Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

3.3.1.Adpositional phrases

quickinfo

This section is concerned with PPs functioning as postnominal modifiers. Some examples of noun phrases containing such a modifier are given in (40).

a.		tulpen	uit Amsterdam
		tulips	from Amsterdam

b.		een	meisje	met rood haar
		a	girl	with red hair

c.		een	cadeautje	voor mijn moeder
		a	present	for my mother

d.	de	auto	van mijn buurman
	the	car	of my neighbor
	'my neighborʼs car'

e.		het	gekuch	tijdens de voorstelling
		the	coughing	during the performance

The examples in (41) show that the postnominal PP-modifier need not be prepositional in nature, but can also be post- or circumpositional.

a.	de weg	de berg	op
	the road	the mountain	up
	'the road up the mountain'

b.	het kanaal	onder	de weg	door
	the channel	under	the road	through
	'the channel underneath the road'

Given that the prepositions are by far the largest group of adpositions and given that they behave in a way similar to the post- and circumpositions in the relevant respects, we will mainly use them in the examples to follow.
The restrictive PP-modifiers in (40) and (41) reduce the set of potential referents of the nominal head: in (40a) the PP restricts the set of all tulips to those from Amsterdam, in (40b) reference is made not to any girl, but to a girl with red hair, etc. Although PP-modifiers are typically restrictive, they can also be used non-restrictively, in which case they merely provide extra information about the set denoted by the nominal head. In what follows we will discuss these two uses of postnominal PP-modifiers in some detail.

I. Restrictive PP-modifiers
II. Non-restrictive PP-modifiers

[+] I. Restrictive PP-modifiers

In speech, the restrictive use of PP-modifiers can be recognized by the fact that the head noun and the PP form a single intonation unit. In written language, restrictive PP-modifiers are not characterized by any typographical features either; it is rather the absence of such features that makes them recognizable in written text. For examples, see Section 3.1.1, sub I.
Section 3.1 has shown that restrictive modifiers serve to reduce the referent set of the noun phrase by restricting the denotation of the nominal head. This also holds for restrictive PP-modifiers in postnominal position, which may therefore be crucial for determining the truth conditions of the sentence and/or for the identifiability of the intended referent. In (42), for example, the predications only hold for the restricted sets: without the PP the sentences are grammatical, but the truth value of the sentence may change from true to false.

a.	Moderne horloges	(uit Zwitserland)	lopen	altijd	gelijk.
	modern watches	from Switzerland	run	always	on time
	'Modern watches (from Switzerland) always keep good time.'

b.		Je	hebt	niets	aan een computer	(met zo weinig geheugen).
		you	have	nothing	on a computer	with so little memory

In (43), the PPs restrict the set denoted by the nominal head to exactly one, thus enabling the hearer to pick out the intended referent. Without the PPs, the sentences remain grammatical, but the referent may become unidentifiable for the hearer. If so, the sentence as a whole will become infelicitous as well due to the fact that the use of a definite determiner implies identifiability of the intended referent, while the information given in the noun phrase is insufficient to warrant that implication.

a.	De auto	(van de buurman)	is in beslag genomen.
	the car	of the neighbor	is confiscated
	'The neighborʼs car has been confiscated.'

b.	Het boek	(op de tafel)	is van mij.
	the book	on the table	is of me
	'The book on the table is mine.'

Now that we have seen that the function of restrictive PP-modifiers is to reduce the set of potential referents of the noun phrase as a whole, the following subsections will consider what the result of this is with several types of noun phrases.

[+] A. Indefinite noun phrases

Indefinite noun phrases are not identifiable for the speaker and/or the addressee. This holds also for modified noun phrases. The effect of adding a PP-modifier is simply that the relevant set is smaller in size: in example (44c), for instance, the speaker expresses that the entities he has in mind are part of the subset of tulips that have the property of being from Amsterdam.

a.	Ik	ben	op zoek	naar	[een cadeautje	voor mijn moeder].
	I	am	looking	for	a present	for my mother
	'Iʼm looking for a present for my mother.'

b.	Hij	heeft	[een meisje	met rood haar]	ontmoet.
	he	has	a girl	with red hair	met
	'He has met a girl with red hair.'

c.	Ik	heb	[tulpen	uit Amsterdam]	voor je	meegenomen.
	I	have	tulips	from Amsterdam	for you	prt.-brought
	'Iʼve brought you tulips from Amsterdam.'

The noun phrases in (44) can be pronounced with neutral intonation or with accent on the PP. In the former case, the speaker simply refers to a (possibly empty) set of entities with the desired properties. In the latter case, exemplified in (45), two sets are (implicitly or explicitly) contrasted: the first set is characterized by having the property denoted by the nominal head, but lacking the property denoted in the PP, whereas the second has both properties. Example (45b), for example, contrasts the set of girls with red hair with the set of girls with hair of some other color.

a.		Ik ben op zoek	naar	[een cadeautje	voor mijn moeder];	niet	voor mijn zus.
		I am looking	for	a present	for my mother	not	for my sister

b.		Hij	heeft	[een meisje	met rood haar]	ontmoet;	niet	met blond haar.
		he	has	a girl	with red hair	met	not	with blond hair

c.		Ik	heb	[tulpen uit Amsterdam]	voor je	meegenomen;	niet	uit Tilburg.
		I	have	tulips from Amsterdam	for you	prt.-brought	not	from Tilburg

Indefinite constructions of this type can also be used generically, both with singular and plural noun phrases. In example (46a), for instance, predication is said to hold for any watch from Switzerland, while in (46b) it is claimed that all tomatoes from tropical countries are delicious. Again, it is not asserted that the predications hold of the larger sets of watches and tomatoes.

a.	[Een horloge	uit Zwitserland]	loopt	altijd	gelijk.
	a watch	from Switzerland	runs	always	on.time
	'A watch from Switzerland always keeps good time.'

b.		[Tomaten	uit tropische landen]	zijn	erg lekker.
		tomatoes	from tropical countries	are	very nice

[+] B. Quantified noun phrases

In quantified noun phrases, restrictive PP-modifiers again fulfill the function of restricting the denotation of the NP. As the PPs are part of the NP-domains and therefore fall within the scope of the quantifier, they serve to restrict the domain of the quantifier. In other words, in (47a) the PP voor mijn moeder'for my mother' first restricts the set of possible presents, and subsequently the noun phrase as a whole is quantified by enkele'some'. As a result of these scope relations, the sentence in (47a) says nothing about the total number of presents I am looking for (which may be many), but only about the number of presents for my mother. Likewise, in (47b) the predicate of being tasty is not assigned to all tomatoes, but only to those from Italy, while in (47c) not every book, but only the ones with a red dot, are reduced in price.

a.		Ik	ben	op zoek	naar	[enkele cadeautjes	voor mijn moeder].
		I	am	looking	for	some presents	for my mother

b.		[Alle tomaten	uit Italië]	zijn	lekker.
		all tomatoes	from Italy	are	delicious

c.	[Elk boek	met een rode stip]	is in prijs	verlaagd.
	every book	with a red dot	is in price	reduced
	'Every book with a red dot has been reduced in price.'

[+] C. Definite noun phrases

In definite noun phrases, the function of the PP is to enable the hearer to uniquely identify the intended referent set in the given discourse situation. Example (48a), for example, can be used in a context in which one may be expected to bring presents for oneʼs mother. Note that, just as in the case of indefinite noun phrases in (45), stressing the PP implies the existence of yet another set of presents: in (48b), in which the PP is contrastively stressed, the hearer is assumed to know that the speaker has bought presents for a number of people.

a.	Ik	ben	[de cadeautjes	voor mijn moeder]	vergeten.
	I	have	the presents	for my mother	forgotten
	'Iʼve forgotten the presents for my mother.'

Ik ben [de cadeautjes voor mijn moeder] vergeten.

If the noun phrase is singular, the referent set is said to contain exactly one referent; thus, the most likely reading of (49a) is one in which the neighbor has only one car. This effect seems lost or at least less prominent in contrastive contexts: (49b) simply expresses that one car was confiscated, and that this happened to be a car owned by my neighbor (not by someone else).

a.	Ze	hebben	[de auto	van mijn buurman]	in beslag genomen.
	they	have	the car	of my neighbor	confiscated
	'They have confiscated my neighborʼs car.'

Ze hebben [de auto van mijn buurman] in beslag genomen.

The examples in (50) show that, in the case of locational prepositions, the PP-modifier can be contrasted in several ways. First consider the contrast between the PPs in the (a)- and the (b)-examples: the PP in (50a) is not contrasted and merely serves to distinguish the book on the table from any other book, whereas the PPs in the (b)-examples are contrasted, and thus imply a second set of books that is not on the table. In (50b), contrastive accent is placed on the complement of the preposition, de tafel'the table', and the alternative set of books is consequently identified by its relation to some object other than the table. In (50b'), on the other hand, contrastive accent falls on the preposition, and the alternative set of books is consequently identified by having a different orientation with respect to the table.

a.	[De boeken	op de tafel]	zijn van mij;	de andere boeken	niet.
	the books	on the table	are of me	the other books	not
	'The books on the table are mine; the other books arenʼt.'

b.		[De boeken	op de tafel]	zijn van mij;	die	in de kast	zijn van Jan.
		the books	on the table	are of me	those	in the bookcase	are of Jan

b'.		[De boeken	op de tafel]	zijn van mij;	[die	onder de tafel]	zijn van Jan.
		the books	on the table	are of me	those	under the table	are of Jan

Generally speaking, when a singular definite noun phrase is modified by a PP, the nominal complement of the preposition is also definite, as shown in (51a&b). Given that definiteness typically indicates identifiability, this is not surprising; if the entity itself is identifiable, so will the properties referred to by the PP. Alternatively, one could argue that since the function of the modifier is to enable the addressee to identify the overall referent, we again expect the presence of a definite noun phrase in the PP.

a.		de emmer	met het/??een gat
		the bucket	with the/a hole

b.		het huis	op de/??een hoek
		the house	at the/a corner

As shown in (52), plural definite noun phrases can be modified by a PP if the noun phrase complement of the preposition is indefinite. In that case, the DP refers to a contextually determined set of entities, and the function of the PP-modifier is to restrict this set to those entities that have the property expressed by the PP.

a.		de emmers met een/*het gat
		the buckets with a/the hole

b.		de huizen	op een/de hoek
		the houses	at a/the corner

Note that the referent set of (52b) varies with the choice of the determiner: if we are dealing with the definite determiner de, the set consists of houses situated at a contextually determined street corner; if we are dealing with the indefinite determiner een, the set consists of the subset of houses situated on some street corner. For a similar reason, example (52a) with a definite noun phrase complement is unacceptable because it forces a reading in which there is a particular (identifiable) hole in each of the buckets.
The (a)-examples in (53) show that singular indefinite noun phrases have the converse property of not allowing PP-modifiers if the noun phrase complement of the preposition is definite: once a particular property is identifiable or known, so must be the entity referred to by the noun phrase as a whole. The (b)-examples are only acceptable with a definite PP-modifier when it is established knowledge that there is more than one house located at the street corner in question.

a.		een emmer	met een/??het gat
		a bucket	with a/the hole

a'.		emmers	met een/??het gat
		buckets	with a/the hole

b.		een huis	op een/#de hoek
		a house	at a/the corner

b'.		huizen	op een/#de hoek
		houses	at a/the corner

If this line of reasoning holds water, we should conclude that in inalienable possession constructions, the addition of an indefinite van-PP to a definite noun phrase may make the definite noun phrase sufficiently “indefinite” to act as the modifier of an indefinite noun phrase. This is illustrated by the examples in (54), which are acceptable in any context.

a.	Ik	wil	graag	een huis	op de hoek van een straat	kopen.
	I	want	gladly	a house	on the corner of a street	buy
	'I would like to buy a house on the corner of a street.'

b.	Zij	willen	allemaal	graag	huizen op de hoek van een straat	kopen.
	they	want	all	gladly	houses on the corner of a street	buy
	'They would all like to buy houses on the corner of a street.'

[+] D. Noun phrases with a demonstrative pronoun

Combinations of a demonstrative determiner and a restrictive PP-modifier are not very frequent. This is not surprising, since in most cases the use of a demonstrative, whether deictic or anaphoric, suggests identifiability of the referent, thus rendering the use of a restrictive PP superfluous. This accounts for the fact that in neutral contexts, with a neutral intonation, the sentences in (55) are marked.

a.	??	Deze auto	van mijn buurman	rijdt	erg zuinig.
		this car	of my neighbor	drives	very economically

b.	*?	Dit boek	met een rode stip	is in prijs	verlaagd.
		this book	with a red dot	is in price	reduced

There are, however, a number of special cases, in which the use of a PP-modifier gives rise to an acceptable result.

[+] 1. Contrastive contexts

As in the case of noun phrases with a definite article, the PP may be used in contrastive contexts to distinguish the intended referent from some other available entities. In the case of a deictic demonstrative, accent will fall on the demonstrative as in example (56a). If the demonstrative is used anaphorically, accent will be placed on (part of) the noun phrase within the PP, as in example (56b), or on the preposition, as in example (56c).

a.		Bedoelt	u	deze auto	uit Amerika,	of	die (auto uit Amerika)?
		mean	you	this car	from America	or	that car from America)

b.		Die auto	uit Amerika	heeft	vier airbags;	die	uit Japan	twee.
		that car	from America	has	four airbags	that	from Japan	two

c.		Die auto	met spoilers	is veel sneller	dan	die (auto)	zonder (spoilers).
		that car	with spoilers	is much faster	that	that car	without spoilers

[+] 2. Noun phrases referring to a type

Constituents containing a demonstrative determiner and a restrictive PP-modifier are also acceptable if the nominal denotes a type rather than a token. Thus in (57a) reference is made not to a particular car but to a particular type of car, which is available with or without air conditioning. In (57b) reference is made to the contents of the book rather than to the physical object.

a.	Deze	(zelfde)	auto	met airconditioning	is haast	niet	te verkrijgen.
	this	same	car	with air.conditioning	is almost	not	to obtain
	'This (same) car with air conditioning is hardly available.'

b.	Dit(zelfde)	boek	met een harde kaft	is veel	duurder.
	this.same	book	with a hard cover	is much	more.expensive
	'This (same) book in hardcover is much more expensive.'

[+] 3. Noun phrases invoking known information

Furthermore, constructions like these are common with distal demonstratives when used to (re-)invoke certain referents that are part of the domain of discourse. An example such as (58) is completely acceptable in a context in which there has been mention of the fact that we should not forget to bring the present in question. In colloquial Dutch, postnominal van-PPs are often used to identify persons that are not part of the active domain of discourse, but can still be assumed to be familiar to the hearer; see Section 5.2.3.2, sub IIB, for discussion.

a.	?	Ik	ben	dat cadeautje	voor mijn moeder	nou toch nog vergeten.
		I	have	that present	for my mother	now still prt. forgotten
		'Now, Iʼve still forgotten that present for my mother.'

b.	Hé,	dat	is die man	van dat reclamespotje!
	hey	that	is that man	from the commercial
	'Hey, that is the man from this commercial!'

c.	Dat kind	van hiernaast	huilt	de hele dag.
	that child	of next.door	cries	the whole day
	'That child next door is crying all day.'

[+] E. Noun phrases with a possessive pronoun, personal pronouns and proper nouns

Restrictive PP-modifiers cannot readily be used to modify constructions with possessive pronouns, personal pronouns or proper nouns. In all cases, the referent of the noun phrase is assumed to be identifiable independently from the information provided by the PP-modifier, which is therefore superfluous. Nevertheless there are certain cases in which adding a restrictive PP-modifier is possible. These will be discussed in the following subsections.

[+] 1. Noun phrases with a possessive pronoun

PP-modifiers can be used in constructions with possessive pronouns, but only if the possessive construction by itself does not uniquely identify the intended referent. Thus, example (59) is perfectly acceptable provided the speaker owns at least one other watch.

Ik	ben	mijn horloge	met het zwarte bandje	kwijt.
I	am	my watch	with the black strap	lost
'Iʼve mislaid my watch with the black strap.'

Constructions such as (59) are typically used for things associated with the body that are normally referred to by means of a possessive phrase: mijn horloge'my watch'. PP-modifiers are also frequent with nouns denoting family members or other human relationships; the examples in (60) are all acceptable, the implication being that the speaker has more than one cousin, aunt and uncle, or friend and that the PP serves to uniquely identify the referent for the hearer.

a.	Onze neef	(uit Amerika)	komt	vanavond	ook.
	our cousin	from America	comes	tonight	also
	'Our cousin (from America) is also coming tonight.'

b.	Mijn tante en oom	(uit Laren)	zijn	morgen	40 jaar	getrouwd.
	my aunt and uncle	from Laren	are	tomorrow	40 years	married
	'My aunt and uncle (from Laren) will be married 40 years tomorrow.'

c.	Mijn vriendin	(met die zes kinderen)	komt	vanavond	eten.
	my friend	with those six children	comes	tonight	eat
	'My friend who has six children is coming to dinner tonight.'

It should be noted, however, that the possessive constructions in (60) may sometimes also be used in contexts where the PP does not fulfill an identifying function, in which case they come close to indefinite expressions (e.g., een neef van me uit Amerika'a cousin of mine from America'); see Section 5.2.2.2, sub I, for discussion.
In most other cases, co-occurrence of a possessive determiner and a PP-modifier is odd, even in contrastive contexts like (61a-c). Given that replacement of the possessive pronouns by a definite article yields felicitous sentences, we may conclude that it is not definiteness that is at stake here.

a.	??	Mijn boeken	op de tafel	gaan	over de oorlog	(die in de kast niet).
		my books	on the table	go	about the war	those in the bookcase not
		'My books on the table are about the war (those in the bookcase arenʼt).'

b.	?	Onze bloemen	in de tuin	doen	het	goed	(die	in de kamer	minder).
		our flowers	in the garden	do	it	well	those	in the room	less
		'Our flowers in the garden are doing well (those in the room not so well).'

c.	?	Mijn buurman	met de BMW	gaat	morgen	op vakantie.
		my neighbor	with the BMW	goes	tomorrow	on holiday
		'My neighbor with the BMW is going on holiday tomorrow.'

Perhaps the degree of acceptability also depends on the form of the PP-modifier: if the modifier contains a bare noun phrase, as in (62), the construction seems to improve. Note, however, that these cases with bare noun phrases generally involve fixed collocations; cf. 5.1.2.3, sub II.

Mijn boeken	op tafel/zolder	gaan	over WO II	(die in de kast niet).
my books	on table/attic	go	about WW II	those in the bookcase not
'My books on the table/in the attic are about WW II (those in the bookcase arenʼt).'

[+] 2. Personal pronouns

With personal pronouns the use of PP-modifiers is severely restricted. Once again, this is not surprising, since personal pronouns are normally only used if the intended referent is assumed to be uniquely identifiable in the given context. Nevertheless, PP-modifiers can be used if the referent is not uniquely identifiable, as for instance with the deictically used pronouns in (63a&b).

a.		Zij	met die blauwe blouse	is mijn buurvrouw.
		she	with the blue blouse	is my neighbor

b.		Hij	bij het raam	is mijn broer.
		he	at the window	is my brother

In colloquial Dutch it is common to modify personal pronouns by a van-PP containing a phrase mentioning a location associated with the referent in order to identify the intended referent, as in (64a&b). The phrase as a whole differs from those in (63) in that it is often used rather disparagingly. A special use of this construction is (64c), where the preposition van is followed by the family name of the person in question.

a.	Ik	heb	hem	van hiernaast	al	in geen tijden	meer	gezien.
	I	have	him	of next.door	already	in no times	anymore	seen
	'Him from next door I havenʼt seen for ages.'

b.	Zij	van de overkant	zit	de hele dag	voor het raam.
	she	from the other.side	sits	the whole day	for the window
	'She from across sits at the window all day.'

c.	Zij	van Jansen	heeft	een nieuwe baan.
	she	from Jansen	has	a new job
	'The Jansen woman has a new job.'

[+] 3. Proper nouns

Restrictive PP-modifiers can only be used to modify proper nouns under special circumstances. Once again, this is not surprising: proper nouns normally have unique reference in a given discourse situation, which means that their referent set cannot be further restricted. There are, however, circumstances in which proper nouns do not refer uniquely, as for instance when in a given context there are more persons by the same name.

a.	Jan	van hiernaast	komt	vanavond	op visite.
	Jan	of next.door	comes	tonight	on visit
	'Jan from next door is coming to visit us tonight.'

b.		Piet	van Jan en Marie	heeft	een nieuwe baan.
		Piet	of Jan and Marie	has	a new job

c.	Marie	uit Tilburg	heeft	gisteren	opgebeld.
	Marie	from Tilburg	has	yesterday	prt.-called
	'Marie from Tilburg called yesterday.'

Another situation in which a proper noun can be followed by a restrictive PP-modifier is that in which it is not the (physical) entity that is referred to, but a personʼs or objectʼs characteristics. As these may change according to the circumstances, we are no longer dealing with a uniquely identifiable entity, as a result of which identification by a restrictive PP becomes possible. Constructions of this kind are typically used in contrastive contexts.

a.		Koningin Beatrix op vakantie	is heel iemand anders	dan Koningin Beatrix	in functie.
		Queen Beatrix on holiday&nb