• Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Afrikaans
Show full table of contents
The adjunct IPI features obligatory control
quickinfo

The Imperativus-pro-Infinitivo (IPI) does not have a lexical subject (but see the imperative IPI, but the bare infinitival verb of the IPI-construction entails an implied subject. This implied subject is controlled by its antecedent. There are two types of control: obligatory control and optional control. The adjunct IPI features obligatory control, whereas the argument IPI may feature optional control.

readmore

Optional control implies a choice: the antecedent is not fixed, and may for example be discontinuous. An example of optional control is given in (1).

Example 1

Odysseus soe my fêstbine om ússels te behoedzjen foar wat ik dwaan soe
Odysseys would me fast.tie for ourselves to protect from what I do would
Odysseus would tie me down in order to protect ourselves from what I would do

In the example above, the implied subject of the to-infinitival clause refers to a discontinuous antecedent, namely to Odysseus and to the speaker. However, depending on the choice of embedded verb and context, the implied subject can also refer to the matrix subject alone, or the matrix object alone, as illustrated in (2):

Example 2

a. Odysseus soe my fêstbine om mysels te behoedzjen foar wat ik dwaan soe
Odysseys would me fast.tie for myself to protect from what I do would
Odysseus would tie me down in order to protect myself from what I would do
b. Odysseus soe my fêstbine om himsels te behoedzjen foar wat ik dwaan soe
Odysseys would me fast.tie for himself to protect from what I do would
Odysseus would tie me down in order to protect himself from what I would do

It is characteristic of optional control that the antecedent of the implied subject is in itself free, but varies depending on the pragmatic context. Obligatory control has the property that the antecedent is a fixed argument of the selecting predicate.

The adjunct IPI features obligatory control. To illustrate this, consider the example in (3):

Example 3

De plysje soe him opslute en beskermje my
the police would him.OBJ up.lock and protect me
The police would lock him up and protect me

The example can only have the interpretation in which the implied subject is controlled by the matrix subject, not the interpretation in which the implied object is controlled by the matrix object. In contrast, an infinitive of purpose can have either interpretation:

Example 4

De plysje soe him opslute om my te beskermjen
the police would him.OBJ up.lock for me to protect
The police would lock him up to protect me

In this example, either the matrix subject or the matrix object can control the reference of the implied subject. The latter interpretation obtains in case the person locked up by the police is going to protect the speaker, who is also locked up. Note, finally, that a normal coordination of infinitives also features obligatory control, as shown in (5).

Example 5

De plysje soe him opslute en my beskermje
the police would him.OBJ up.lock and me protect
The police would lock him up and protect me

Of course, it is not clear that the sentence involves control, but it if does, it features obligatory control by the matrix subject.

References:
    Suggestions for further reading ▼
    phonology
    • Dutch
    • Frisian
    • Afrikaans
    Show more ▼
    morphology
    • Dutch
    • Frisian
    • Afrikaans
    Show more ▼
    syntax
    • Dutch
    • Frisian
    • Afrikaans
    • 5.2.1.3. The implied subject PRO in om + te-infinitivals
      [86%] Dutch > Syntax > Verbs and Verb Phrases > 5 Projection of verb phrases IIIb:Argument and complementive clauses > 5.2. Infinitival argument clauses > 5.2.1. Om + te-infinitivals
    • 6.5. Clausal subjects
      [84%] Dutch > Syntax > Adjectives and Adjective Phrases > 6 Predicative use of the adjective phrase
    • 3.2.1.1. General properties of passives
      [83%] Dutch > Syntax > Verbs and Verb Phrases > 3 Projection of verb phrases II:Verb frame alternations > 3.2. Alternations involving the external argument > 3.2.1. Passivization
    • 3.2.1.3. The regular passive
      [83%] Dutch > Syntax > Verbs and Verb Phrases > 3 Projection of verb phrases II:Verb frame alternations > 3.2. Alternations involving the external argument > 3.2.1. Passivization
    • 13.2. A-Scrambling: nominal argument shift
      [83%] Dutch > Syntax > Verbs and Verb Phrases > 13 Word order in the clause V: Middle field (scrambling)
    Show more ▼
    cite
    print