• Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
Show full table of contents
2.2. Complementives (secondary predicates)
quickinfo

Section 2.1 has discussed nominal complementation of verbs, which has resulted in the identification of the basic verb types in Table 6. This section discusses the behavior of these verbs with respect to secondary predication. The basic patterns are given in the examples in (156) to (158). In (156), we find an intransitive and an impersonal verb, that is, verbs without an internal argument. The primed examples show that the addition of a complementive is possible in such cases, but requires the addition of an extra argument that functions as the subject of the complementive; wakker'awake' and nat'wet' are predicated of, respectively, the noun phrases zijn baas'his master' and Jan. The construction as a whole receives a resultative interpretation: it is claimed that the referent of the added noun phrase becomes part of the set denoted by the complementive as the result of the action/process denoted by the verb.

Example 156
Verbs without an internal argument
a. De hond blaft.
  the dog  barks
a'. De hond blaft zijn baas wakker.
  the dog  barks  his boss  awake
b. Het regent.
  it  rains
b'. Jan regent nat.
  Jan rains  wet

In (157), we find a transitive and a monadic unaccusative verb, that is, verbs with one internal argument. The primed examples show that it is possible to add a complementive, which, in the cases at hand at least, is predicated of the original theme argument. The construction as a whole receives a resultative interpretation: it is claimed that the referent of the theme argument becomes part of the set denoted by the complementive as the result of the action/process denoted by the verb.

Example 157
Verbs with one internal argument (theme)
a. Jan slaat Peter.
  Jan hits  Peter
a'. Jan slaat Peter dood.
  Jan hits  Peter dead
b. Jan viel.
  Jan fell
b'. Jan viel dood.
  Jan fell dead

In (158), we find a ditransitive, a nom-dat, and an undative verb, that is, verbs with two internal arguments. The primed examples are all unacceptable under the intended, resultative, reading. The examples marked with a number sign are at least marginally possible, but then the adjective kapot does not function as a complementive but as a supplementive, that is, a predicative phrase that provides additional information about the theme.

Example 158
Verbs with two internal arguments (theme and goal/experiencer)
a. Jan geeft Marie het boek.
  Jan gives  Marie the book
a'. # Jan geeft Marie het boek kapot.
  Jan gives  Marie the book  broken
b. De vaas viel Marie op.
  the vase  fell  Marie  prt.
  'The vase caught Marieʼs eye.'
b'. * De vaas viel Marie kapot op.
  the vase  fell  Marie broken  prt.
c. Marie kreeg het boek.
  Marie received  the book
c'. # Marie kreeg het boek kapot.
  Marie  received  the book  broken

      When we return to the examples in (156) and (157), we see that the two sets differ in that the addition of a complementive in (156) goes hand in hand with the introduction of an additional argument which is not selected by the verb itself, as is clear from the fact that dropping the complementives in the primed examples in (156) results in ungrammaticality.

Example 159
a. De hond blaft zijn baas *(wakker).
  the dog  barks  his boss     awake
b. Jan regent *(nat).
  Jan rains    wet

This strongly suggests that the noun phrase the complementive is predicated of is not selected by the verb but an external argument of the complementive. We will therefore refer to such noun phrases as the logical subject of the complementive. We will use small capitals for this notion in order to distinguish it from the traditional notion of subject (in lower case), which refers to the nominative argument of the clause.
      In the primed examples in (157) the subject of the complementive also seems to entertain a thematic relation with the verb; if the complementive is dropped, as in the primeless examples, the resulting structure is still grammatical. Many proposals have been given to account for this dual thematic relationship in the primed examples, which generally amounts to saying that the subject relation between the noun phrase and the complementive is primary compared to the semantic relationship between the noun phrase and the verb; we will return to this issue in Section 2.2.3, sub II.
      This section is organized as follows. Section 2.2.1 starts with a more general discussion on the use of complementives. Section 2.2.2 continues with a discussion of two non-resultative constructions involving a complementive: the copular construction and the so-called vinden-construction. Section 2.2.3 is concerned with resultative constructions of the type illustrated above. Section 2.2.4 concludes with a very brief discussion of two types of analyses of complementive constructions proposed within generative grammar.

References:
    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.