Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

5.1.5.2.Distribution of geen inside the noun phrase

quickinfo

This section discusses the restrictions on the use of geen within the noun phrase. We start in Subsection I by considering the question of what types of noun it can modify. After that, we briefly discuss in Subsection II whether geen can be combined with pronouns and proper nouns. Subsection III discusses the co-occurrence restrictions with other elements within the noun phrase.

I. Geen and noun phrase types
II. Geen and personal pronouns and proper nouns
III. Restrictions on accompanying determiners and quantificational elements

[+] I. Geen and noun phrase types

Geen is remarkably flexible when it comes to the types of noun phrase that it can combine with. It is possible for geen to combine with count nouns of all genders and numbers. Geen can also be construed with non-count nouns. Examples are given in Table 3.

Table 3: Distribution of geen in noun phrases headed by count/non-count nouns

	singular		plural
	-neuter	+neuter
count nouns	geen stad no town	geen huis no house	geen steden/huizen no towns/houses
non-count nouns	geen ellende/wijn no misery /wine	geen verdriet/water no sorrow/water	n.a.

Though geen can in principle combine with plural count noun phrases, there are restrictions on the use of plurals in combination with geen: whereas the plural noun schepen'ships' can be used with geen in the primeless sentences of (246), this is impossible in the primed examples that feature the more special “not a single” reading of geen — this reading requires that the noun is singular, as in (222) in Section 5.1.5.1, sub III.

246

a.	Er	varen	geen schepen	op de zee.
	there	sail	no ships	on the sea
	'There are no ships sailing on the sea.'

a'.	*	Geen schepen	zijn	100%	waterdicht.
		no ships	are	100 per cent	watertight

b.	Ik	heb	daar	geen schepen	gezien.
	I	have	there	no ships	seen
	'I didnʼt see any ships there.'

b'.	*	Geen schepen	levert	men	100%	waterdicht	af.
		no ships	delivers	one	100 per cent	watertight	prt.

The ungrammaticality of the primed examples in (246) matches that of the corresponding cases featuring geen enkel(e)/één in (247b); that these examples are unacceptable is not surprising from the point of view of their meaning “not a single”. What is interesting, though, is that enkel(e) is compatible with plural noun phrases in other contexts: enkele schepen is perfect as the plural counterpart of een enkel schip'a single ship'. This means that it is not entirely clear what causes the unacceptability of (247b) with enkel(e).

247

a.		Geen	enkel/één	schip	is 100%	waterdicht.
		no	single/one	ship	is 100 per cent	watertight

b.	*	Geen	enkele/één	schepen	zijn	100%	waterdicht.
		no	single/one	ships	are	100 per cent	watertight

There are also many pluralia tantum that cannot be preceded by geen, like tropen or Verenigde Staten in (248a&b). The reason for this lies in the fact that tropen and Verenigde Staten are always definite expressions, with which geen cannot be combined. If the plurale tantum can be indefinite, like hersens/hersenen in (248c&c'), geen is possible.

248

a.	*	geen	tropen	cf. de/*∅ tropen
		no	tropics

b.	*	geen	Verenigde Staten	cf. de/*∅ Verenigde Staten
		no	United States

c.		Planten	hebben	geen hersenen.
		plants	have	no brains

c'.	Heb	jij	geen hersens	of zo?!
	have	you	no brains	or so
	'Donʼt you have brains, or what?!'

The acceptability of using geen with non-count nouns extends to the cases of bare-stem and ge-nominalizations in (249).

249

a.		geen werk	bare-stem nominalization
		no work

b.		geen gewerk	ge-nominalization
		no work

Inf-nominalization like (250a) are generally awkward, although (250b&c) show that there are idiomatic examples involving inf-nominalizations.

250

a.	??	geen werken	inf-nominalization
		no work

b.	Dat	is	geen doen.
	that	is	no do
	'That is impossible, unbearable.'

c.	Er	is	geen houden	meer	aan.
	there	is	no hold	anymore	prt
	'It cannot be controlled/stopped anymore.'

When we now take a birdʼs eye view of the noun phrase types with which geen can be construed, we find that only a subset can occur with the indefinite article een in neutral contexts; een does not combine with plurals or non-count nouns (except in the special contexts discussed in Section 5.1.4.2). An approach to geen that would hold that it is the result of the fusion of niet and the indefinite article een would hence fail to cover the entire spectrum of possibilities in the distribution of geen. A particularly tough nut to crack for such an analysis of geen would be the case in (251), in which geen combines with an element that does not seem to qualify as nominal at all.

251

		Het	was	geen buitenspel.
		it	was	no off.side

The expression buitenspel'offside' used in sports is a compound originating from a PP headed by buiten (lit.: outside (of) play) and it does not show any earmarks of nominalness; for example, it cannot be pluralizedor used as the input for diminutivization, nor does it combine with any determiners: *de/*?het/*een buitenspel. In particular, the fact that buitenspel cannot be construed with the indefinite article een in any context (not even in exclamatives, which otherwise feature een rather profusely: * Een buitenspel dat het was!'an offside that it was') makes a fusion approach to the geen found in (251) difficult to uphold. Laxer variants of the fusion analysis which allow geen to result from merger of niet and the null article ∅ as well fare no better in this regard, unless it can be successfully argued that buitenspel features the null article.
Geen can also combine with the nominal part of verbal N+V collocations of the type illustrated in (252), in which the primeless geen examples alternate with the primed examples featuring the negative adverb niet. There is a tendency to spell the members of the collocation as individual words in the examples with geen but as a single word in the examples with niet, although all variants can be found on the internet.

252

a.	Ik	kan	geen piano	spelen.
	I	can	no piano	play
	'I canʼt play the piano.'

a'.	Ik	kan	niet	pianospelen.
	I	can	not	piano.play
	'I canʼt play the piano.'

b.	Ik	kan	geen	auto	rijden.
	I	can	no	car	drive
	'I cannot drive (a car).'

b'.	Ik	kan	niet autorijden.
	I	can	not car.drive
	'I cannot drive (a car).'

Section 5.1.2.3, sub I, has shown that N+V collocations of this type are like particle verbs in the sense that the dependent nominal is obligatorily split off the verbal base if the verb undergoes verb-second, that is, moves into the second position of the main clause. It seems that in such cases, there is a clear preference to use a noun phrase with geen; examples with geen occur frequently on the internet, whereas the frequency of examples with niet is conspicuously low.

253

a.	Ik	speel	geen piano.
	I	play	no piano
	'I donʼt play the piano.'

a'.	?	Ik	speel	niet	piano.
		I	play	not	piano
		'I donʼt play the piano.'

b.	Ik	rijd	geen	auto.
	I	drive	no	car
	'I donʼt drive (a car).'

b'.	?	Ik	rijd	niet	auto.
		I	drive	not	car
		'I donʼt drive (a car).'

The same contrast can be observed if the verb is part of a verb cluster and non-adjacent to the noun, as in (254). These facts suggests that N+V collocations are actually ambiguous; if the noun combines with geen it functions a regular object, while it is part of the verb if it is preceded by niet; see Booij (2010:ch.4) for a similar conclusion.

254

a.	dat	ik	geen/?niet piano	kan	spelen.
	that	I	no/not piano	can	play
	'that I canʼt play the piano'

b.	dat	ik	geen/?niet	auto	kan	rijden.
	that	I	no/not	car	can	drive
	'that I cannot drive a car.'

This suggestion is further supported by the fact that if the noun is also part of the verb cluster, as in (255), it is niet that must be used. Note that in these examples there is again a tendency to spell the collocations as single words.

255

a.	dat	ik	niet	kan	pianospelen.
	that	I	not	can	piano.play
	'that I canʼt play the piano'

a'.	*	dat	ik	kan	geen piano	spelen.
		that	I	can	no piano	play

b.	dat	ik	niet	kan	autorijden.
	that	I	not	can	car.drive
	'that I cannot drive a car.'

b'.	*	dat	ik	kan	geen auto	rijden.
		that	I	can	no car	drive

Section 5.1.2.3, sub I, has shown that topicalization of the main verb cannot strand the noun but must pied-pipe it. The examples in (256) show that topicalization of the N+V collocation is excluded with geen and strands the negative adverb niet in its original position. This suggests that the examples in (256) are related to those in (255a&b), in which the N+V collocation behave like a single word, rather than to those in (254) where they are clearly construed independently and the nouns form a constituent with the negative article geen.

256

a.		Pianospelen	kan	ik	niet.
		piano.play	can	I	not

a'.

Geen piano spelen kan ik.

b.		Autorijden	kan	ik	niet.
		car.drive	can	I	not

b'.

Geen auto rijden kan ik.

This fact that geen forms a syntactic constituent with the nouns piano/auto again suggests that geen cannot be the result of fusion of niet and een: nouns like piano/auto never feature an indefinite article in N+V collocations, nor are they likely to have a null determiner; they are truly bare nouns, which nonetheless can still be combined with geen.

[+] II. Geen and personal pronouns and proper nouns

It is impossible for geen to combine directly with personal pronouns; in (257), we have illustrated this for the plural pronouns. An exception must be made, however, for the doubly-primed examples in which geen is followed by a case-inflected form of the pronoun. These forms are relics from older stages of the language and belong to the formal register; in present-day Dutch the partitive constructions in the singly-primed examples would be used.

257

a.	*	geen	wij/ons
		no	we/us

a'.		geen van ons
		none of us

a''.	$	geen onzer
		none usgen

b.	*	geen	jullie/u
		no	you pl/polite

b'.		geen van jullie/u
		none of you pl/polite

b''.	$	geen uwer
		none yougen

c.	*	geen	zij/hen
		no	they/them

c'.		geen van hen
		none of them

c''.	$	geen hunner
		none themgen

Geen does normally not appear with proper nouns referring to persons, although a somewhat special case was discussed in Section 5.1.2.1, sub III. Nevertheless, geographical proper nouns can sometimes be construed with geen, particularly in contexts in which they are premodified by some adjective, as illustrated in the (a)-examples of (258). Another instantiation of the combination of proper nouns with geen is formed by the names of languages, as in the (b)-examples of (258). In the (a)-examples geen can be replaced with niet een, whereas in the (b)-examples only geen is possible.

258

a.		De Denen	willen	eigenlijk	helemaal	geen ?(verenigd) Europa.
		the Danish	want	actually	altogether	no united Europe

a'.		België	wil	geen ?(tweede) Italië	worden.
		Belgium	wants	no second Italy	become

b.		Ik	spreek	geen Züritüütsch.
		I	speak	no Swiss-German

b'.		Dat	is geen Nederlands.
		that	is no Dutch

[+] III. Restrictions on accompanying determiners and quantificational elements

This subsection investigates the restrictions that geen poses on other elements within the noun phrase, such as determiners, quantificational elements and attributive adjectives.

[+] A. Determiners

We can be brief about the distribution of definite articles and demonstrative and possessive pronouns. We have already seen in Section 5.1.5.1, sub II, that noun phrases containing geen are normally indefinite, as is evident, e.g., from the fact illustrated in (259) that they readily occur as the subject in expletive constructions.

259

		Er	staat	geen paard	in de gang.
		there	stands	no horse	in the hall

Since geen is not possible in definite noun phrases, it will not come as a surprise that geen cannot be combined with noun phrases which feature a definite article or a demonstrative/possessive pronoun (changing the order does not affect the judgments).

260

a.	*	de/die/mijn	geen	stad/steden
		the/that/my	no	town/towns

b.	*	het/dat/mijn	geen	huis
		the/that/my	no	house

It is also impossible for geen to combine with noun phrases containing the indefinite article een, regardless of whether it precedes or follows geen. This would of course follow from the “fusion” approach to geen since there are no noun phrases which feature multiple instances of the indefinite article: *een een stad (lit.: an a city). But by essentially the same token, the deviance of (261) also follows from an approach to geen as an atomic indefinite quantifier; multiple specification of indefiniteness on a single noun phrase is also impossible: *een één of andere stad and *een enige steden (lit.: a some towns).

261

	*	<een>	geen <een>	stad
		a	no	town

Some speakers report that they allow geen to precede noun phrases featuring the indefinite determiner-like elements dat/dit/zulk soort'that/this/such sort of', as in (262a). Such examples are, however, extremely rare on the internet: we only found two or three examples with dit and zulk. We did, however, find substantial numbers of examples such as (262b) with zulke/dergelijke'such'. Examples like these seem to be rejected by speakers of Standard Dutch.

262

a.	%	Ik	heb	helaas	geen	dat/dit/zulk	soort dingen	in voorraad.
		I	have	unfortunately	no	that/this/such	sort [of] things	in store
		'Unfortunately, I have no such things in store.'

b.	%	Ik	heb	helaas	geen	zulke/dergelijke	dingen	in voorraad.
		I	have	unfortunately	no	such	things	in store

Of course, the co-occurrence restrictions discussed in this subsection would immediately follow if geen is analyzed as an article, and hence competes for the same position occupied by the articles and the demonstrative and possessive pronouns. We have seen in the introduction to this section on geen, however, that we should not to jump to conclusions, since geen also exhibits various properties of numerals and quantifiers; cf. the discussion of the examples in (204) in the introduction to Section 5.1.5.

[+] B. Quantifiers and numerals

Apart from the cases in which geen seems to act as a degree modifier, discussed in Section 5.1.5.1, sub IIID, geen does not seem to readily combine with numerals, with the exception of cases in which some presupposition is denied. So, when someone is accused of having eaten five cakes, he may react by saying something like (263a). A more or less similar construction is given in (263b), which can often be heard in markets.

263

a.	Ik	heb	geen	vijf koeken	opgegeten,	maar	slechts twee!
	I	have	no	five cakes	prt.-eaten	but	only two
	'I didnʼt eat five cakes; Iʼve had only two.'

b.	Dit alles kost	geen tien,	geen zeven,	geen zes,	maar	slechts vijf eurootjes!
	this all costs	no ten,	no seven,	no six,	but	only five eurosdim
	'And all this doesnʼt cost ten, seven, or six, but only five euros!'

Quantifiers never co-occur with geen. The following examples are all ungrammatical, regardless of the order of geen and the quantifier, although examples such as geen één/enkele'not a single' may be considered an exception; cf. Section 5.1.5.1, sub IIIA.

264

a.	*	geen	enige	ellende
		no	some	misery

b.	*	geen	elke/iedere	stad
		no	every	town

c.	*	geen	veel	ellende/steden
		no	much/many	misery/towns

c'.	*	geen	weinig	ellende/steden
		no	little/few	misery/towns

[+] C. Geen preceding attributive adjectives, and inflection

Geen can readily be construed with noun phrases premodified by attributive adjectives. As shown in Section 5.1.5.1, sub IC, it is even possible for geen in examples such as (265a) to be semantically associated not with the noun phrase as a whole but just with the adjective. Example (265a) is ambiguous between the two niet paraphrases in (265b&c); on the (265b) reading geen is semantically construed with the entire noun phrase, while on the interpretation corresponding to (265c) geen is semantically associated to the attributive adjective geringe.

265

a.		Dat	is	geen geringe prestatie.
		that	is	no insignificant accomplishment

b.		Dat	is	niet	een geringe prestatie.
		that	is	not	an insignificant accomplishment

c.		Dat	is	een	niet geringe	prestatie.
		that	is	a	not insignificant	accomplishment

Regardless of whether it semantically teams up with the adjective or with the noun phrase as a whole, the distribution of adjectival inflection is determined by the gender features of the head noun in the same way as in indefinite noun phrases headed by the indefinite articles een/Ø.

266

a.		geen/een	gering-*(e)	prestatie
		no/an	insignificant	accomplishment

b.		geen/een	gering-(*e)	resultaat
		no/an	insignificant	result

c.		geen/∅	gering-*(e)	prestaties/resultaten
		no	insignificant	accomplishments/results

Note that in the singular examples geen must be taken to be syntactically construed with the noun phrase as a whole, given that count noun phrases like prestatie and resultaat normally cannot be determinerless: *Dat is prestatie/resultaat. Hence, even if geen negates only the content of the attributive adjective, it is still a syntactic part of the noun phrase as a whole. This tallies with the fact that geen cannot, in fact, form a constituent with an adjective: *Dat is geen gering'that is no insignificant'.

References:

Booij, Geert2010Construction morphologyOxford/New YorkOxford University Press

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Hans Broekhuis, Marcel den Dikken

Category: Dutch Syntax

Publication date: 22 November 2023

Keywords: Attributive -e EndingAttributiveBare NounExpletive ConstructionN(P)+V CollocationsNominalizationNounParticle VerbPartitivePartitive Construction Personal PronounPluralia TantumPronounProper NounTopicalizationVP-TopicalizationVerbVerb ClusterVerb-Second

report errorprintcite

Jump to:

introduction
references
related articles