons his shirt smoother than when they are dry.'
b. Jan strijkt zijn overhemden droog altijd minder glad dan nat.
  Jan irons  his shirts  wet  always  less smooth  than  wet
  'When they are dry, Jan irons his shirt less smooth than when they are wet.'
c. Jan strijkt zijn overhemden zowel droog als nat altijd glad.
  Jan irons  his shirts  both dry and wet  always  smooth
  'Regardless of whether theyʼre wet or dry, Jan irons his shirts smooth.'

For completeness’ sake, note that if the element nog'even' is placed in front of the comparative minder glad'less smooth' in (150b), the implication seems to be that Jan never succeeds in ironing his shirts smooth; cf. the discussion of this element nog in Section 4.1.1, sub II.

[+]  D.  Topicalization/Wh-movement of the two supplementive types

To conclude our discussion on the distribution of supplementive-I and -II, we will consider topicalization and wh-constructions, and show that the two types exhibit different behavior with respect to these movements.

[+]  1.  Topicalization

The fact that the primeless examples in (151) are acceptable shows that both types of supplementive can be topicalized. However, if we add a clausal adverb, as in the primed examples, topicalization of supplementive-II seems to give rise to an unacceptable result. Insofar as (151a') is interpretable, tevreden'satisfied' seems to act as supplementive-I: the interpretation that is forced upon us is “when Jan is satisfied, he goes home".

Example 151
a. Tevreden gaat Jan naar huis.
supplementive-II
  satisfied  goes  Jan to home
  'Jan goes home, while heʼs satisfied.'
a'. ?? Tevreden gaat Jan altijd naar huis.
  satisfied  goes  Jan always  to home
b. Dronken kraamt Jan onbegrijpelijke onzin uit.
supplementive-I
  drunk speaks  Jan incomprehensible nonsense  prt.
  'When heʼs drunk, Jan talks nonsense.'
b'. Dronken kraamt Jan altijd onbegrijpelijke onzin uit.
  drunk  speaks  Jan always  incomprehensible nonsense  prt.

The unacceptability of (151a') suggests that the presence of a clausal adverb blocks topicalization of supplementive-II by making the VP into a weak island for extraction of supplementive-II. If this is indeed the case, we correctly predict that the adjective dronken'drunk' in (152a) must be interpreted as a supplementive-I; example (152a) corresponds to (152b), not to (152c). This becomes especially clear in these examples because (152c), but not (152a&b), allows the hyperbolic interpretation “Jan is always drunk".

Example 152
a. Dronken zwalkt Jan altijd over straat.
  drunk  wanders  Jan always  over street
  Available reading: 'When heʼs drunk, Jan always wanders about the streets.'
  Not: 'When Jan wanders about the streets, heʼs drunk/Jan is always drunk.'
b. Jan zwalkt dronken altijd over straat.
  Jan wanders  drunk  always  over the.street
  'When heʼs drunk, Jan always wanders about the streets.'
c. Jan zwalkt altijd dronken over straat.
  Jan wanders  always drunk  over the.street
  'When Jan wanders about the streets, heʼs drunk/Jan is always drunk.'

Of course, if the adverb altijd is dropped in (152a), as in (153a), both readings are available. This example can however be disambiguated by means of intonation: if assigned accent, the adjective dronken is preferably interpreted as a supplementive-I; if not, the interpretation as a supplementive-II is most salient.

Example 153
a. Dronken zwalkt Jan over straat.
b. Dronken zwalkt Jan over straat.
  Preferred reading: 'When heʼs drunk, Jan always wanders about the streets.'
c. Dronken zwalkt Jan over straat.
  Preferred reading: 'Jan wanders about the streets, while heʼs drunk.'

      The claim that the clausal adverb makes the VP into a weak island for extraction of supplementive-II also correctly predicts the contrast between (154b) and (154c). It is not clear in this case, however, whether it is the clausal adverb that is responsible for this contrast, given that the same facts can be observed if the adverb is absent. This suggests that supplementive-I also blocks topicalization of supplementive-II (which can probably be seen as a relativized-minimality effect).

Example 154
a. Jan gaat dronken altijd ziek naar bed.
  Jan goes  drunk  always  sick  to bed
  'Whenever heʼs drunk, Jan goes to bed sick.'
b. Dronken gaat Jan (altijd) ziek naar bed.
c. * Ziek gaat Jan dronken (altijd) naar bed.
[+]  2.  Wh-movement

The wh-constructions in (155), which correspond to the primeless examples in (151), show that only supplementive-II can be questioned by means of the interrogative intensifier hoe'how'; wh-movement of supplementive-I is never possible.

Example 155
a. Hoe tevreden gaat Jan naar huis?
  how  satisfied  goes  Jan to home
b. * Hoe dronken kraamt Jan onbegrijpelijke onzin uit?
  how  drunk  speaks  Jan incomprehensible nonsense  prt.

However, as in the case of topicalization, questioning of supplementive-II is blocked if it crosses a clausal adverb or a supplementive-I. This is illustrated in the (b)-examples of (156), which correspond to (154c).

Example 156
a. * Hoe dronken gaat Jan (altijd) ziek naar bed?
  how drunk  goes  Jan  always  sick  to bed
b. * Hoe ziek gaat Jan (*altijd) naar bed?
  how ill  goes Jan  always  to bed
b'. * Hoe ziek gaat Jan (*dronken) naar bed?
  how ill  goes Jan  drunk  to bed

The contrast in acceptability between the topicalization constructions in (151b') and (154b), on the one hand, and the wh-constructions in (155b) and (156a), on the other, may be related to the fact that supplementive-I cannot easily be modified by an intensifier: after all, the adverb hoe is the interrogative counterpart of the degree adverb erg in (157); cf. Section 3.1.2, sub IV.

Example 157
a. *? Jan gaat erg dronken altijd ziek naar bed.
  Jan goes  very drunk  always  ill  to bed
b. Jan gaat dronken altijd erg ziek naar bed.
  Jan goes  drunk  always  very ill  to bed

The examples in (158) further show that supplementive-II, but not supplementive-I, can be questioned by means of the wh-element hoe'how'. The examples in (159) show that supplementive-I can at least marginally be questioned by means of wanneer'when'; this contrast may be related to the fact illustrated by the doubly primed (b)-examples that wanneer can question a condition, whereas hoe cannot.

Example 158
a. Hoe gaat Jan naar huis?
questioning of supplementive-II
  how  went  Jan to home
a'. Tevreden.
answer
  satisfied
b. Hoe gaat Jan altijd ziek naar bed?
questioning of supplementive-I
  how  goes  Jan always  ill  to bed
b'. * Dronken.
answer
  drunk
b''. * Als hij dronken is.
answer
  When  he  drunk is
Example 159
a. Wanneer gaat Jan naar huis?
questioning of supplementive-II
  when  goes  Jan to home
a'. * Tevreden.
answer
  satisfied
b. Wanneer gaat Jan altijd ziek naar bed?
questioning of supplementive-I
  when  goes  Jan always  ill  to bed
b'. ? Dronken.
answer
  drunk
b''. Als hij dronken is.
answer
  when  he drunk  is
[+]  IV.  Restrictions on the adjective and the verb

There are several restrictions on the occurrence of supplementives. First, the set-denoting adjective must refer to a transitory property, that is, it cannot be an individual-level predicate. Second, there are several (sometimes poorly understood) restrictions on the syntactic frame a supplementive may occur in.

[+]  A.  Restrictions on the adjective: stage- vs. individual-level predicates

Adjectives that refer to an “inherent" or “permanent" property of the modified noun phrase do not give rise to a felicitous result if used as a supplementive. This is illustrated in (160) by means of the contrast between the stage-level adjective vermoeid'tired' and the individual-level adjective intelligent, which denote a temporary and a more permanent property, respectively.

Example 160
a. Jan gaat vermoeid/%intelligent naar school.
  Jan goes  tired/intelligent  to school
  'Jan goes to school tired/intelligent.'
b. Jan gaat vermoeid/%intelligent nooit naar school.
  Jan goes  tired/intelligent  never  to school
c. Jan gaat nooit vermoeid/%intelligent naar school.
  Jan goes  never  tired/intelligent  to school

The contrasts in the examples in (160) are probably related to the fact that similar contrasts can be observed in their paraphrases in (161). The conditional paraphrases in (161b-c) associated with (160b-c), for example, are equally strange: apparently, both the when- and the then-clause of a conditional when(ever) ... then-sentence must denote temporary situations in everyday use. Something similar holds in case of the simultaneity reading of (160a), which can be paraphrased as in (161a).

Example 161
a. Jan gaat naar school terwijl hij vermoeid/%intelligent is.
  Jan goes  to school  while  he  tired/intelligent  is
  'Jan goes to school, while heʼs tired/intelligent.'
b. Als Jan vermoeid/%intelligent is, dan gaat hij nooit naar school.
  if  Jan tired/Intelligent  is  then  goes  he  never  to school
  'Whenever Jan is tired/intelligent, he doesnʼt go to school.'
c. Als Jan naar school gaat, dan is hij nooit vermoeid/%intelligent.
  if  Jan to school  goes  then  is he  never  tired/intelligent
  'Whenever Jan goes to school, he isnʼt tired/intelligent.'

Note that example (162) is not a counterexample to our claim since the adjective intelligent is not predicated of the noun phrase Jan in this case. The adjective instead modifies the VP and we are therefore dealing with a manner adverb; cf. Section 8.2.2.

Example 162
Jan loste het raadsel intelligent op.
  Jan solved  the riddle  intelligently  prt.
'Jan solved the riddle in an intelligent way.'

Observe further that we do not claim that individual-level adjectives can never be used in conditionals; the examples in (163) show that they can. The difference between (161b-c) and (163a) is that the latter does not involve quantification over times due to the fact that the frequency adverb nooit'never' is replaced by the negative marker niet'not'. Note also that the appropriate translations of the examples in (163) involve the connectives if ..., then ..., and not when ..., then ...; see the discussion below example (133) in Subsection IIIA.

Example 163
a. Als Jan intelligent is, dan gaat hij niet naar school.
  if  Jan intelligent  is   then  goes  he  not  to school
  'if Jan is tired/intelligent, he doesnʼt go to school.'
b. Als Jan naar school gaat, dan is hij niet intelligent.
  if  Jan to school  goes  then  is he  not  intelligent
  'If Jan goes to school, he isnʼt tired/intelligent.'
[+]  B.  Restrictions on the verb

The verb must denote an action: if a supplementive is added to a clause that contains a stative verb, such as kennen'to know', the use of a supplementive adjective gives rise to a severely degraded result.

Example 164
a. Jan leerde vermoeid zijn huiswerk.
  Jan  learned  tired  his homework
b. *? Jan kende vermoeid zijn huiswerk.
  Jan  knew  tired  his homework

Further, the use of a supplementive often gives rise to an unacceptable result if the verb is intransitive, as in (165a). If we are dealing with an unaccusative verb, on the other hand, the result is fully acceptable, as is shown by (165b).

Example 165
a. * Jan heeft razend/vrolijk gelopen.
  Jan has  furious/merry  walked
b. Jan is razend/vrolijk vertrokken.
  Jan is  furious/merry  left
  'Jan left furious/merry.'

Since the addition of a predicative locational PP may turn an intransitive verb of movement into an unaccusative verb, we expect that the addition of such a PP to the verb lopen licenses the presence of a supplementive. That this expectation is borne out is shown in (166a). Example (166b) shows that, for some reason, the predicative PP naar de directeur cannot be topicalized if a supplementive is present; this is possible if the supplementive is omitted.

Example 166
a. Jan is razend naar de directeur gelopen.
  Jan is furious  to the director  walked
b. Naar de directeur is Jan (*razend) gelopen.
  to the director  is Jan   furious  walked

Note that the addition of a locational adverbial phrase like over straat also seems to improve example (165a), but it might well be that in this case the marginal status of (167a) is the result of interpreting the adjectives razend/vrolijk as manner adverbs. Example (167b) shows that this is especially possible with the adjective vrolijk'merry'; this sentence does not express that the subject of the clause is merry, but that the laughing/chattering makes a merry impression. See Section 8.2.2, sub I, for more discussion.

Example 167
a. Hij heeft ?razend/(?)vrolijk over straat gelopen.
  he  has   furious/merry  on the.street  walked
b. Jan lacht/babbelt vrolijk.
  Jan  laughs/chatters  merrily

      The primeless examples in (168) show that supplementives can readily be used with transitive verbs and verbs that take a prepositional complement. However, if the direct or the prepositional object is omitted the result degrades, unless the sentence contains a progressive auxiliary like zitten'to sit'.

Example 168
a. Jan las bezorgd ??(de brief).
  Jan read  worried      the letter
a'. Jan zat bezorgd (de brief) te lezen.
  Jan sat  worried   the letter  to read
  'Worried, Jan was reading the letter.'
b. Jan wachtte ongerust ?(op zijn vader).
  Jan waited  worried    for his father
b'. Jan zat ongerust (op zijn vader) te wachten.
  Jan sat worried   for his father  to wait
  'Worried, Jan was waiting (for his father).'
References:
  • Haeseryn, Walter, Romijn, Kirsten, Geerts, Guido, Rooij, Jaap de & Toorn, Maarten C. van den1997Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunstGroningenNijhoff
Suggestions for further reading ▼
phonology
  • Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
Show more ▼
morphology
  • Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
Show more ▼
syntax
  • Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
Show more ▼
cite
print
This topic is the result of an automatic conversion from Word and may therefore contain errors.
A free Open Access publication of the corresponding volumes of the Syntax of Dutch is available at OAPEN.org.