Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch1
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

The complementiser dat that as a marker of syntactic coordination

quickinfo

So far we know that the complementiser dat that can be followed by a Verb-Final construction and by a Verb-Second construction. Examples of the latter are discussed in UCV2s are main clauses syntactically, UCV2s are sensitive to linearity and referentiality and semantic characterisation of superordinate structures in which UCV2s are found. In addition, the complementiser dat that, therefore may also be used as a coordinating conjunction meaning so, therefore. In these cases, the clause introduced by dat that characteristically represents a reconstructed, or deduced, cause.

The complementiser dat that, therefore may be used as a coordinating conjunction meaning so, therefore. To illustrate, consider the sentence below:

Ik ha him yn lang net sjoen dat hy hat my yn lang net sjoen

I have him in long not seen that he has me in long not seen

I have not seen him for a long time, so he has not seen me for a long time

The complementiser dat that can also be used to string a sentence together to the previous discourse:

Dat de Holwerda's wiene om sa te sizzen yn alle trije thús

that the Holwerda's were for so to put in all three home

So the Holwerda's were at home in all three of them, so to speak

As in the case of coordination, this use of the complementiser allows of forward gapping, at least for some speakers. The gapped words have been put between parentheses:

Ik ha him yn lang net sjoen dat hy hat my (yn lang) net (sjoen)

I have him in long not seen that he has me in long not seen

I have not seen him for a long time, so he has not seen me for a long time

Ik ha him yn lang net sjoen en hy hat my (yn lang) net (sjoen)

I have him in long not seen and he has me in long not seen

I have not seen him for a long time, and he has not seen me for a long time

Coordinating complementisers in general display this pattern of ellipsis, such as dus so, mar but, want for, because.

However, in case dat that introduces a UCV2 with a verb of saying or attitude, it does not allow of forward gapping:

Pyt sei dat hy sei wat tsjin my

Pyt said that he said something to me

*Pyt sei dat hy wat tsjin my

Pyt said that he said something to me

Both examples involve a second sentence displaying Verb-Second, so it seems that what differentiates the two is not syntax. The difference between the two could well be semantic. The grammatical example of ellipsis involves semantic coordination, whereas the ungrammatical example involves semantic subordination, seeing that the second clause functions as the semantic complement to the verb of saying.

Note that the coordinating use of dat that always requires Verb-Second in the coordinated sentence. Verb-Final is not an option, which is shown in (5):

*Ik ha him yn lang net sjoen dat hy my yn lang net sjoen hat

I have him in long not seen that he me in long not seen has

I have not seen him for a long time, so he has not seen me for a long time

*Dat de Holwerda's om sa te sizzen yn alle trije thús wiene

that the Holwerda's for so to put in all three home were

So the Holwerda's were at home in all three of them, so to speak

The alternation between Verb-Final and Verb-Second is only found following verbs of saying and attitude, as well as in some other specific environments (see semantic characterisation of superordinate structures in which UCV2s are found). The alternation between Verb-Final and Verb-Second may be analysed as an alternation between two different categories.

Bound variable binding is not normally allowed between an antecedent in one conjunct and a bound pronoun in the other conjunct. However, it is possible to come up with examples that are grammatical, as is clear from (6):

Elke boer hie in jier syn kij net sjoen, dat hy woe se mar al te graach wer sjen

every farmer had a year his cows not seen that he wanted them DcP all too eagerly again see

Every farmer had not seen his cows for a year, so he wanted to see them again very much

The same example is also grammatical with the conjunct en and, instead of dat that. Such examples seem to require a specific type of syntactic structure in the first conjunct, possibly involving negation. The sentence can be converted into a donkey sentence which is also grammatical:

As in boer syn kij in jier net sjoen hat, wol er se mar al te graach wer sjen

if a farmer his cows a year not seen has wants he them DcP all to eagerly again see

If a farmer has not seen his cows for a year, then he wants very much to see them again

References

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Eric Hoekstra

Category: Frisian Syntax

Keywords: complementiser

Version: 1.0, December 2015

Version history:

version	editor(s)	date	remarks
1.0	Eric Hoekstra	December 2015

printreport errorcite

Jump to:

introduction
references
related articles