• Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Saterfrisian
  • Afrikaans
Show all alle'all'

This section presents a survey of the distribution of inflected alle inside the noun phrase. We will distinguish two cases: alle followed by a numeral, and “simplex” alle, that is, alle without a numeral. Since alle followed by a numeral is close in behavior to pre-determiner bare al discussed in Section, we will start with this case.

[+]  I.  Inflected alle + numeral

This subsection discusses instances of alle that occur as a subpart of the quantificational pre-determiners in (41). The second part of these pre-determiners consists of a numeral greater than one or the morpheme – bei, which can perhaps be considered a short form of beide'both'.

a. alle + Numeral: alle twee'all two', alle drie'all three', etc.
b. allebei'both' (lit.: all-both)

Before we start our survey, we want to make a note on the spelling of the forms in (41a). Though spelling alle and the numeral as two separate words is the norm, it is also possible to spell alle + Num as one single word, especially if the numeral denotes a very small quantity: alletwee'all-two' alongside alle twee, alledrie'all-three' alongside alle drie. However, a survey on the internet shows that starting from alle vier'all four' the frequency of writing the sequence as a single word rapidly decreases: allezes'all-six' is already rare, alleacht is virtually non-existent, and allenegen'all-nine' does not occur at all. Allebei is always spelled as one single word. The form allemaal'all' (lit.: all-together) partially patterns with the forms in (41), but it will not be discussed here because its exceptional properties would blur the picture to be sketched for alle + Num and allebei; we therefore refer the reader to Section 7.1.5 for a discussion of this form.

[+]  A.  Pre-determiner alle and noun phrase types

Like bare al, the forms in (41) can only occur in plural noun phrases; this is illustrated for alle twee in Table 4, but the judgments remain the same if this modifier is replaced by allebei. The ill-formedness of the singular nouns in Table 4 is due to the fact that the pre-determiners in (41) are built up of alle and a numeral of a cardinality greater than 1; for the same reason, pre-determiner alle cannot precede noun phrases headed by non-count nouns. Note further that the plural examples with the proximate demonstrative deze'these' are marked.

Table 4: Pre-determiner alle in noun phrases headed by a count noun
  singular [-neuter]/[+neuter] plural [-neuter]/[+neuter]
*alle twee de man/het huis
all two the man/the house
alle twee de mannen/huizen
all two the men/houses
*alle twee die man/dat huis
all two that man/that house
alle twee die mannen/huizen
all two those men/houses
  *alle twee deze man/dit huis
all two this man/this house
?alle twee deze mannen/huizen
all two these men/houses
*alle twee mʼn man/huis
all two my man/house
alle twee mʼn mannen/huizen
all two my men/houses

As with bare al, it is not possible for pre-determiner alle to be combined with the pluralia tantum in (42a) or with plurals which denote a conventionally fixed unit, like Verenigde Staten'US' in (42b).

a. * alle + Num/allebei de hersenen/tropen
  all + Num/all-both  the brains/tropics
b. * alle + Num/allebei de Verenigde Staten
  all + Num/all-both  the United States
[+]  B.  Restrictions on accompanying determiners and quantificational elements

This subsection investigates the restrictions that alle + Num and allebei pose on the presence of determiners and quantificational elements. As in the case of bare al, the syntax of the constituents following alle + Num or allebei largely mirrors that of the same constituents lacking these quantifiers. For example, adjectival modification of the noun is not affected by the presence of these quantifiers, as is illustrated in (43); the attributive modifiers, of course, always carry an inflectional schwa, due to the fact that noun phrases like these are plural.

alle tien/allebei de/die/??deze eenzame mensen
  all/both  the/those/these  lonely  people
[+]  1.  Determiners

Table 4 has already shown that pre-determiner alle + Num can precede the definite article de and the distal demonstrative die with equal ease; the relevant examples are repeated here as (44a&b), and supplemented with the corresponding allebei'both' examples. The proximate demonstrative deze in (44c), however, is rather marked in a position linearly following the pre-determiner alle + Num and allebei, and sequences like these are also relatively rare on the internet. In this regard pre-determiner alle differs from al, which is perfect to the left of the proximate demonstrative, and instead resembles pre-determiner heel'all/whole'; cf. Section, sub I.

a. alle twee/allebei de mannen/huizen
  all two/both  the men/houses
b. alle twee/allebei die mannen/huizen
  all two/both  those men/houses
c. ? alle twee/allebei deze mannen/huizen
  all two/both  these men/houses

The marked proximate demonstrative cases improve to a certain degree in contexts of the type in (45), in which the demonstrative receives contrastive accent. The acceptability of examples of this type improves further under backward conjunction reduction, as in the primed examples. By contrast, NP-ellipsis in the second conjunct leads to ungrammaticality, as is shown in the doubly-primed examples. The ungrammaticality of these examples is due entirely to the presence of the pre-determiners alle tien and allebei; with these quantifier elements removed, the sentences are perfect. Replacing these pre-determiners with bare al also leads to a somewhat better result, as can be seen in Section, sub IIA.

a. (?) Ik ken wel alle tien deze mannen, maar niet alle tien die mannen.
a'. Ik ken wel alle tien deze ∅, maar niet alle tien die mannen.
a''. * Ik ken wel alle tien deze mannen, maar niet alle tien die ∅.
  know  aff  all ten  these men  but  not  all ten  those [men]
b. ? Ik ken wel allebei deze mannen, maar niet allebei die mannen.
b'. Ik ken wel allebei deze ∅, maar niet allebei die mannen.
b''. * Ik ken wel allebei deze mannen, maar niet allebei die ∅.
  know  aff  both  these men  but  not  both  those [men]

      Possessive pronouns can be placed between alle + Num/ allebei and the projection of the noun, provided that they are prosodically weak: the reduced forms of the pronouns in (46a) are fine, whereas the full forms in (46b) are marked to varying degrees — in particular onze'our' and hun'their', which do not have a weak form, are relatively acceptable, but jullie, which can only be reduced under the strict conditions discussed in Section, seems completely unacceptable. Example (46c) shows that stressed possessive pronouns are impossible. The (semi-)genitival possessors in (46d) are acceptable in this position roughly to the same marginal degree as full possessive pronouns, but, for some unclear reason, proper nouns like those in (46e) give rise to an unacceptable result.

a. alle tien/allebei mʼn/je/zʼn/dʼr boeken
  all ten/all-both  my/your/his/her  books
b. alle tien/allebei ??mijn/*jouw/??zijn/??haar/?onze/*jullie/?hun boeken
  all ten/all-both    my/yoursg/his/her/our/yourpl/their  books
c. * alle tien/allebei mijn boeken
  all ten/all-both  my  books
d. ?? alle tien/allebei mʼn vaders/mʼn vader zʼn boeken
  all ten/all-both  my fatherʼs/my father his  books
e. * alle tien/allebei Jans/Jan zʼn boeken
  all ten/all-both  Janʼs/Jan his  books

      The alle + Num examples in (46) alternate with constructions in which bare al precedes and the numeral follows the possessor of the noun: al mʼn tien boeken'al my ten books'; cf. Section, sub IIC. This syntactic alternation does not seem semantically innocuous, though judgments are subtle. Consider the pair in (47), used in a context in which a selection committee is finalizing a short list, and each of the committee members has drawn up a list of his three top candidates. In this context, alle drie onze kandidaten primes a reading in which all committee members selected the same three candidates (hence the total number of candidates figuring on the committee members’ lists is exactly three), while al onze drie kandidaten seems more felicitously used in a situation in which not all committee members selected the same three candidates (hence the total number of candidates figuring on the committee members’ lists exceeds three).

a. Alle drie onze kandidaten (*vormen samen een groep van zeven man).
  all three our candidates     form  together  a group of seven people
b. Al onze drie kandidaten (vormen samen een groep van zeven man).
  all our three candidates   form  together  a group of seven people

      For completeness’ sake, it should be noted that alle + Num and allebei can also be used with nominalized possessive pronouns. The article preceding the noun must be de, because alle + Num and allebei do not combine with singular noun phrases; this excludes the article het, which is only found in singular noun phrases.

a. alle twee/allebei de mijne/jouwe/zijne/hare/onze/hunne
  all two/both  the mine/yourssg/his/hers/ours/theirs
b. * alle twee/allebei het mijne/jouwe/zijne/hare/onze/hunne
  all two/both  the mine/yourssg/his/hers/ours/theirs

      Pre-determiner alle + Num cannot be construed with noun phrases containing the indefinite article een, not even in contexts in which, in the absence of the pre-determiner, the indefinite article can combine with a plural noun phrase.

a. Een boeken dat hij heeft!
  a books  that  he  has
  'He has a lot of books/very nice books!'
b. * Alle tien/allebei een boeken dat hij heeft!
  all ten/both  a books  that  he  has

As is shown in (50a), the pre-determiner allebei cannot combine with bare plurals either. Alle + Num, on the other hand, can be construed with bare plurals, although this depends on the numeral in question. The empirical generalization seems to be that with “high” numerals, like vijfentwintig in (50d), the determiner de is preferably dropped (although some speakers find (50d) with the determiner de perfectly acceptable), whereas with “low” numerals the pattern without the determiner de is awkward, to a degree which varies somewhat from speaker to speaker and from case to case (Perridon 1997: 184). A rough search on the internet has shown that in examples like (50a&b), with allebei and alle twee/drie/vier, use of the article de is clearly preferred. In cases such as (50c), with alle vijf/zes both options have about the same frequency. In examples such as (50d) with high numbers, dropping the article seems obligatory: the string [ alle vijfentwintig de] resulted in no relevant hits, whereas the string [ alle vijfentwintig] provided many cases of the relevant construction; see also taaladvies.net/taal/advies/vraag/48.

a. allebei/alle twee de/* boeken
  all-both/all two  the  books
c. alle vijf/zes/... de/∅ boeken
  all  five/six/...  the  books
b. alle drie/vier de/* boeken
  all  three/four  the  books
d. alle vijfentwintig ∅/%de boeken
  all twenty five  ∅/the  books

      If the numeral is modified by an adverb, construing alle + Num with a bare plural is the only possibility; adding the article de gives rise to an unacceptable result, even with relatively “low” numerals like vijf.

alle ongeveer/bijna/ruim honderd/vijf (*de) deelnemers
  all  approximately/almost/well over  hundred/five     the  participants
[+]  2.  Indefinite determiner-like elements

Example (52a) shows that the indefinite determiner-like elements dat/dit soort'such', discussed in Section 4.1.2, are not compatible with alle + Num/ allebei to their left. Example (52b) shows that the same thing holds for pseudo-partitive noun phrases, discussed in Section, sub I, with the indefinite determiner-like element van die'such'.

a. * alle tien/allebei dat/dit soort boeken
  all ten/all-both  that/this sort  books
b. * alle tien/allebei van die boeken
  all ten/all-both  of such  books
[+]  3.  Quantifiers and numerals

Since the pre-determiners allebei and alle + Num already contain a cardinal number, the addition of other quantificational elements to the noun phrase is impossible; the examples below are all ungrammatical. Numerals are, of course, excluded since this would either result in unwanted redundancy or in a contradiction: *alle vier de drie/vier boeken'all four the three/four books'.

a. * alle tien/allebei enige/sommige boeken
  all ten/all-both  some  books
b. * alle tien/allebei veel boeken
  all ten/all-both  many  books
c. * alle tien/allebei de vele/weinige mensen in de zaal
  all ten/all-both  the  many/few  people in the room
d. * alle twee/allebei de twee/beide boeken
  all two/all-both  the two/both  books
[+]  4.  Personal pronouns and proper nouns

Alle + Num and allebei can form a constituent with a plural personal pronoun, provided that the pronoun is realized in its strong, unreduced form and that it precedes the quantifier. That the string zij alle tien/allebei in (54) is a constituent is clear from the fact that it can precede the finite verb zijn in the main clauses (the constituency test). Note, though, that (54b), in which the pronoun has an inanimate referent, is much worse than (54a), in which the pronoun is animate. This may be related to the fact that strong pronouns are normally interpreted as +human; cf. Section, sub V.

a. (Wat die kinderen betreft,) zij/*ze alle tien/allebei zijn zeer slim.
  what those children concerns  they  all ten/both  are  very smart
  'As far as those children are concerned, they are all ten/both very smart.'
b. (Wat die problemen betreft,) ??zij/*ze alle tien/allebei zijn zeer ernstig.
  what those problems concerns    they  all ten/both  are very serious
  'As far as those problems are concerned, they are all ten/both very serious.'

It must also be noted that, while grammatical, example (54a) is marked compared to the variants in (55), in which the pronoun and the quantifier do not form a constituent; this use as floating quantifier is more extensively discussed in Section 7.1.4.

Discourse topic: a number of children
a. Zij/Ze zijn alle tien/allebei zeer slim.
  they  are  all ten/all-both  very smart
  'They are all ten/both very smart.'
b. Alle tien/allebei zijn zij/ze zeer slim.
  all ten/all-both  are  they  very smart

Since proper nouns are normally uniquely referring singular expressions, it is correctly predicted that they do not co-occur with pre-determiner alle + Num, as shown by (56a). The exceptional case in (56b) is not a counter-example; here the plural proper noun is preceded by the definite article de, and therefore behaves as a count noun.

a. * alle tien Jan/Jannen
  all  ten  Jansg/pl
b. alle tien de Jannen
  all  ten  the  Janpl
[+]  II.  Inflected simplex alle

The construction with pre-determiner al in (57a), discussed in Section, is semantically roughly on a par with the alle N construction in (57b), and the two constructions are therefore often considered to be surface variants, alle being assumed to be a fusion of bare al and the definite determiner. The investigation of the meaning contribution of alle and al de in Section 7.1.1 has already shown that there are semantic reasons to not follow this “fusion” approach, and the discussion in the following subsections will show that there are also distributional differences between them that make such an approach less plausible.

a. al de mannen
  all  the man
b. alle mannen
  all  men

This subsection will discuss the properties of alle inside the noun phrase. In conjunction with alle we will consider beide'both', which is syntactically virtually identical with alle except where noted otherwise.

[+]  A.  Simplex alle and noun phrase types

Table 5 shows that alle and beide cannot occur in singular count noun phrases, regardless of the grammatical gender of the noun. They do readily occur in plural noun phrases, which must be determinerless; see Subsection B for more discussion.

Table 5: Inflected alle'all' and beide'both' in noun phrases headed by a count noun
  [-neuter] [+neuter] plural
inflected alle *alle stad
all town
*alle huis
all house
alle steden/huizen
all towns/houses
beide *beide stad
both town
*beide huis
both house
alle/beide steden/huizen
all/both towns/houses

It should be noted, however, that in older stages of the language alle was possible with singular count nouns denoting a temporal interval like alle maand'each month', even when the noun was preceded by a numeral, as in alle vier maand (lit.: all four month) cf. Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal, lemma al. In present-day Dutch, elk(e) is used instead ( elke maand), although there are still some formal, idiomatic cases like in alle geval'in any case' and te allen tijde'at all times'. Finally, it should be noted that the form alleman with singular man exists as a compound, found in the fixed expression Jan en alleman'everybody' (lit.: Jan and everyman), and as the left-hand member of the larger compound allemansvriend'everymanʼs friend'.
      Though alle and beide precede plural noun phrases, they cannot be combined with the pluralia tantum in (58a) or with plurals like (58b) that denote a conventionally fixed unit.

a. * alle/beide hersenen/tropen
  all/both  brains/tropics
b. * alle/beide Verenigde Staten
  all/both  United States

      Inflected alle can also be combined with non-count nouns, although there are many restrictions that are not well understood. Furthermore, the data are not always as clear as one would like. Let us start with mass nouns like vee'cattle' or meubilair'furniture'. Although many cases can be found on the internet, we have the impression that alle does not readily combine with such nouns: our feeling is that al het vee/meubilair'all the cattle/furniture' is much preferred to alle vee/meubilair.

a. al het/??alle vee
  all the/all  cattle
b. al het/??alle meubilair
  all the/all  furniture

It might be the case that the two forms differ in meaning and that the form with al het is D-linked, that is, refers to a contextually defined set of entities, whereas the form with alle is non-D-linked, but we leave this to future research to decide. Furthermore, there are more or less idiomatic examples involving alle + mass noun: example (60a) provides one involving the mass noun verkeer'traffic'. That noun phrases like these are not productively used outside their formulaic syntactic contexts is shown by the fact that, to our ear, (60b) seems pretty awkward with inflected alle.

a. gesloten voor alle verkeer
  closed  for all traffic
b. Al het/*?Alle verkeer op de snelweg stond vast.
  all the/all  traffic  on the highway  stood  fast
  'All traffic on the highway was jammed.'

      With abstract non-count nouns gender may play a role: neuter nouns like verdriet'sorrow' and geluk'happiness' seem marked, whereas non-neuter nouns like moeite'trouble' and hoop'hope' seem completely acceptable with inflected alle. Our impression seems supported by a Google search (July 2008) on the nouns mentioned: the neuter nouns are more often preceded by al het'all the' than by alle'all', al de moeite'all the trouble' was about as frequent as alle moeite'all trouble', and alle hoop'all hope' far outnumbered al de hoop'all the hope'. It should be noted, however, that the results may not reflect that actual productive use of the sequence alle + abstract noun, given that abstract non-count nouns frequently occur in frozen expressions like those given in (61).

a. Straks komt er een eind aan alle verdriet.
  soon  comes  there  an end  to all sorrow
  'Soon, there will come an end to all sorrow.'
b. Alle moeite is voor niets geweest.
  all trouble  is for nothing  been
  'All efforts were to no avail.'
c. Hij had alle hoop al opgegeven.
  he  had  all hope  already  given.up
d. Alle begin is moeilijk.
  all beginning  is difficult

      With substance nouns, gender may again play a role. Neuter nouns like water and gebak'confectionery' seem marked, whereas non-neuter nouns like wijn'wine' and kaas'cheese' are completely acceptable with inflected alle. Our impression again seems to be confirmed by a Google search (July 2008) on the nouns mentioned: the neuter nouns are more often preceded by al het'all the' than by alle'all', whereas the non-neuter nouns are more often preceded by alle'all' than by al de'all the'. Nevertheless, it might be the case that judgments differ from case to case, and from person to person. Although future research is needed to see whether this is justified, we will assume for the moment that the general pattern is that substance nouns can be preceded both by alle'all' and by al de/het'all the'.
      Table 6 aims at summarizing the findings above, and also shows that beide differs from inflected alle in that it never co-occurs with non-count nouns.

Table 6: Inflected alle and beide in noun phrases headed by a non-count noun
  inflected alle beide
  [+neuter] [-neuter] [+neuter] [-neuter]
?alle water
all water
alle wijn/kaas
all wine/cheese
*beide water
both water
*beide wijn/kaas
both wine/cheese
?alle verdriet
all sadness
alle moeite
all trouble/hope
*beide verdriet
both sadness
*beide moeite
both trouble
??alle vee
all cattle
??alle politie
all police
*beide vee
both cattle
*beide politie
both police

      Section 7.1.1 has shown that inflected alle need not express universal quantification, but may also have a high degree reading; the examples in (62a&b), illustrate again that alle phrases headed by an abstract non-count noun are quite common on this reading. Another context in which alle can combine with an abstract non-count noun is given in (62c); the adjective mogelijke seems to be the licenser of alle here; possibly, alle mogelijke should be analyzed as a constituent.

High degree alle
a. alle lof
  all laudation
a'. alle reden
  all reason (every reason)
b. in alle ernst
  in all seriousness
b'. voor alle zekerheid
  for all security
c. alle mogelijke moeite/onzin/pracht/...
  all  possible  trouble/nonsense/beauty/...

      The universal quantifier alle gives rise to unacceptable or highly marked results if combined with a deverbal noun. A systematic class of exceptions to this rule is formed by ge-nominalizations, which can be construed relatively freely with alle (though the results may vary from case to case). This is shown in Table 7, which also shows that beide is never possible in this context.

Table 7: Inflected alle and beide in noun phrases headed by a deverbal noun
  inflected alle beide
bare stem ??alle werk (van deze week)
all work of this week
*beide werk (van deze week)
both work of this week
nominal infinitive *alle werken
all work
*beide werken
both work
ge-nominalization alle gedoe/gezeur/?gewerk
all fuss/nagging/working
*beide gedoe/gezeur/gewerk
both fuss/nagging/working

      This subsection has shown that there are various restrictions on the use of alle in combination with non-count nouns; cf. Table 6 and Table 7. Although the nature of these restrictions is far from clear, it is useful to point out that these restrictions are completely lacking in the case of pre-determiner bare al; cf. Table 2 and Table 3. This is unexpected on, and can therefore be seen as a problem for, the “fusion” approach, which considers alle a contracted form of pre-determiner bare al and the determiner following it.

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

This subsection investigates the restrictions that alle'all' and beide'both' pose on the presence of co-occurring determiners and quantificational elements. As in the case of bare al and the pre-determiner alle + Num, the syntax of the constituents modified by alle and beide largely mirrors that of the same constituents lacking these quantifiers. We will see later in this subsection that this fact provides a nice testing ground for the “fusion” approach, according to which alle is a contracted form of al and a definite determiner; cf. the discussion of example (70).

[+]  1.  Determiners

In the present-day vernacular, simplex alle cannot be combined with the definite article de or the demonstratives die/deze'those/these' (although the sequence alle de/die/deze can still be found in archaic and very formal language). Beide differs from alle in that it can be used to the right, though not to the left, of these determiners. Note that the fact that beide is not in complementary distribution with the definite article indicates that beide cannot be treated as the result of “fusion” of the morpheme bei, also found in the pre-determiner allebei (see Section, and the definite article.

a. * alle/beide de/die/deze mannen
  all/both  the/those/these  men
b. de/die/deze beide/*alle mannen
  the/those/these  both/all  men

There is no way of salvaging the ungrammatical examples in (63a) with the aid of contrastive accent; the bad cases are bad, no matter what context they are inserted into. On the other hand, the contrastive example in (64a), a contextualized variant of grammatical (63b) with beide, is somewhat awkward but structurally well-formed. backward conjunction reduction is marginally possible in (64b) when applied to beide mannen, but highly awkward when applied to mannen alone. NP-ellipsis in the second conjunct strengthens this distinction; (64c) show that it is fine with beide mannen elided but unacceptable with just mannen undergoing ellipsis.

a. ? Ik ken wel déze beide mannen, maar niet dié beide mannen.
b. Ik ken wel déze ?(??beide) ∅, maar niet dié beide mannen.
c. Ik ken wel déze beide mannen, maar niet dié (*beide) ∅.
  know  aff  these both men  but  not  those both [men]

       Alle does not occur in noun phrases that contain a possessive pronoun. Beide, on the other hand, is again possible if it appears to the right of the possessor, as is shown by (65b). The acceptability of these examples is unaffected by the complexity of the possessor; all variants of (65b) with beide in the right-hand slot are perfect, while all their counterparts with alle are unacceptable.

a. * alle/beide mijn/mijn vaders/mijn vader zʼn autoʼs
  all/both  my/my fatherʼs/my father his  cars
b. mijn/mijn vaders/mijn vader zʼn beide/*alle autoʼs
  my/my fatherʼs/my father his  both/all  cars

      The examples in (66a) show that neither alle nor beide combine with nominalized possessive pronouns. The ungrammaticality of (66a) is striking in the light of the impeccability of (66b), involving the pre-determiner counterparts of alle and beide. This contrast between (66a&b) is a further indication that alle/beide are not the result of “fusion” of the pre-determiners in (66b) with the definite article following them. The difference between al and beide in (66b') is due to the fact that only the former can be combined with non-count nouns; the fact that het mijne is necessarily singular therefore excludes allebei; cf. the earlier discussion of example (48).

a. * alle/beide mijne/jouwe/zijne/hare/onze/hunne
  all/both  mine/yourssg/his/hers/ours/theirs
b. al/allebei de mijne/jouwe/zijne/hare/onze/hunne
  all/both  the  mine/yourssg/his/hers/ours/theirs
b'. al/*allebei het mijne/jouwe/zijne/hare/onze/hunne
  all/both  the  mine/yourssg/his/hers/ours/theirs

       Alle and beide cannot be construed with noun phrases containing the indefinite article een, not even in the exclamative context in (67b), in which, in the absence of the pre-determiner, the indefinite article can combine with a plural noun phrase.

a. * <alle/beide> een <alle/beide> ellende
  all/both  misery
b. * <Alle/Beide> een <alle/beide> boeken dat hij heeft!
  all/both  books  that he has

      Earlier we saw that, next to beide mannen'both men', de beide mannen'the both men' is also grammatical. It should be noted, however, that the interpretation and concomitant syntactic distribution of the two forms are not identical. It seems to be the case that beide used without a determiner is semantically on a par with allebei + Det: allebei de mannen'both the men'. Post-determiner beide, on he other hand, is semantically distinct and behaves more like the numeral twee: de beide/twee mannen'the two men'. This difference between pre- and post determiner beide can be brought out by means of the examples in (68). While (68a) is preferably interpreted in such a way that the two Koreas have made a joint decision, the interpretation for (68b) is one in which each of the two Koreas has reached a decision on its own. In this regard (68b) seems to be on a par with (68b'), which, however, also allows an interpretation according to which there is one joint decision taken.

a. De beide/twee Koreaʼs hebben besloten de grenzen te openen.
  the both/two Koreas  have  decided  the borders  to open
  'The two Koreas have decided to open the borders.'
b. Allebei de Koreaʼs hebben besloten de grenzen te openen.
  all-both the Koreas  have  decided  the borders  to open
  'Both Koreas have decided to open the borders.'
b'. Beide Koreaʼs hebben besloten de grenzen te openen.
  both Koreas  have  decided  the borders  to open

That (68b&b') pattern together and are distinct from the pair in (68a) seems confirmed by (69): whereas the two examples in (69a) are fully acceptable, those in (69b) are anomalous.

a. Het overleg tussen de beide/twee Koreaʼs was vruchteloos.
  the consultation  between  the both/two  Koreas  was fruitless
b. * Het overleg tussen allebei de/beide Koreaʼs was vruchteloos.
  the consultation  between  both the/both  Koreas  was fruitless

      To conclude this subsection on determiners, we want to pay some more attention to the “fusion” approach to alle, according to which it is a fused form of al and the definite determiner. The overall conclusion from the discussion above is that simplex alle combines only with plural bare noun phrases. The complementary distribution of alle and the determiners makes it possible to hypothesize that the former occurs in the determiner position, which would of course support the “fusion” approach to alle. The examples in (70), however, provide evidence against this approach, since they show that alle does not behave like a definite determiner when it comes to the determination of adjectival inflection. While the definite article in (70c) triggers the inflectional -e ending in the attributive modifier of the noun, the attributive modifier in the alle phrase in (70a), taken from Perridon (1997), inflects as in the indefinite noun phrase in (70b).

a. alle ?slim/*slimme geknoei in de handel
  all  clever  fiddling  in the commerce
b. slim/*slimme geknoei
  clever  fiddling
c. het slimme/*slim geknoei
  the  clever  fiddling

Although noun phrase internal alle does not qualify as a definite determiner (which in turn may indicate that it does not occupy the determiner position in the DP), the noun phrase in (70a) has the outward appearance of a definite/strong noun phrase in the sense that it cannot be used as the associate of expletive er in existential or presentational constructions. Note that this holds for all alle phrases except for those in which alle h