• Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
Show full table of contents
9.2.1. Past and present participles
quickinfo

Section 9.1 has shown that participles can be divided into two groups: present participles like vechtend'fighting' and past/passive participles like gekust'kissed'. Both types can be used as attributive adjectives, which is clear from the fact that they are inflected in prenominal position; see Table 1 and Table 3 in Section 9.1, subsection I starts with a discussion of the verb types of the participles that can be attributively used. Since attributively used participles often exhibit verbal behavior, subsection II continues with an investigation of the categorial status of attributively used participles, subsection III concludes with a brief discussion of the temporal and aspectual properties of noun phrases with an attributively used participle.

readmore
[+]  I.  Verb types

Whether a certain past/passive or present participle can be used attributively depends on the verb type involved; we will see that this is related to the fact that attributively used present and past/passive participles must enter into a well-defined logical relation with the noun they modify; cf. Koster (1978) and Hoekstra (1984a).

[+]  A.  Transitive verbs

That attributively used present and past/passive participles enter into different logical relations with the nouns they modify can be illustrated by means of the transitive sentence in (18a) and the corresponding attributive constructions. If we use the present participle of the verb slachten'to butcher' attributively, the modified noun corresponds to the subject of the sentence; (18b) expresses that it is the butcher that slaughters the lambs. If we use the past/passive participle, however, the head noun corresponds to the direct object of the sentence, as shown in (18c).

Example 18
Participles of transitive verbs
a. De slager slacht de lammeren.
  the butcher  slaughters  the lambs
b. de (de lammeren) slachtende slager
  the   the lambs  slaughtering  butcher
  'the butcher that is slaughtering (the lambs)'
c. de (door de slager) geslachte lammeren
  the    by the butcher  slaughtered  lambs
  'the lambs that are slaughtered (by the butcher)'

The examples in (18) therefore show that the attributively used present and past/passive participle enter into different logical relations with the noun they modify. This is confirmed by the fact that the examples in (19) are only compatible with the less common readings on which the butcher functions as a theme and the lambs as the agent.

Example 19
a. # de geslachte slager
  the  slaughtered  butcher
  Not: 'the butcher that is slaughtering (the lambs)'
b. # de slachtende lammeren
  the  slaughtering  lambs
  Not: 'the lambs that are slaughtered (by the butcher)'

      The noun phrase de lammeren in (18b) and the agentive door-phrase in (18c), which correspond to, respectively, the direct object and the subject of the sentence in (18a), can be omitted. This seems to be related to the fact that the noun phrase de lammeren can in principle also be dropped in (18a), and that the door-phrase is optional in the corresponding passive construction. If an argument is obligatory in a transitive construction, as in (20a), it must normally also be realized in the attributive construction. The number signs in (20) indicate that the examples are acceptable without the noun phrase de vazen. but only if the nominative argument is interpreted as theme (“the boy is breaking down"), which is of course not relevant here.

Example 20
a. De jongen breekt #(de vazen).
  the boy  breaks     the vases
  'The boy is breaking the vases.'
b. de #(de vazen) brekende jongen
  the     the vases  breaking  boy
  'the boy who is breaking the vases'

      Not all transitive verbs that have a participle can be used attributively. The (a)-examples in (21) show, for instance, that the present and past/passive participle of main verb hebben'to have' cannot be used attributively, and the (b)-examples show that the same thing holds for the present (but not the past/passive) participle of the verb krijgen'to get'.

Example 21
a. Jan heeft nog een platenspeler.
  Jan has  still  a record player
  'Jan still has a record player.'
b. Peter kreeg een CD-speler.
   Peter got  a CD-player
  'Peter was given a CD-player.'
a'. * de een platenspeler hebbende man
  the  a record player  having  man
b'. ?? de een CD-speler krijgende man
   the  a CD player  getting  man
a''. * de gehadde platenspeler
  the  had  record player
b''. de gekregen CD-speler
   the  gotten  CD player

Note in passing that the idiomatic combinations gelijk hebben'to be right' and gelijk krijgen'to be backed up' can be used attributively with the present participle hebbende. Attributive use of the past/passive participles is categorically excluded, however.

Example 22
a. (?) een altijd gelijk hebbende jongen
  an  always  right  having  boy
  'a boy who is always right'
a'. * het (door de jongen) gehadde gelijk
b. (?) een altijd gelijk krijgende jongen
  an always right  getting  boy
  'a boy with whom everybody always agrees in the end'
b'. * het (door de jongen) gekregen gelijk

      The examples in (23) show that the attributive use of participles of stative verbs like weten'to know' and kennen'to be familiar with' often give rise to a degraded result as well.

Example 23
a. Jan weet het antwoord.
  Jan  knows  the answer
b. Jan kent dat restaurant
   Jan   knows  that restaurant
a'. ? de het antwoord wetende man
  the  the answer  knowing man
b'. ? de dat restaurant kennende man
   the  that restaurant  knowing  man
a''. ? het geweten antwoord
  the  known  answer
b''. * het gekende restaurant
   the  known  restaurant

The degraded status of the primed and doubly-primed examples in (21) and (23) may be related to the fact that these transitive verbs cannot be used in the passive voice either. We leave it to future research to establish whether this is the proper generalization.

[+]  B.  Ditransitive verbs

The examples in (24) show that the participles of ditransitive verbs essentially behave like transitive verbs. The only thing that needs mentioning here is that the indirect object can be expressed overtly in the attributive construction. The question mark in (24b) intends to express that many speakers prefer to realize the indirect object by means of an aan-PP if it is a full noun phrase.

Example 24
a. Jan geeft de jongen/hem een boek.
  Jan gives  the boy/him  a book
b. het ?(aan) de jongen gegeven boek
b'. het (aan) hem gegeven boek
  the    to  the boy/him  given  book

We will see in Subsection I1, however, that there is more to say about ditransitive verbs, but in order not to complicate matters unnecessarily we will confine ourselves here to the examples in (24).

[+]  C.  Intransitive verbs and verbs that take a PP-complement

Since past/passive participles of transitive verbs cannot be used attributively if the head of the noun phrase corresponds to the subject, we expect that in the case of intransitive verbs only present participles can be used attributively. This expectation is indeed borne out, as is illustrated in (25) by means of the intransitive verbs huilen'to weep' and dromen'to dream'.

Example 25
Participles of intransitive verbs
a. De jongen huilt.
  the boy  weeps
b. het meisje droomt.
   the girl  dreams
a'. de huilende jongen
  the  weeping  boy
b'. het dromende meisje
   the dreaming  girl
a''. * de gehuilde jongen
  the  wept  boy
b''. # het gedroomde meisje
  the  dreamt  girl

The examples in (26) show that verbs with a PP-complement essentially behave like intransitive verbs. Given that examples of the type in (26c) do occur in English (the looked-at portrait), the ungrammaticality of (26c) seems to be related to the fact that Dutch does not allow pseudo-passives; see the contrast between English The portrait was stared at and Dutch *Het portret werd naar gestaard.

Example 26
a. De jongen staarde naar het portret.
  the boy  stared  at the portrait
b. de naar het portret starende jongen
  the  at the portrait  staring  boy
c. * het door de jongen (naar) gestaarde portret
  the  by the boy   at  looked  portrait
[+]  D.  Monadic unaccusative verbs

Subjects of unaccusative verbs are referred to in this work as DO-subjects, since they are assumed to originate in a similar position and stand in a similar logical relation to the verb as direct objects of transitive verbs; subjects of unaccusative verbs and objects of transitive verbs are both themes. Given this, it will not come as a surprise that past/passive participles of unaccusative like verbs sterven ‘to die’ or struikelen'to stumble' in the doubly-primed examples of (27) differ from past/passive participles of intransitive verbs like huilen'to weep' or dromen'to dream' in (25) in that they can modify nouns that correspond to their subject; as expected, the former behave just like the past/passive participles of transitive verb slachten'to butcher' in (18) towards their objects. The primed examples in (27) show, however, that present participles of unaccusative verbs are unlike present participles of transitive verbs in that they can modify nouns that correspond to their theme argument.

Example 27
Participles of monadic unaccusative verbs
a. De jongen sterft.
  the boy dies
b. De jongen struikelt.
  the boy stumbles
a'. de stervende jongen
  the dying boy
  'the boy that is dying'
b'. de struikelende jongen
  the stumbling boy
  'the boy that is stumbling'
a''. de gestorven jongen
  the died boy
  'the boy that has died'
b''. de gestruikelde jongen
  the stumbled boy
  'the boy that has stumbled'

In short, DO-subjects behave like direct objects if it comes to attributive modification by a past/passive participle but like subjects of (in)transitive verbs when it comes to attributive modification by a present participle. This shows that the attributive use of past/passive participles is related to the thematic function (agent/theme) of the argument that corresponds to the modified noun, whereas the attributive use of present participles is instead related to the syntactic function (subject/object) of the argument related to the modified noun.
      The examples in (28) show that the present and past/passive participles of unaccusatively used motion verbs, like springen'to jump', can also be used in attributive position. Attributive use of the past/passive participle requires that the predicatively used PP be present: omitting the directional postposition PP de sloot in in (28c) results in unacceptability. This is, of course, not surprising given that motion verbs without a complementive PP are always intransitive.

Example 28
a. Jan springt de sloot in.
  Jan jumps  the ditch  into
  'Jan jumps into the ditch.'
b. de de sloot in springende jongen
  the  the ditch  into  jumping  boy
  'the boy that is jumping into the ditch'
c. de *(de sloot in) gesprongen jongen
  the      the ditch  into  jumped  boy
  'The boy that has jumped into the ditch.'

      The English renderings of the attributive examples in (27) and (28) intend to express that the difference between the attractively used past and present participles is aspectual in nature: whereas past participles express perfective aspect in the sense that the process involved is completed, present participles express durative or imperfective aspect in the sense that the process is still ongoing. Observe that the past/passive and present participles in (18) and (25) exhibit the same aspectual difference.

[+]  E.  Dyadic unaccusative verbs

Dyadic unaccusative verbs, which are generally called nom-dat verbs, differ from the monadic unaccusative verbs discussed in the previous subsection in that they take an additional object, which would be assigned dative case in German; cf. Section V2.1.3. The behavior of the participles of these nom-dat verbs seems to depend on auxiliary selection. The examples in (29) show that the present and the past participle can both be used attributively if the nom-dat verb selects the perfect auxiliary zijn.

Example 29
Participles of nom-dat verbs that select the perfect auxiliary zijn
a. De vakantie is ons goed bevallen.
  the holiday  is us  good  pleased
  'The holiday (has) pleased us very much.'
b. de ons goed bevallende vakantie
  the  us  good  pleasing  holiday
  'the holiday that pleases us very much'
c. de ons goed bevallen vakantie
  the  us  good  pleasing  holiday
  'the holiday that has pleased us very much'

The examples in (30), on the other hand, show that attributive use of the past/perfect participle is excluded if the auxiliary hebben is selected; only the present participle gives rise to an acceptable result in this case.

Example 30
Participles of nom-dat verbs that select the perfect auxiliary hebben
a. De moed heeft ons ontbroken.
  the courage  has  us  lacked
  'We lacked the courage.'
b. de ons ontbrekende moed
  the  us  lacking  courage
  'the courage we lack'
c. *? de ons ontbroken moed
  the  us  lacked  courage
[+]  F.  Psychological verbs

Like the nom-dat verbs discussed in the previous subsection, object experiencer psych-verbs like opwinden'to excite' in (31a) arguably have a derived subject; cf. Section V2.5.1.3. With respect to the attributive use of their participles, however, such psych-verbs behave like regular transitive verbs like slachten'to butcher' in (18): the present participle opwindend'exciting' in (31b) modifies a head noun that corresponds to the nominative subject, whereas the past participle opgewonden'excited' in (31c) modifies a head noun that corresponds to the object of the active verb.

Example 31
Participles of object experiencer psych-verbs
a. Het avontuur wond de jongen op.
  the adventure  excited  the boy  prt.
  'The adventure excited the boy.'
b. het (de jongen) opwindende avontuur
  the   the boy  prt.-exciting  adventure
c. de opgewonden jongen
  the  excited  boy

Note that, although the participles of psych-verbs like opwinden behave on a par with transitive verbs if it comes to attributive use, the present participles of these verbs exhibit different behavior in predicative constructions: the examples in (32) show that present participles of psych-verbs can be used in copular constructions, whereas present participles of transitive verbs cannot; see Section 9.3.1, sub II, for more discussion.

Example 32
a. * De slager is slachtend.
  the butcher  is  slaughtering
b. Het avontuur is erg opwindend.
  the adventure  is very exciting
[+]  G.  Verbs with a resultative complementive

The examples in (33) show that participles of verbs in resultative constructions can be used attributively, provided that the complementive adjective is present as well; see Section 6.2.1, sub II, for a comprehensive discussion of the resultative construction.

Example 33
a. Jan loopt zijn schoenen *(kapot).
  Jan walks  his shoes   worn.out
b. de zijn schoenen *(kapot) lopende jongen
  the  his shoes  worn.out  walking  boy
c. de *(kapot) gelopen schoenen
  the  worn.out  walked  shoes

The fact that the noun phrase zijn schoenen'his shoes' in (33a) is not an argument of the intransitive verb lopen'to walk' but the logical subject of the adjective kapot'worn-out' conclusively shows that nouns modified by an attributively used past/passive participle need not correspond to arguments of the corresponding active verb. The same thing can be argued on the basis of the transitive (b)-examples in (34), given that the noun phrase de kwast clearly does not function as the theme of the transitive verb verven'to paint'.

Example 34
a. Jan verft de muur (geel).
  Jan  paints  the wall  yellow
b. Jan verft de kwast #(kapot).
  Jan  paints  the brush    worn.out
a'. de de muur (geel) vervende man
  the  the wall yellow  painting  man
b'. de de kwast #(kapot) vervende man
  the  the brush worn.out  painting  man
a''. de (geel) geverfde muur
  the yellow painted  wall
b''. de #(kapot) geverfde kwast
  the  worn.out  painted  brush

For completeness’ sake, we give comparable examples with the unaccusative verb slibben in (35).

Example 35
a. De sloot slibt *(dicht).
  the ditch  silts     shut
b. de *(dicht) slibbende sloot
  the      shut  silting  ditch
c. de *(dicht) geslibde sloot
  the      shut  silted  ditch
[+]  H.  Summary

The findings on the attributive use of the past/passive and present participles from the previous subsections are summarized in Table 4. The headers indicate that all present participles express durative aspect, whereas all past/passive participles express perfective aspect. The second and third columns indicate what the syntactic function of the modified noun is in the corresponding active sentence: the present and past/passive participles of a transitive verb, for instance, can be used to modify a noun that corresponds to, respectively, the subject and the direct object of the corresponding active verb. The marking n.a. simply expresses that the past/passive participle in question cannot be used attributively. Table 4 does not include our finding from Subsection G, that participles of verbs occurring in resultative constructions can also be used attributively.

Table 4: Verb types and attributively used adjectival participles
verb type present participle
durative aspect
past/passive participle
perfective aspect
intransitive verb subject n.a.
(di-)transitive verb subject direct object
unaccusative verb DO-subject DO-subject
nom-dat verbs that select zijn DO-subject DO-subject
nom-dat verbs that select hebben DO-subject n.a.
object experiencer psych-verbs (derived) subject object
[+]  I.  Some special cases

This subsection discusses two special cases. The first involves ditransitive verbs like betalen'to pay' and voeren'to feed'; we will show that the attributively used past/passive participles of these verbs are able to modify not only the theme of the active verb, but also the goal. The second involves contraction verbs like gaan'to go': we will show that the past/passive and present participles of these verbs cannot be used in prenominal attributive position.

[+]  1.  Ditransitive verbs

All of the examples in the previous subsections, with the exception of the resultative constructions discussed in Subsection IG, involve modification of a noun corresponding to the agent (subject) or the theme (direct object/DO-subject) of the relevant verbal construction. At first sight, this seems to exhaust the possibilities; the participles corresponding to the ditransitive verb aanbieden'to offer' in (36a), for instance, cannot modify the noun that corresponds to the goal argument (indirect object) of the verb. The number signs indicate that the noun directeur'the manager' in (36b&c) can be interpreted as corresponding to, respectively, the agent and the theme of the active verb, but this is of course not relevant for our present discussion.

Example 36
a. De man bood de directeur een groot bedrag aan.
  the man  offered  the manager  a large sum  prt.
  'The man offered the manager a large sum.'
b. # de een groot bedrag aanbiedende directeur
  the  a large sum  prt.-offered  manager
  Intended meaning: 'the manager that was (being) offered a large sum'
c. # de aangeboden directeur
  the  prt.-offered  manager
  Intended meaning: 'the manager that has been offered (something)'

Some care must be taken, however, with a small class of ditransitive verbs that are special in that they do not require that the direct object be present. Two examples are the verbs betalen'to pay' and voeren'to feed' in (37).

Example 37
a. De firma betaalt zijn werknemers (een goed loon).
  the firm  pays  his employees   a good wage
  'The firm pays its employees a good wage.'
b. De bezoeker voerde de aap (pindaʼs).
  the visitor  fed  the monkey   peanuts

The number agreement on the finite verb in the primeless examples in (38) shows that, as usual, it is the direct object that is promoted to subject in the passive construction. The primed examples show, however, that if the direct object is absent, it is the goal argument that is instead promoted to subject.

Example 38
a. De werknemers wordtsg/*?wordenpl een goed loon betaald.
  the employees  is/are  a food wage  paid
a'. De werknemers worden betaald.
  the employees  are  paid
b. Er wordenpl/??wordtsg de aap pindaʼs gevoerd.
  there  are/is  the monkey  peanuts  fed
b'. De aap wordt gevoerd.
  the monkey  is  fed

This special behavior in the passive construction is reflected in the corresponding attributive constructions. In the primeless examples in (39) the modified noun corresponds to the theme and in the primed examples it corresponds to the goal of the verb.

Example 39
a. het (aan de werknemers) betaalde loon
  the  to the employees  paid  wage
a'. de betaalde werknemers
  the  paid  employees
b. de (aan de aap) gevoerde pindaʼs
  the to the monkey  fed  peanuts
b'. de gevoerde aap
  the  fed  monkey

One might propose that the availability of the primed examples in (38) and (39) is due to the fact that we are dealing with homophonous verbs: verbs like betalen'to pay' and voeren can be ditransitive verbs with a theme and a goal but they can also be monotransitive verbs that realize their goal argument ( zijn werknemers/de aap) as a direct object. A potential problem for such a proposal would be that the primed examples are marked but acceptable if the direct object is realized, as in (40).

Example 40
a. ? de een goed loon betaalde werknemers
  the  a good wage  paid  employees
b. ? de pindaʼs gevoerde aap
  the  peanuts  fed  monkey

The relative acceptability of the examples in (40) raises some doubt about our earlier conclusion reached on the basis of example (36c) that past/passive participles of ditransitive verbs cannot be used attributively if the noun corresponds to the goal, that is, the indirect object of the active verb. This doubt may even increase once we realize that (36c) considerably improves if the direct object of the corresponding verbal construction is added, as in (41). Note, however, that most (but not all) speakers still consider (41) to be marked.

Example 41
? de een groot bedrag aangeboden directeur
  the  a large sum  prt.-offered  manager
'the manager that has been offered a large sum'

If real, the contrast between (36c) and (41) can perhaps be related to the fact that besides the regular passive in (42a), Dutch has also the so-called krijgen- or semi-passive in (42b), in which it is the indirect object of the ditransitive construction is promoted to subject; cf. V3.2.1. Observe that the direct object must be overtly expressed in (42b), just as in (41). This possibly accounts for the fact that in (36c) the head noun can only be interpreted as corresponding to the theme: after all, the indirect object, but not the direct object, is generally an optionally realized argument; cf. (42a').

Example 42
a. De directeurs werd een groot bedrag aangeboden.
  the managers  gotsg  a large sum  prt.-offered
  'A large sum of money was offered to the managers.'
a'. Er werd (de directeurs) een groot bedrag aangeboden.
  there  was  the managers  a large sum  prt.-offered
  'A large sum was offered (to the managers).'
b. De directeurs kregen *(een groot bedrag) aangeboden.
  the managers  gotpl    a large sum  prt.-offered
  'The managers were offered a large sum of money.'
[+]  2.  Contraction verbs

This subsection concludes our discussion of the restrictions imposed on attributively used participles with a brief discussion of contraction verbs. These verbs have a stem that ends in a long vowel and an infinitive form that involves -n instead of the regular -en ending. The present participle of these verbs is formed by adding -nd to the stem. The past/passive participles end in a low vowel + /n/. Some examples are given in Table (43).

Example 43
Contraction verbs
infinitive stem present participle past participle
doen‘to do’ doe doend gedaan
gaan‘to go’ ga gaand gegaan
slaan‘to hit’ sla slaand geslagen (irregular)
staan‘to stand’ sta staand gestaan
vergaan‘to decay/be wrecked’ verga vergaand vergaan
zien‘to see’ zien ziend gezien

      The examples in (44) show that the present participles of these contraction verbs normally cannot readily be used attributively.

Example 44
a. * de de afwas doende man
  the  the dishes  doing  man
c. * een vergaand lijk
   a  decaying  corpse
b. * de de hond slaande man
  the  the dog  hitting  man
d. * een de kust ziende man
   a  the coast  seeing  man

      The examples in (45) seem to constitute counterexamples to this claim, but it should be noted that these involve more or lesss fixed combinations.

Example 45
a. een staande lamp
  standing  lamp
  'a floor lamp (on a foot)'
b. een meegaand karakter
  with.going  character
  'a docile character'

This is particularly clear in (46a), in which the modified noun does not have the function of subject of the verb corresponding to the present participle: it is not the reception but the people who are standing. This kind of “metaphoric" use of the present participle is abundantly found in Dutch: another clear example of this use, which involves a regular form of the present participle, is given in (46b): again, it is not the buffet that is walking, but the people who are supposed to collect their food.

Example 46
a. een staande receptie
  standing  reception
  'a reception where people stand'
b. een lopend buffet
  walking  buffet
  'a buffet'

      The attributive use of past participles of contraction verbs generally yields degraded results as well. Possibly this has a phonological/morphological ground: the result is always degraded in contexts that require the attributive -e ending to be present, whereas the result is sometimes much better in singular indefinite noun phrases headed by a neuter noun, where this ending is absent. This is illustrated in (47) by comparing the singular and plural counterparts of noun phrases headed by a neuter noun.

Example 47
a. (?) een naar Rome gegaan echtpaar
  to Rome  gone  couple
a'. * naar Rome gegane echtparen
   to Rome  gone  couples
b. een vergaan schip
  wrecked ship
b'. ?? vergane schepen
   wrecked  ships

      As in the case of the present participles, there are more or lesss idiomatic expressions that are acceptable. Some examples are given in (48).

Example 48
a. Gedane zaken nemen geen keer.
  done business  take  no turn
  'Itʼs no use crying over spilt milk.'
b. een geziene gast
  seen  guest
  'a popular visitor'
c. van voorbijgaande aard
  of  passing  nature
d. de voorafgaande dagen
  the  preceding  days

In these examples the participles are probably true adjectives, which may be supported by the minimal pair in (49): example (49a) involves an attributively used participle and the result is degraded; the negative prefix on- in (49b) unambiguously shows that we are dealing with an adjective and the result is perfectly fine (which is confirmed by the fact that the frequency of inflected onvoorziene on the internet is extremely high).

Example 49
a. ?? een niet voorziene omstandigheid
  not  foreseen  circumstance
b. een onvoorziene omstandigheid
  an  unforeseen  circumstance

Note that the judgments given in this subsection are based on introspection and that many of the examples of the sort we have given here as degraded can readily be found on the internet. More research is therefore needed and it may be useful to investigate whether there is a dichotomy between speech and written text in this respect.

[+]  II.  Categorial status

Subsection I has shown that one of the differences between attributively used present and past/passive participles is aspectual in nature: present participles express durative aspect, whereas the past/passive participles express perfective aspect. The fact that these participles are able to express aspect strongly suggests that they are still verbal in nature. Sometimes, however, we also find attributively used participles that have lost these aspectual properties, in which case we are probably dealing with true (deverbal) adjectives. This difference between verbal and truly adjectival participles will be the topic of this subsection.

Example 50
Adjectival participles
a. Verbal participle: attributively used past/passive or present participle that has retained its aspectual properties
b. Truly adjectival participle: attributively used past/passive or present participle that has lost its aspectual properties
[+]  A.  Past/passive participles

This subsection shows that not all attributively used past/passive participles can be used as true adjectives: this is possible with participles of transitive, unaccusative, and object experiencer psych-verbs, but not with participles of nom-dat verbs that select zijn. Participles of intransitive and nom-dat verbs that select hebben are of course not discussed here, given that they cannot be used attributively; cf. Table 4. We conclude with a aummary and a number of potentially problematic cases.

[+]  1.  Transitive and monadic unaccusative verbs

Consider again the examples in (18b&c), repeated here in a slightly different form as (51). The present participle in (51a) expresses durative aspect: we are dealing with an ongoing event. The past/passive participle in (51b) expresses perfective aspect: we are dealing with an event that has been completed. What we have ignored so far, however, is that the past/passive participle in (51b) has a second reading in which perfective aspect plays no role: in that case the participle simply refers to the property of being slaughtered, and no action is implied at all. In other words, the verbal nature of the past/passive participle geslachte has perished and the participle is semantically acting like a true adjective, comparable to, e.g., breek -baar'fragile/breakable'.

Example 51
a. de slachtende slager
  the  slaughtering  butcher
b. de geslachte lammeren
  the  slaughtered  lambs
  Verbal reading: 'the lambs that have been slaughtered'
  Truly adjectival reading: 'the lambs that are slaughtered'
are = copula

That adjectival past/passive participles can be non-verbal in nature can be demonstrated even more clearly by means of the participle gesloten'closed' in (52). This example would be fully appropriate in the context of a newly built swimming pool the opening ceremony of which has been delayed; this means that the event of closing the swimming pool has never occurred and that the verbal reading of gesloten is excluded for extra-linguistic reasons.

Example 52
Het zwembad is nog steeds gesloten.
  the swimming pool  is prt  still  closed

      The ambiguity in (51b) arises not only with transitive verbs, but also with unaccusative verbs. This is illustrated in (53) for the unaccusative verb trouwen'to marry'. The past participle getrouwd may refer either to the event of getting married, in which case we are dealing with a verbal participle or to the state of being married, in which case the participle is truly adjectival.

Example 53
het getrouwde stel
  the married  couple
Verbal reading: 'the couple that has married'
Truly adjectival reading: 'the couple that is married'
is = copula

The verbal and truly adjectival participles differ in various respects. First, if the participle is transitive, the subject of the corresponding active clause can be expressed by means of a door-phrase in the case of a verbal past/passive participle; cf. Section 9.2.1. This is not possible, however, with a truly adjectival participle, which is clear from the fact that (54a) has the verbal reading only. The same thing holds if arguments other than the agentive door-phrase are expressed: (54b) illustrates this by means of the (optional) beneficiary argument voor Peter'for Peter'.

Example 54
a. de door de slager geslachte lammeren
  the  by the butcher  slaughtered  lambs
  Verbal reading only: 'the lambs that have been slaughtered by the butcher'
b. de voor Peter geslachte lammeren
  the  for Peter  slaughtered  lambs
  Verbal reading only: 'the lambs that have been slaughtered for Peter'

Second, adjectives and verbs differ in that only the former can be prefixed by means of the negative morpheme on-; see Section 9.1, sub IB3. Consequently, if the participle is prefixed with this morpheme, we can be sure that we are dealing with a truly adjectival past/passive participle. In accordance with this, the examples in (55) have a state reading only. Since the presence of a door-phrase and the prefixation with on- lead to a contradiction with respect to the ±V status of the participle, we correctly predict that example (55b) is unacceptable if the door-phrase is present.

Example 55
a. Het ongetrouwde stel.
  the  un-married  couple
  Truly adjectival reading only: 'the couple that is unmarried.'
b. de (*door de slager) ongeslachte lammeren
  the      by the butcher  un-slaughtered  lambs
  Truly adjectival reading only: 'the lambs that arenʼt slaughtered'

The final difference concerns adverb selection. A verbal past/passive participle refers to a certain point on the time axis, at which the action was completed, whereas a truly adjectival participle refers to a larger interval during which the state attributed to the head noun is applicable. As a result of this, the two types of participle combine with different types of adverbial phrases of time: verbal participles combine with adverbial phrases that refer to a certain point on the time axis such as gisteren'yesterday' or with adverbs such as meermaals'several times' or twee keer'twice', which express that an event has taken place more than one time; truly adjectival participles, on the other hand, combine with adverbial phrases that refer to a continuous span of time such as jarenlang'for years'. Consequently, example (56a) only has the verbal reading, which is also clear from the fact that the participle cannot be prefixed with the negative prefix on-, whereas example (56b) only has the truly adjectival reading, which is supported by the fact that on- prefixation is possible.

Example 56
a. het gisteren/twee keer getrouwde/*ongetrouwde stel
  the  yesterday/twice  married/unmarried  couple
  Verbal reading: 'the couple that married yesterday/twice'
b. het al jarenlang getrouwde/ongetrouwde stel
  the  for years  married/unmarried  couple
  Truly adjectival reading: 'the couple that has been married/unmarried for years'
[+]  2.  Nom-dat verbs

The fact that suppression of the dative object leads to a degraded result with attributively used past participles of the nom-dat verbs in (57) shows that these participles cannot readily receive a truly adjectival reading. Note that (57a&c) are only marginally acceptable if the dative object is contextually implied or recoverable from the situation.

Example 57
a. de ??(ons) goed bevallen vakantie
  the     us  well  pleased  holiday
  'the holiday that pleased (us) very much'
b. de *(mij) overkomen ongelukken
  the    me  happened  accidents
  'the accidents that happened (to me)'
c. de ??(mij) opgevallen fouten
  the     me  noticed  mistakes
  'the mistakes that I noticed'

The examples in (58) show that the present participles of nom-dat verbs also lack the adjectival properties of on- prefixation and modification by means of adverbial phrases like jarenlang'for years'. It should be noted, however, that we did find some cases such as (58c) on the internet.

Example 58
a. * de onbevallen vakantie
a'. * de jarenlang bevallen vakantie
b. * de onoverkomen ongelukken
b'. * de jarenlang overkomen ongelukken
c. ?? onopgevallen fouten
c'. * de jarenlang opgevallen fouten
[+]  3.  Object experiencer psych-verbs

The fact that the past participle of object experiencer psych-verbs can be modified by intensifiers like heel'very' and be prefixed by means of on- unambiguously shows that the participles of this type of verb can be interpreted as truly adjectival.

Example 59
a. een (heel) geïnteresseerde doelgroep
  a  very interested  target.group
b. een ongeïnteresseerde doelgroep
  an indifferent  target.group

The fact that intensification by means of heel'very' is never possible with attributively used participles of other verb types shows that adjectival past participles of object experiencer verbs are special in being gradable. This conclusion is supported by the examples in (60), which show that the participle geïnteresseerd also has a comparative/superlative form; note that the synthetic comparative form geïnteresseerdere can also be found on the internet but is clearly less popular.

Example 60
a. een meer geïnteresseerde doelgroep
  more interested  target.group
b. de meest geïnteresseerde doelgroep
  the  most   interested  target.group

      Although the examples above unambiguously show that past participles of object experiencer psych-verbs have a truly adjectival reading, it is not so clear whether the attributively used object experiencer psych-verbs may have a verbal reading as well: a truly adjectival, stative reading is strongly favored, which is clear from the fact, illustrated in (61a), that adverbs like gisteren'yesterday', which refer to a certain point on the time axis, cannot readily be added. For this reason, we conclude that attributively used past/passive participles of the psych-verb strongly prefer the truly adjectival reading (but see section V2.5.1.3 for a more careful discussion).

Example 61
a. het nog steeds/*gisteren geamuseerde publiek
  the  prt  still/yesterday  amused  audience
b. De voorstelling amuseerde het publiek nog steeds/gisteren.
  the performance  amused  the audience  prt  still/yesterday

For completeness’ sake, note that we have not used the verb interesseren in (61) since the use of the adverbial phrase gisteren also gives rise to a marked result in the active construction in (62b); this example improves, however, if a negative element like niet'not' or weinig'little' is added. As can be seen in (61b), this problem does not arise with the verb amuseren.

Example 62
a. * het gisteren geïnteresseerde publiek
  the  yesterday  interested  audience
b. * De voorstelling interesseerde het publiek gisteren.
  the  performance  interested  the audience  yesterday
[+]  4.  Summary

The discussion in the previous subsections is summarized by means of Table 5. The verbal types for which the distinctions are marked n.a. were not discussed given that they never allow their past/passive participle in attributive position; see Table 4.

Table 5: The categorial status of attributively used adjectival past/passive participles
  verbal truly adjectival
intransitive verb n.a. n.a.
transitive verb + +
unaccusative verb + +
nom-dat verbs that selectzijn +
nom-dat verbs that selecthebben n.a. n.a.
object experiencer psych-verbs +
[+]  5.  Some potentially problematic cases

Although we have established that past/perfect participles of transitive and unaccusative verbs can have a truly adjectival reading, there are cases in which this seems to give rise to less felicitous results. Consider, for instance, the examples in (63) with the past/passive participle of the transitive verb aanbieden'to offer': since only the time adverb gisteren is possible, the participle is apparently able to refer to a completed action, but not to a property that applies during a longer period of time.

Example 63
a. het gisteren aangeboden boek
  the  yesterday  prt.-offered  book
  'the book that was offered yesterday'
b. # het jarenlang aangeboden boek
  the  for years  prt.-offered  book
  'the book that has been on display for years'

Similar facts can be observed with the unaccusative verb vallen'to fall' in (64). Note that the primed examples are accepted by some speakers with an iterative meaning, but in that case we are of course also dealing with the verbal reading of the participle.

Example 64
a. de gisteren gevallen jongen
  the  yesterday  fallen  boy
  'the boy that fell yesterday'
b. # de jarenlang gevallen jongen
  the  for years  fallen  boy
  'the boy that was fallen for years'
was = copula

Concomitant with this difference between participles like geslacht/getrouwd and aangeboden/gevallen is that the former but not the latter can readily be used as predicates in a copular construction: as will be discussed more extensively in Section 9.3.1, sub I, only truly adjectival participles can appear in this construction.

Example 65
a. De schapen bleken geslacht.
transitive
  the sheep  turned.out  slaughtered
  'The sheep turned out to be slaughtered.'
a'. ?? Dat boek bleek aangeboden.
  that book  turned.out  prt.-offered
b. Dat stel bleek (al jaren) getrouwd.
unaccusative
  that couple  turned.out  for years  married
  'that couple turned out to have been married for years'
b'. ?? De jongen bleek gevallen.
  the boy  turned.out  fallen

We have used the copular verb blijken'to turn out' in (65) instead of zijn in order to avoid ambiguity with passive and perfect-tense construction. That the use of zijn creates ambiguity is clear from the fact that the primed examples in (65) become fully acceptable if we add the infinitive te zijn'to be': the two primed examples in (66) involve, respectively, the passive and perfect auxiliary zijn, which means that we are again dealing with verbaladjectival participles. Observe that the primeless examples in (66) remain ambiguous: both the verbal and the truly adjectival reading are possible.

Example 66
a. De schapen bleken geslacht te zijn.
transitive
  the sheep  turned.out  slaughtered  to have.been/be
  'The sheep turned out to have been/be slaughtered.'
a'. Dat boek bleek (al) aangeboden te zijn.
  that book  turned.out  already  prt.-offered  to be
  'That book turned out to have been offered already.'
b. Het stel bleek getrouwd te zijn.
unaccusative
  the couple  turned.out  married  to have been/be
  'The couple turned out to have been/be married.'
b'. De jongen bleek gevallen te zijn.
  the boy  turned.out  fallen  to be
  'The boy turned out to have fallen.'

      This subsection has shown that two classes of transitive and unaccusative verbs should be distinguished: attributively used past/passive participles of the type geslacht/getrouwd can be both verbal and truly adjectival, whereas those of the type aangeboden/gevallen cannot be truly adjectival. We leave it to future research to investigate what determines whether a certain adjectival participle of a transitive or unaccusative verb can or cannot be interpreted as truly adjectival.

[+]  B.  Present participles

Although Table 4 has shown that present participles of all verb types can be used attributively, Subsection 1 will argue that the truly adjectival use of present participles is only found with object experiencer psych-verbs, subsection 2 will discuss a number of potential counterexamples to this claim.

[+]  1.  Verb types

This subsection shows that truly adjectival present participles can only be derived from object experiencer psych-verbs. The examples in (67) show that present participles normally retain their aspectual properties if used attributively; the intransitive, transitive and unaccusative present participles all express durative aspect, and we therefore have to conclude that we are dealing with verbal participles.

Example 67
a. de lachende jongen
intransitive
  the  laughing  boy
  Verbal reading only: 'the boy that is laughing'
b. de slachtende slager
transitive
  the  slaughtering  butcher
  Verbal reading only: 'the butcher that is slaughtering (some animal)'
c. de vallende bladeren
unaccusative
  the  falling  leaves
  Verbal reading only: 'the leaves that are falling'

Nom-dat verbs of both types also resist the formation of truly adjectival present participles, which may be related to the fact that dropping the dative object gives rise to a marked result; the primed examples are only acceptable without the dative object if the goal is somehow recoverable from the context.

Example 68
a. De vakantie is ons goed bevallen.
  the holiday is us well pleased
  'The holiday pleased us well.'
a'. de ?(ons) goed bevallende vakantie
  the     us  good  pleasing  holiday
  'the holiday that pleases us very much'
b. De moed heeft ons ontbroken
  the courage has us lacked
  'We lacked the courage.'
b'. de ?(ons) ontbrekende moed
  the    us  lacking  courage
  'The courage we lack.'

A notable exception is the nom-dat verb opvallen'to strike', which does have a corresponding gradable, truly adjectival participle. That the participle is truly adjectival is clear from the fact that it can be intensified by heel'very' and appear in the comparative and superlative forms.

Example 69
a. Die jongen is mij opgevallen.
  that boy  has  me prt.-struck
  'That boy attracted my attention.'
b. een (heel) opvallende verschijning
  very  eye.catching  figure
c. een meer/de meest opvallende verschijning
  a more/the most  eye.catching  figure

The examples in (70) show that, in accordance with the hypothesis that only truly adjectival participles can be used predicatively (cf. Section 9.3.1, sub I), the present participle opvallend also differs from the present participles of the nom-dat verbs in (68) in that it can appear in complementive position.

Example 70
a. * Die vakantie is goed bevallend.
  the holiday  is well  pleasing
b. * De moed is ontbrekend.
  the courage  is lacking
c. Die jongen is erg opvallend.
  that boy  is very eye.catching
  'That boy is conspicuous.'

Object experiencer psych-verbs differ from the other verb types discussed above in that they readily allow a truly adjectival reading of their present participles. Under this reading, the participle has lost its aspectual properties and generally expresses some intrinsic property of the modified head noun. As expected, the object of the corresponding verb can only be expressed if the present participle is verbal: whereas example (71b) is ambiguous, the participle in (71c) can only be interpreted as verbal.

Example 71
a. Het argument overtuigde ons.
  the argument  convinced  us
b. een overtuigende argument
  convincing  argument
  Verbal reading: 'an argument that convinces (someone)'
  Truly adjectival reading: 'a conclusive argument'
c. een ons overtuigende argument
  us  convincing  argument
  Verbal reading only: 'an argument that convinces us'

Since comparative formation and on- prefixation can only apply to truly adjectival participles (cf. Section 1.3.1, sub II), we correctly predict that the examples in (72) only have the non-aspectual reading and that the addition of the object ons'us' leads to ungrammaticality.

Example 72
a. een (*ons) overtuigender bewijsvoering
    us  more.convincing  argument
  Truly adjectival reading only: 'a more conclusive argument'
b. een (*ons) onovertuigende bewijsvoering
  a    us  un-convincing  argument
  Truly adjectival reading only: 'an inconclusive argument'

If we are dealing with separable particle verbs, like innemen'to win oneʼs sympathy' in (73a), verbal and truly adjectival present participles differ with respect to their stress properties: like separable verbs, verbal present participles normally have main stress on the particle, whereas truly adjectival participles have main stress on the verbal part; cf. (73b). Apart from interpretation, this claim is supported by the fact that the stress pattern of the verbal type is required if the object is expressed, as in (73c), and that the adjectival stress pattern of the adjectival type is required if comparative formation has applied, as in (73d).

Example 73
a. Die opmerking nam ons voor hem in.
  that remark  captivated  us  for him  prt
  'That remark won our sympathy for him.'
b. een innemende/innemende opmerking
  captivating  remark
c. een ons voor hem innemende/*innemende opmerking
  us  for him  captivating  remark
d. een innemender/*innemender opmerking
  more.captivating  remark
[+]  2.  Potential counterexamples

Subsection 1 has already mentioned that only truly adjectival present participles can be used predicatively; see also Section 9.3.1, sub II. The examples in (74) are therefore in accordance with the finding of the Subsection 1 that only the present participles of object experiencer psych-verbs can be truly adjectival.

Example 74
a. * De jongen is lachend.
is = copular
  the boy  is  laughing
b. * De slager is slachtend.
is = copular
  the butcher  is  slaughtering
c. * De bladeren zijn vallend.
zijn = copular
  the leaves  are  falling
d. De bewijsvoering is overtuigend.
is = copular
  the argumentation  is  convincing/conclusive

It should be noted, however, that there are many adjectival compounds consisting of a present participle of an (in)transitive verb as their second member and a noun (75a-i), an adjective (75j&k), or a particle (75l) as their first member; cf. De Haas and Trommelen (1993). That we are dealing with adjectives is clear from the fact that these compounds can all be used in predicative position, and that many of them can be modified by means of the intensifier zeer/heel'very'.

Example 75
a. adembenemend
  breath+taking
  'breathtaking'
e. gezaghebbend
  authority+having
  'authoritative'
i. zorgwekkend
  worry+raising
  'worrisome'
b. alwetend
  all+knowing
  'omniscient'
f. noodlijdend
  need+suffering
  'destitute/needy'
j. slechthorend
  ill+hearing
  'hard of hearing'
c. angstaanjagend
  fear+filling.with
  'frightening'
g. toonaangevend
  tone+setting
  'authoritative'
k. weldenkend
  right+thinking
  'right-minded'
d. geestdodend
  mind+killing
  'stultifying'
h. veelzeggend
  much+saying
  'revealing'
l. neerbuigend
  down+bending
  'patronizing'

Other potentially problematic cases involve the adjectives in (76), which denote properties of substances and materials. Although adjectives of this type are generally compounds as well, there are also some cases in which we are dealing with a simplex form. An example is laxerend'laxative' in (76c), which is clearly adjectival given that it can be used in predicative position and be modified by the intensifier heel'very'.

Example 76
a. een vochtwerende verf
  damp+proof  paint
a'. Deze verf is vochtwerend.
  this paint  is damp+proof
b. ijzerhoudend water
  iron+keeping  water
  'chalybeate water'
b'. Dit water is ijzerhoudend.
  this water  is iron+keeping
  'This water is chalybeate'
c. een laxerend medicijn
  laxative  medicine
c'. Koffie is (heel) laxerend.
  coffee  is very  laxative

Example (77), finally, provides a final set of probably apparent counterexamples for the claim that only the present participles of psych-verbs can be truly adjectival.

Example 77
a. een heel neerbuigende houding
  very patronizing  attitude
b. een zeer lovende bespreking
   a  very commending  review
a'. Zijn houding is heel neerbuigend.
  his attitude  is very patronizing
b'. Zijn bespreking is zeer lovend.
   his review is very commending
a''. * Zijn houding boog hem neer.
  his attitude  patronized  him  prt.
b''. *? Zijn bespreking loofde het boek.
   his review commended the book

Given that modification by the adverb heel/zeer'very' is possible, the examples in (77) must involve true adjectives, which is also consistent with the fact that the forms in question can be used predicatively. The doubly-primed examples show, however, that the head nouns of these examples do not correspond to the subject of the corresponding active verbal construction, which may indicate that we are dealing with pseudo-participles. These examples clearly deserve more research.

[+]  C.  Summary

This section has proposed several tests to determine the ±V status of attributively used participles; the results are summarized in Table 6. Row (i) indicates whether the participle expresses aspect, row (ii) whether the arguments of the corresponding active verb can be realized, row (iii) whether prefixation with the negative morpheme on- is possible, row (iv) whether a modifying temporal adverbial phrase refers to specific points or to an interval on the time axis, and row (v) whether the participle can be modified by the intensifier zeer/heel'very' or undergo comparative/superlative formation. The adverbial test in (iv) is suitable only for determining the verbal status of past participles: present participles are durative in nature, and therefore apply to an interval on the time axis by definition. The test concerning intensification and comparative/superlative in (v) is only applicable to object experiencer verbs, given that the other participles are all non-gradable.

Table 6: Tests for determining the ±V status of attributively used adjectival participles
  verbal truly adjectival
(i) aspect +
(ii) arguments +
(iii) on- prefixation +
(iv) temporal adverbial phrase (past participles only) (multiple) point(s) on the time axis continuous interval on the time axis
(v) intensification comparative/superlative + (if scalable)

[+]  III.  Tense and aspect

Since participle phrases are not finite, tense distinctions are not explicitly made. Nevertheless, often some notion of tense seems to be expressed. This will be discussed in the following subsections.

[+]  A.  Present participles

Present participle phrases normally refer to states of affairs that take place simultaneously with the state of affairs described in the clause; the implied tense of the participle phrase is the same as the tense of the clause. This can be supported by the fact that the primeless examples in (78) can be paraphrased by means of the primed examples, where the participle phrase has been replaced by a relative clause in which the implied tense of the participle phrase has been made explicit; changing the tense of the relative clauses would make these relative constructions improper paraphrases of the participle constructions.

Example 78
a. De daar bij het raam zittende jongen is mijn broer.
  the  there  at the window  sitting  boy  is my brother
a'. De jongen die daar bij het raam zit is mijn broer.
  the boy  who  there  at the window sits  is my brother
  'The boy who is sitting there at the window is my brother.'
b. De vrolijk een deuntje fluitende jongen fietste voorbij.
  the cheerfully  a tune  whistling boy  cycled  past
b'. De jongen, die vrolijk een deuntje floot, fietste voorbij.
  the boy  who cheerfully a tune whistled  cycled  past
  'The boy, who cheerfully whistled a tune, cycled past.'

In some cases, however, the participle phrase contains an adverbial phrase that indicates that the implied tense deviates from that of the matrix clause. In (79a), for instance, the adverb nu'now' suggests that present tense is implied in the participle phrase, while the matrix clause is in the past; similarly, in (79b), the adverb ooit'formerly/in the past' indicates a past tense, while the matrix clause is in the present.

Example 79
a. De nu voor zichzelf werkende aannemer werkte toen bij een bedrijf.
  the  now  for himself  working  contractor  worked  then  with a company
  'The contractor, who is now working for himself, was then working for a firm.'
b. Deze ooit voor Ajax spelend voetballer is nu trainer van PSV.
  this  once  for Ajax  playing  soccer player  is now  trainer of PSV
  'This soccer player, who once played for Ajax, is now the trainer of PSV.'

In formal or literary language, a present participle phrase may appear with an auxiliary, which formally expresses perfective aspect. In colloquial speech, the intended meanings of the examples in (80) are expressed by means of non-restrictive relative clauses in the perfect tense.

Example 80
a. ? Jan, zijn trein gemist hebbende, besloot een kopje koffie te gaan drinken.
  Jan  his train missed having  decided  a cup coffee  to go  drink
  'Jan, having missed his train, decided to have a cup of coffee.'
b. ? Het meisje, een uur gewacht hebbende, ging teleurgesteld naar huis terug.
  the girl  an hour waited having  went  disappointed  to house  back
  'The girl, having waited for an hour, returned home disappointed.'
[+]  B.  Past/passive participles

Past/passive participle phrases normally describe states of affairs that have taken place prior to the state of affairs referred to in the matrix clause. Here, too, the implied tense is typically identical to that of the matrix clause, which is shown for the primeless examples in (81) by means of the paraphrases in the primed examples; changing the tense of the relative clauses would make these relative constructions improper paraphrases of the participle constructions.

Example 81
a. De van hout gemaakte huizen zien er nogal gammel uit.
  the  of wood  made  houses  look  prt. rather crumbling  prt.
a'. De huizen die gemaakt zijn van hout zien er nogal gammel uit.
  the houses  which  made  are  of wood  look  prt. rather crumbling  prt.
b. De van hout gemaakte huizen brandden tot aan de grond af.
  the of wood  made  houses  burnt  to the ground  prt.
  'The houses, made of wood, burnt down completely.'
b'. De huizen, die gemaakt waren van hout, brandden tot aan de grond af.
  the houses  which  made  were  of wood  burnt  to the ground  prt.

Exceptions do again occur, which is clear from the fact that both the past and the present relative constructions in (82b) are adequate paraphrases of (82a): the use of the past tense in the paraphrases suggests that the houses under discussion did not survive, while the present tense suggests that the houses are still there. The apparent ambiguity of (82a) is due to the fact that the attributively used participle does not provide any clue concerning the question as to whether the houses still exist.

Example 82
a. Hun van hout gemaakte huizen zagen er nogal gammel uit.
  their of wood  made  houses  looked  prt.  rather rickety  prt.
  'Their houses, made of wood, looked rather ramshackle.'
b. Hun huizen, die gemaakt waren/zijn van hout, zagen er nogal gammel uit.
  their houses which made were/are  of wood  looked  prt.  rather rickety  prt.
  'Their houses, which were/are made of wood, looked rather ramshackle.'
References:
  • Haas, Wim de & Trommelen, Mieke1993Morfologisch handboek van het Nederlands. Een overzicht van de woordvormingSDU Uitgeverij
  • Hoekstra, Teun1984Transitivity. Grammatical relations in government-binding theoryDordrecht/CinnaminsonForis Publications
  • Koster, Jan1978Locality principles in syntaxDordrechtForis Publications
Suggestions for further reading ▼
phonology
  • Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
Show more ▼
morphology
  • Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
Show more ▼
syntax
  • Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
  • 9.3.1. Complementive use
    [96%] Dutch > Syntax > Adjectives and Adjective Phrases > 9 Participles and infinitives: their adjectival use > 9.3. Predicative use
  • 2.2.3. Resultative constructions
    [94%] Dutch > Syntax > Verbs and Verb Phrases > 2 Projection of verb phrases I:Argument structure > 2.2. Complementives (secondary predicates)
  • 1.3. Inflection
    [94%] Dutch > Syntax > Verbs and Verb Phrases > 1 Characterization and classification
  • 9.1. General discussion
    [94%] Dutch > Syntax > Adjectives and Adjective Phrases > 9 Participles and infinitives: their adjectival use
  • 2.5.1.3. Object experiencer psych-verbs
    [94%] Dutch > Syntax > Verbs and Verb Phrases > 2 Projection of verb phrases I:Argument structure > 2.5. Special verbs > 2.5.1. Psychological verbs
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.