• Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
Show full table of contents
The relation of the adjunct IPI to second conjuncts
quickinfo

The adjunct Imperativus-pro-Infinitivo (IPI) is similar to a second conjunct, but there are also differences. True second conjuncts can be extracted from, provided that a similar extraction applies to the first conjunct. The adjunct IPI does not allow of such so-called across- the-board extraction.

readmore

The adjunct IPI bears some similarities to the second conjunct of a coordinate structure, and it is very likely that the adjunct IPI originated in Old Frisian as such, when the distinction between subjunctive and infinitive broke down, see historical and dialectgeographical information about the two IPI-constructions . Even nowadays, the IPI shares properties with coordinate structures, regardless of whether the adjunct IPI or the argument IPI is involved, see also the adjunct IPI-construction.

  1. IPIs, like second conjuncts, cannot be moved.
  2. IPIs, like second conjuncts, cannot be extracted from.

On the other hand, what differentiates IPIs from ordinary second conjuncts is of course:

  1. The Verb-Initial word order of the IPI as against the Verb-Final order of a second conjunct based on other types of infinitives.
  2. The morphology of the verb inside the IPI as against the morphology of other infinitives.

The adjunct IPI functions as an adjunct in the sense that its presence is not required by a selecting head. It might be thought that the complementiser of the adjunct IPI is really a coordinate conjunct, and that the IPI is a coordinate construction. True coordinations do not allow extraction from one of their conjuncts, as shown in (1):

Example 1

*De man dy't de plysje [ – sykje soe] en [syn hantlangers meinimme woe]
the man who the police look.for would and his accomplices along.take wanted
Lit. The man who the police were going to look for and wanted to pick up his accomplices

They only allow simultaneous extraction from both conjuncts. This is illustrated in (2):

Example 2

De man dy't [de plysje – socht] en [ – meinimme woe]
the man who the police looked.for and along.take wanted
The man who the police were going to look for and were going to pick up

Adjunct IPIs, in contrast, do not allow of simultaneous extraction:

Example 3

*De man dy't [de plysje – sykje soe] en [nim – mei]
the man who the police looked.for would and take along
Lit. The man who the police were going to look for and were going to pick up

Adjunct IPIs, in contrast, allow of extraction out of what would be the first conjunct under the coordinate structure analysis:

Example 4

De man dy't [de plysje – sykje soe] en [nim syn hantlangers mei]
the man who the police looked.for would and take his accomplices along
Lit. The man who the police were going to look for and were going to pick up his accomplices

So, although it is clear that the adjunct IPI-construction bears similarities to coordinate structure, it must be different in at least one respect from true coordinations, seeing that adjunct IPIs behave differently from true coordinations with respect to extraction. Another problem for a coordinate structure analysis is that an IPI appears as the second conjunct, but that it cannot appear as the first conjunct:

Example 5

a. *De plysje soe en nim de man mei
the police would and take the man along
The police were going to pick up the man
b. *De plysje soe nim de man mei
the police would take the man along
The police were going to pick up the man

On the other hand, it is well-known that second conjuncts may sometimes violate selection restrictions holding for complements which do take the form of a coordination. The well-known example is the paradigm from English: it is not possible to say Me laughed, whereas the form me is perfect inside a coordination, as in John and me laughed. To sum up, the adjunct IPI bears both similarities and differences to second conjuncts.

References:
    Suggestions for further reading ▼
    phonology
    • Dutch
    • Frisian
    • Afrikaans
    Show more ▼
    morphology
    • Dutch
    • Frisian
    • Afrikaans
    • Ellipsis
      [75%] Frisian > Morphology > Inflection > Adjectives
    • -k
      [74%] Frisian > Morphology > Word formation > Derivation > Suffixation > Verbal suffixes > Noun as base
    • Weak verbs
      [74%] Frisian > Morphology > Inflection > Verbs
    • In prenominal position
      [74%] Frisian > Morphology > Inflection > Adjectives
    • Degree
      [74%] Frisian > Morphology > Inflection > Adjectives
    Show more ▼
    syntax
    • Dutch
    • Frisian
    • Afrikaans
    Show more ▼
    cite
    print