Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch1
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

The relation of the argument IPI to to-infinitival clauses

quickinfo

An argument Imperativus-pro-Infinitivo (IPI) can always be replaced by a to-infinitival clause.

The argument IPI characteristically occurs in positions in which a to-infinitival clause can be found. An example is given below of a pair in which the first example involves an IPI, the second one a to-infinitival clause (BI stands for Bare Infinitive):

Ien fan 'e beppes hat sa goed west en doch in taast yn it knipke

one of the grandmothers has so good been and do.BI a seize in the purse

One of the grandmothers has been so kind as to provide a contribution from her purse

Ien fan 'e beppes hat sa goed west (om) in taast yn it knipke te dwaan

one of the grandmothers has so good been for a seize in the purse to do

One of the grandmothers has been so kind as to provide a contribution from her purse

The example also makes it clear that the IPI clause is not an argument in the normal sense of the word, although it is referred to as an argument IPI. In the example above, neither the IPI nor the to-infinitival clause can be replaced by an argument pronoun:

*Ien fan 'e beppes hat dat sa goed west

one of the grandmothers has that so good been

One of the grandmothers has been so kind as to do that

In the example above, the IPI seems to entertain a link with sa so. To the extent that pronominalisation is possible at all, an Adposition Phrase (PP) must be used, but that sounds old-fashioned and stilted, that is, it may have belonged to older written language:

??Ien fan 'e beppes hat dêrta sa goed west

one of the grandmothers has R.to so good been

One of the grandmothers has been so kind as to do that

??Ien fan 'e beppes hat dêr sa goed ta west

one of the grandmothers has R so good to been

One of the grandmothers has been so kind as to do that

In other cases, the IPI occurs in an argument position, or rather, in a position connected to an argument position, just like the to-infinitival clause:

Ik sjoch it net sitten en doch dêroan mei

I see it not sit and do.BI T.to with

I do not look forward to participating in it

Ik sjoch it net sitten om dêroan mei te dwaan

I see it not sit for T.to with to do.OI

I do not look forward to participating in it

It is an informed conjecture that the argument IPI developed around the same time that the inflection of the non-finite verb inside adjunct IPIs changed from being an ordinary infinitive to being a bare infinitive, that is, a form homophonous to the imperative. This may indicate that the feature specification of bare infinitives made it possible for the IPI to occur in argument positions, whereas this was not an option for ordinary infinitives.

The distribution of argument IPIs strongly overlaps with the distribution of to-infinitival clauses which are introduced by the optional complementiser om for. Such infinitival clauses are always selected. The complementiser om for is obligatory in the infinitival clause of purpose, which is not selected. Correspondingly, an IPI cannot have the interpretation of an infinitival clause of purpose:

Ik gie nei Bommel om de Maas te sjen

I went to Bommel for the Maas to see

I went to Bommel to see the Maas

*Ik gie nei Bommel en sjoch de Maas

I went to Bommel and see the Maas

I went to Bommel to see the Maas

There is, however, also a context in which the to-infinitival clause is selected, but the complementiser om for is nevertheless obligatory. This is the construction in which the infinitival clause contains an object gap that is coreferential with the subject of the matrix predicate. An example is given below:

Dizze fioele is gaadlik om sonates op te spyljen

this violin is suitable for sonatas on to play

This violin is very well suited to play sonatas on

An IPI is excluded here:

*Dizze fioele is gaadlik en spylje sonates op

this violin is suitable and play sonatas on

This violin is very well suited to play sonatas on

The example with the IPI improves in case a pronoun is inserted in the position which is linked to the subject position of the matrix predicate, although the end result is still ungrammatical, as the second example below shows. The first example below shows that the corresponding to-infinitival, with overt pronoun, is grammatical: