/ instituut voor de Nederlandse taal / Taalportaal
bibliography glossary about
  • Dutch1
  • Frisian
  • Saterfrisian
  • Afrikaans
Show all
    6.4.Appositive use of the adjective
    quickinfo

    The term apposition is normally used for nominal modifiers of a noun phrase, such as the ones given in italics in the (a)-example in (169). Here, we will extend this notion in order to include the postnominal adjectival modifiers in the (b)-examples; see also Quirk (1985) and Heringa (2012),

    169
    a. Jan/Hij, de bankdirecteur, komt vandaag langs.
      Jan/he the bank manager  comes  today  by
      'Jan, the bank manager, will drop in today.'
    a'. Mijn zuster Els is ziek.
      my sister  Els is ill
    b. Jan, zo dronken als een tempelier, zwalkte gisteren over straat.
      Jan  as drunk  as a templar  wandered  yesterday  over the.street
      'Jan, as drunk as a fiddler, wandered about the streets, yesterday.'
    b'. Studieboeken over taalkunde geschikt voor eerstejaars zijn moeilijk te vinden.
      textbooks on linguistics  suitable for first-year.students are  hard  to find

    The fact that the subject and the appositive occur in clause-initial position shows that they form a constituent; cf. the constituency test. Since appositive adjectives resemble attributive adjectives in this respect, we will compare these two uses of the adjective in Subsection I. The appositive constructions in the primeless and primed examples of (169) differ in interpretation: just like relative clauses, appositives allow a restrictive and a non-restrictive interpretation. This will be discussed for the appositive adjectives in Subsection II. Finally, we will discuss some differences between appositive and supplementive adjectives in Subsection III. Nominal appositives are discussed in Section N3.1.3.

    readmore
    [+]  I.  Appositive and attributive adjectives

    Since both appositive and attributive adjectives are part of the noun phrase they modify, more has to be said about the similarities and differences between them. Occasionally, it has been suggested that the attributive and appositive constructions are alternative realizations of the same underlying construction; see Alexiadou et al. (2007: Part III, chapter 1) for a detailed discussion and references. The following subsections will show, however, that there are various problems with this suggestion.

    [+]  A.  Differences between appositively and attributively used adjectives

    The first difference involves the size of the AP in question. Appositives are mostly complex APs, for instance, an adjective with a prepositional complement, like verliefd'in love' in (170a). If the complement is omitted, as in (170a'), the appositive construction normally degrades, although it remains possible if the adjective is emphatically or contrastively stressed; cf, subsection II. The (b)-examples show that a complement is possible but not required in the case of an attributively used adjective. A second difference involves word order. Although example (170c) shows that the PP-complement of the adjective verliefd may either precede or follow the complementive adjective, the PP-complement must precede the adjective if the AP is used attributively, as in (170b); cf. the discussion of the Head-final Filter on attributive adjectives in Section 5.3, sub IB. With the appositively used adjective in (170a), on the other hand, both orders are possible.

    170
    a. De man, <op zijn vrouw> verliefd <op zijn vrouw>, kocht bloemen.
      the man     with his wife  in.love  bought  flowers
    a'. ? De man, verliefd, kocht bloemen.
    b. De <op zijn vrouw> verliefde <*op zijn vrouw> man kocht bloemen.
      the    with his wife in.love  man bought  flowers
    b'. De verliefde man kocht bloemen.
    c. dat de man <op zijn vrouw> verliefd <op zijn vrouw> is.
      that  the man   with his wife  in.love  is

    The examples in (171) show that “heavy" APs with a complex modifier like zo ... dat ...'so ... that ...' can also be used as appositives.

    171
    a. Het meisje, zo blij dat ze straalde, nam de prijs in ontvangst.
      the girl  so  happy  that she beamed  took  the prize  in receipt
      'The/A girl, beaming with joy, received the prize.'
    a'. ? Het meisje, blij,nam de prijs in ontvangst.
    b. Er lag een jas, zo vies dat niemand hem aan durfde te raken, op de grond.
      there  lay a coat  so dirty  that nobody  him  prt. dared to touch  on the floor
    b'. ? Er lag een jas, vies, op de grond.
    [+]  B.  The hypothesis that appositives and attributives have the same source

    If we are dealing with comparison, the adjective can optionally be accompanied by a dan/als/van-phrase, which must follow the adjective in predicative constructions; cf. (172).

    172
    a. dat jouw begeleider zeker niet <*dan de mijne> beter <dan de mijne> is.
      that  your supervisor  certainly not       than the mine  better  is
      'that your supervisor is certainly not better than mine.'
    b. dat jouw begeleider <*van de staf> het best <van de staf > is.
      that  your supervisor      of the staff  the best  is
      'that your supervisor is the test of the staff.'
    c. dat jouw begeleider <*als de mijne> even goed <als de mijne> is.
      your supervisor      as the mine  as good  is
      'that your supervisor is as good as mine.'

    The Head-final Filter on attributive adjectives correctly predicts that such APs modified by a dan/als/van-phrase cannot be used in attributive position. However, there is a “repair" strategy that places the dan/als-phrase after the head noun; see Section 5.3, sub IIA, for further discussion. This is illustrated in the examples in (173).

    173
    a. Een betere begeleider dan de mijne bestaat niet.
      a better supervisor  than the mine  exists  not
      'A better supervisor than mine doesnʼt exist.'
    b. De beste begeleider van de staf zorgt voor de zwakste studenten.
      the best supervisor of the staff  takes.care  of the weakest students
    c. Een even goede begeleider als de mijne bestaat niet.
      an  as good supervisor  as the mine  exists not

    Alternatively, the AP as a whole can be used as an appositive, as shown in (174).

    174
    a. Een begeleider beter dan de mijne , bestaat niet.
      a supervisor  better than the mine  exists not
      'A supervisor, better than mine, doesnʼt exist.'
    b. Deze begeleider, het best van de staf, zorgt voor de zwakste studenten.
      this supervisor  the best of the staff  takes.care  of the weakest students
    c. Een begeleider even goed als de mijne, bestaat niet.
      a supervisor  as good as the mine  exists not

          It is important to stress that the dan/als/van-phrases are part of the predicatively used APs in (172), as is clear from the fact, illustrated in (175), that they can be pied-piped by topicalization of the adjective; cf. the constituency test.

    175
    a. Beter dan de mijne is jouw begeleider zeker niet.
      better than the mine  is your supervisor  certainly  not
    b. Het beste van de staf is jouw begeleider zeker niet.
      the best of the staff  is your supervisor  certainly  not
    c. Even goed als de mijne is jouw begeleider zeker niet.
      as good as the mine  is your supervisor  certainly  not

    This leads to the conclusion that the dan/als/van-phrases in (173) are also part of the attributive APs, and that their postnominal placement is the result of some movement operation: if we assume that the AP is base-generated in postnominal position, we may derive the attributive construction by leftward movement of the adjective across the noun while stranding the dan/als/van-phrase (alternatively, we may assume that the AP is base-generated in prenominal position and that the dan/als/van-phrase has been moved rightward across the noun, but we will not consider this option here). If so, this makes it possible to assume that the appositive constructions in (174) have the same underlying structure as the attributive ones in (173) by assuming that the Head-final Filter on attributive adjectives functions as a constraint on the postulated movement operation. One might want to claim that the attributive construction is derived by movement of the phrase minimally containing the adjective and its complement and stranding the adjunct als/dan/van-phrase.

    176
    a. [Determiner ... N [AP ... [A PP] dan/als/van...]]
    appositive AP
    a'. * [Determiner [A PP]i N [AP ... ti dan/als van...]]
    attributive AP
    b. [Determiner ... N [AP... [PP A] dan/als/van...]]
    appositive AP
    b'. [Determiner [PP A]i N [AP ... ti dan/als/van...]]
    attributive AP

    The claim that the Head-final Filter blocks the movement in (176a') but not the one in (176b') correctly accounts for the fact that an adjective like gek'fond' in (177a), which must precede its PP-complement, cannot be used attributively; cf. (177b) and Section 5.3, sub IB. The intended meaning of (177b) must therefore be expressed by using the AP as an appositive, as in (177c).

    177
    a. De man is <*op zijn vrouw> gek <op zijn vrouw>.
      the man  is     of his wife  fond
    b. de gekke <*op zijn vrouw> man <*op zijn vrouw>
      the  fond      of his wife  man
    c. de man, gek op zijn vrouw, ...
      the man  fond of his wife

    Analyses of the sort in (176), of course, raise non-trivial questions concerning the size of the moved phrase, given that it is not the case that all modifiers of the adjective can be stranded. Example (178b), for example, shows that modifier genoeg blocks the attributive use of the modified adjective regardless of whether it is stranded or pied-piped; see Section 5.3, sub IIB, for more detailed and careful discussion. Consequently the only option is to use the AP appositively.

    178
    a. De mand is <*genoeg> groot <genoeg> om een kip in te houden.
      the basket  is  big enough  comp  a chicken  in to keep
      'The basket is big enough to keep a chicken in.'
    b. * een groot <genoeg> mand <genoeg> om een kip in te houden
      a  big    enough  basket  comp  a chicken  in to keep
    c. een mand groot genoeg om een kip in te houden
      a basket  big enough  comp  a chicken  in to keep

    Similarly, the (a)-examples in (179) and (180) show that attributive use of adjectives with a clausal complement is also blocked; cf. Section 5.3, sub IB2. This holds regardless of whether (the stranded part of) the anticipatory PP precedes or follows the adjective. Note in passing that the corresponding appositive constructions are again acceptable, but require that the anticipatory PP be unsplit, as will be clear from the degraded status of (179c).

    179
    a. * de er ziek(e) van jongen dat jij steeds zeurt
      the  there  fed.up  with  boy  that  you  continually  nag
    b. de jongen, ziek ervan dat jij steeds zeurt, ...
    c. ? de jongen, er ziek van dat jij steeds zeurt, ...
    180
    a. * de er tegen gekante jongen dat Marie uitgenodigd wordt
      the  there  against  opposed  boy  that  Marie  invited  is
    b. de jongen, ertegen gekant dat Marie uitgenodigd wordt, ...

    We will put these problems aside, however, given that the hypothesis that attributives and appositives have the same underlying structure and that the choice between them is subject to additional constraints like the Head-final Filter on attributive adjectives encounters a number of additional problems that are perhaps even more problematic.

    [+]  C.  Problems for the hypothesis

    The hypothesis that attributives and appositives have the same underlying structure meets with various problems. A first problem is that appositives and attributives differ in that only the former can modify pronouns and proper nouns. Some acceptable examples involving appositives are given in (181). Note that examples like een bange Jan or een tevreden Marie are possible; the presence of the indefinite article suggests, however, that the proper nouns are used here as common nouns.

    181
    a. Hij/Jan, bang voor regen, nam een paraplu mee.
      he/Jan  afraid for rain  took  an umbrella  with (him)
    b. Zij/Marie, tevreden over het resultaat, gaf de student een tien.
      she/Marie  satisfied with the result  gave  the student  an A

          The second problem is more semantic in nature. Consider the examples in (170a&b), repeated in a slightly different form as (182a&b). Section 1.3.2 has shown that the noun phrase in (182a) refers to the intersection of the set denoted by the noun man and the set denoted by the AP op zijn vrouw verliefd. In addition, the definite determiner indicates that this intersection has one member. The noun phrase in (182b), on the other hand, refers to a known male person in the domain of discourse, about whom it is claimed that he is in love with his wife; in this respect the appositive behaves like the non-restrictive relative clause in (182c). The fact that (182a) and (182b) differ in interpretation in this way seems inconsistent with the claim that they both have the same underlying structure.

    182
    a. de op zijn vrouw verliefde man
      the  with his wife  in.love  man
    b. de man, op zijn vrouw verliefd, ...
      the man  with his wife  in.love
    c. de man, die op zijn vrouw verliefd is, ...
      the man  who  with his wife  in.love  is

          Another difference in meaning can be made clear by means of the examples in (183) and (184). Example (183a) is ambiguous between a “one-set" reading, according to which the cars that sold well have the property of being both old and cheap, and a “two-set" reading, according to which both the old and the cheap cars sold well. The attributive construction in (183b), on the other hand, only has the “one-set" reading.

    183
    a. De autoʼs, oud en goedkoop, werden goed verkocht.
      the cars  old and cheap  were  well  sold
      'The cars, old and cheap, sold well.'
    b. De oude en goedkope autoʼs werden goed verkocht.
      the old and cheap cars  were  well  sold
      'The old and cheap cars sold well.'

    This difference between the appositive and attributive constructions can be more clearly demonstrated by means of the examples in (184), in which the antonymous adjectives oud'old' and nieuw'new' block the “one-set" reading due to the fact that this reading would give rise to a contradiction. As expected, the appositive construction in (183a) now only allows the “two-set" reading, according to which both the old and the new cars sold well, whereas the corresponding attributive construction in (183b) is unacceptable due to the fact that it only allows the semantically anomalous interpretation that all cars that sold well are both old and new.

    184
    a. De autoʼs, oud en nieuw, werden goed verkocht.
      the cars  old and new  were  well  sold
      'The cars, (both) old and new, sold well.'
    b. * De oude en nieuwe autoʼs werden goed verkocht.
      the old and new cars  were  well  sold
      'The old and new cars sold well.'

    Note that, in this case, the relative clauses in (185) pattern like the attributive construction, due to the fact that the relative pronoun acts as the logical subject of the complete coordinated predicative APs.

    185
    a. De autoʼs, die oud en goedkoop waren, werden goed verkocht.
      the cars  which old and cheap were  were  well  sold
      'The cars, which were old and cheap, sold well.'
    b. * De autoʼs, die oud en nieuw waren, werden goed verkocht.
      the cars  which old and new were  were  well  sold
      'The cars, which were old and new, sold well.'

          A third difference is illustrated by means of the examples in (186) and (187), which contain an attributively used comparative. In the attributive constructions in (186), the comparative can be complemented by the dan-phrase dan ik (heb)'than I (have)', whereas complementation with dan het mijne (is)'than mine (is)' is excluded.

    186
    a. Jan heeft een groter huis dan ik (heb).
      Jan has  a bigger house  than  I   have
      'Jan has a bigger house than I (have).'
    b. * Jan heeft een groter huis dan het mijne (is).
      Jan has  a bigger house  than  the mine   is

    If the appositive and the attributive have a common source, we expect the same thing to be the case in the corresponding appositive construction. Example (187) shows, however, that this expectation is not borne out. Complementation with dan het mijne (is) becomes fully acceptable, whereas complementation with dan ik heb becomes unacceptable. Note that example (187a) is grammatical without the verb hebben'to have', but that this leads to the pragmatically odd interpretation “Jan has a house that is bigger than I am", which is not available in (186a).

    187
    a. Jan heeft een huis groter dan ik %(*?heb).
      Jan has  a house  bigger  than  I        have
    b. Jan heeft een huis groter dan het mijne (is).
      Jan has  a house  bigger  than  the mine   is
      'Jan has a house bigger than mine (is).'

    In these comparative constructions, relative clauses again behave like appositives, not attributives. This is illustrated in (188).

    188
    a. % Jan heeft een huis dat groter is dan ik.
      Jan has  a house  that  bigger  is than  I
    b. Jan heeft een huis dat groter is dan het mijne.
      Jan has  a house  that  bigger  is than  the mine
      'Jan has a house that is bigger than mine.'
    [+]  D.  Conclusion

    The general picture that seems to emerge from the discussion in the previous subsections is that appositive constructions are used if the attributive use of the AP is blocked for some reason. At first sight, this seems to provide support for the claim that the appositive and attributive construction are alternative realizations of the same underlying structure. The last subsection has shown, however, that there are various problems both of a semantic and a syntactic nature for proposals of this sort. We have furthermore seen that appositives resemble non-restrictive relative clauses in various respects, which suggest that the apposition is propositional in nature; an analysis that emphasizes the propositional nature of the apposition can be found in Heringa (2012).

    [+]  II.  Restrictive and non-restrictive use of the appositive

    Subsection I has shown that the function of the appositive in (182b) is comparable to that of a non-restrictive relative clause. However, if the appositive modifies a nonspecific indefinite noun phrase, as in (178c) and (187a&b), it is perfectly compatible with a restrictive interpretation. That a restrictive interpretation is possible becomes even clearer when we consider transitive verbs with an intentional interpretation in the sense that they do not presuppose the existence of the direct object. A clear example of such a verb is zoeken'search for': although a philosopher may be searching for the meaning of life, this does not presuppose that there really is such a thing as the meaning of life. In the contexts of these intentional verbs, a restrictive interpretation of appositives is highly favored.

    189
    a. Jan zoekt naar een studieboek over taalkunde geschikt voor eerstejaars.
      Jan looks  for  a textbook on linguistics  suitable for first-year.students
    b. Marie verlangt naar een plek ver van de moderne samenleving.
      Marie longs  for a place  far from  the modern society

    In these restrictive uses of the appositive, there is no intonation break between the noun and the appositive, although an intonation break may occur between the full noun phrase and the finite verb in second position. In the non-restrictive uses, on the other hand, such intonation breaks are required. The examples in (190) show that restrictive appositives and restricted relative clauses again behave alike in this respect; as in the examples above, the intonation breaks are indicated by commas.

    190
    a. Studenten geschikt voor deze baan, zijn uitgenodigd.
    restrictive
      students  fit  for this job  are invited
    a'. Studenten die geschikt zijn voor deze baan, zijn uitgenodigd.
      students  that  fit  are  for this job  are invited
      'Students that are fit for this job are invited.'
    b. De studenten, geschikt voor deze baan, zijn uitgenodigd.
    non-restrictive
      the students  fit  for this job  are invited
    b'. De studenten, die geschikt zijn voor deze baan, zijn uitgenodigd.
      the students  that  fit  are  for this job  are invited
      'The students, who are fit for this job, are invited.'

    Observe that only the restrictive appositives alternate with the attributive construction: (189a), for instance, has the near-synonymous paraphrase in (191a), whereas (191b), if acceptable at all, is not an appropriate paraphrase of (190b).

    191
    a. Jan zoekt naar een geschikt studieboek over taalkunde voor eerstejaars.
      Jan looks for  a suitable textbook on linguistics  for first-year.students
    b. ?? De geschikte studenten voor de baan zijn uitgenodigd.
      the  fit  students  for the job  are invited

          Restrictive appositives are also quite acceptable with indefinite noun phrases if the AP is heavy, that is, if the adjective is modified by a complex modifier like zo ... dat ..., which, as we have seen in Section 3.1.3, sub IB, also allows the split attributive pattern in the primed examples.

    192
    a. een vergadering zo saai [dat ik ervan in slaap viel]
      a  meeting  so boring   that  I  thereof  in sleep  fell
    a'. een zo saaie vergadering [dat ik ervan in slaap viel]
    b. een meisje zo vrolijk dat iedereen haar mag
      a girl  so cheerful  that  everybody  her  likes
      'a girl so cheerful that everybody likes her'
    b'. een zo vrolijk meisje dat iedereen haar mag

          If the antecedent is a definite DP or a proper noun, restrictive appositives only occur in emphatic, usually contrastive, contexts. Some examples are given in (193). In these cases, the postmodifying adjectives do not serve to restrict the referent set of the modified noun phrase, but instead indicate the circumstances under which the predication of the main clause holds. In (193b), for instance, the referent of Jan is uniquely indentified, and what the adjective serves to express is that an angry Jan is to be preferred over a sad Jan.

    193
    a. Deze jongen jaloers is tot alles in staat.
    emphatic
      this boy  jealous  is to  everything  capable
      'This boy jealous is capable of everything.'
    b. Jan kwaad is te verkiezen boven Jan verdrietig.
    contrastive
      Jan angry  is to prefer  above  Jan sad
      'Jan angry is preferable to Jan sad.'

    The fact that these examples are necessarily restrictive also accounts for the fact that such constructions allow stage-level adjectives only, as shown by the semantic anomaly of the examples in (194).

    194
    a. * Deze jongen intelligent kan nog een eind komen.
      this boy  intelligent  can  yet  an end  come
    b. * Jan klein van stuk zou veel minder indrukwekkend zijn.
      Jan small of piece  would  much less impressive  be
      'Jan small would be much less impressive.'
    [+]  III.  Differences between appositives and supplementives

    Since they can both occupy a position in the middle field of the clause, appositives and supplementives can be easily confused. Non-restrictive appositives can be relatively easily distinguished from supplementives because the former, but not the latter, must be preceded and followed by a brief intonation break; cf, subsection II. For example, (195a) contains a non-restrictive appositive, whereas (195b) contains a supplementive adjective. Note that (195b) cannot be interpreted with the AP as a restrictive appositive phrase because proper nouns generally do not allow restrictive modifiers.

    195
    a. Gisteren zwalkte Jan, zo dronken als een tempelier, over straat.
      yesterday  wandered  Jan  as drunk  as a templar  over street
      'Yesterday, Jan, as drunk as a fiddler, wandered about the streets.'
    b. Gisteren zwalkte Jan zo dronken als een tempelier over straat.
      yesterday  wandered  Jan as drunk  as a templar  over street
      'Yesterday, Jan wandered about the streets as drunk as a fiddler.'

    In (195a) the AP is an adjunct of the noun phrase Jan, whereas it is an independent constituent in (195b). This can also be made clear by means of the constituency test: the fact that the string Jan, zo dronken als een tempelier can be placed in clause-initial position as a whole shows that it must be a single constituent, whereas the fact that the string Jan zo dronken als een tempelier (i.e., the phrase without the intonation break between Jan and the AP) cannot occupy this position suggests that Jan and dronken als een tempelier are separate phrases.

    196
    a. Jan, zo dronken als een tempelier, zwalkte over straat.
      Jan  as drunk  as a templar  wandered  over street
      'Jan, as drunk as a fiddler, wandered about the streets.'
    b. * Jan zo dronken als een tempelier zwalkte over straat.
      Jan as drunk  as a templar  wandered  over street
    b'. Jan zwalkte zo dronken als een tempelier over straat.
      Jan wandered  as drunk  as a templar  over street

    It should be noted, however, that, despite the fact that (196a) shows that the noun and the appositive may form a single constituent, the appositive can be in extraposed position, that is, appear detached from the noun in a position following the clause-final verb, as in (197a). This need not be construed as evidence against the claim that the noun and the appositive form a constituent: relative clauses, for instance, can often also be in extraposed position. Still, it should be observed that the adjectival appositive differs from the nominal appositive in that extraposition of the latter is only possible if its antecedent is a pronoun, as shown in the (b)-examples in (197); in fact, (197b') probably does not involve an appositional phrase at all, but Right Dislocation (which is akin to left dislocation, but does not involve movement of the resumptive element).

    197
    a. Jan/Hij zwalkte over straat, zo dronken als een tempelier.
      Jan/he  wandered  over the.street  as drunk  as a templar
    b. Jan/Hij, de bankdirecteur, komt vandaag langs.
      Jan/he  the bank manager  comes  today  by
      'Jan/He, the bank manager, will drop in today.'
    b'. * Jan komt vandaag langs, de bankdirecteur.
    b''. Hij komt vandaag langs, de bankdirecteur.

          Non-restrictive appositives and supplementives differ semantically in that the former, but not the latter (cf. Section 6.3, sub III), acts as a kind of reduced parenthetical clause, which simply provides additional information that has no fixed relation with the remainder of the clause. Consider the contrast between the two examples in (198). Example (198b) is unacceptable since the conditional interpretation of supplementive-I is gibberish (cf. Section 6.3, sub IIIC1): “When Jan is as drunk as a fiddler now, he always claims to be a teetotaler". Since the appositive in (198a) does not have a fixed semantic relation with the remainder of the clause, a sensible interpretation can readily be found, e.g., “Although Jan always claims that he is a teetotaler, he is as drunk as a fiddler now".

    198
    a. dat Jan, nu zo dronken als een tempelier, altijd beweert dat hij geheelonthouder is.
      that  Jan  now  as drunk  as a templar  always  claims that  he  teetotaler  is
      'that Jan (heʼs as drunk as a fiddler now) always says that heʼs a teetotaler.'
    b. * dat Jan nu zo dronken als een tempelier altijd beweert dat hij geheelonthouder is.
      that  Jan now as drunk as a templar  always  claims that  he  teetotaler  is

    That the relation between the appositive and the remainder of the clause is indeed not fixed can be made clear by comparing (198a) with (199a). Whereas we seem to be dealing with a concessive relation in (198a), example (199a) is rather interpreted as a causative relation: because Jan was satisfied about the result, he went home early. Finally, example (199b) shows that supplementive-II cannot be used if the verb (phrase) is modified by an adverb such as vroeg'early'; cf. Section 6.3, sub IIIA. As can be seen in (199a), however, the addition of this modifier makes no difference in the case of an appositive phrase.

    199
    a. Gisteren ging Jan, tevreden over het resultaat, vroeg naar huis.
      yesterday  went  Jan  satisfied about the result  early to home
      'Jan, satisfied about the result, went home early yesterday.'
    b. Gisteren ging Jan tevreden over het resultaat (*vroeg) naar huis.
      yesterday  went  Jan satisfied about the result     early  to home

    Since it is quite difficult to construct minimal pairs that involve restrictive appositive phrases and supplementives, we will not discuss the differences between the two any further here, but leave that to future research.

    References:
    • Alexiadou, Artemis, Haegeman, Liliane & Stavrou, Melita2007Noun phrases in the generative perspectiveBerlin/New YorkMouton de Gruyter
    • Heringa, Herman2012Appositional constructionsGroningenUniversity of GroningenThesis
    • Heringa, Herman2012Appositional constructionsGroningenUniversity of GroningenThesis
    • Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan1985A comprehensive grammar of the English languageLondon/New YorkLongman
    About this article
    Author(s): Hans Broekhuis
    Category: Dutch Syntax
    Keywords: RestrictiveAdjectiveAppositionAppositiveClauseExtrapositionIntensional VerbNon-restrictiveRelative ClauseVerb
    Version: 1.0, December 2015
    Version history:
    version editor(s) date remarks
    1.0 Hans Broekhuis December 2015
    report errorprintcite
    Jump to:
    X