Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

4.2.1.1.Spatial constructions

quickinfo

Although we do not intend to extensively repeat the discussion of spatial adpositions that was given in Section 1.1.2.2, we will nevertheless start in Subsection I by giving a brief indication of the main difference between locational and directional adpositional phrases, which will be the topics of, respectively, Subsections II and III.

I. General introduction
II. Locational constructions
III. Directional constructions
IV. Summary

[+] I. General introduction

Spatial adpositional complementives can either denote a location or a direction. The actual interpretation of clauses with a locational complementive depends on the main verb: if the verb is stative, as in (15a), the clause just expresses that the subject of the adpositional phrase occupies a certain location, but if the verb denotes an activity or a process, as in (15b), the clause expresses that the subject is undergoing a change of location. Since directional complementives always imply a change of location, they require that the main verb denote an activity or a process, as is shown in (15c).

a.		Jan ligt	in	het zwembad.	location
		Jan lies	in	the swimming.pool

b.		Jan valt	in	het zwembad.	change of location
		Jan falls	into	the swimming.pool

c.		Jan valt/*ligt	het zwembad	in.	directional
		Jan falls	the swimming.pool	into

Locational adpositional phrases are normally headed by prepositions (although occasionally a circumposition can be used as well). Directional phrases, on the other hand, can either be headed by a directional preposition like naar'to' or a post- or circumposition; cf. Section 1.3.
The semantic difference between constructions like (15b) and (15c) is often not immediately clear. The main difference between locational and directional adpositional phrases is that the latter implies the notion of a path, whereas the former does not and simply indicate the (new) position of the located object. The fact that the two types of adpositional phrases differ can be made clear by means of the XP met die NP! construction. For most speakers, the XP must be a directional phrase; if the XP is a locational phrase, the construction gives rise to a marked result. This accounts for the difference between (16a') and (16b').

a.		We	gooien	die jongen	in het zwembad.	change of location
		we	throw	that boy	into the swimming.pool

a'.	%	In het zwembad	met die jongen!
		into the swimming.pool	with that boy

b.		We	gooien	die jongen	het zwembad	in.	directional
		we	throw	that boy	the swimming.pool	into

b'.		Het zwembad	in	met die jongen!
		the swimming.pool	into	with that boy

Verbs with spatial complementives may differ with respect to the selection restrictions they impose on spatial PPs: the (stative) locational verbs in (17a) are only compatible with adpositional phrases that denote a location; the verbs of change of location in (17b) force a change of location reading on the adpositional phrase, and can be seen as the causative counterparts of the verbs in (17a); the verbs of traversing in (17c), finally, seem compatible only with adpositional phrases that denote a direction (= change of location along a path).

Verbs of location (monadic): hangen'to hang', liggen'to lie', staan'to stand', zitten'to sit'

Verbs of change of location (dyadic): hangen'to hang', leggen'to lay', zetten'to put'

Verbs of traversing: fietsen'to cycle', rijden'to drive', wandelen'to walk', etc.

An illustration of the restrictions imposed by these verbs on an adpositional predicate is given in (18). In (18a), the locational verb staan'to stand' indicates that the car is situated on the hill. Example (18b) also expresses that the car is situated on the hill, but in addition it is claimed that this position of the car is the result of an action by Jan, that is, that a change of location is involved. That the verb zetten'to put' is not compatible with a directional adpositional phrase is clear from the fact illustrated in (18b') that the prepositional phrase cannot be replaced by the postpositional one de heuvel op'onto the hill'. Example (18c) also indicates a change of location, but in addition it is expressed that the car is covering some path. That rijden'to drive' preferably takes a directional adpositional phrase is clear from the fact that it is at best marginally compatible with the prepositional phrase op de heuvel'on the hill'; see Section 1.1.2.2, sub I, for exceptions and more discussion.

a.	De auto	staat	op de heuvel.
	the car	stands	on the hill
	'The car is standing on the hill.'

b.	Jan zet	de auto	op de heuvel.
	Jan puts	the car	onto the hill
	'Jan is putting the car onto the hill.'

b'.

Jan zet de auto de heuvel op.

c.	Jan rijdt	de auto	de heuvel	op.
	Jan drives	the car	the hill	onto
	'Jan is driving the car onto the hill.'

c'.

Jan rijdt de auto op de heuvel.

Now that we have repeated some of the basic distinctions between the various types of spatial adpositional phrases, we can continue by discussing their behavior with respect to topicalization, scrambling, PP-over-V, and R-extraction: Subsection II starts by discussing spatial complementives denoting a (change) of location, which is followed by a discussion of the directional complementives in Subsection III.

[+] II. Locational constructions

This subsection investigates four syntactic properties of the predicative constructions in (19), which express a (change of) location of the referent of the noun phrase het boek'the book', subsequently, we will discuss topicalization, scrambling, and PP-over-V of, and R-extraction from the adpositional complementives.

a.		Het boek	lag	gisteren	op de tafel.
		the book	lay	yesterday	on the table

b.	Jan legde	het boek	net	op de tafel.
	Jan put	the book	just	on the table
	'Jan put the book on the table just now.'

[+] A. Topicalization

The examples in (20) show that topicalization of a predicative adpositional phrase denoting (change of) location is easily possible.

a.		Op de tafel	lag	gisteren	een boek.
		on the table	lay	yesterday	a book

b.		Op de tafel	legde	Jan net	een boek.
		on the table	put	Jan just	a book

[+] B. Scrambling

Generally speaking, scrambling of locational complementives gives rise to degraded results. As is shown in (21), the locational PP normally immediately precedes, that is, is left-adjacent to the verb(s) in clause-final position.

a.		dat	het boek <*op de tafel>	gisteren <op de tafel>	lag.
		that	the book on the table	yesterday	lay

b.	dat	Jan <*op de tafel>	het boek <*op de tafel>	net <op de tafel>	legde.
	that	Jan on the table	the book	just	put
	'that Jan put the book on the table just now.'

There are, however, at least two exceptions to this general rule. First, if the locational complementive is assigned emphatic focus (indicated by italics) or if it is preceded by a focus particle like zelfs'even', scrambling is possible. So, whereas scrambling is excluded in the neutrally pronounced (22a), it is possible in (22b&c).

a.	dat	Jan <*in de vaas>	rozen <in de vaas>	zet.
	that	Jan in the vase	roses	puts
	'that Jan probably puts the roses in the vase.'

b.		dat	Jan <in deze vaas>	rozen <in deze vaas>	zet.
		that	Jan in this vase	roses	puts

c.	dat	Jan zelfs <in deze vaas>	rozen <in deze vaas>	zet.
	that	Jan even in this vase	roses	puts
	'that Jan even puts roses in this vase.'

Second, example (23b) shows that scrambling is also licensed if the located and reference object are quantified. At first sight, the two variants in (23a&b) seem to have the same meaning in (23c): for every vase (in the domain of discourse), there is a rose such that Jan puts that rose in it. The main difference seems to be that the order in which the noun phrase een roos precedes the PP requires emphatic focus on the noun phrase.

a.	?	dat	Jan een roos	in elke vaas	stopte.
		that	Jan a rose	in every vase	put

b.		dat	Jan in elke vaas	een roos	stopte.
		that	Jan in every vase	a rose	put

∀x (vase (x) → ∃y (rose (y) ∧ Jan put y in x))

The claim that the two orders in (23a&b) express the same meaning is wrong, however, given that the two orders in (24a&b) do express different meanings. The most prominent reading of (24a) is that one of Janʼs fingers is put in all bowls (e.g., Jan is tasting the content of each bowl by using the forefinger of his right hand), whereas (24b) is most readily interpreted as involving more fingers, with each finger put in another bowl. If these intuitions are correct, we may conclude that the two orders differ in the relative scope of the two quantified nouns, as is formally expressed in (24a'&b').

a.	dat	Jan	een vinger	in elk schaaltje	stopt.
	that	Jan	a finger	in every bowl	puts
	'that Jan puts a finger in every bowl.'

a'.

∃x (finger (x) ∧ ∀y (bowl (y) → Jan puts x in y))

b.	dat	Jan in elk schaaltje	een vinger	stopt.
	that	Jan in every bowl	a finger	puts
	'that Jan puts a finger in every bowl.'

b'.

∀x (bowl (x) → ∃y (finger (y) ∧ Jan puts y in x))

The conclusion that the order of the noun phrase and the PP (24a&b) reflects the relative scope of the two phrases also accounts for the fact that placing the PP left-adjacent to the verb gives rise to a somewhat marked result in (23a) if the sentence is pronounced without emphatic focus on the noun phrase: the resulting interpretation that there is only one rose, which is put in every vase, does not refer to a plausible situation.
The discussion in this subsection strongly suggests that scrambling of locational PPs is excluded unless they are assigned emphatic focus or the relative scope of the located and the reference objects is indicated.

[+] C. PP-over-V

Although the precise judgments on status of the primed examples in (25) seem to differ somewhat among speakers, the general consensus seems to be that PP-over-V of complementive adpositional phrases denoting a (change of) location gives rise to a degraded result.

a.	dat	het boek	op de tafel	lag.
	that	the book	on the table	lay
	'that the book lay on the table.'

a'.

dat het boek lag op de tafel.

b.	dat	Jan het boek	op de tafel	legde.
	that	Jan the book	on the table	put
	'that Jan put the book on the table.'

b'.

dat Jan het boek legde op de tafel.

It should be noted, however, that the ban on PP-over-V is lifted if we are dealing with particle verbs or certain prefixed verbs. Example (26) illustrates this for the particle verb neerleggen'to put down'; we will return to this fact in Section 4.2.1.2, sub II and III.

a.	dat	Jan het boek	op de tafel	neer	legde.
	that	Jan the book	on the table	down	put
	'that Jan put the book down on the table.'

dat Jan het boek neer legde op de tafel.

[+] D. R-extraction

R-extraction from predicative adpositional phrases denoting a (change of) location is possible. The examples in (27) illustrate this by means of a relative clause, in which the relative R-pronoun corresponds to the complement of the locational adposition.

a.	de tafel	waar	het boek	op	lag
	the table	where	the book	on	lay
	'the table that the book lay on'

b.	de tafel	waar	Jan het boek	op	legde
	the table	where	Jan the book	on	put
	'the table that Jan put the book on'

[+] E. Conclusion

The previous subsections have shown that whereas locational complementives do allow topicalization, they cannot be scrambled or in extraposed position. Furthermore, we have seen that these complementive readily allow R-extraction, subsection III will show that directional complementives exhibit more or less the same behavior.

[+] III. Directional constructions

Locational adpositional phrase are generally prepositional, whereas the examples in (28) show that directional ones can be pre-, post- or circumpositional. Below we will see that these three types of adpositional phrases exhibit different behavior with respect to the four syntactic processes under discussion.

a.		Jan reed	naar zijn buitenhuis.	prepositional
		Jan drove	to his country.house

b.	Jan reed	de berg	op.	postpositional
	Jan drove	the mountain	onto
	'Jan drove onto the mountain.'

c.	Jan sprong	van de tafel	af.	circumpositional
	Jan jumped	from the table	af
	'Jan jumped from the table.'

[+] A. Topicalization

Topicalization of directional complementives requires that contrastive accent be assigned to some specific part of the adpositional phrase; the part that must be accented depends on whether we are dealing with a pre-, post- or circum-positional phrase. Example (29a) shows that topicalization of a prepositional phrase requires that the nominal complement of the PP be assigned contrastive accent (indicated by small caps). Topicalization of a postpositional phrase, as in (29b), requires that the postposition be assigned contrastive accent; if the accent is on the complement of the postposition, the complement may be topicalized but the postposition must be stranded in its original position. Topicalization of a circumpositional phrase requires that contrastive accent be assigned to the second part of the adposition, as in (29c).

a.		Naar zijn buitenhuis	reed	Jan.
		to his country.house	drove	Jan

b.		De berg	op	reed	Jan (niet af).
		the mountain	onto	drove	Jan not down

b'.		De berg	<*op>	reed	Jan <op>	(niet de brug).
		the mountain	onto	drove	Jan	not the bridge

c.		Van de tafel	af	sprong	Jan.
		from the table	af	jumped	Jan

[+] B. Scrambling

The examples in (30) show that, just as in the case of the predicatively used locational PPs, scrambling is generally excluded with directional PPs. Example (30a') is excluded and cannot even be saved by giving emphatic accent to the PP. The same thing holds for (30b'), although it may be worthwhile to note that scrambling of the nominal complement of the postposition, as in (30b''), does lead to an acceptable result. The (c)-examples show that Scrambling of circumpositional phrases is again excluded.

a.		dat	Jan met zijn dienstauto	naar zijn buitenhuis	reed.
		that	Jan with his company.car	to his country.house	drove

a'.

dat Jan naar zijn buitenhuis met zijn dienstauto reed.

b.		dat	Jan snel	de berg	op	reed.
		that	Jan quickly	the mountain	up	drove

b'.

dat Jan de berg op snel reed.

b''.

dat

Jan de berg snel op reed.

c.		dat	Jan snel	van de tafel	af	sprong.
		that	Jan quickly	from the table	af	jumped

c'.

dat Jan van de tafel af snel sprong.

[+] C. PP-over-V

The examples in (31) show that, just as in the case of the predicatively used locational PPs, PP-over-V of directional adpositional phrases leads to a degraded result.

a.		dat	Jan naar zijn buitenhuis	reed.
		that	Jan to his country.house	drove

a'.

dat Jan reed naar zijn buitenhuis.

b.		dat	Jan de berg	op	reed.
		that	Jan the mountain	onto	drove

b'.

dat Jan reed de berg op.

c.		dat	Jan van de tafel	af	sprong.
		that	Jan from the table	af	jumped

c'.

dat

Jan sprong van de tafel af.

[+] D. R-extraction

R-extraction from directional prepositional phrases gives rise to a degraded result. This is illustrated in (32a) by means of a relative clause, in which the relative pronoun corresponds to the complement of the directional preposition naar; see Section 5.2.1, sub IB for a more detailed discussion. R-extraction from postpositional phrases is excluded as well; example (32b) is allowed but strongly favors a locational reading of the adposition op, which shows that we are dealing with the pre-, not the postposition op. Example (32c) shows that R-extraction from circumpositional phrases, on the other hand, is easily possible.

a.	*	het buitenhuis	waar	Jan naar	reed
		the country.house	where	Jan to	drove

b.	#	de berg	waar	Jan op	reed
		the mountain	where	Jan onto	drove

c.		de tafel	waar	Jan van	af	sprong
		the table	where	Jan from	af	jumped

Example (33b) shows that (32a) becomes grammatical if the element toe is added, but that is not surprising in the light of the acceptability of (32c) given that we are probably dealing then with the circumposition naar ... toe from (33a). It is not clear whether the unacceptability of (32a) should be attributed to some (unknown) syntactic constraint or whether the acceptable example in (33b) is preferred for some reason and thus blocks realization of (32a).

a.		Jan reed	naar het buitenhuis	toe.
		Jan drove	to the country.house	toe

b.		het buitenhuis	waar	Jan naar	*(toe)	reed
		the country.house	where	Jan to	toe	drove

In order to obtain a directional reading in (32b), waar must be replaced by the relative pronoun die'that' as in (34b). This is remarkable given the fact that the relative pronoun die gives rise to an ungrammatical result in prepositional and circumpositional constructions like (34a&c).

a.	*	het buitenhuis	die	Jan naar	(toe)	reed
		the country.house	that	Jan to	toe	drove

b.		de berg	die	Jan op	reed
		the mountain	that	Jan onto	drove

c.	*	de tafel	die	Jan van	af	sprong
		the table	that	Jan from	af	jumped

Note in passing that the judgments on the (b)-examples in (32) and (34) are somewhat idealized and actually vary somewhat among speakers. Further, there are some postpositional constructions in which the R-pronoun can also be used. Since discussing these data in detail would lead to a laborious digression, we postpone this issue to Section 5.2.2.
The acceptability of (34b) is probably related to the fact that the postposition and its nominal complement need not be adjacent: the nominal complement can be topicalized, as in (29b') repeated below as (35a); it can be scrambled, as in (35b), and in the southern varieties of Dutch it can be separated from the postposition by incorporation of the latter into the verb cluster, as in (35c).

a.		De berg	reed	Jan op	(niet de brug).
		the mountain	drove	Jan onto	not the bridge

b.		Jan reed	de berg	snel	op.
		Jan drove	the mountain	quickly	onto

c.	%	dat	Jan de berg	wou	op	rijden.
		that	Jan the mountain	wanted	onto	drive
		'that Jan wanted to drive onto the mountain.'

Although the complement of the postposition seems to behave in this respect as an independent constituent, it is important to note that it is assigned case not by the verb but by the postposition. This is clear from the fact that examples such as (36a) cannot be passivized; actually, the fact that verbs of traversing are unaccusative a priori militates against assuming that the noun phrase de berg is assigned accusative case by the verb rijden'to drive' in (36a).

a.		dat	Jan de berg	snel	op	reed.
		that	Jan the mountain	quickly	onto	drove

b.	*	dat	de berg	snel	werd	op	gereden.
		that	the mountain	quickly	was	onto	driven

The claim that it is the postposition op that assigns case to the noun phrase de berg is also supported by the fact that it is the located object de autoʼs'the cars' that is assigned accusative case by the verb in the resultative construction in (37b); as expected, passivization results in promotion of the located object to subject, and not of the reference object de berg'the mountain', as can be readily verified from (the lack of) number agreement between the noun phrases and the finite verb in (37b).

a.	dat	Jan de autoʼs	de berg	op	reed.
	that	Jan the car	the mountain	onto	drove
	'that Jan drove the car onto the mountain.'

b.	dat	de autoʼspl	de bergsg	werdenpl	op	gereden.
	that	the cars	the mountain	were	onto	driven
	'that the cars were driven onto the mountain.'

[+] IV. Summary

Table 3 summarizes the discussion of the syntactic behavior of predicatively used spatial adpositional phrases in the previous subsections. Recall that the ban on scrambling of the locational PPs is lifted if the PP is contrastively focused or if the located and reference object are quantified; see the discussion of the examples in (22) and (23). R-extraction is possible from directional circumpositional phrases, but not from pre- and postpositional ones. This means that there is also a contrast between locational and directional prepositional phrases in this respect, but it is not clear whether this difference is syntactically motivated or whether some other constraint is involved; see the discussion of (32a) and (33).

Table 3: Predicatively used spatial adpositional phrases

	locational	directional
topicalization	+	+
scrambling	—	—
PP-over-V	—	—
R-extraction	+	— (pre- and postpositions) + (circumpositions)

References:

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Hans Broekhuis

Category: Dutch Syntax

Keywords: Adpositional PhraseBlockingDirectional Adpositional PhraseEmphatic FocusFocusFocus ParticleLocational Adpositional PhraseNoun PhrasePP-over-VParticleParticle VerbQuantified Noun phraseR-extractionScopeScramblingSpatial Adpositional phraseTopicalizationVerbVerb Cluster

Version: 1.0, December 2015

Version history:

version	editor(s)	date	remarks
1.0	Hans Broekhuis	December 2015

report errorprintcite

Jump to:

introduction
references
related articles