- Dutch1
- Frisian
- Saterfrisian
- Afrikaans
-
- Phonology
- Segment inventory
- Phonotactics
- Phonological processes
- Phonology-morphology interface
- Word stress
- Primary stress in simplex words
- Monomorphemic words
- Diachronic aspects
- Generalizations on stress placement
- Default penultimate stress
- Lexical stress
- The closed penult restriction
- Final closed syllables
- The diphthong restriction
- Superheavy syllables (SHS)
- The three-syllable window
- Segmental restrictions
- Phonetic correlates
- Stress shifts in loanwords
- Quantity-sensitivity
- Secondary stress
- Vowel reduction in unstressed syllables
- Stress in complex words
- Primary stress in simplex words
- Accent & intonation
- Clitics
- Spelling
- Morphology
- Word formation
- Compounding
- Nominal compounds
- Verbal compounds
- Adjectival compounds
- Affixoids
- Coordinative compounds
- Synthetic compounds
- Reduplicative compounds
- Phrase-based compounds
- Elative compounds
- Exocentric compounds
- Linking elements
- Separable complex verbs (SCVs)
- Gapping of complex words
- Particle verbs
- Copulative compounds
- Derivation
- Numerals
- Derivation: inputs and input restrictions
- The meaning of affixes
- Non-native morphology
- Cohering and non-cohering affixes
- Prefixation
- Suffixation
- Nominal suffixation: person nouns
- Conversion
- Pseudo-participles
- Bound forms
- Nouns
- Nominal prefixes
- Nominal suffixes
- -aal and -eel
- -aar
- -aard
- -aat
- -air
- -aris
- -ast
- Diminutives
- -dom
- -een
- -ees
- -el (nominal)
- -elaar
- -enis
- -er (nominal)
- -erd
- -erik
- -es
- -eur
- -euse
- ge...te
- -heid
- -iaan, -aan
- -ief
- -iek
- -ier
- -ier (French)
- -ière
- -iet
- -igheid
- -ij and allomorphs
- -ijn
- -in
- -ing
- -isme
- -ist
- -iteit
- -ling
- -oir
- -oot
- -rice
- -schap
- -schap (de)
- -schap (het)
- -sel
- -st
- -ster
- -t
- -tal
- -te
- -voud
- Verbs
- Adjectives
- Adverbs
- Univerbation
- Neo-classical word formation
- Construction-dependent morphology
- Morphological productivity
- Compounding
- Inflection
- Inflection and derivation
- Allomorphy
- The interface between phonology and morphology
- Word formation
- Syntax
- Preface and acknowledgements
- Verbs and Verb Phrases
- 1 Characterization and classification
- 2 Projection of verb phrases I:Argument structure
- 3 Projection of verb phrases II:Verb frame alternations
- Introduction
- 3.1. Main types
- 3.2. Alternations involving the external argument
- 3.3. Alternations of noun phrases and PPs
- 3.3.1. Dative/PP alternations (dative shift)
- 3.3.1.1. Dative alternation with aan-phrases (recipients)
- 3.3.1.2. Dative alternation with naar-phrases (goals)
- 3.3.1.3. Dative alternation with van-phrases (sources)
- 3.3.1.4. Dative alternation with bij-phrases (possessors)
- 3.3.1.5. Dative alternation with voor-phrases (benefactives)
- 3.3.1.6. Conclusion
- 3.3.1.7. Bibliographical notes
- 3.3.2. Accusative/PP alternations
- 3.3.3. Nominative/PP alternations
- 3.3.1. Dative/PP alternations (dative shift)
- 3.4. Some apparent cases of verb frame alternation
- 3.5. Bibliographical notes
- 4 Projection of verb phrases IIIa:Selection of clauses/verb phrases
- 5 Projection of verb phrases IIIb:Argument and complementive clauses
- Introduction
- 5.1. Finite argument clauses
- 5.2. Infinitival argument clauses
- 5.3. Complementive clauses
- 6 Projection of verb phrases IIIc:Complements of non-main verbs
- 7 Projection of verb phrases IIId:Verb clusters
- 8 Projection of verb phrases IV: Adverbial modification
- 9 Word order in the clause I:General introduction
- 10 Word order in the clause II:Position of the finite verb (verb-first/second)
- 11 Word order in the clause III:Clause-initial position (wh-movement)
- Introduction
- 11.1. The formation of V1- and V2-clauses
- 11.2. Clause-initial position remains (phonetically) empty
- 11.3. Clause-initial position is filled
- 12 Word order in the clause IV:Postverbal field (extraposition)
- 13 Word order in the clause V: Middle field (scrambling)
- 14 Main-clause external elements
- Nouns and Noun Phrases
- 1 Characterization and classification
- 2 Projection of noun phrases I: complementation
- Introduction
- 2.1. General observations
- 2.2. Prepositional and nominal complements
- 2.3. Clausal complements
- 2.4. Bibliographical notes
- 3 Projection of noun phrases II: modification
- Introduction
- 3.1. Restrictive and non-restrictive modifiers
- 3.2. Premodification
- 3.3. Postmodification
- 3.3.1. Adpositional phrases
- 3.3.2. Relative clauses
- 3.3.3. Infinitival clauses
- 3.3.4. A special case: clauses referring to a proposition
- 3.3.5. Adjectival phrases
- 3.3.6. Adverbial postmodification
- 3.4. Bibliographical notes
- 4 Projection of noun phrases III: binominal constructions
- Introduction
- 4.1. Binominal constructions without a preposition
- 4.2. Binominal constructions with a preposition
- 4.3. Bibliographical notes
- 5 Determiners: articles and pronouns
- Introduction
- 5.1. Articles
- 5.2. Pronouns
- 5.3. Bibliographical notes
- 6 Numerals and quantifiers
- 7 Pre-determiners
- Introduction
- 7.1. The universal quantifier al 'all' and its alternants
- 7.2. The pre-determiner heel 'all/whole'
- 7.3. A note on focus particles
- 7.4. Bibliographical notes
- 8 Syntactic uses of noun phrases
- Adjectives and Adjective Phrases
- 1 Characteristics and classification
- 2 Projection of adjective phrases I: Complementation
- 3 Projection of adjective phrases II: Modification
- 4 Projection of adjective phrases III: Comparison
- 5 Attributive use of the adjective phrase
- 6 Predicative use of the adjective phrase
- 7 The partitive genitive construction
- 8 Adverbial use of the adjective phrase
- 9 Participles and infinitives: their adjectival use
- 10 Special constructions
- Adpositions and adpositional phrases
- 1 Characteristics and classification
- Introduction
- 1.1. Characterization of the category adposition
- 1.2. A formal classification of adpositional phrases
- 1.3. A semantic classification of adpositional phrases
- 1.3.1. Spatial adpositions
- 1.3.2. Temporal adpositions
- 1.3.3. Non-spatial/temporal prepositions
- 1.4. Borderline cases
- 1.5. Bibliographical notes
- 2 Projection of adpositional phrases: Complementation
- 3 Projection of adpositional phrases: Modification
- 4 Syntactic uses of the adpositional phrase
- 5 R-pronominalization and R-words
- 1 Characteristics and classification
- Phonology
-
- General
- Phonology
- Segment inventory
- Phonotactics
- Phonological Processes
- Assimilation
- Vowel nasalization
- Syllabic sonorants
- Final devoicing
- Fake geminates
- Vowel hiatus resolution
- Vowel reduction introduction
- Schwa deletion
- Schwa insertion
- /r/-deletion
- d-insertion
- {s/z}-insertion
- t-deletion
- Intrusive stop formation
- Breaking
- Vowel shortening
- h-deletion
- Replacement of the glide w
- Word stress
- Clitics
- Allomorphy
- Orthography of Frisian
- Morphology
- Inflection
- Word formation
- Derivation
- Prefixation
- Infixation
- Suffixation
- Nominal suffixes
- Verbal suffixes
- Adjectival suffixes
- Adverbial suffixes
- Numeral suffixes
- Interjectional suffixes
- Onomastic suffixes
- Conversion
- Compositions
- Derivation
- Syntax
- Verbs and Verb Phrases
- Characteristics and classification
- Unergative and unaccusative subjects
- Evidentiality
- To-infinitival clauses
- Predication and noun incorporation
- Ellipsis
- Imperativus-pro-Infinitivo
- Expression of irrealis
- Embedded Verb Second
- Agreement
- Negation
- Nouns & Noun Phrases
- Classification
- Complementation
- Modification
- Partitive noun constructions
- Referential partitive constructions
- Partitive measure nouns
- Numeral partitive constructions
- Partitive question constructions
- Nominalised quantifiers
- Kind partitives
- Partitive predication with prepositions
- Bare nominal attributions
- Articles and names
- Pronouns
- Quantifiers and (pre)determiners
- Interrogative pronouns
- R-pronouns
- Syntactic uses
- Adjective Phrases
- Characteristics and classification
- Complementation
- Modification and degree quantification
- Comparison by degree
- Comparative
- Superlative
- Equative
- Attribution
- Agreement
- Attributive adjectives vs. prenominal elements
- Complex adjectives
- Noun ellipsis
- Co-occurring adjectives
- Predication
- Partitive adjective constructions
- Adverbial use
- Participles and infinitives
- Adposition Phrases
- Characteristics and classification
- Complementation
- Modification
- Intransitive adpositions
- Predication
- Preposition stranding
- Verbs and Verb Phrases
-
- General
- Morphology
- Morphology
- 1 Word formation
- 1.1 Compounding
- 1.1.1 Compounds and their heads
- 1.1.2 Special types of compounds
- 1.1.2.1 Affixoids
- 1.1.2.2 Coordinative compounds
- 1.1.2.3 Synthetic compounds and complex pseudo-participles
- 1.1.2.4 Reduplicative compounds
- 1.1.2.5 Phrase-based compounds
- 1.1.2.6 Elative compounds
- 1.1.2.7 Exocentric compounds
- 1.1.2.8 Linking elements
- 1.1.2.9 Separable Complex Verbs and Particle Verbs
- 1.1.2.10 Noun Incorporation Verbs
- 1.1.2.11 Gapping
- 1.2 Derivation
- 1.3 Minor patterns of word formation
- 1.1 Compounding
- 2 Inflection
- 1 Word formation
- Morphology
- Syntax
- Adjectives and adjective phrases (APs)
- 0 Introduction to the AP
- 1 Characteristics and classification of APs
- 2 Complementation of APs
- 3 Modification and degree quantification of APs
- 4 Comparison by comparative, superlative and equative
- 5 Attribution of APs
- 6 Predication of APs
- 7 The partitive adjective construction
- 8 Adverbial use of APs
- 9 Participles and infinitives as APs
- Nouns and Noun Phrases (NPs)
- 0 Introduction to the NP
- 1 Characteristics and Classification of NPs
- 2 Complementation of NPs
- 3 Modification of NPs
- 3.1 Modification of NP by Determiners and APs
- 3.2 Modification of NP by PP
- 3.3 Modification of NP by adverbial clauses
- 3.4 Modification of NP by possessors
- 3.5 Modification of NP by relative clauses
- 3.6 Modification of NP in a cleft construction
- 3.7 Free relative clauses and selected interrogative clauses
- 4 Partitive noun constructions and constructions related to them
- 4.1 The referential partitive construction
- 4.2 The partitive construction of abstract quantity
- 4.3 The numerical partitive construction
- 4.4 The partitive interrogative construction
- 4.5 Adjectival, nominal and nominalised partitive quantifiers
- 4.6 Kind partitives
- 4.7 Partitive predication with a preposition
- 4.8 Bare nominal attribution
- 5 Articles and names
- 6 Pronouns
- 7 Quantifiers, determiners and predeterminers
- 8 Interrogative pronouns
- 9 R-pronouns and the indefinite expletive
- 10 Syntactic functions of Noun Phrases
- Adpositions and Adpositional Phrases (PPs)
- 0 Introduction to the PP
- 1 Characteristics and classification of PPs
- 2 Complementation of PPs
- 3 Modification of PPs
- 4 Bare (intransitive) adpositions
- 5 Predication of PPs
- 6 Form and distribution of adpositions with respect to staticity and construction type
- 7 Adpositional complements and adverbials
- Verbs and Verb Phrases (VPs)
- 0 Introduction to the VP in Saterland Frisian
- 1 Characteristics and classification of verbs
- 2 Unergative and unaccusative subjects and the auxiliary of the perfect
- 3 Evidentiality in relation to perception and epistemicity
- 4 Types of to-infinitival constituents
- 5 Predication
- 5.1 The auxiliary of being and its selection restrictions
- 5.2 The auxiliary of going and its selection restrictions
- 5.3 The auxiliary of continuation and its selection restrictions
- 5.4 The auxiliary of coming and its selection restrictions
- 5.5 Modal auxiliaries and their selection restrictions
- 5.6 Auxiliaries of body posture and aspect and their selection restrictions
- 5.7 Transitive verbs of predication
- 5.8 The auxiliary of doing used as a semantically empty finite auxiliary
- 5.9 Supplementive predication
- 6 The verbal paradigm, irregularity and suppletion
- 7 Verb Second and the word order in main and embedded clauses
- 8 Various aspects of clause structure
- Adjectives and adjective phrases (APs)
-
- General
- Phonology
- Afrikaans phonology
- Segment inventory
- Overview of Afrikaans vowels
- The diphthongised long vowels /e/, /ø/ and /o/
- The unrounded mid-front vowel /ɛ/
- The unrounded low-central vowel /ɑ/
- The unrounded low-central vowel /a/
- The rounded mid-high back vowel /ɔ/
- The rounded high back vowel /u/
- The rounded and unrounded high front vowels /i/ and /y/
- The unrounded and rounded central vowels /ə/ and /œ/
- The diphthongs /əi/, /œy/ and /œu/
- Overview of Afrikaans consonants
- The bilabial plosives /p/ and /b/
- The alveolar plosives /t/ and /d/
- The velar plosives /k/ and /g/
- The bilabial nasal /m/
- The alveolar nasal /n/
- The velar nasal /ŋ/
- The trill /r/
- The lateral liquid /l/
- The alveolar fricative /s/
- The velar fricative /x/
- The labiodental fricatives /f/ and /v/
- The approximants /ɦ/, /j/ and /ʋ/
- Overview of Afrikaans vowels
- Word stress
- The phonetic properties of stress
- Primary stress on monomorphemic words in Afrikaans
- Background to primary stress in monomorphemes in Afrikaans
- Overview of the Main Stress Rule of Afrikaans
- The short vowels of Afrikaans
- Long vowels in monomorphemes
- Primary stress on diphthongs in monomorphemes
- Exceptions
- Stress shifts in place names
- Stress shift towards word-final position
- Stress pattern of reduplications
- Phonological processes
- Vowel related processes
- Consonant related processes
- Homorganic glide insertion
- Phonology-morphology interface
- Phonotactics
- Morphology
- Syntax
- Afrikaans syntax
- Nouns and noun phrases
- Characteristics of the NP
- Classification of nouns
- Complementation of NPs
- Modification of NPs
- Binominal and partitive constructions
- Referential partitive constructions
- Partitive measure nouns
- Numeral partitive constructions
- Partitive question constructions
- Partitive constructions with nominalised quantifiers
- Partitive predication with prepositions
- Binominal name constructions
- Binominal genitive constructions
- Bare nominal attribution
- Articles and names
- Pronouns
- Quantifiers, determiners and predeterminers
- Syntactic uses of the noun phrase
- Adjectives and adjective phrases
- Characteristics and classification of the AP
- Complementation of APs
- Modification and Degree Quantification of APs
- Comparison by comparative, superlative and equative degree
- Attribution of APs
- Predication of APs
- The partitive adjective construction
- Adverbial use of APs
- Participles and infinitives as adjectives
- Verbs and verb phrases
- Characterisation and classification
- Argument structure
- Verb frame alternations
- Complements of non-main verbs
- Verb clusters
- Complement clauses
- Adverbial modification
- Word order in the clause: Introduction
- Word order in the clause: position of the finite Verb
- Word order in the clause: Clause-initial position
- Word order in the clause: Extraposition and right-dislocation in the postverbal field
- Word order in the middle field
- Emphatic constructions
- Adpositions and adposition phrases
This section discusses complementation of inf-nominalizations, which come in two types: bare-inf nominalizations like (226a), which are not preceded by a determiner, and det-inf nominalizations like (226b), which can be introduced by a variety of determiners. Section 1.3.1.2 has shown that there are only few restrictions on inf-nominalization; it is the most productive process of deriving nouns from verbs and accepts virtually any type of input verb.
a. | Wandelen | van zieken | moet | worden | aangemoedigd. | |
walk | of sick | must | be | encouraged | ||
'Walking of sick people must be encouraged.' |
b. | Het wandelen | van zieken | moet | worden | aangemoedigd. | |
the walk | of sick | must | be | encouraged | ||
'The walking of sick people must be encouraged.' |
This section is organized as follows. Subsection I starts by presenting some general principles regarding the complementation of inf-nouns. Subsection II will be concerned with complementation of the most common types of inf-nouns. The discussion will be concluded in Subsection III by applying the adjunct/complement tests from Section 2.2.1 to the inherited arguments of the verbs that are realized as PPs within the noun phrase in order to show that they indeed function as complements.
- I. General principles of inf-nominalization
- II. Complementation
- A. Inf-nominalization of intransitive verbs
- B. Inf-nominalization of unaccusative verbs
- C. Inf-nominalization of transitive verbs
- D. Inf-nominalization of ditransitive verbs
- E. Inf-nominalizations of verbs selecting a prepositional argument
- F. Inf-nominalizations taking a complementive
- G. Conclusion
- 1. Inf-nominalizations derived from intransitive verbs
- 2. Inf-nominalizations derived from monadic unaccusative verbs
- 3. Inf-nominalizations derived from monotransitive verbs
- 4. Inf-nominalizations derived from ditransitive verbs
- 5. Inf-nominalizations derived from verbs selecting a PP-complement
- 6. Inf-nominalizations derived from verbs selecting a complementive
- 7. The distribution of agentive van- and door-phrases
- 1. Inf-nominalizations derived from intransitive verbs
- A. Inf-nominalization of intransitive verbs
- III. Application of the complement/adjunct test
This subsection discusses the characteristics of complementation shared by all types of inf-nouns in order to simplify the discussion of complementation which follows in Subsection II.
The examples in (227) show that in det-inf nominalizations the determiner position can be filled by the definite article het, the demonstrative determiner dit'this' or dat'that', or a genitive noun phrase/possessive pronoun. Schoorlemmer (2001) distinguishes two types of inf-nominalization, the plain type in (227a&a') and the expressive type in (227b).
a. | Het | klagen | over het weer | is irritant. | |
the | complain | about the weather | is annoying | ||
'The complaining about the weather is annoying.' |
a'. | ??Mijn vaders/?Zijn/(?)Dit | klagen | over het weer | is irritant. | |
my fatherʼs/his/this | complain | about the weather | is annoying | ||
'My fatherʼs/His complaining about the weather is annoying.' |
b. | Dat | klagen | over het weer | is irritant. | |
that | complain | about the weather | is annoying | ||
'That/this complaining about the weather is annoying.' |
Expressive inf-nominalizations like (227b) often sound more natural than plain inf-nominalizations. They contain the (expressive) expressive demonstrative pronoun dat'that', and are characterized by the fact that they always convey a negative judgment, which is often reinforced by the use of an attributive adjective expressing frequency and/or value judgment. Some examples are given in (228).
a. | Dat | eeuwige/voortdurende | hoesten | van hem | werkt | me op de zenuwen. | |
that | eternal/continuous | cough | of him | works | me on the nerves | ||
'That eternal/continuous coughing of his gets on my nerves.' |
b. | Dat | afschuwelijke | hoesten | van hem | werkt | me op de zenuwen. | |
that | terrible | cough | of him | works | me on the nerves | ||
'That terrible coughing of his gets on my nerves.' |
Plain and expressive inf-nominalizations differ in that the latter refer to ongoing events, whereas the former may also refer to past, completed events. This is shown by the contrast given in (229a). Furthermore, the contrast in (229b) shows that certain combinations of prenominal theme-NP and attributive adjective are perfectly acceptable in the expressive type but less so in the plain type.
a. | het/*dat | nooit meer | gebeld hebben | van Tanja | |
the/that | never again | called have | of Tanja | ||
'Tanjaʼs never having called us again' |
b. | dat/??het | afschuwelijke | overlast | veroorzaken | van jou | |
that/the | terrible | trouble | cause | of you | ||
'that terrible causing of trouble by you' |
Another important difference concerning complementation is that transitive expressive inf-nominalizations can be followed by two van-phrases expressing, respectively, the theme and the agent, whereas this is impossible with plain inf-nominalizations. Note that example (230b) is acceptable if the agent is expressed by means of an agentive door-phrase.
a. | dat | eeuwige | treiteren | van hondenTheme | van | jullieAgent | |
that | eternal | pester | of dogs | of | you | ||
'that eternal pestering of dogs by you' |
b. | het | eeuwige | treiteren | van hondenTheme | *van/door | jullieAgent | |
the | eternal | pester | of dogs | of/by | you |
In other respects, the two subtypes behave very much as one group, especially in comparison with the category of bare-inf nominalizations. Since including the distinction between expressive and plain inf-nominalizations in our discussion of inf-nominalizations may cause unnecessary confusion, the subsequent treatment of det-inf nominalizations will be restricted to one (the most appropriate) form only.
Example (227a'), repeated here in slightly different form as (231a), shows that the agent argument can be expressed by means of a genitive noun phrase or possessive pronoun. The examples in (231b&c) show that this is never possible with the theme argument. In this respect, inf-nominalizations differ from many other nominalizations where this is easily possible.
a. | ??Mijn vaders/?ZijnAgent | klagen | over het weer | is irritant. | |
my fatherʼs/his | complain | about the weather | is annoying | ||
'My fatherʼs/His complaining about the weather is annoying.' |
b. | * | Mijn vaders/ZijnTheme | behandelen | (door de arts) | kost | veel tijd. |
my fatherʼs/his | treat | by the doctor | takes | much time | ||
Intended reading: 'My fatherʼs treatment by the doctor takes much time.' |
c. | * | Peters/ZijnTheme | voorstellen | aan SinterklaasRecipient |
Peterʼs/his | introduce | to Santa Claus | ||
Intended reading: 'the introduction of Peter to Santa Claus' |
The most natural use of bare-inf nominalizations seems to be a generic one, in the sense that they have a preference for determinerless (generic or nonspecific) arguments. This is especially the case if the postnominal van-PP corresponds to the subject of the corresponding verbal construction, that is, if the input verb is intransitive like wandelen'to walk' in (232a) or unaccusative like opstijgen'to take off' in (232b).
a. | Wandelen | van | (*de/*deze) | ziekenAgent | moet | worden | aangemoedigd. | |
walk | of | the/these | sick | must | be | encouraged | ||
'Sick peopleʼs walking (in the park) ought to be encouraged.' |
b. | Opstijgen | van | (*de/*deze) | vliegtuigenTheme | maakt | te veel lawaai. | |
take.off | of | the/these | planes | makes | too much noise | ||
'Taking off of (the/these) planes makes too much noise.' |
The results are better, although still marked, with the postnominal van-PP and the prenominal noun phrase in (233), which correspond to the theme argument/direct object of the corresponding verbal construction. Section 1.3.1.2, sub IID, has shown that realization of the theme as a prenominal noun phrase is always preferred with bare-inf nominalizations, but this is not indicated by the judgments given in (233), which only aim at expressing the effect of adding the relevant determiner. When not directly relevant for the discussion, the effect of the manner of realization of the theme argument in bare-inf nominalizations is also ignored in the examples given later in this subsection.
a. | Opbergen | van | (?de/?die/?mijn) | mappenTheme | kost | veel tijd. | |
put.away | of | the/those/my | files | costs | much time | ||
'Putting away of (the/those/my) files took a lot of time.' |
b. | (?De/?Die/?Mijn) | mappenTheme | opbergen | kost | veel tijd. | |
the/those/my | files | put.away | costs | much time | ||
'Putting away (the/those/my) files took a lot of time.' |
The acceptability of sentences such as (233) varies with the degree of genericity. This is shown by the fact illustrated by the examples in (234) that the choice between past and present tense affects the acceptability of the examples, which is of course due to the fact that the present tense makes a generic reading more readily available.
a. | Maken | van deze somTheme | *was/??is | lastig. | |
make | of this sum | was/is | difficult |
b. | Behandelen | van JanTheme | *kostte/??kost | veel tijd. | |
treat | of Jan | took/takes | much time |
The use of a binominal construction involving a kind-noun like soort/type in the examples in (235) also improves the result due to the fact that these noun phrases, despite their definiteness, may trigger a generic reading.
a. | ? | Maken | van dit soort sommenTheme | is lastig. |
make | of this kind of sums | is difficult | ||
'Doing this kind of sums is difficult.' |
b. | ? | Behandelen | van dit type patiëntTheme | kost | veel tijd. |
treat | of this type of patient | takes | much time | ||
'Treating this patient takes a lot of time.' |
The examples in (236) show that det-inf nominalizations also seem to have a preference for nonspecific arguments that correspond to the subject of the corresponding verbal construction, although the effect is less strong than with bare-inf nominalizations.
a. | Het wandelen | van | (?de/?deze) | ziekenAgent | moet | worden | aangemoedigd. | |
the walk | of | the/these | sick | must | be | encouraged | ||
'The walking of the/these sick people ought to be encouraged.' |
b. | Het opstijgen | van | (??de/?deze) | vliegtuigenTheme | maakt | te veel lawaai. | |
the take.off | of | the/these | planes | makes | too much noise | ||
'The taking off of the/these planes makes too much noise.' |
If the postverbal van-PP corresponds to the object of the corresponding verbal construction, this preference disappears: example (237a) shows that in this case specific and nonspecific arguments give rise to equally acceptable results. However, if the object of the corresponding verbal construction is expressed by means of a prenominal noun phrase, as in (237b), the preference for a nonspecific argument reappears. Section 1.3.1.2, sub IID, has shown that realization of the theme as a postnominal van-PP is always preferred with det-inf nominalizations, but this is not indicated by the judgments given in (237), which only aim to express the effect of adding the relevant determiner. When not directly relevant for the discussion, the effect of the manner of realization of the theme in det-inf nominalizations is also ignored in the examples given later in this subsection.
a. | Het opbergen | van | (de/die/mijn) | mappenTheme | kost | veel tijd. | |
the put.away | of | the/those/my | files | costs | much time | ||
'This putting away of (the/those/my) files took a lot of time.' |
b. | Het | (?de/?die/?mijn) | mappenTheme | opbergen | kost | veel tijd. | |
the | the/those/my | files | put.away | costs | much time | ||
'Putting away (the/those/my) files took a lot of time.' |
The examples in (238) show that the degraded status of (237b) is not due to the sequence of two determiners because it also arises with specific noun phrases that appear without a determiner, like proper nouns. This is illustrated in (238) by means of the proper noun Peter.
a. | Het behandelen | van patiënten/PeterTheme | door de artsAgent | kost | veel tijd. | |
the treat | of patients/Peter | by the doctor | takes | much time | ||
'The treating of patients/Peter by the doctor takes much time.' |
b. | Het | patiënten/*PeterTheme | behandelen | door de artsAgent | kost | veel tijd. | |
the | patients/Peter | treat | by the doctor | takes | much time | ||
'The treating of patients/Peter by the doctor takes much time.' |
The specificity effect also arises with inf-nominalizations of ditransitive verbs: (239a&a') and (239b) show this for respectively the theme and the recipient argument of a bare-inf nominalization.
a. | Winnaars | (?de) prijzen | uitreiken | is een feestelijke gelegenheid. | |
winners | the prizes | present | is a festive occasion | ||
'Presenting winners with prizes is a festive occasion.' |
a'. | (*?De) prijzen | uitreiken | aan de winnaars | is een feestelijke gelegenheid. | |
the prizes | present | to the winners | is a festive occasion |
b. | (??De) winnaars | prijzen | uitreiken | is een feestelijke gelegenheid. | |
the winners | prizes | present | is a festive occasion |
Examples (240a&a') and (240b) present the corresponding det-inf nominalizations, and example (240c) shows that realizing the theme and recipient arguments as specific postnominal PPs gives rise to a fully acceptable result.
a. | Het winnaars (??de) | prijzen | uitreiken | is een feestelijke gelegenheid. | |
winners | the prizes | present | is a festive occasion | ||
'Presenting winners with prizes is a festive occasion.' |
a'. | Het | (*de) prijzen | uitreiken | aan de winnaars | is een feestelijke gelegenheid. | |
the | the prizes | present | to the winners | is a festive occasion |
b. | Het | (*?de) winnaars | prijzen | uitreiken | is een feestelijke gelegenheid. | |
the | the winners | prizes | present | is a festive occasion |
c. | Het | uitreiken | van de prijzen | aan de winnaars | is een feestelijke gelegenheid. | |
the | present | of the prizes | to the winners | is a festive occasion |
Another general principle of inf-nominalizations concerns the position of agentive door-phrases, which may appear in plain inf-nominalizations derived from transitive and ditransitive verbs that can be passivized. Note that Subsection II will show that inf-nominalizations derived from intransitive verbs prefer the realization of the agent as a van-PP, despite the fact that intransitive verbs can also be passivized in Dutch. This is illustrated in example (241).
a. | Het | lachen | van/*?door Jan | is gênant. | |
that | laugh | of/by Jan | is embarrassing | ||
'That laughing of Jan is embarrassing.' |
b. | Het | treiteren | van kleuters | door/*van Jan | is onaanvaardbaar. | |
that | bully | of toddlers | by/of Jan | is unacceptable | ||
'That bullying of toddlers by Jan is unacceptable.' |
c. | Het | geven | van cadeaus | aan kinderen | door/*van Sinterklaas | is traditie. | |
the | give | of presents | to children | by/of Santa Claus | is tradition | ||
'The giving of presents to children by Santa Claus is a tradition.' |
The agentive door-phrase typically occurs postnominally, following all other arguments. However, placement in other positions, either postnominally or prenominally, is also possible. The placement possibilities of the door-phrase depend on the form of the inf-nominalization (bare-inf or det-inf) and the position of the theme (postnominal or prenominal). Separate subsections will therefore be devoted to (i) det-inf nominalizations with a postnominal theme, (ii) bare-inf nominalizations with a postnominal theme, and (iii) det-inf and bare-inf nominalizations with the theme in prenominal position. Finally, some attention will be paid to det-inf nominalizations of causative constructions, as these turn out to be much more tolerant with regard to the placement of the door-PP.
Example (242a) provides the typical, unmarked order of constituentsin det-inf nominalizations derived from a transitive verb with a postnominal theme: the door-PP follows the nominalized head and the theme argument realized as a van-PP. Placing the door-PP in some other position within the noun phrase, as in (242b&c), yields a marked result.
a. | Het | behandelen | van de patiëntenTheme | door de artsAgent | kost | veel tijd. | |
the | treat | of the patients | by the doctor | takes | much time | ||
'The treatment of the patients by the doctor takes a lot of time.' |
b. | *? | Het behandelen door de artsAgent van de patiëntenTheme kost veel tijd. |
c. | ?? | Het door de artsAgent behandelen van de patiëntenTheme kost veel tijd. |
The examples in (243) show, however, that the marked orders may arise under certain conditions. First, (243a) illustrates that the agentive door-PP may precede the theme PP if the latter is sufficiently heavy. Second, (243b) shows that placement of the door-PP in prenominal position is somewhat better in generic contexts; in formal generic contexts, such as (243b'), it is even fully acceptable.
a. | Het | behandelen | door de artsAgent | van de patiënt van kamer 114Theme | kost | veel tijd. | |
the | treat | by the doctor | of the patient from room 114 | takes | much time |
b. | ? | Het | door artsenAgent | behandelen | van patiëntenTheme | kost | veel tijd. |
the | by doctors | treat | of patients | costs | much time |
b'. | Het | door co-assistentenAgent | behandelen | van patiëntenTheme | staat | ter discussie. | |
the | by interns | treat | of patients | stands | at discussion | ||
'The treating of patients by interns is under discussion.' |
In the case of a ditransitive example such as (244), too, the door-PP typically follows the complements of the inf-nominalization, the alternative orders exhibiting a varying degree of unacceptability: the orders in (244a&b) both seem acceptable; the orders in (244c&d) are marginal at best, although they may become slightly more acceptable in generic contexts or in the case of heavy-PP shift.
a. | Het | uitreiken | van de prijzenTh | aan de winnaarsRec | door de voorzitter | duurde | lang. | |
the | present | of the prizes | to the winners | by the chairman | took | long | ||
'This presenting of the prizes to the winners by the chairman took a long time.' |
b. | ? | Het uitreiken van de prijzenTh door de voorzitterAg aan de winnaarsRec duurde lang. |
c. | *? | Het uitreiken door de voorzitterAg van de prijzenTh aan de winnaarsRec duurde lang. |
d. | ?? | Het door de voorzitterAg uitreiken van de prijzenTh aan de winnaarsRec duurde lang. |
The fact that the door-phrase seems to prefer a peripheral position in the inf-nominalization may reflect the fact that agents of nominalized constructions are less closely associated with the head than themes or recipients.
As was noted in Subsection C above, bare-inf nominalizations with the theme argument in postnominal position are only acceptable on a generic reading. Even so, word order variation is restricted: only the order in (245a), in which the door-phrase follows both the head and the theme argument, is fully acceptable; placing the door-phrase between the noun and the theme, as in (245b), yields a bad result even with a heavy theme; placing the door-phrase in front of the noun, as in (245c), is entirely impossible.
a. | Behandelen | van patiënten | (met hardnekkige kwalen)Th | door artsenAg | kost | veel tijd. | |
treat | of patients | with persistent ailments | by doctors | takes | much time | ||
'The treating of patients by inexperienced doctor takes a lot of time.' |
b. | *? | Behandelen door artsenAg van patiënten (met hardnekkige kwalen)Th kost veel tijd. |
c. | * | Door artsenAg behandelen van patiënten (met hardnekkige kwalen)Th kost veel tijd. |
A similar pattern emerges with bare-inf nominalizations derived from ditransitive verbs. In (246) we give examples with a normal theme and recipient: (246b&c) show that placing the door-phrase in front of the recipient or the theme gives rise to a marginal result, and (246d) shows that placing the door-phrase in front of the noun is impossible.
a. | Uitreiken | van prijzenTh | aan winnaarsRec | door voorzittersAg | duurt altijd lang. | |
present | of prizes | to winners | by chairmen | takes always long | ||
'Presenting prizes to winners by chairmen always takes a long time.' |
b. | ? | Uitreiken van prijzenTh door voorzittersAg aan winnaarsRec duurt altijd lang. |
c. | *? | Uitreiken door voorzittersAg van prijzenTh aan winnaarsRec duurt altijd lang. |
d. | * | Door voorzittersAg uitreiken van prijzenTh aan winnaarsRec duurt altijd lang. |
The examples in (247) show that cases with a heavy theme or a heavy recipient argument do not give rise to better results.
a. | * | Uitreiken | aan winnaarsRec | door voorzittersAg | van prijzen | voor de leukste | bijdrageTh | duurt | altijd | lang. |
present | to winners | by chairmen | of prizes | for the funniest | contribution | takes | always | long |
b. | ? | Uitreiken van prijzenTh | door voorzittersAg | aan winnaars | van internationale | wedstrijdenRec | duurt | altijd | lang. |
present of prizes | by chairmen | to winners | of international | competitions | takes | always | long |
If the theme appears prenominally as a noun phrase, as in the transitive constructions in (248) and (249), the distribution of the door-phrase is severely restricted. It can only occur postnominally, and even this leads to a marked result: the (a)-examples are certainly more marked than the corresponding examples in which the theme is expressed by a postnominal van-PP.
a. | ? | Het | patiëntenTh | behandelen | door artsenAg | kost | veel tijd. |
the | patients | treat | by doctors | takes | much time | ||
'The treating of patients by doctors takes a lot of time.' |
b. | * | Het door artsenAg patiëntenTh behandelen kost veel tijd. |
c. | * | Het patiëntenTh door artsenAg behandelen kost veel tijd. |
a. | ?? | PatiëntenTh | behandelen | door artsenAg | kost | altijd | veel tijd. |
patients | treat | by doctors | takes | always | much time | ||
'Treating of patients by doctors takes a lot of time.' |
b. | * | Door artsenAg patiëntenTh behandelen kost altijd veel tijd. |
c. | * | PatiëntenTh door artsenAg behandelen kost altijd veel tijd. |
more or less the same pattern can be observed in the ditransitive constructions in (250) and (251): the (a)-examples show that expressing the door-phrase with a prenominal theme is somewhat marked compared to constructions in which the theme is expressed by a postnominal van-PP; the (b)-examples show that constructions with both the theme and the door-PP in prenominal position are unacceptable; the (c)-examples, finally, show that constructions with all three arguments in prenominal position are degraded, although they are perhaps marginally possible with det-infs if the indirect object takes the form of an aan-PP.
a. | (?) | Het | prijzenTh | uitreiken | aan winnaarsRec | door voorzittersAg | duurt altijd lang. |
the | prizes | present | to winners | by the chairman | takes always long | ||
'The presenting of prizes to winners by the chairman always takes a long time.' |
b. | *? | Het door voorzittersAg prijzenTh uitreiken aan winnaarsRec duurt altijd lang. |
b'. | * | Het prijzenTh door voorzittersAg uitreiken aan winnaarsRec duurt altijd lang. |
c. | ?? | Het door voorzittersAg prijzenTh aan winnaarsRec uitreiken duurt altijd lang. |
c'. | * | Het door voorzittersAg winnaarsRec prijzenTh uitreiken duurt altijd lang. |
a. | (?) | PrijzenTh | uitreiken | aan winnaarsRec | door voorzittersAg | duurt altijd | lang. |
prizes | present | to the winners | by the chairman | takes always | long | ||
'Presenting prizes to winners by chairmen always takes a long time.' |
b. | * | Door voorzittersAg prijzenTh uitreiken aan winnaarsRec duurt altijd lang. |
b'. | * | PrijzenTh door voorzittersAg uitreiken aan winnaarsRec duurt altijd lang. |
c. | * | Door voorzittersAg prijzenTh aan winnaarsRec uitreiken duurt altijd lang. |
c'. | * | Door voorzittersAg winnaarsRec prijzenTh uitreiken duurt altijd lang. |
Placement of the door-PP in prenominal position is much easier in det-inf nominalizations derived from a causative verb like laten than in the other inf-nominalizations. This is true regardless of the position of the other arguments (prenominal or postnominal). Examples are given in (252).
a. | Het | door artsen | laten | behandelen | van patiënten | is erg verstandig. | |
the | by doctors | let | treat | of patients | is very wise | ||
'Having doctors treat patients is very wise.' |
b. | Het | door artsen | patiënten | laten | behandelen | is erg verstandig. | |
the | by doctors | patients | let | treat | is very wise |
If the verb embedded under the causative verb is ditransitive, essentially the same pattern arises as in the case of the transitive verbs in (252). Example (253a) gives an example in which the theme is realized as a postnominal van-PP, and (253b&b') exemplify cases with a prenominal theme.
a. | Het | door de voorzitter | laten | uitreiken | van de prijzen | aan de winnaars | bleek | geen goed idee. | |
the | by the chairman | let | present | of the prizes | to the winners | proved | no good idea | ||
'Having the chairman present the prizes to the winners wasnʼt a good idea.' |
b. | Het | door de voorzitter | prijzen | laten | uitreiken | aan de winnaars ... | |
the | by the chairman | prizes | let | present | to the winners |
b'. | Het | door de voorzitter | prijzen | aan de winnaars | laten | uitreiken ... | |
the | by the chairman | prizes | to the winners | let | present |
The crucial difference with the other cases is that the door-phrase in these examples does not correspond to an argument of the nominalized causative verb laten, but to the subject of the verbs behandelen'to treat' and uitreiken'present' embedded under the causative verb. Note that the subject of the embedded verb can also be realized in the verbal causative construction, as is shown by (254b): the phrases between angle brackets indicate the alternative realizations of the agent argument of the infinitival clause.
a. | Zij | laten | <de dokter> | de patiënten <door de dokter> | behandelen. | |
they | let | the doctor | the patients | treat |
b. | Zij | laten | <de voorzitter> | de prijzen <door de voorzitter> | aan de winnaars | uitreiken. | |
they | let | the chairman | the prizes | to the winner | present | ||
'They let the chairman present the prizes to the winners.' |
The door-PP in (252) and (253) must precede the other arguments in prenominal position, which, just like the door-PP, are not arguments of the causative verb, but of the verb embedded under it. This is illustrated in the (a)-examples of (255) and (256). In postnominal position the door-phrase must follow the theme and preferably precedes the recipient, just as in the verbal construction in (254b). This is illustrated in the (b)-examples of (255) and (256).
a. | Het <door artsen> patiënten <??door artsen> laten behandelen is erg verstandig. |
b. | Het laten behandelen <??door artsen> van patiënten <door artsen> is erg verstandig. |
a. | Het | door de voorzitter | prijzen | aan de winnaars | laten | uitreiken | bleek ... | |
the | by the chairman | prices | to the winners | let | present | proved | ||
'Having the prices being presented to the winners by the chairman was ...' |
a'. | * | Het prijzen door de voorzitter aan de winnaars laten uitreiken bleek ... |
a'. | * | Het prijzen aan de winnaars door de voorzitter laten uitreiken bleek ... |
b. | ?? | Het laten uitreiken door de voorzitter van prijzen aan de winnaars bleek ... |
b'. | Het laten uitreiken van prijzen door de voorzitter aan de winnaars bleek ... |
b''. | ? | Het laten uitreiken van prijzen aan de winnaars door de voorzitter bleek ... |
The examples in (257) show that the agent of the embedded verb can also be realized in the form of a noun phrase. This possibility is related to the fact that the agent can be assigned accusative case in the verbal causative construction: the agentive noun phrases de dokter or de voorzitter in (254) can only be replaced by the object pronoun hem'him'. In (257), the agent must precede the other arguments in prenominal position: placing the agent after the theme (or the recipient) will give rise to an unacceptable result.
a. | Het | artsen | patiënten | laten | behandelen | is erg verstandig. | |
the | doctors | patients | let | treat | is very wise | ||
'Having doctors treat patients is very wise.' |
b. | Het | de voorzitter | de prijzen | laten | uitreiken | aan de winnaars | bleek ... | |
the | the chairman | the prizes | let | present | to the winners | proved | ||
'Having the chairman present the prizes to the winners was ...' |
b'. | Het de voorzitter de prijzen aan de winnaars laten uitreiken bleek ... |
Example (258a) finally shows that door-PPs are excluded with det-inf nominalizations if the embedded verb is intransitive. This is clearly related to the fact that their subject cannot be realized as a door-phrase in the verbal construction either; see Section V5.2.3.4, sub V, for discussion.
a. | * | Het | <door Peter> | laten | wachten <door Peter>. |
the | by Peter | let | wait |
b. | Jan laat | (door) | Peter wachten. | |
Jan let | by | Peter wait |
The previous subsection has discussed some general considerations concerning complementation of inf-nominalizations. This subsection continues by giving a more detailed discussion of complementation of the types of inf-nominalizations illustrated in (259). These examples involve bare-inf nouns; the corresponding examples with det-inf nouns will be given later in this subsection.
a. | Wandelen | van zieken | moet | worden | aangemoedigd. | intransitive | |
walk | of sick | must | be | encouraged | |||
'Walking of sick people must be encouraged.' |
b. | Vallen | kan pijnlijk | zijn. | unaccusative | |
fall | can painful | be | |||
'Falling can be painful.' |
c. | Een goede baan | vinden | is moeilijk. | transitive | |
a good job | find | is difficult | |||
'Finding a good job is difficult.' |
d. | Kinderen | cadeaus | geven | is leuk. | ditransitive | |
children | presents | give | is nice | |||
'Giving presents to children is nice.' |
e. | Jagen | op groot wild | roept | veel protesten | op. | PP-theme | |
hunt | on big game | calls | many protests | up | |||
'Hunting big game evokes a lot of protest.' |
f. | De deur | rood | schilderen | bleek | niet | zoʼn goed idee. | complementive | |
the door | red | paint | proved | not | such a good idea | |||
'Painting the door red didnʼt really turn out to be a good idea.' |
The agent argument of inf-nominalizations derived from intransitive verbs is normally only optionally expressed. If it is expressed it can take the form of a postnominal van-PP, or, in the case of det-inf nominalizations, the form of a prenominal genitive noun phrase or possessive pronoun.
a. | Wandelen | (van zieken) | moet | worden | aangemoedigd. | |
walk | of sickpl | must | be | encouraged | ||
'Walking of sick people ought to be encouraged.' |
b. | Onrustig slapen | (van patiënten) | is de oorzaak van het probleem. | |
unquiet sleep | of patients | is the cause of the problem | ||
'Unquiet sleeping (of patients) is the cause of the problem.' |
a. | Het | wandelen | (van zieken) | moet | worden | aangemoedigd. | |
the | walk | of sickpl | must | be | encouraged | ||
'The walking (of sick people) ought to be encouraged.' |
a'. | (Jans/Zijn) | wandelen in het park | moet | worden | aangemoedigd. | |
Janʼs/His | walk in the park | must | be | encouraged |
b. | Het | onrustige slapen | (van patiënten) | is de oorzaak van het probleem. | |
the | unquiet sleep | of patients | is the cause of the problem | ||
'The restless sleeping (of patients) is the cause of the problem.' |
b'. | (Peters/Zijn) | onrustige slapen | is de oorzaak van het probleem. | |
Peterʼs/his | unquiet sleep | is the cause of the problem |
That both the postnominal van-PP and the genitive noun phrase/possessive pronoun indeed express the agent argument of the inf-nouns is shown by the fact illustrated by (262) that they cannot co-occur; like their intransitive verbal base, inf-nouns can assign each semantic function only once.
a. | * | Jans | wandelen | van de zieken |
Janʼs | walk | of the sick |
b. | * | hun | onrustige | slapen | van de patiënten |
their | unquiet | sleep | of the patients |
The agents of the inf-nominalization in the primed examples of (263) cannot appear in the form of a door-PP, unlike the agents in the corresponding (impersonal) passive constructions in the primeless examples.
a. | Er | wordt | door de zieken | veel | in het park gewandeld. | |
there | is | by the sick | much | in the park walked | ||
'There is much walking by sick people in the park.' |
a'. | * | het | wandelen | door de zieken | in het park |
the | walk | by the sick people | in the park |
b. | Er | werd | door de studenten | om het grapje | gelachen. | |
there | was | by the students | about the joke | laughed | ||
'The students laughed about the joke.' |
b'. | * | het lachen | door de studenten | om het grapje |
the laugh | by the students | about the joke |
The subject of an unaccusative verb is a theme, which can be expressed by means of a postnominal van-PPin the corresponding bare-inf nominalizations. The result is, however, always marked.
a. | ?? | Vallen | van bladeren | maakt | me neerslachtig. |
fall | of leaves | makes | me depressed | ||
'The falling of leaves depresses me.' |
b. | ?? | (Plotseling) | verschijnen | van gasten | schikt | me niet. |
sudden | appear | guests | suits | me not | ||
'The sudden appearing of guests doesnʼt suit me.' |
Det-inf nominalizations based on unaccusative verbs can readily be expressed by means of a postnominal van-PP. However, it is not possible to realize them prenominally as a genitive noun phrase or possessive pronoun. The unacceptability of (265a') is not really surprising, since possessive pronouns normally do not refer to inanimate entities. The construction is, however, also marginal if the pronoun refers to a human entity; the marginality of (266b) clearly illustrates this restriction.
a. | Het | vallen | van de bladeren | maakt | me neerslachtig. | |
the | fall | of the leaves | makes | me depressed | ||
'The falling of the leaves depresses me.' |
b. | * | Hun | vallen | maakt | me neerslachtig. |
their | falling | makes | me depressed |
a. | Het | (plotselinge) | verschijnen | van die gasten | schikte | me niet. | |
the | sudden | appear | of those guests | suited | me not | ||
'The sudden appearing of those guests didnʼt suit me.' |
b. | ?? | Zijn/Jans | (plotselinge) | verschijnen | schikte | me niet. |
his/Jans | sudden | appear | suited | me not |
Since the input unaccusative verb cannot be passivized, it is not surprising that the preposition van can never be replaced by the preposition door. This is illustrated for the (a)-examples above in (267).
a. | * | Het vallen door de bladeren maakt mij neerslachtig. |
a'. | * | Vallen door de bladeren maakt mij neerslachtig. |
b. | * | Het (plotselinge) verschijnen door die gasten schikte mij niet. |
b'. | * | (Plotseling) verschijnen door die gasten schikte mij niet. |
With inf-nominalizations based on transitive verbs, the picture becomes somewhat more complicated. Since cases in which none of the arguments are expressed are only possible under special circumstances, which will be discussed in Subsection III, we will focus here on the three remaining possibilities: cases in which only the theme is realized, cases in which both the agent and the theme are expressed, and cases in which only the agent is expressed. We will discuss them in the given order.
If in a transitive inf-nominalization only one argument is expressed, this argument must be the theme. In bare-inf nominalizations the theme argument is normally realized as a prenominal noun phrase. Alternatively, it can surface postnominally as a van-PP, although this leads to a somewhat marked result (just as in the case of bare-inf nominalizations derived from unaccusative verbs).
a. | SommenTheme | maken | is saai. | |
sums | make | is boring |
a'. | ? | Maken | van sommenTheme | is saai. |
make | of sums | is boring |
b'. | PatiëntenTheme | behandelen | kost | veel tijd. | |
patients | treat | takes | much time |
b'. | ? | Behandelen | van patiëntenTheme | kost | veel tijd. |
treat | of patients | takes | much time |
The theme argument of a bare-inf nominalization is preferably nonspecific; using a specific argument in (268) will normally degrade the results; cf. Subsection IC. Note, however, that this is not a restriction on complementation as such, but rather due to the semantics of the complete construction. This can be illustrated by the fact that the bare-inf nominalizations in the primeless examples in (269) are only marked compared to those in (268a&b). Furthermore, they are best in the present tense, which may be due to the fact that this favors a generic interpretation of these sentences. The primed examples in (269), finally, show that a contrastive reading may render such generic sentences even fully acceptable.
a. | Deze sommenTheme | maken | ?is/??was | lastig. | |
these sums | make | is/was | difficult |
a'. | Deze sommen | maken | is lastiger | dan | de afwas | doen. | |
these sums | make | is more difficult | than | the dishes | do | ||
'Making these sums is more difficult than doing the dishes.' |
b. | De koninginTheme | behandelen | ?kost/??kostte | veel tijd. | |
the queen | treat | takes/took | much time |
b'. | De koninginTheme | behandelen | kost | meer tijd | dan | een normale patiënt | behandelen. | |
the queen | treat | takes | much time | than | a regular patient | treat | ||
'Treating the queen takes more time than treating a regular patient.' |
In det-inf nominalizations the preferred pattern is just the opposite of that in bare-inf nominalizations: expressing the theme by means of a prenominal noun phrase is possible, but using a postnominal van-PP is the preferred way of expressing the theme.
a. | Het | altijd | maar | sommenTheme | maken | is saai. | |
the | always | prt | sums | make | is boring | ||
'The always making of sums is boring.' |
a'. | Het | maken | van die sommenTheme | is saai. | |
the | make | of those sums | is boring | ||
'The making of these sums is boring.' |
b. | ? | Het | patiëntenTheme | behandelen | kost | veel tijd. |
the | those patients | treat | takes | much time | ||
'The treating of (these) patients takes a lot of time.' |
b'. | Het | behandelen | van die patiëntenTheme | kost | veel tijd. | |
the | treat | of those patients | takes | much time | ||
'The treating of these patients takes a lot of time.' |
Furthermore, example (271) shows that the prenominal theme only allows a generic interpretation; cf. Subsection IC. The judgments on these examples contrast sharply with those on the det-inf constructions with a postnominal theme in (270a'&b').
a. | * | Het | deze sommenTheme | maken | was lastig. |
the | these sums | make | was difficult |
b. | * | Het | de koninginTheme | behandelen | maakte | hem | beroemd. |
the | the queen | treat | made | him | famous |
In generic contexts the result of using a prenominal theme gives rise to a less degraded result, but still the use of a postnominal van-PP is much preferred.
a. | Het | eten | van een appeltje | in de pauze | is een goede gewoonte. | |
the | eat | of an appledim | in the break | is a good habit | ||
'The eating of an apple during the break is a good habit.' |
a'. | ?Het een appeltje eten in de pauze is een goede gewoonte. |
b. | Het | opeten | van je appeltje | in de pauze | is een goede gewoonte. | |
the | eat.up | of your appledim | in the break | is a good habit | ||
'The eating of your apple during the break is a good habit.' |
b'. | ? | Het je appeltje opeten in de pauze is een goede gewoonte. |
When not directly relevant, the effect of the manner of realization of the theme in inf-nominalizations will be ignored in the examples discussed later in this section; we will simply concentrate on the effect of adding more arguments to the construction.
Example (273) shows that the agent argument of bare-inf nouns can be added in the form of a door-PP, which must follow the nominalized head and the theme argument realized as a van-PP; cf. Subsection ID.
a. | Treiteren | van peutersTheme | door grote jongensAgent | is onaanvaardbaar. | |
bully | of toddlers | by big boys | is unacceptable | ||
'Bullying of toddlers by big boys is unacceptable.' |
a'. | * | Treiteren door grote jongensAgent van peutersTheme is onaanvaardbaar. |
b. | Behandelen | van dit soort patiëntenTheme | door onervaren artsenAgent | kan lang duren. | |
treat | of this sort of patients | by inexperienced doctors | can long take | ||
'Treatment of such patients by inexperienced doctors can take a long time.' |
b'. | *? | Behandelen door onervaren artsenAgent van dit soort patiëntenTheme kan ... |
However, if the theme argument is realized as a prenominal noun phrase, the addition of a door-PP gives rise to a degraded result, regardless of the position of the door-phrase; the examples in (274) only illustrate the case in which the door-phrase appears postnominally.
a. | ?? | PeutersTheme | treiteren | door grote jongensAgent | is onaanvaardbaar. |
toddlers | bully | by big boys | is unacceptable |
b. | ?? | PatiëntenTheme | behandelen | door onervaren artsenAgent | kan lang duren. |
patients | treat | by inexperienced doctors | can long take |
Adding the agent argument in the form of a door-PP is also possible with det-inf nominalizations. Example (275a) shows that this door-PP must also follow the nominalized head and the theme argument realized as a van-PP; cf. Subsection ID.
a. | Het treiteren | van peutersTheme | door grote jongensAgent | is onaanvaardbaar. | |
the bully | of toddlers | by big boys | is unacceptable | ||
'The bullying of toddlers by big boys is unacceptable.' |
a'. | *? | Het treiteren door grote jongensAgent van peutersTheme is onaanvaardbaar. |
b. | Het behandelen | van patiëntenTheme | door de artsAgent | kost | veel tijd. | |
the treat | of patients | by the doctor | takes | much time | ||
'The treating of patients by the doctor takes a lot of time.' |
b'. | *? | Het behandelen door de artsAgent van patiëntenTheme kost veel tijd. |
As in the case of bare-inf nominalizations, the addition of a door-PP gives rise to a degraded result in cases such as (276), in which the theme argument is realized as a prenominal noun phrase. Placing the door-phrase in prenominal position seems to deteriorate the examples even further.
a. | ?? | Het | peutersTheme | treiteren | door grote jongensAgent | is onaanvaardbaar. |
that | toddlers | bully | by big boys | is unacceptable |
b. | *? | Het patiëntenTheme | behandelen | door de artsAgent | kost | veel tijd. |
that patients | treat | by the doctor | takes | much time |
The agent of det-inf nominalizations can also take the form of a genitive noun phrase or a possessive pronoun provided that the theme appears as a van-PP, as in the primeless examples in (277); if the theme is realized as a prenominal noun phrase, as in the primeless examples, the result is seriously degraded.
a. | Jans/ZijnAgent | treiteren | van peutersTheme | is onaanvaardbaar. | |
Janʼs/his | bully | of toddlers | is unacceptable | ||
'Janʼs bullying of toddlers is unacceptable.' |
a'. | *? | Jans/ZijnAgent | peutersTheme | treiteren | is onaanvaardbaar. |
Janʼs/his | toddlers | bully | is unacceptable |
b. | Peters/??ZijnAgent | behandelen | van de patiëntTheme | kost | veel tijd. | |
Peterʼs/their | treat | of the patient | takes | much time | ||
'Peterʼs/Their treatment of the patient takes a lot of time.' |
b'. | *? | Peters/HunAgent | patiëntenTheme | behandelen | kost | veel tijd. |
Peterʼs/their | patient | treat | takes | much time |
The examples in (278) show that det-inf nominalizations with transitive base verbs require the presence of a theme argument, regardless of whether an agent argument is present.
a. | * | Het treiteren | (door die grote jongensAgent) | is onaanvaardbaar. |
the bully | by big boys | is unacceptable |
b. | * | Het behandelen | (door de artsAgent) | kost | veel tijd. |
the treat | by the doctor | takes | much time |
For some speakers, however, example (278a) improves if the agent is expressed by means of a van-PP, as in (279a'). This may be due to the fact that in such cases the verb is derived from the pseudo-intransitive (generic) verb in (279a). If the verb does not readily allow such a generic reading, as is the case with behandelen'to treat' in (279b), the corresponding inf-nominalization is also unacceptable if the theme is not expressed. In what follows we will, for the sake of simplicity, ignore the pseudo-intransitive use of nominalizations.
a. | Die | jongens | treiteren | graag. | |
those | boys | bully | gladly | ||
'Those boys like bullying.' |
a'. | *? | Dat | treiteren | van die jongensAg | is onaanvaardbaar. |
this | bullying | of those boys | is unacceptable |
b. | ?? | Die arts | behandelt | vakkundiger | dan | de meesten. |
that doctor | treats | more.competently | than | the most |
b'. | * | Het | behandelen | van die artsAg | is vakkundiger | dan | dat van de meesten. |
the | treating | of that doctor | is more.competent | than | that of the most |
Unlike with det-inf nominalizations, in bare-inf nominalizations the theme argument can often be left unexpressed in the presence of an agentive door-phrase. The examples in (280) show that this is even possible in the presence of a specific agent argument, although similar constructions with a nonspecific agent are noticeably better. Note that in these sentences the implied theme argument is either generic or contextually determined. With regard to sentence (280b), it also needs to be mentioned that the implied theme argument is not so much the patient, but rather the ailment treated.
a. | Treiteren | door (??die) grote jongensAgent | is onaanvaardbaar. | |
bully | by those big boys | is unacceptable | ||
'Bullying by (those) big boys is unacceptable.' |
b. | Behandelen | door een/??de artsAgent | kost | veel tijd. | |
treat | by a/the doctor | takes | much time | ||
'Treatment by a/the doctor takes a lot of time.' |
This subsection considers inf-nominalizations derived from ditransitive verbs like geven'to give', schenken'to donate', overdragen'to hand over', verschaffen'to provide', uitreiken'to present' (verbs of transfer) and meedelen'to announce', zeggen'to say', beloven'to promise', leren'to teach' (verbs of communication). As in the verbal domain, it is possible with inf-nominalizations to express all three arguments. In actual practice, however, such occurrences are very rare. More often one (typically the agent) or two (the agent and the recipient) of the arguments are left unexpressed. We will start by discussing those cases in which only the theme is expressed. This is followed by a discussion of those cases in which either the agent or the recipient is expressed. We conclude by giving some examples in which all arguments are realized.
The (a)-examples in (281) show that, as in the case of bare-inf nominalizations derived from transitive verbs, bare-inf nominalizations derived from ditransitive verbs prefer the theme to be realized as a prenominal noun phrase; realizing the theme as a postnominal van-PP is possible but marked. And, again, bare-inf nominalizations are not acceptable with specific themes. This is shown by the (b)-examples in (281).
a. | ?? | Geven | van cadeaus | op 5 december | is een oude traditie. |
give | of presents | on 5 December | is an old tradition |
a'. | Cadeaus | geven | op 5 december | is een oude traditie. | |
presents | give | on 5 December | is an old tradition | ||
'Giving presents on 5 December is an old tradition.' |
b. | * | Uitreiken | van de prijzen | duurde | lang. |
present | of the prizes | took | long |
b'. | * | De prijzen | uitreiken | duurde | lang. |
the prizes | present | took | long |
The examples in (282) show that the theme argument of det-inf nominalizations preferably takes the form of a van-PP following the head; realizing the theme in the form of a noun phrase preceding the head is also acceptable, provided that we are dealing with a generic context; prenominal definite themes give rise to a severely degraded result.
a. | Dat | geven | van cadeaus | op 5 december | is een oude traditie. | |
that | give | of presents | on 5 December | is an old tradition | ||
'That giving of presents on 5 December is an old tradition.' |
a'. | ? | Dat | cadeaus | geven | op 5 december | is een oude traditie. |
that | presents | give | on 5 December | is an old tradition | ||
'That giving of presents on 5 December is an old tradition.' |
b. | Dat | uitreiken | van de prijzen | duurde | lang. | |
that | present | of the prizes | took | long | ||
'That presenting of the prizes took a long time.' |
b'. | Dat | ?(*de) prijzen | uitreiken | duurde | lang. | |
that | the prizes | present | took | long | ||
'That presenting of the prizes took a long time.' |
In det-inf nominalizations, the agent can be expressed as a second argument in the form of a door-PP. Example (283a) shows that the agentive door-PP follows both the head noun and the postverbal theme argument. If the theme argument takes the form of a prenominal noun phrase, as in (283b), the agentive door-PP may occur in postnominal position.
a. | Dat geven | van (de) cadeausTheme | door SinterklaasAgent | is een oude traditie. | |
that give | of the presents | by Santa Claus | is an old tradition | ||
'That giving of the presents by Santa Claus is an old tradition.' |
b. | ? | Dat | cadeausTheme | geven | door SinterklaasAgent | is een oude traditie. |
that | presents | give | by Santa Claus | is an old tradition |
The examples in (284) show, however, that bare-infnominalizations cannot realize the agent, no matter the form of the theme or the word order.
a. | * | Geven | van cadeausTheme | door SinterklaasAgent | is een oude traditie. |
give | of presents | by Santa Claus | is an old tradition |
b. | * | CadeausTheme | geven | door SinterklaasAgent | is een oude traditie. |
presents | give | by Santa Claus | is an old tradition |
Although this is less preferred, in det-inf nominalizations the agent can also be realized by means of a genitive phrase or a possessive pronoun if the theme is realized as a postnominal van-PP, as in (285a). This gives rise to a less felicitous result, however, if the theme is realized as a prenominal noun phrase, as in (285b), which may be due to the fact that the intended reading is blocked by the more prominent reading in which the possessive pronoun is construed as the possessor of theme cadeaus.
a. | ? | Zijn | geven | van (de) cadeausTheme | is een oude traditie. |
his | give | of the presents | is an old tradition | ||
'His giving of the presents by Santa Claus is an old tradition.' |
b. | # | Zijn | cadeausTheme | geven | is een oude traditie. |
that | presents | give | is an old tradition |
Example (286) shows that in clauses with ditransitive verbs, the recipient either appears as an aan-PP following the theme or as a dative noun phrase preceding the theme, as in (286b). The word order is normally as indicated, although placement of the aan-PP in front of the theme is possible if the recipient is assigned contrastive accent.
a. | dat | Sinterklaas | de cadeaus | aan de kinderen | heeft | gegeven. | |
that | Santa Claus | the presents | to the children | has | given | ||
'that Santa Claus has given the presents to the children.' |
b. | dat | Sinterklaas | de kinderen | de cadeaus | heeft gegeven. | |
that | Santa Claus | the children | the presents | has given | ||
'that Santa Claus has given the children the presents.' |
In inf-nominalizations the recipient can also be realized either as a noun phrase or an aan-PP: the former must precede the inf-noun, whereas the latter can either precede of follow it. First consider the case of bare-inf nominalizations. The primeless examples in (287) show that both the theme and the recipient can be realized as prenominal noun phrases, provided that they are both indefinite. Nevertheless, there seems to be some preference to realize the recipient as an aan-PP following the theme, as in the primed examples. Placing the aan-PP in front of the theme is possible, provided that it is given contrastive accent.
a. | ? | KinderenRec | cadeausTheme | geven | is een oude traditie. |
children | presents | give | is an old tradition | ||
'Giving presents to children is an old tradition.' |
a'. | CadeausTheme | < aan kinderenRec> | geven <aan kinderenRec> | is traditie. | |
presents | to children | give | is tradition | ||
'Giving presents to children is a tradition.' |
b. | ? | WinnaarsRec | prijzenTheme | uitreiken | duurt | altijd | lang. |
winners | prizes | present | takes | always | long | ||
'Presenting prizes to winners always takes a long time.' |
b'. | PrijzenTheme | <aan winnaarsRec> | uitreiken <aan winnaarsRec> | duurt | lang. | |
prizes | to winners | present | takes | long | ||
'Presenting prizes to winners always takes a long time.' |
If the theme argument is expressed as a postnominal van-PP, the recipient cannot be realized as a prenominal noun phrase; the primeless examples in (287) are ungrammatical. The primed examples show that expressing the recipient as an aan-PP is possible, provided that it follows the van-PP. As usual, examples such as (288b') are marked compared to examples such as (287b') with a prenominal theme.
a. | * | KinderenRec | geven | van cadeausTheme | is een oude traditie. |
children | give | of present | is an old tradition |
a'. | ? | Geven | van cadeausTheme | aan kinderenRec | is een oude traditie. |
give | of presents | to children | is an old tradition | ||
'Giving of presents to children is an old tradition.' |
b. | * | WinnaarsRec | uitreiken | van de prijzenTheme | duurde | lang. |
winners | present | of the prizes | took | long | ||
'This presenting of the prizes to the winners took a long time.' |
b'. | Uitreiken | van prijzenTheme | aan de winnaarsRec | duurt | lang. | |
present | of prizes | to the winners | takes | long | ||
'This presenting of the prizes to the winners takes a long time.' |
In det-inf nominalizations, the form of the recipient is related to the form of the theme in the same way as in bare-inf nominalizations. The examples in (289) show that the recipient must be realized as a postnominal aan-PP if the theme is a postnominal van-PP. The word order is rigid in this case: the aan-PP must follow both the noun and the postnominal van-PP.
a. | * | Dat | kinderenRec | geven | van cadeausTheme | is een oude traditie. |
that | children | give | of presents | is an old tradition |
a'. | Dat | geven | van cadeausTheme | aan de kinderenRec | is een oude traditie. | |
that | give | of presents | to the children | is an old tradition | ||
'This giving of the presents to the children is an old tradition.' |
b. | * | Dat | winnaarsRec | uitreiken | van de prijzenTheme | duurde | lang. |
that | winners | present | of the prizes | took | long |
b'. | Dat | uitreiken | van de prijzenTheme | aan de winnaarsRec | duurde | lang. | |
that | present | of the prizes | to the winners | took | long | ||
'This presenting of the prizes to the winners took long.' |
If the theme is realized as a prenominal noun phrase, the recipient can be expressed either by means of an aan-PP or a prenominal noun phrase. Again, there seems to be some preference for the former. Note that if the aan-PP occurs in prenominal position it is normally nonspecific, just like the prenominal theme; this restriction does not hold for the postnominal aan-PP. Thus, replacing the nonspecific recipient aan kinderen by the specific recipient aan de kinderen is easily possible in (290a''), but gives rise to a marked result in (290a'). Finally, note that placing the aan-PP in front of the prenominal theme is possible, provided that it is given contrastive accent.
a. | ? | Het | kinderenRec | cadeausTheme | geven | is een oude traditie. |
the | children | presents | give | is an old tradition | ||
'The giving of presents to children is an old tradition.' |
a'. | Het | cadeausTheme | aan (?de) kinderenRec | geven | is een oude traditie. | |
the | presents | to the children | give | is an old tradition |
a''. | Het | cadeausTheme | geven | aan (de) kinderenRec | is een oude traditie. | |
the | presents | give | to the children | is an old tradition |
b. | ? | Dat winnaarsRec | prijzenTheme | uitreiken | duurt | altijd | lang. |
that winners | prizes | present | takes | always | long | ||
'That presenting of prizes to winners always takes a long time.' |
b'. | Dat | prijzenTheme | aan (?de) winnaarsRec | uitreiken | duurt | lang. | |
that | prizes | to the winners | present | takes | long |
b''. | Dat | prijzenTheme | uitreiken | aan (de) winnaarsRec | duurt | lang. | |
that | prizes | present | to the winners | takes | long |
If all three arguments are expressed, there are many conceivable combinations, but given the earlier discussion we expect only a few to be acceptable, and even these will rarely be encountered (except perhaps in written, formal language). This is especially true for bare-inf nominalizations: since we have seen in Subsection 2, that agentive door-PPs give rise to a severely degraded result in these constructions, we expect expression of all three arguments to be impossible. The examples in (291) show that this expectation is indeed borne out.
a. | * | KinderenRec | cadeausTheme | geven | door SinterklaasAgent | is een oude traditie. |
children | presents | give | by Santa Claus | is an old tradition | ||
'The giving of presents to children by Santa Claus is an old tradition.' |
b. | * | CadeausTheme | geven | aan kinderenRec | door SinterklaasAgent | is ... |
presents | give | to children | by Santa Claus | is ... |
b'. | * | Geven | van cadeausTheme | aan kinderenRec | door SinterklaasAgent | is ... |
give | of presents | to children | by Santa Claus | is ... |
This leaves us with det-inf nominalizations. We have seen in Subsection 2 that the door-PP must follow the postnominal van-PP expressing the theme, and in Subsection 3 we have seen that the same thing holds for the aan-PP expressing the recipient. We therefore correctly predict that the same thing holds for cases in which all arguments are expressed. The examples in (292) show that the preferred order is indeed the one in which the recipient precedes the agent.
a. | Dat | geven | van cadeausTheme | aan kinderenRec | door SinterklaasAgent | is ... | |
that | give | of presents | to children | by Santa Claus | is ... | ||
'This giving of presents to children by Santa Claus is an old tradition.' |
b. | ?? | Dat | geven | van cadeausTheme | door SinterklaasAgent | aan kinderenRec | is ... |
that | give | of presents | by Santa Claus | to children | is ... |
We have also seen in Subsection 3 that if the theme is realized as a prenominal noun phrase, the recipient can be realized either as a (pre- or postnominal) aan-PP or as a prenominal noun phrase. Since the agentive door-PP must be postnominal, this correctly predicts the following orders to be possible. All examples are somewhat marked, just like the corresponding examples without the recipient given in Subsection C.
a. | ? | Dat | kinderenRec | cadeausTheme | geven | door SinterklaasAgent | is ... |
that | children | presents | give | by Santa Claus | is ... | ||
'That giving of presents to children by Santa Claus is an old tradition.' |
b. | ? | Dat | cadeausTheme | geven | aan kinderenRec | door SinterklaasAgent | is ... |
that | presents | give | to children | by Santa Claus | is ... | ||
'That giving of presents to children by Santa Claus is an old tradition.' |
b'. | ? | Dat | cadeausTheme | aan kinderenRec | geven | door SinterklaasAgent | is ... |
that | presents | to children | give | by Santa Claus | is ... |
The examples in (292) and (293) exhaust the options; all other orders lead to a severe decrease in acceptability. Realizing the agent as a genitive noun phrase or a possessive pronoun seems possible, although it does gives rise to a somewhat marked result. The intended reading of (294b&c) seems to be hampered by the more prominent reading in which the possessive pronoun is construed as the possessor of the presents/children.
a. | ? | Zijn | geven | van cadeausTheme | aan kinderenRec | is een oude traditie. |
his | give | of presents | to children | is an old tradition | ||
'His giving of presents to children is an old tradition.' |
b. | # | Zijn | cadeausTheme | <aan kinderenRec> | geven <aan kinderenRec> | is ... |
his | presents | to children | give | is ... | ||
'His giving presents to children is an old tradition.' |
c. | # | Zijn | kinderenRec | cadeausTheme | geven | is een oude traditie. |
his | children | presents | give | is an old tradition | ||
'His giving presents to children is an old tradition.' |
This subsection discusses inf-nominalizations derived from verbs selecting a PP-complement. We start with those cases in which the argument of the PP has the role of theme. This is followed by some cases in which the argument has some other semantic role.
Inf-nominalizations also inherit PP-themes from their base verb. Examples are such verbs as zoeken naar'to search for' and jagen op'to hunt for', which select their own specific preposition. The inherited PP-themes seem to have the same distribution within the inf-nominalizations as their nominal counterparts. First and foremost, the PP-theme can occur in prenominal position. Second, if it is placed postnominally, it must precede the (optional) agentive door-phrase.
a. | Op groot wildTheme | jagen | (door adellijke herenAgent) | is verachtelijk. | |
on big game | hunt | by noble gentlemen | is despicable | ||
'Hunting of big game by noble gentlemen is despicable.' |
b. | Jagen | op groot wildTheme | (door adellijke herenAgent) | is verachtelijk. | |
hunt | on big game | by noble gentlemen | is despicable | ||
'Hunting of big game by noble gentlemen is despicable.' |
a. | Dat op groot wildTheme | jagen | (door adellijke herenAgent) | is verachtelijk. | |
that on big game | hunt | by noble gentlemen | is despicable | ||
'This hunting of big game is despicable.' |
b. | Dat | jagen | op groot wildTheme | (door adellijke herenAgent) | is verachtelijk. | |
that | hunt | on big game | by noble gentlemen | is despicable | ||
'This hunting of big game by noble gentlemen is despicable.' |
The main difference with inf-nominalizations derived from transitive verbs concerns the selection of the preposition: just like its base verb, the inf-nominalization jagen selects an op-PP and, consequently, the theme argument does not appear as a van-PP. Since the preposition op is selected by the noun, it must of course also be present if the PP is in prenominal position.
In det-inf nominalizations the agent-PP can sometimes take the form of a van-PP, although the result may be considered slightly marked. The availability of this option may be due to the factthatthe theme-PP is not introduced by van in these constructions. Note that the construction in (297b), with the theme realized in postnominal position, is ambiguous: the van-PP can be interpreted either as an agentive complement of the head noun, or as a possessor of the noun phrase groot wild'big game'. For this reason, the preferred order may be the one given in (297c), where only the agentive reading is available.
a. | ? | Het | op groot wildTheme | jagen | (van adellijke herenAgent) | is verachtelijk. |
the | on big game | hunt | by noble gentlemen | is despicable | ||
'The hunting of big game by noble gentlemen is despicable.' |
b. | ?? | Het | jagen | op groot wildTheme | (van adellijke herenAgent) | is verachtelijk. |
the | hunt | on big game | of noble gentlemen | is despicable |
c. | ? | Het | jagen | (van adellijke herenAgent) | op groot wildTheme | is verachtelijk. |
the | hunt | of noble gentlemen | on big game | is despicable |
The examples in (298) show that the option of expressing the agent by means of a van-PP is not available in bare-inf constructions. Given that postmodification by means of a van-PP is a property of nouns rather than verbs, this contrast might be due to the fact that bare-inf constructions are more nominal in character than det-inf constructions; cf. Table 17 in Section 1.3.1.6.
a. | * | Op groot wildTheme | jagen | (van adellijke herenAgent) | is verachtelijk. |
on big game | hunt | by noble gentlemen | is despicable |
b. | * | Jagen | op groot wildTheme | (van adellijke herenAgent) | is verachtelijk. |
hunt | on big game | of noble gentlemen | is despicable |
c. | * | Jagen | (van adellijke herenAgent) | op groot wildTheme | is verachtelijk. |
hunt | of noble gentlemen | on big game | is despicable |
The verb aanbevelen'recommend' in (299) selects a voor-PP as its third argument. As with recipient third arguments realized as aan-PPs, inf-nominalizations select the same preposition as the input verb (in this case voor). Examples such as this differ from those with recipient arguments in that the PP-complement does not alternate with a noun phrase.
a. | dat | de commissie | (de) bejaardenTh | voor de baan | heeft | aanbevolen. | |
that | the committee | the senior citizens | for the job | has | recommended | ||
'that the committee has recommended (the) elderly people for the job.' |
b. | * | dat | de commissie | de baan | (de) bejaardenRec | heeft | aanbevolen. |
that | the committee | the job | the senior citizens | has | recommended | ||
'that the committee has recommended the job to (the) elderly people.' |
Given that (299b) is unacceptable it does not come as a surprise that the inherited PP-complement must also be realized as a voor-PP in the corresponding bare-inf nominalization. Example (300a) shows that with a prenominal theme the voor-PP can be realized either before or after the inf-noun. If the theme is realized as a postnominal van-PP, the voor-PP must also be postnominal and be placed after the van-PP (unless it is assigned contrastive accent, in which case it can marginally be placed between the noun and the van-PP).
a. | BejaardenTheme | <voor deze baan> | aanbevelen <voor deze baan> | is slim. | |
senior citizens | for this job | recommend | is smart | ||
'Recommending elderly people for this job is smart.' |
b. | ? | Aanbevelen | van bejaardenTheme | voor deze baan | is slim. |
recommend | of senior citizens | for this job | is smart |
In det-inf nominalizations we find more or less the same pattern, although in this case expression of the theme as a postnominal van-PP is preferred, as always.
a. | Het | aanbevelen | van bejaardenTheme | voor deze baan | is slim. | |
the | recommend | of senior citizens | for this job | is smart | ||
'The recommending of elderly people for this job is smart.' |
b. | ? | Het | bejaardenTheme | <voor deze baan> | aanbevelen <voor deze baan> | is slim. |
the | senior citizens | for this job | recommend | is smart | ||
'The recommending of elderly people for this job is smart.' |
Inf-nominalizations are the only type of nominalization that readily accepts verbs selecting a complementive (predicative complement) as their input. Comparison between bare-inf and det-inf nominalizations reveals an interesting pattern: whereas det-inf nominalizations yield the best results if the logical subject of the complementive appears as a postnominal van-PP, bare-inf nominalizations require the subject to appear as a prenominal noun phrase. In addition, we will discuss an interesting difference between adjectival complementives and complementives introduced by the prepositions tot'to' and als'as'.
Example (302) shows that complementives must precede and be adjacent to the verbs in clause-final position.
a. | Dat | Jan | Marie | <onaardig> | vindt <*onaardig> | komt | voort | uit jaloezie. | |
that | Jan | Marie | unkind | considers | comes | prt. | from jealousy | ||
'That Jan doesnʼt like Marie is the result of jealousy.' |
b. | Dat | Jan | de deuren | <rood> | schildert <*rood> | verbaast | ons | zeer. | |
that | Jan | the doors | red | paints | surprises | us | much | ||
'Weʼre surprised that Jan paints the doors red.' |
c. | Dat | hij | haar ideeën | <leuk> | vindt <*leuk> | is opmerkelijk. | |
that | he | her ideas | nice | considers | is remarkable | ||
'That he considers her ideas nice is remarkable.' |
A similar fact can be found in bare-inf nominalizations: the primeless examples in (303) show that the complementive immediately precedes the derived noun. Furthermore, the subject of the predicate must be realized as a prenominal noun phrase; using a postnominal van-PP, as in the primed examples, leads to an unacceptable result (regardless of the actual placement of the complementive).
a. | Marie <onaardig> | vinden <*onaardig> | komt | voort | uit jaloezie. | |
Marie unkind | consider | comes | prt. | from jealousy | ||
'Considering Marie unkind is the result of jealousy.' |
a'. | * | Onaardig vinden van Marie komt voort | uit jaloezie. |
b. | Deuren | <rood> | schilderen <*rood> | is een leuke bezigheid. | |
doors | red | paint | is a nice pastime | ||
'Painting the doors red is a nice pastime.' |
b'. | * | Rood schilderen van deuren is een leuke bezigheid. |
c'. | Haar ideeën | <leuk> | vinden <*leuk> | is opmerkelijk. | |
her ideas | nice | consider | is remarkable |
c'. | * | Leuk vinden van haar ideeën is opmerkelijk. |
Det-inf nominalizations also require the complementive to be in prenominal position, but differ from bare-inf nominalizations in that they prefer a postnominal van-PP; realizing the subject as a prenominal noun phrase is at least marginally possible but requires a generic context, as in (304b').
a. | Het | <onaardig> | vinden | van Marie | komt | voort | uit jaloezie. | |
the | unkind | consider | of Marie | comes | prt. | from jealousy |
a'. | *? | Het Marie <onaardig> vinden komt voort uit jaloezie. |
b. | ? | Het | <rood> | schilderen | van deuren | is een leuke bezigheid. |
the | red | paint | of doors | is a nice pastime |
b'. | Het deuren <rood> schilderen is een leuke bezigheid. |
c. | Het | <leuk> | vinden | van haar ideeën | is opmerkelijk. | |
the | nice | consider | of her ideas | is remarkable |
c'. | *? | Het haar ideeën <leuk> vinden is opmerkelijk. |
Example (305) shows that complementives introduced by a preposition like tot or als differ from the complementives discussesed in the previous subsection in that they can be placed either before or after the deverbal head.
a. | Dat | zij | Jan | <tot voorzitter> | benoemden <tot voorzitter> | was verstandig. | |
that | they | Jan | to chairman | elected | was wise | ||
'That they elected Jan chairman was wise.' |
b. | Dat | hij | zijn grootste vijand | <als zijn vriend> | beschouwt <als zijn vriend> | is dwaas. | |
that | he | his greatest enemy | as his friend | considers | is foolish | ||
'That he considers his greatest enemy as his friend is foolish.' |
In inf-nominalizationswe seem to find the same possibilities: for many speakers the tot/als-phrase can occur either pre- or postnominally; for some speakers, however, placing the tot/als-phrase after the nominal infinitive leads to a somewhat degraded result. In (306), some examples are given of bare-inf nominalizations; as with the adjectival complementives, the subject must be realized as a prenominal noun phrase, regardless of the placement of the tot/als-phrase.
a. | Jan | <tot voorzitter> | benoemen <%tot voorzitter> | was een slimme zet. | |
Jan | to chairman | appoint | was a smart move | ||
'Appointing Jan chairman was a smart move.' |
a'. | * | <Tot voorzitter> benoemen van Jan <tot voorzitter> was een slimme zet. |
b. | Je grootste vijand | <als je vriend> | beschouwen <%als je vriend> | is dwaas. | |
your greatest enemy | as your friend | consider | is foolish | ||
'Considering your greatest enemy as your friend is foolish.' |
b'. | * | <Als je vriend> beschouwen van je grootste vijand <als je vriend> is dwaas. |
Example (307) provides the corresponding det-inf nominalizations, and shows that using a postnominal van-PP is preferred in non-generic contexts like (307a), whereas it is at least possible to use a prenominal noun phrase in generic contexts like (307b). Note that the postnominal tot/als-phrase cannot precede the van-PP: *het benoemen tot voorzitter van Jan; *het beschouwen als je vriend van je grootste vijand.
a. | Het | <tot voorzitter> | benoemen | van Jan <%tot voorzitter> | was verstandig. | |
the | to chairman | appoint | of Jan | was wise | ||
'Appointing Jan chairman was wise.' |
a'. | *? | Het Jan <tot voorzitter> benoemen <tot voorzitter> was verstandig. |
b. | Het | <als je vriend> | beschouwen | van je grootste vijand <%als je vriend> | is dwaas. | |
the | as your friend | consider | of your greatest enemy | is foolish | ||
'Considering your worst enemy as your friend is foolish.' |
b'. | ? | Het je grootste vijand <als je vriend> beschouwen <als je vriend> is dwaas. |
To conclude, note that even those speakers that object to the postnominal placement of the tot/als-phrase in the examples above accept it in the case of a more complex tot/als-PP. In those cases, the postnominal position is perfectly acceptable, and perhaps even preferable.
a. | (?) | Jan | tot voorzitter van de vereniging | benoemen | is verstandig. |
Jan | to chairman of the association | appoint | is wise | ||
'Appointing Jan chairman of the association is wise.' |
a'. | Jan benoemen tot voorzitter van de vereniging is verstandig. |
b. | (?) | Het | tot voorzitter van de vereniging | benoemen | van Jan | is verstandig. |
the | to chairman of the association | appoint | of Jan | is wise |
b'. | Het benoemen van Jan tot voorzitter van de vereniging is verstandig. |
The previous subsections have shown that in both det-inf and bare-inf nominalizations the arguments of the input verb function are inherited by the derived nominal. It has further investigated how these arguments can be realized in the pertinent inf-nominalizations. Here we will summarize the main findings.
The agent argument of intransitive verbs is optionally expressed in the form of a postnominal van-PP. Alternatively, the agent can be expressed by means of a genitive noun phrase or possessive pronoun. The most common patterns are therefore as given in (309).
bare-inf | N (+ van-PPAgent) | wandelen (van zieken) ‘walking of sick people’ |
det-inf | det + N (+ van-PPAgent) | het wandelen (van de zieken) ‘the walking (of the sick)’ |
(NPs/pronounAgent) + N | (zijn/Jans) wandelen ‘Janʼs walking’ |
In det-inf nominalizations, the theme argument of unaccusative verbs is optionally expressed in the form of a postnominal van-PP. This option is, however, not readily available in bare-inf nominalizations. Expressing the theme by means of a genitive noun phrase or possessive pronoun gives rise to a marginal result.
bare-inf | N + van-PPTheme | ??vallen van bladeren ‘falling of leaves’ |
det-inf | det + N + van-PPTheme | het vallen van de bladeren ‘the falling of the leaves’ |
NPs/pronounTheme + N | ?hun vallen ‘their falling’ |
With inf-nominalizations derived from transitive verbs, the theme argument is obligatorily present (if it has specific reference). The theme may precede the derived noun, in which case it is assigned accusative case and appears in the form of a noun phrase, or it may follow the head, in which case it appears as a van-PP. The use of a prenominal noun phrase is the preferred option in bare-inf nominalizations, whereas the use of a postnominal van-PP is the preferred option in det-inf nominalizations. The theme argument of bare-inf nominalizations is normally nonspecific. This also holds for the prenominal noun phrase (but not the postnominal van-PP) in det-inf nominalizations. The theme argument cannot be expressed by means of a genitive noun phrase or a possessive pronoun.
bare-inf | NPTheme + N | patiënten behandelen ‘treating patients’ |
N + van-PPTheme | ?behandelen van patiënten ‘treating of patients’ | |
det-inf | det + N + van-PPTheme | het treiteren van de kleuters ‘the bullying of the toddlers’ |
det + NPTheme + N | ?het kleuters treiteren ‘the bullying of toddlers’ |
With inf-nominalizations derived from ditransitive verbs, recipients can be optionally expressed either by means of a prenominal noun phrase or by a (pre- or postnominal) aan-PP: the former requires that the theme is also expressed by means of a prenominal noun phrase, whereas the latter can be used both with a prenominal NP-theme and with a postnominal van-PP. The prenominal NP-recipient must precede the NP-theme, whereas the aan-PP normally follows the theme (regardless of whether the theme is realized as a noun phrase or a van-PP). The arguments of bare-inf nominalizations are normally nonspecific. This also holds for the prenominal noun phrases (but not the postnominal PPs) in det-inf nominalizations.
bare-inf | (NPRec +) NPTheme + N | (kinderen) cadeaus geven ‘giving (children) presents’ |
NPTheme(+ aan-PPRec) + N | cadeaus (aan kinderen) geven ‘giving presents (to children)’ | |
NPTheme + N (+ aan-PPRec) | cadeaus geven (aan kinderen) ‘giving presents (to children)’ | |
N + van-PPTheme (+ aan-PPRec) | ?geven van cadeaus (aan kinderen) ‘giving of the presents (to children)’ | |
det-inf | det + N + van-PPTheme (+ aan-PPRec) | het geven van de cadeaus (aan de kinderen) ‘the giving of the presents (to the children)’ |
det (+ NPRec)+ NPTheme+ N | ?het (kinderen) cadeaus geven ‘the giving of presents (to children)’ |
Inf-nominalizations derived from verbs with a PP-argument take a PP with the same preposition. The PP may appear either pre- or postnominally, just like it can appear pre- or postverbally in the corresponding verbal constructions.
bare-inf | N + PPTheme | jagen op herten ‘hunting deer’ |
PPTheme+ N | op herten jagen ‘hunting deer’ | |
det-inf | det + N + PPTheme | het jagen op herten ‘the hunting of deer’ |
det + PPTheme+ N | het op herten jagen ‘the hunting of deer’ |
Inf-nominalizations derived from verbs involving a complementive reveal an interesting opposition between det-inf and bare-inf nominalizations: whereas det-inf nominalizations prefer the theme argument to appear postnominally in the form of a van-PP, bare-inf nominalizations require the theme argument to appear as a prenominal noun phrase. The complementive must appear prenominally. just as it must be preverbally in the corresponding verbal constructions.
bare-inf | NP + pred + N | Marie aardig vinden ‘liking Marie’ |
det-inf | det + pred + N + van-PP | het aardig vinden van Marie ‘liking Marie’ |
det + NP+ pred + N | ?het Marie aardig vinden ‘liking Marie’ |
The form of the agent argument depends on the adicity of the base verb. If the input verb is intransitive or unaccusative, the agent typically appears postnominally as a van-PP; see Subsection 1. In all other cases the agent typically appears as an optional door-phrase following all other arguments. Agentive door-phrasesonly occur in det-inf nominalizations: bare-inf nominalizations with an agentive door-phraseare always degraded. In det-inf nominalizations the agent may also be realized as a genitive noun phrase or possessive pronoun.
bare-inf | NP + N | boeken lezen (*door Jan) ‘reading books’ |
det-inf | det + N + van-PP (+ door-PP) | het lezen van boeken door Jan ‘the reading of books by Jan’ |
det + N + van-PP + aan-PP (+ door-PP) | het geven van boeken aan Marie door Jan ‘the presenting of books to Marie by Jan’ |
The preceding subsection has shown that inf-nominalizations typically combine with noun phrases or PPs that correspond to the arguments of the input verb. However, since in many cases complements and adjuncts are not formally distinguished within the noun phrase, it is conceivable that some of these PPs are adjuncts. This subsection will therefore apply the tests provided in Section 2.2.1 for distinguishing between PP-complement and PP-adjuncts to inf-nominalizations to determine the status (as complement or adjunct) of the PPs accompanying these nominalizations. Of course, the tests are not readily applicable to bare-inf nominalizations, given thatthis construction prefers realization of the theme as a prenominal noun phrase, which is clearly an argument of the derived noun. The discussion will therefore mainly focus on det-inf nominalizations. The results of these tests indicate that the PPs in question should be regarded as complements of the noun.
It is normally assumed that bare-inf and det-inf nominalizations both inherit the argument structure of the input verb: they resemble the corresponding verbal constructions with regard to the number of arguments and their thematic functions. Nevertheless, there is an important difference: whereas in the verbal constructions the subject is required, explicit mention of this same element is not required in the nominal constructions. Consequently, the inf-nominalizations in (316), which are derived from an unaccusative or an intransitive verb, do not require the presence of any PP, or may be modified by an adjunct only. Note that leaving out the argument is not semantically innocuous but results in a generic interpretation.
a. | (Dat) | vallen | (met de fiets) | kan | erg pijnlijk | zijn. | |
the | fall | with the bike | can | very painful | be | ||
'Falling with your bike can be very painful.' |
b. | (Dat) | slapen | (in een waterbed) | is niet | gezond. | |
that | sleep | in a waterbed | is not | healthy | ||
'(This) sleeping in a waterbed isnʼt healthy.' |
In inf-nominalizations derived from a transitive verb, the theme must normally be present; dropping the theme argument is only marginally possible if the sentences are given a generic interpretation.
a. | Het | verzamelen | *?(van postzegels) | kost | hem | veel geld. | |
the | collect | of stamps | costs | him | much money | ||
'Collecting stamps is costing him a lot of money.' |
b. | *? | (Postzegels) | verzamelen | kost | veel geld. |
stamps | collect | costs | much money |
Of course if the input verb can be used as a pseudo-intransitive verb like schrijven'to write' or drinken'to drink', the theme does not need to accompany the derived inf-noun. As with the pseudo-intransitive verb, the resulting interpretation of the examples in (318) is that of a habitual activity; cf. Section 2.2.3.1 (and see also Groefsema, 1995, for semantic and syntactic constraints on the use of implicit arguments). Note that using det-inf nominalizations with non-expressive determiners like het normally gives rise to an unacceptable result; the expressive demonstrative determiner dat can be used provided that the context permits a pejorative interpretation, as in (318b').
a. | Schrijven | is een leuk beroep. | |
write | is a nice occupation | ||
'Writing is a nice occupation.' |
a'. | * | Het schrijven | is een leuk beroep. |
the write | is a nice occupation |
b. | Drinken | is ongezond. | |
drink | is unhealthy | ||
'Drinking is unhealthy.' |
b'. | Dat/*Het drinken is ongezond. | |
that/the drink is unhealthy |
The theme is also normally present if the input verb is ditransitive. It can only be left out in obvious (and contrastive) generic statements, like the ones in (319). Again, such constructions are more common with bare-inf than with det-inf nominalizations, which is clear from the fact that (319a&b) will become unacceptable if we add the determiner het to the inf-nominalizations. Example (319a') shows, however, that det-inf nominalizations occasionally also allow the theme to be absent in generic contexts.
a. | Geven | is beter | dan nemen. | |
give | is better | than take | ||
'To give is better than to take.' |
a'. | Het | gaat | om | het geven, | niet | om | het krijgen. | |
it | goes | about | the give | not | about | the get | ||
'Itʼs the giving that counts, not the getting.' |
b. | Bij hem | is het | alleen | maar | beloven, | maar | nooit | eens | doen. | |
with him | is it | only | prt | promise | but | never | prt | do | ||
'He is always promising things, but never doing them.' |
The (a)-examples in (320) show that, just like in the verbal construction, the recipient need not be expressed. If it is expressed, as in the (b)-examples, dropping the theme argument does not give rise to a generic reading but to an ungrammatical result.
a. | Het | geven | *?(van cadeaus) | is altijd | leuk. | |
the | give | of presents | is always | nice |
a'. | ?? | (Cadeautjes) | geven | is altijd | leuk. |
presents | give | is always | nice |
b. | Het geven | *(van het cadeautje) | aan mijn neefje | is leuk. | |
the give | of the present | to my nephewdim | is nice |
b'. | Mijn neefje | *(cadeautjes) | geven | is leuk. | |
my nephew | presents | give | is nice |
Finally, (321) shows that, if the input verb selects a PP, this PP is also required by the derived inf-nominalization, unless the implied theme is recoverable from the linguistic or non-linguistic context.
(Het) | zoeken | *(naar een oplossing) | bleef | zonder resultaat. | ||
the | search | for a solution | remained | without result |
Example (322) shows that the van-PP of det-inf nominalizations cannot occur in postcopular position. This is, of course, hardly surprising, because van-PPs in postcopular position are normally interpreted as possessive elements: states of affairs, the denotation of inf-nominalizations, cannot be possessed.
a. | * | Het | maken | is van sommen. |
the | make | is of sums |
b. | * | Het | behandelen | is van de patiënten. |
the | treat | is of the patients |
c. | * | Het | geven | is van de cadeaus | (aan de kinderen). |
the | give | is of the presents | to the children |
d. | * | Het | uitreiken | is van de prijzen | (aan de winnaars). |
the | present | is of the prizes | to the winners |
Note that if the input verb takes a PP-complement, this PP-complement can sometimes occur in postcopular position (Barbiers 1995). Examples like these suggest the (possible) attainment of some future state, like father being present or there being a solution, which can be made explicit by adding the addition of the time adverb nu'now' or a particle like nog'still'.
a. | Het wachten | is nu | op vader. | |
the wait | is now | for father | ||
'We still have to wait for father.' |
b. | Het zoeken | is nu | nog | naar een oplossing. | |
the search | is now | still | for a solution | ||
'We still have to search for a solution.' |
This is, however, not a general property of inf-nominalizations derived from such verbs. For example, verbs denoting a state and a momentary action or an activity give rise to a distinctly odd result, which may be due to the fact that these constructions cannot be used to express the attainment of some future state.
a. | * | Het geloven | is nu | nog | in een vreedzame oplossing. |
the believing | is now | prt | in a peaceful solution |
b. | * | Het waarschuwen | is nu | nog | voor zware regenval. |
the warning | is now | prt | for heavy rain |
c. | * | Het jagen | is nu | nog | op reeën. |
the hunt | is now | prt | on deer |
Furthermore, the construction is only possible with the determiner het; replacing het by some other determiner results in unacceptability. This suggests that the acceptable cases in (323a&b) are more or less idiomatic.
a. | * | Mijn/Dat wachten | is nu | op vader. |
my/that wait | is now | for father |
b. | * | Mijn/Dat zoeken | is nu | nog | naar een oplossing. |
my/that search | is now | still | for a solution |
Example (326) shows that det-inf nominalizations do allow R-pronominalization. The examples in (326a&b) show that the pronominalized van-PPs expressing the inherited theme must also follow the noun, as is of course expected given that such van-PPs can only occur postnominally. If the PP is inherited directly from the input verb, placement of the pronominal PP in prenominal position is acceptable, although placement of these PPs in postverbal position seems to be preferred (which is clear from the fact that this is by far the dominant order found on the internet). This is illustrated in (326c&d) by means of inf-nominalizations derived from, respectively, jagen (op)'hunt' and genieten (van)'enjoy'.
a. | Het | <*ervan> | maken <ervan> | is eenvoudig. | |
the | there-of | make | is simple | ||
'Making it is simple.' |
b. | Het | <*ervan> | uitreiken <ervan> | aan de winnaars | duurde | lang. | |
the | there-of | present | to the winners | lasted | long | ||
'Presenting them to the winners took a long time.' |
c. | Het | <?erop> | jagen <erop> | moest | verboden | worden. | |
the | there-on | hunt | should | prohibited | be | ||
'Hunting of them should be prohibited.' |
d. | Het | <?ervan> | genieten <ervan> | werd | ons | onmogelijk | gemaakt. | |
the | there-of | enjoy | was | us | impossible | made | ||
'Enjoying it was made impossible for us.' |
The examples in (327a&b) show that R-pronominalization is impossible in bare-inf nominalizations with postnominal van-PPs expressing the inherited theme, which is of course related to the fact that these PPs are not much favored in this construction anyway. R-pronominalization of inherited PPs, however, is possible: the examples in (327c&d) differ from the ones in (326c&d) in that they seem to prefer placement of pronominalized PP in prenominal position.
a. | * | Maken <ervan> is eenvoudig. |
b. | * | Uitreiken <ervan> aan de winnaars duurde lang. |
c. | <Erop> jagen <?erop> moest verboden worden. |
d. | <Ervan> | genieten <?ervan> werd ons onmogelijk gemaakt. |
For completeness’ sake, example (328) shows that R-pronominalization is impossible with agents and recipients.
a. | het overhandigen | van de petitie | aan de regering/*eraan | |
the hand.over | of the petition | to the government/there-to |
b. | het schenken | van geld | aan de kerk/*eraan | |
the donate | of money | to the church/there-to |
c. | het opstellen | van een programma | door de partij/*erdoor | |
the draft | of a program | by the party/there-by |
Topicalization of the postnominal van-PP yields results that are at best questionable, as shown by example (329a) for inf-nominalizations derived from transitive verbs. It seems, however, that the result improves if the extracted PP is heavy and a modal verb is used, as in (329b).
a. | * | Van fruit | wordt | het eten | altijd | gestimuleerd. |
of fruit | is | the eat | always | encouraged |
b. | ?? | Van vers fruit | zou | het eten | altijd | gestimuleerd | moeten | worden. |
of fresh fruit | should | the eat | always | encouraged | must | be | ||
'The eating of fresh fruit should always be encouraged.' |
As is shown in (330), inf-nominalizations derived from ditransitive verbs behave more or less on a par with those derived from transitive verbs in (329), the only difference being that the presence of the recipient blocks topicalization completely. The fact that example (330b) with a heavy van-PP in clause-initial position is fully ungrammatical if the recipient is present suggests that the preposed van-PP is actually not extracted from the noun phrase but generated as an independent restrictive adverbial phrase; if so, the ungrammaticality of (330b) with a recipient would follow from the fact established in Subsection A that overt realization of the recipient aan-PP requires that the theme argument also be overtly realized as a van-PP; see the discussion of example (320).
a. | * | Van cadeaus | heb | ik | het geven | (aan kinderen) | altijd | leuk | gevonden. |
of presents | have | I | the give | to children | always | nice | consider |
b. | Van onveilige cadeaus | moet | het geven | ??(*aan kinderen) | verboden worden. | |
of unsafe presents | should | the give | to children | prohibited be | ||
'The giving of unsafe presents (to children) must be prohibited.' |
As is shown by (331a), a similar blocking effect can be evoked by the agentive door-PP. Further, it is interesting to note that the sentence in (331b), without the door-phrase, strongly favors a reading in which the van-PP is interpreted as the agent and the verb treiteren'to bully' is given a generic reading. Since non-realization of the theme normally has this effect, this might again indicate that the preposed van-PP is actually not extracted from the noun phrase but generated as an independent restrictive adverbial phrase.
a. | * | Van peuters | heb | ik | het treiteren | door grote jongens | altijd | veracht. |
of toddlers | have | I | the bully | by big boys | always | despised | ||
Intended reading: 'Iʼve always despised the bullying of toddlers by big boys.' |
b. | # | Van peutersTheme | heb | ik | het treiteren | altijd | veracht. |
of toddlers | have | I | the bully | always | despised |
Relativization and questioning are possible under more or less the same conditions as topicalization, as will become clear by comparing the examples in (332) with those in (329). We will refrain from giving similar examples with ditransitive verbs since relativization and questioning always give an objectionable result, although we want to note that in this case, too, expression of a recipient aan-PP has a deteriorating effect.
a. | * | het fruit | waarvan | het eten | altijd | gestimuleerd | wordt |
the kind | where-of | the eat | always | encouraged | is |
a'. | ? | het soort fruit | waarvan | het eten | altijd | gestimuleerd | zou moeten worden |
the kind fruit | where-of | the eat | always | encouraged | should must be |
b. | *? | Van welk fruit | wordt | het eten | gestimuleerd? |
of which fruit | is | the eat | encouraged |
b'. | ? | Van welk soort fruit | zou | het eten | gestimuleerd | moeten | worden? |
of which kind fruit | should | the eat | encouraged | must | be |
Inf-nominalizations do not readily accept PP-over-V and scrambling. It may perhaps occur in highly contrastive contexts, e.g., when contrastive accent is assigned to the modifier vers'fresh' in the examples in (333).
a. | Ik | heb | het eten | aangeraden | *van appels/?van vers fruit. | |
I | have | the eat | recommended | of apples/of fresh fruit |
b. | Ik | heb | *van appels/??van vers fruit | het eten | aangeraden. | |
I | have | of apples/of fresh fruit | the eat | recommended |
For completeness’ sake, it can be mentioned that topicalization, relativization and questioning of PPs introduced by prepositions other than van is sometimes marginally possible. Some examples are given in (334); examples (334a&c) are best if the PP is given contrastive tress; the fact that (334b) is more marked might be due to the fact that assigning contractive is not possible in this case. PP-over-V and scrambling of these PPs is impossible, which will go unillustrated here.
a. | ?? | Op groot wild | zou | het jagen | verboden | moeten | worden. |
on big game | should | the hunt | prohibited | must | be | ||
'The hunting of big game should be prohibited.' |
b. | *? | het soort wild | waarop | het jagen | verboden | zou | moeten | worden |
the kind [of] game | where-on | the hunt | prohibited | should | must | be |
c. | ?? | Op welk soort wild | zou | het jagen | verboden | moeten | worden? |
on what [of] kind game | should | the hunt | prohibited | must | be |
Topicalization, relativization and questioning of a recipient aan-PP or an agentive door-PP, however, are impossible or at best highly questionable. This is shown in (335) and (336).
a. | *? | Aan zieke kinderen | moet | het geven | van cadeaus | gestimuleerd | worden. |
to sick children | must | the give | of presents | encouraged | be | ||
'To sick children the giving of presents must be encouraged.' |
b. | * | zieke kinderen | aan wie | het geven | van cadeaus | gestimuleerd moet worden |
the kind children | to whom | the give | of presents | encouraged must be |
c. | *? | Aan wie | moet | het geven | van cadeaus | gestimuleerd | worden? |
to whom | must | the give | of presents | encouraged | be |
a. | * | Door grote jongens zou | het treiteren | van peuters | niet | mogen | voorkomen. |
by big boys should | the bully | of toddlers | not | may | prt.-occur |
b. | * | grote jongens | door wie | het treiteren | van peuters | niet zou mogen voorkomen |
big boys | by whom | the bully | of toddlers | not should may prt.-occur |
c. | * | Door welke jongens | zou | het treiteren | van peuters | niet mogen voorkomen? |
by which boys | should | the bully | of toddlers | not may prt.-occur |
Table 7 summarizes the results of the four adjunct/complement tests for theme arguments of inf-nominalizations expressed by, respectively, a postnominal van-PP and a PP directly inherited from the verb. The third and fifth columns indicate whether the results provide evidence for or against the assumption that we are dealing with complements of the er-nominalization. The first three tests provide unequivocal evidence for complement status of both van-PPs and PPs headed by other prepositions. The results of the PP-extraction tests seem to go against this, but we have seen that these tests are problematic in various respects, and may not be suitable for establishing complement status anyway. We therefore conclude that these themes are arguments of the derived nouns.
van-PPs | other PPs | |||
Test 1: PP obligatory | + | positive | + | positive |
Test 2: Post-copular position | — | positive | n.a. | n.a. |
Test 3: R-pronominalization | + | positive | + | positive |
Test 4A: Topicalization | ? | negative | ? | negative |
Test 4B: Relativization/questioning | ? | ? | ||
Test 4C: PP-over-V | — | — | ||
Test 4D: Scrambling | — | — |
For recipient aan-PPs and agentive door-PPs it is more difficult to establish whether they are arguments of the noun. Only the first test is relevant for them, and it seems that this test provides evidence against assuming argument status: recipients and agents normally need not be expressed. However, given that recipients and agentive door-phrases are normally also optional in the verbal constructions, this is not conclusive. We may therefore assume that they have a status similar to that of the theme, which clearly does behave as an argument.
- 1995The syntax of interpretationThe Hague, Holland Academic GraphicsUniversity of Leiden/HILThesis
- 1995Understood arguments: a semantic/pragmatic approachLingua96139-162
- 2001Dutch nominalised infinitives as non-identical twinsUiL OTS Working PaperNovember 2001