Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch1
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

2.2.1.General restrictions on complementives

quickinfo

This section discusses some general properties of complementives. We will start by reviewing the construction types that contain a complementive in Subsection I. This is followed in Subsection II by a discussion of the categories that the complementives may have, subsection III continues with the positions that the complementives may occupy within the sentence, that is, whether they can be scrambled, topicalized, etc, subsection IV concludes with a discussion of the co-occurrence restrictions between complementives.

I. Construction types
II. The category of the complementive
III. The position of the complementive
IV. Co-occurrence restrictions on complementives
V. Conclusion

[+] I. Construction types

There are three constructions in which complementives are found. The first is the copular construction, illustrated by (160a), in which the complementive is predicated of the subject of the clause. The second is the so-called vinden-construction, illustrated by (160b), in which the complementive is predicated of the accusative argument of the clause: this construction conveys a subjective evaluation of the object by the subject of the clause. The third construction is the resultative construction: if this construction contains an accusative object, as in (160c), it is this object that the complementive is predicated of; if the construction does not contain an accusative noun phrase, as in (160c'), the complementive is predicated of the subject of the clause.

160

a.		Jan is aardig.	copular construction
		Jan is nice

b.		Ik	vind	Jan aardig.	vinden-construction
		I	consider	Jan nice

c.		Jan slaat	Peter dood.	resultative construction
		Jan hits	Peter dead

c'.		Jan valt	dood.	resultative construction
		Jan falls	dead

[+] II. The category of the complementive

The examples in (160) all involve a complementive AP. The complementive can, however, also be a PP or a noun phrase. This is illustrated in (161) for the copular construction. Note that traditional grammar strongly opposes the idea that the PP in (161b) is a complementive, and analyzes this PP as an adverbial phrase. We will see in Subsection III, however, that PPs of this type have all the distributional properties of a complementive.

161

a.		Jan is ziek.	AP-complementive
		Jan is ill

b.		Jan is naar Utrecht.	PP-complementive
		Jan is to Utrecht

c.		Jan is een schurk.	NP-complementive
		Jan is a villain

Example (162a) shows that so-called modal infinitives can also be used as complementives: such infinitives, which behave like adjectival complementives in the relevant respects, are more extensively discussed in A9. The (b)-examples in (162) show that we occasionally also find om + te-infinitives; such infinitival clause often receive an idiomatic interpretation.

162

a.	Dat boek	is	gemakkelijk	te lezen.
	that book	is	easy	to read
	'That book is easy to read.'

b.	De wedstrijd	is niet	[om	over naar huis	te schrijven].
	the game	is not	comp	to home	to write
	'The game was disappointing.'

b'.	De baby was [om	op	te vreten].
	the baby was comp	down	to gobble
	'The baby was lovely.'

b''.	Het geluid	is [om	gek	van	te worden].
	the sound	is comp	crazy	of	to become
	'The sound is driving me crazy.'

The examples in (163) and (164) show that the same types of complementives may occur in the vinden-construction.

163

a.		Marie vindt	Jan aardig.	AP-complementive
		Marie considers	Jan nice

b.	$	Marie	vindt	Jan onder de maat.	PP-complementive
		Marie	considers	Jan under the measure
		'Marie considers Jan not up to the mark/inadequate.'

c.		Marie vindt	Jan een schurk.	NP-complementive
		Marie considers	Jan a villain

164

a.	Ik	vind	dat boek	gemakkelijk	te lezen.
	I	consider	that book	easy	to read
	'I consider that book easy to read.'

b.	Ik vind	de wedstrijd	niet	[om	over naar huis	te schrijven].
	I consider	the game	not	comp	to home	to write
	'I consider the game disappointing.'

It should be noted, however, that vinden-constructions with a complementive PP are rare and often more or less idiomatic in nature. Examples such as (165a) are possible but not under the intended reading: the verb vinden is instead construed with the meaning "to find", and the PP functions as an adverbial phrase of place: the garden is the place in which Marie found the golden coin. Examples with a directional PP are outright ungrammatical.

165

a.	#	Marie vond	de gouden munt	in de tuin.
		Marie found	the golden coin	in the garden

b.		$Marie vindt	Jan naar Utrecht.
		Marie considers	Jan to Utrecht

The reason for the unacceptability of the vinden-constructions in (165) does not seem to be syntactic in nature. We noted earlier that the vinden-construction expresses a subjective evaluation of the accusative noun phrase by the subject of the clause, and as a result of this, the complementive must be evaluative in nature: if it denotes a property that can be objectively established, the result is semantically anomalous. The restriction accounts, for example, for the unacceptability of an example such as (166a) and for the fact that (166) is only possible if construed with an added evaluative meaning aspect. Given that the PPs in the examples in (165) also lack the required subjective contents, the unacceptability of these examples under the intended reading does not come as a surprise.

166

a.	*	Marie vindt	Jan dood.
		Marie considers	Jan dead

b.	Marie vindt	Jan	een man.
	Marie considers	Jan	a man
	'Marie considers Jan a true/prototypical/... man.'

In (167), finally, we give some examples of the resultative construction. Example (167c) shows that, for some unclear reason, complementives cannot be nominal in this construction; see Section 2.2.3, sub IA.

167

a.		Marie slaat	Jan dood.	AP-complementive
		Marie beats	Jan dead

b.		Marie gooit	Jan uit de trein.	PP-complementive
		Marie throws	Jan out.of the train

c.	*	Marie slaat	Jan een invalide.	NP-complementive
		Marie beats	Jan an invalid

Although noun phrases cannot be used as a complementive in the resultative construction, it is often possible to express the intended meaning by making use of an adpositional phrase introduced by tot; example (168a) expresses that the spinach changes into a pulp as a result of the cutting event and (168b) expresses that Jan is becoming a knight as the result of the action of the king. This construction is discussed more extensively in Section P4.2.1.2, sub II.

168

a.		Jan hakt	de spinazie	tot moes.
		Jan cuts	the spinach	to pulp

b.	De koning	slaat	Jan tot ridder.
	the king	hits	Jan to knight
	'The king raises Jan to the peerage.'

It is often claimed that verbal particles are also complementives; cf. Den Dikken (1995). These particles are then analyzed as intransitive adpositions, that is, instances of PP-complementives. Some examples with the particle weg'away' are given in (169). As expected on the basis of the findings in (165), the particle weg cannot be used in the vinden-construction: again this is due to the lack of subjective content. Since we will not extensively discuss verbal particles here, we refer the reader to Section P1.2.4 for a more detailed discussion.

169

a.		Jan is weg.
		Jan is away

b.	$	Marie vindt	Jan weg.
		Marie considers	Jan away

c.		Marie stuurt	Jan weg.
		Marie sends	Jan away

[+] III. The position of the complementive

Although Dutch has a relatively free word order, this subsection shows that the position of the complementive is relatively fixed; complementives occur left-adjacent to the verb(s) in clause-final position, unless they are topicalized or wh-moved.

[+] A. Position relative to the verb(s) in clause-final position

The examples in (170) show that complementives normally occupy a position to the left of the verb(s) in clause-final position; placement of the complement in postverbal position leads to ungrammaticality. Recall from Subsection II that traditional grammar strongly opposes the idea that the PP in (170b) is a complementive, and analyzes it as an adverbial phrase. The fact that it must precede the clause-final verb shows, however, that it behaves as a complementive; see e.g Van den Berg (1978) and Mulder and Wehrmann (1989).

170

a.	dat	Marie Jan waarschijnlijk	<dood>	slaat <*dood>.
	that	Marie Jan probably	dead	beat
	'that Marie probably hits Jan to death.'

b.	dat	Peter	de hond	met de auto	<naar Utrecht>	brengt <*?naar Utrecht>.
	that	Peter	the dog	with the car	to Utrecht	brings
	'that Peter brings the dog to Utrecht by car.'

c.	dat	Marie Peter nog	steeds	<een schurk>	vindt <*een schurk>.
	that	Marie Peter prt	still	a villain	considers
	'that Marie still considers Peter a villain.'

The examples in (171) show that something similar holds for embedded clauses with two (or more) verbs. The complementive is normally placed to the left of the clause-final verb cluster, although the percentage signs indicate that some speakers also allow the complementive to permeate the verb cluster. Placement of the complementive after the verb cluster is unacceptable for all speakers.

171

a.		dat	Marie Jan waarschijnlijk	<dood>	zal <%dood>	slaan <*dood>.
		that	Marie Jan probably	dead	will	beat

b.		dat P. de hond met de auto <naar Utrecht>	zal <%naar U>	brengen <*naar U>.
		that P. the dog with the car to Utrecht	will	bring

c.		dat M. P. altijd <een schurk>	heeft <%een schurk >	gevonden <*een schurk>.
		that M. P. always a villain	has	considered

Permeation of the verb cluster is especially common for speakers of various southern varieties of Dutch, although this is also a marginally acceptable option for some northern speakers if the complementive consists of a single word; such speakers do allow (171a) while rejecting (171b&c). If the complementive is a verbal particle like weg, all speakers allow the complementive in between the verbs.

172

dat	Marie Jan	<weg>	heeft <weg>	gestuurd <*weg>.
that	Marie Jan	away	has	sent
'that Marie has sent away Jan.'

[+] B. Scrambling

The examples in (170) have shown that complementives normally precede the verb(s) in clause-final position. The examples in (173) show that this statement must be made more precise: the complementive must normally be immediately left-adjacent to the verb(s) in clause-final position. In other words, complementives cannot be scrambled across the adverbial phrases in the middle field of the clause.

173

a.	dat	Marie Jan <*dood>	waarschijnlijk <dood>	slaat.
	that	Marie Jan dead	probably	beats
	'that Marie probably hits Jan to death.'

b.	dat	Peter	de hond	<*naar Utrecht>	met de auto <naar Utrecht>	brengt.
	that	Peter	the dog	to Utrecht	with the car	brings
	'that Peter brings the dog to Utrecht by car.'

c.	dat	Marie Peter <*een schurk>	nog	steeds <een schurk>	vindt.
	that	Marie Peter a villain	prt	still	considers
	'that Marie still considers Peter a villain.'

When the complementive competes with some other element for the position left-adjacent to the verb(s) in clause-final position, however, a limited amount of word order variation may arise. This especially holds for resultative constructions like (174a&b), in which the complementive is in competition with a stranded preposition, which normally also occupies the position left-adjacent to the verb(s); we refer the reader to Section A6.2.2, sub III for a more extensive discussion of some factors that may affect the outcome of this competition. Note that we have not been able to construct examples with a nominal complementive, which is due to the fact that these do not appear in the resultative construction. Example (174c) shows that particles behave like full PPs.

174

a.	dat	Marie Jan met een knuppel	dood	slaat.
	that	Marie Jan with a bat	dead	beats
	'that Marie is beating Jan to death with a bat.'

a'.

dat Marie er Jan <mee> dood <mee> slaat.

b.	dat	Peter	de hond	met de auto	naar Utrecht	brengt.
	that	Peter	the dog	with the car	to Utrecht	brings
	'that Peter brings the dog to Utrecht by car.'

b'.

dat Jan er de hond <mee> naar Utrecht <mee> brengt.

c.	dat	Marie Jan met een knuppel	weg	jaagde.
	that	Marie Jan with a bat	away	chased
	'that Marie chased Jan away with a bat.'

c'.

dat Marie er Jan <mee> weg <mee> jaagde.

[+] C. Topicalization and wh-movement

Although complementives are normally placed left-adjacent to the verb(s) in clause-final position, they can also occur in sentence-initial position as the result of topicalization or wh-movement. Some examples are given in (175) and (176).

175

a.		Doodi	heeft	Marie hem ti	geslagen.
		dead	has	Marie him	beaten

b.		[Naar Utrecht]i	heeft	Jan de hond ti	gebracht.
		to Utrecht	has	Jan the dog	brought

c.		[Een schurk]i	vindt	Marie	Peter nog	steeds ti.
		a villain	considers	Marie	Peter prt	still

176

a.		[Hoe aardig]i	vindt	Marie	hem ti?
		how kind	considers	Marie	him

b.	[In welke la]i	heeft	Jan het mes	gelegd ti?
	into which drawer	has	Jan the knife	put
	'Into which drawer did Jan put the knife?'

c.	[Wat voor type mens]i	vind	je	Peter ti?
	what kind of person	consider	you	Peter
	'What kind of person do you think Peter is?'

[+] IV. Co-occurrence restrictions on complementives

Examples (177a&b) show that the verb zetten'to put' can take either an adjectival or an adpositional complementive. Example (177c) cannot, however, be interpreted in such a way that both op straatandklaar act as complementives; it is only the adjective that is interpreted in that way. The PP op straat must be interpreted as a locational adverbial phrase, which can be made clear by means of the adverbial en doet dat test: the fact that (177b) cannot be paraphrased by means of (177b') shows that the PP op straat does not function as an adverbial phrase in contrast to what is the case with the same PP in (177c).

177

a.		Jan zet	de vuilnisemmer	klaar.
		Jan puts	the garbage can	ready

b.		Jan	zet	de vuilnisemmer	op straat.
		Jan	puts	the garbage can	in the.street

b'.	*	Jan zet	de vuilnisemmer	en	hij	doet	dat	op straat.
		Jan puts	the garbage can	and	he	does	that	in the.street

Jan zet de vuilnisemmer op straat klaar.

c'.

Jan zet de vuilnisemmer klaar en hij doet dat op straat.

The discussion of the examples in (177) suggests that a clause can contain at most one complementive. If the suggestion from Subsection II that particles of particle verbs like opbellen'to phone' are complementives is on the right track, this constraint on the number of complementives immediately accounts for the fact that particle verbs are incompatible with complementives.

178

a.	Jan belt	zijn ouders	op.
	Jan phones	his parents	prt.
	'Jan phones his parents.'

b.	Jan belt	zijn ouders	arm.
	Jan phones	his parents	poor
	'Jan phones so much that he makes his parents poor.'

Jan belt zijn ouders arm op/op arm.

Examples like those in (179) seem to be a problem for the claim that a clause can contain at most one complementive; examples (179a&b) show that the verb leggen'to put' can take either a particle or an adpositional phrase as a complementive, and example (179c) shows that both can appear simultaneously. It should be noted, however, that the prepositional phrases in (179a) and (179c) exhibit different behavior when it comes to their placement in the clause, subsection III has established that complementives can never follow the verb(s) in clause-final position, and example (179a) shows that the PP op de tafel is a well-behaved complementive in this respect. The PP in (179c), on the other hand, can readily follow the verb in clause-final position, and we should therefore conclude that it does not function as a complementive if the particle is present. This conclusion is also supported by the fact illustrated in (179d) that the PP can also scramble across the object if the particle is present. See Broekhuis (1992) and Den Dikken (1995) for two competing analyses of such examples.

179

a.	dat	Jan het boek	<op de tafel>	legde <*op de tafel>.
	that	Jan the book	on the table	put
	'that Jan put the book on the table.'

b.	dat	Jan het boek	neer	legde.
	that	Jan the book	down	put
	'that Jan put the book down.'

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

d.	dat	Jan	op de tafel	het boek	??(neer)	legde.
	that	Jan	on the table	the book	down	put
	'that Jan put the book down on the table.'

The examples in (180) show that we can find a similar phenomenon with verbs prefixed with be-. The resultative example in (180a) shows that complementive tot-phrases normally precede the verb in clause-final position. However, if the tot-phrase is selected by a verb prefixed with be-, it can either precede or follow the verb. This suggests that prefixes like be-, ver-and ont- resemble particles like neer in (179) in that they also function syntactically as complementives; see Section 3.3.2, sub B, for a discussion of a proposal of this sort.

180

a.	dat	de koning	Jan <tot ridder>	heeft	geslagen <*tot ridder>.
	that	the king	Jan to knight	has	hit
	'that the king made Jan a knight.'

b.	dat	de koning	Jan <tot adviseur>	heeft	benoemd <tot adviseur>.
	that	the king	Jan to advisor	has	appointed
	'that the king has appointed Jan as advisor.'

[+] V. Conclusion

Subsection I has shown that there are three types of complementive constructions: the copula, vinden- and resultative constructions, subsection II has further shown that complementives can be adjectival, prepositional or nominal in nature, although it should be noted that nominal complementives are not possible in resultative constructions; their place is taken by tot-PPs, subsection III has shown that complementives are normally left-adjacent to the verb(s) in clause-final position, although speakers of certain southern varieties of Dutch also allow them in verb clusters; placement of the complementive after the verb cluster is always impossible. Scrambling of complementives is normally not possible but they can readily undergo wh-movement and topicalization, subsection IV, finally, has shown that a clause can contain at most one complementive.

References:

Berg, Evert van den1978Fokus presuppositie en NP-preposingDe Nieuwe Taalgids71212-222
Broekhuis, Hans1992Chain-government: issues in Dutch syntaxThe Hague, Holland Academic GraphicsUniversity of Amsterdam/HILThesis
Dikken, Marcel den1995Particles: on the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructionsOxford studies in comparative syntaxNew York/OxfordOxford University Press
Dikken, Marcel den1995Particles: on the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructionsOxford studies in comparative syntaxNew York/OxfordOxford University Press
Mulder, René & Wehrmann, Pim1989Locational verbs as unaccusativesBennis, Hans & Kemenade, Ans van (eds.)Linguistics in the Netherlands 1989Dordrecht111-122

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Hans Broekhuis, Norbert Corver, Riet Vos

Category: Dutch Syntax

Keywords: ComplementiveParticleScramblingTopicalizationVerbal Particle VerbWord OrderWh-movement

Version: 1.0, January 2016

Version history:

version	editor(s)	date	remarks
1.0	Hans Broekhuis, Norbert Corver, Riet Vos	January 2016

report errorprintcite

Jump to:

introduction
references
related articles