- 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 the placement of finite object clauses. The most common position for such clauses is after the clause-final verbs but they can also occur in sentence-initial position (observe that we do not use the notion clause-initial here for the simple reason that the initial position of embedded clauses cannot be occupied by non-wh-phrases). Normally, finite object clauses (with the possible exception of factive clauses discussed in Section 5.1.2.3) do not occur in the middle field of the clause, subsections I to III below discuss these three options in more detail.
a. | Jan heeft | (het) | gisteren | gezegd | [dat | Marie | ziek | is]. | clause-final | |
Jan has | it | yesterday | said | that | Marie | ill | is | |||
'Jan said yesterday that Marie is ill.' |
b. | * | Jan heeft | gisteren | [dat | Marie ziek | is] | gezegd. | clause-internal |
Jan has | yesterday | that | Marie ill | is | said |
c. | [Dat | Marie ziek | is] | (dat) | heeft | Jan gisteren | gezegd. | sentence-initial | |
that | Marie ill | is | that | has | Jan yesterday | said | |||
'That Marie is ill Jan said yesterday.' |
The examples in (60a&c) also show that object clauses in clause-final and sentence-initial position differ in that the former can be preceded by the anticipatory object pronoun het, whereas the latter can be followed by the resumptive demonstrative pronoun dat'that'. We take this as a hallmark of argument clauses, and will use it as a test to determine whether or not we are dealing with object clauses, subsection IV will show that according to this test conditional clauses introduced by als, which are analyzed as object clauses in Haeseryn et al. (1997:1155), are in fact adverbial adjuncts.
Finite direct object clauses differ from nominal direct objects in that they must follow the verbs in clause-final position in neutral contexts. This is illustrated in (61): whereas the primeless examples show that nominal direct objects must precede the main verb in clause-final position, the primed examples show that direct object clauses can follow it.
a. | Jan heeft | Marie | <zijn belevenissen> | verteld <*zijn belevenissen>. | |
Jan has | Marie | his adventures | told | ||
'Jan has told Marie his adventures.' |
a'. | Jan heeft | Marie | verteld | [dat | hij | beroofd | was]. | |
Jan has | Marie | told | that | he | robbed | was | ||
'Jan has told Marie that he was robbed.' |
b. | Els zal | <de gebeurtenis> | onderzoeken <*de gebeurtenis>. | |
Els will | the event | investigate | ||
'Els will investigate the event.' |
b'. | Els zal | onderzoeken | [of | Jan beroofd | is]. | |
Els will | investigate | whether | Jan robbed | is | ||
'Els will investigate whether Jan has been robbed.' |
In fact, it seems that object clauses normally follow all non-clausal constituents of their clause including those placed after the verbs in clause-final position. This is illustrated in (62) for, respectively, a prepositional indirect object and a temporal adverbial phrase. The unacceptable orders improve when the object clause is followed by an intonation break, in which case the PP/adverbial phrase would express an afterthought.
a. | Jan heeft | verteld | <aan Marie> | [dat | hij | beroofd | was] <*aan Marie>. | |
Jan has | told | to Marie | that | he | robbed | was | ||
'Jan has told Marie that he was robbed.' |
b. | Els zal | onderzoeken | <morgen> | [of | Jan beroofd | is] <*morgen>. | |
Els will | investigate | tomorrow | whether | Jan robbed | is | ||
'Els will investigate tomorrow whether Jan has been robbed.' |
Direct object clauses are, however, followed by extraposed adverbial clauses. This is illustrated in the primeless examples in (63) for adverbial clauses expressing time and reason, respectively; the number signs preceding the primed examples indicate that these examples are only acceptable if the adverbial clause is interpreted parenthetically, in which case it must be preceded and followed by an intonation break. Note in passing that example (63a) is actually ambiguous; the adverbial clauses may in principle also be construed as part of the object clause, in which case it does not refer to the time at which John told that he was robbed, but to the time at which the robbery took place.
a. | Jan heeft | verteld | [dat | hij | beroofd | was] | [direct | nadat | hij | thuis | kwam]. | |
Jan has | told | that | he | robbed | was] | right | after | he | home | came | ||
'Jan has said that he was robbed immediately after he came home.' |
a'. | # | Jan heeft verteld [direct nadat hij thuis kwam] [dat hij beroofd was]. |
b. | Els zal | onderzoeken | [of | Jan beroofd | is] | [omdat | zij | het | niet gelooft]. | |
Els will | investigate | whether | Jan robbed | is | because | she | it | not believes | ||
'Els will investigate whether Jan has been robbed since she doesnʼt believe it.' |
b'. | # | Els zal onderzoeken [omdat zij het niet gelooft] [of Jan beroofd is]. |
Direct object clauses can also be followed by elements that are not part of the sentence, like the epithet in (64a) or the afterthought in (64b). Such elements are normally preceded by an intonation break.
a. | Jan heeft | Marie | verteld | [dat | hij | beroofd | was], | de leugenaar. | |
Jan has | Marie | told | that | he | robbed | was | the liar | ||
'Jan has told Marie that he was robbed, the liar.' |
b. | Els zal | onderzoeken | [of | Jan beroofd | is], | (en) | terecht. | |
Els will | investigate | whether | Jan robbed | is | and | with.good.reason | ||
'Els will investigate whether Jan has been robbed, and rightly so.' |
Finite object clauses in extraposed position can be introduced by the anticipatory pronoun het'it', which we have indicated here by means of subscripts; see also Section 5.1.1, sub III.
a. | Jan zal | heti | Marie | morgen | vertellen | [dat | hij | beroofd | was]i. | |
Jan will | it | Marie | tomorrow | tell | that | he | robbed | was | ||
'Jan will tell Marie tomorrow that he was robbed.' |
b. | Els zal | heti | morgen | onderzoeken | [of | Jan beroofd | is]i. | |
Els will | it | tomorrow | investigate | whether | Jan robbed | is | ||
'Els will investigate tomorrow whether Jan has been robbed.' |
The examples in (66) show that as a general rule direct object clauses do not precede their matrix verb in clause-final position.
a. | Jan heeft | gisteren | beweerd | [dat | Els | gaat | emigreren]. | |
Jan has | yesterday | claimed | that | Els | goes | emigrate | ||
'Jan claimed yesterday that Els is going to emigrate.' |
a'. | * | Jan heeft [dat Els gaat emigreren] gisteren beweerd. |
b. | Marie zal | grondig | onderzoeken | [of | het | waar | is]. | |
Marie will | thoroughly | investigate | whether | it | true | is | ||
'Marie will investigate thoroughly whether it is true.' |
b'. | * | Marie zal [of het waar is] grondig onderzoeken. |
There are, however, a number of potential counterexamples to this general rule. First, the examples in (67) show that free relative clauses can generally either precede of follow the verbs in clause-final position. We have seen in Section 5.1.1, sub IV, that this is one of a large number of reasons for assuming that free relatives should not be considered argument clauses but noun phrases. Thus, the surprising thing is that example (67a) is acceptable, but it can be accounted for by assuming that free relatives can be in extraposed position just like relative clauses with an overt antecedent: dat Jan de man prijst [die hij bewondert]'that Jan praises the man who he admires'.
a. | dat | Jan prijst | [wie | hij | bewondert]. | |
that | Jan praises | who | he | admires | ||
'that Jan praises whoever he admires.' |
b. | dat Jan [wie hij bewondert] prijst. |
Secondly, we find similar ordering alternations with so-called factive verbs like onthullen'to reveal' and betreuren'to regret'. Although some speakers may judge the primed examples as marked compared to the primeless examples, they seem well-formed and are certainly much better than the primed examples in (66). Barbiers (2000) suggests that the markedness of the primed examples is not related to grammaticality issues but due to the fact that center-embedding of longer constituents normally gives rise to processing difficulties.
a. | Jan heeft | gisteren | onthuld | [dat | Els | gaat | emigreren]. | |
Jan has | yesterday | revealed | that | Els | goes | emigrate | ||
'Jan revealed yesterday that Els is going to emigrate.' |
a'. | Jan heeft [dat Els gaat emigreren] gisteren onthuld. |
b. | Jan heeft | nooit | betreurd | [dat | hij | taalkundige | is | geworden]. | |
Jan has | never | regretted | that | he | linguist | has | become | ||
'Jan has never regretted that he has become a linguist.' |
b'. | Jan heeft [dat hij taalkundige is geworden] nooit betreurd. |
The main difference between the (a)-examples in (66) and (68) is related to the truth of the proposition expressed by the embedded clause; cf. Kiparsky & Kiparsky (1970). Consider the examples in (69). Sentence (69a) shows that the proposition expressed by the clausal complement of beweren'to claim' in (66a) can be denied by the speaker without any problem; the speaker does not commit himself to the truth of the proposition, but instead attributes the responsibility for its truth to Jan. Things are different when the speaker uses a factive verb like onthullen'to reveal'; by using this verb the speaker presupposes that the proposition "Els is going to emigrate" is true. This is clear from the fact that the denial in the second conjunct in (69b) is surprising, to say the least.
a. | Jan heeft | beweerd | [dat | Els gaat | emigreren], | maar | dat | is niet waar. | |
Jan has | claimed | that | Els goes | emigrate | but | that | is not true | ||
'Jan has said that Els is going to emigrate, but that isnʼt true.' |
b. | $ | Jan heeft | onthuld | [dat | Els gaat emigreren], | maar | dat | is | niet waar. |
Jan has | revealed | that | Els goes emigrate | but | that | is | not true | ||
'Jan has revealed that Els is going to emigrate, but that isnʼt true.' |
The behavior of factive clauses deserves more attention, especially since it has been suggested that they do not function as argument clauses. However, since discussing this here would lead us to far afield and away from the present topic, we will return to this in Section 5.1.2.3.
The examples in (70) show that object clauses can readily occur in sentence-initial position. In accordance with the general verb-second requirement in Dutch, the preposed clause must be immediately followed by the finite verb. Placement of object clauses in sentence-initial position is impossible if the anticipatory pronoun het'it' is present, as will become clear by comparing the examples in (70) to those in (65).
a. | [Dat | hij | beroofd | was] | zal | Jan | (*het) | Marie | morgen | vertellen. | |
that | he | robbed | was | will | Jan | it | Marie | tomorrow | tell | ||
'That he was robbed Jan will tell Marie tomorrow.' |
b. | [Of | Jan beroofd | is] | zal | Els | (*het) | morgen | onderzoeken. | |
whether | Jan robbed | is | will | Els | it | tomorrow | investigate | ||
'Whether Jan has been robbed Els will investigate tomorrow.' |
The impossibility of het in (70) can be accounted for in at least two ways. One way is to assume that the examples in (70) are in fact not derived by regular topicalization, but in a similar way as the left dislocation constructions in (71); cf. Koster (1978).
a. | [Dat | hij | beroofd | was], | dat | zal | Jan | (*het) | Marie | morgen | vertellen. | |
that | he | robbed | was | that | will | Jan | it | Marie | tomorrow | tell |
b. | [Of | Jan beroofd | is], | dat | zal | Els | (*het) | morgen | onderzoeken. | |
whether | Jan robbed | is | that | will | Els | it | tomorrow | investigate |
If we follow this line of thinking, the examples in (70) may involve a phonetically empty pronoun pro with the same function and in the same position as the resumptive demonstrative pronoun dat'that' in (71). On this analysis, the anticipatory pronoun cannot be realized since it is replaced by the pronoun dat/pro, which is moved into sentence-initial position; the structures in (72) show that the use of het is blocked because the clause-internal object position is occupied by the trace of the moved pronoun.
a. | [dat hij beroofd was]i [sentence dati zal Jan ti Marie morgen vertellen]. |
b. | [dat hij beroofd was]i [sentence proi zal Jan ti Marie morgen vertellen]. |
The analysis suggested above is contested in Klein (1979), who points out that the examples in (70) and (71) exhibit different intonation patterns: whereas the examples in (71) involve an intonation break between the clause and the pronoun dat, indicated here by means of a comma, the clauses in (70) are not likely to be followed by such an intonation break. If one wants to conclude from this that the examples in (70) must be derived by topicalization of the finite clause, we may account for the impossibility of the pronoun het by assuming that the clause must be moved via the regular object position in the middle field of the clause; under this proposal the pronoun het cannot be realized because the regular object position would be filled by a trace of the moved clause. An analysis like this raises the question as to why finite clauses cannot surface in the regular object position; see the discussion in Subsection II. One option would be to assume that there is a surface condition that prohibits that argument positions are filled by non-nominal categories; see Stowell (1983), Hoekstra (1984a), and Den Dikken and Næss (1993) for proposals to this effect. We will see in Section 5.1.3 that the same issue arises with finite subject clauses.
Haeseryn et al. (1997:1155) claim that subject experiencer verbs like betreuren'to regret' and waarderen'to appreciate' may take an object clause introduced by the conditional complementizer als'if'; cf. the primeless examples in (73). As the claim is simply postulated without any motivation, we can only guess why it is proposed; one obvious argument in favor of this claim is that we can replace the als-clauses by noun phrases that clearly function as direct objects; cf. the primed examples in (73).
a. | Jan zou | het | betreuren | [als | zij | niet | kan | komen]. | |
Jan would | it | regret | if | she | not | can | come | ||
'Jan would regret it if she couldnʼt come.' |
a'. | Jan zou | haar afwezigheid | betreuren. | |
Jan would | her non-attendance | regret | ||
'Jan would regret her absence.' |
b. | Jan waardeert | het | zeer | [als | zij | hem | wil | helpen]. | |
Jan appreciates | it | a.lot | if | she | him | want | help | ||
'Jan really appreciates it if sheʼs willing to help him.' |
b'. | Jan zou | haar hulp | zeer | waarderen. | |
Jan would | her help | a.lot | appreciate | ||
'Jan would really appreciate her help a lot.' |
There are, however, also arguments that militate against the claim that we are dealing with object clauses in (73a&b). These involve the distribution of the anticipatory pronoun het'it' and the resumptive pronoun dat'that', which are optionally used to refer to (logical) object clauses in, respectively, extraposed and sentence-initial position; see the discussion in Subsections I to III. The examples in this subsection reveal that the clauses in (73a&b) display a different behavior here. The examples in (74) indicate first of all that the anticipatory object pronoun het is obligatory, and not optional, if the verbs betreuren and waarderen are followed by an als-clause.
a. | Jan betreurde | (het) | [dat | hij | niet | kon | komen]. | |
Jan regretted | it | that | he | not | could | come | ||
'Jan regretted it that he couldnʼt come.' |
a'. | Jan zou | *(het) | betreuren | [als | hij | niet | kon | komen]. | |
Jan would | it | regret | if | he | not | could | come | ||
'Jan would regret it if he couldnʼt come.' |
b. | Jan waardeerde | (het) | [dat | Els hem | wou | helpen]. | |
Jan appreciated | it | that | Els him | wanted | help | ||
'Jan appreciated it that Els was willing to help him.' |
b'. | Jan zou | *(het) | waarderen | [als | Els hem | wil | helpen]. | |
Jan would | it | appreciate | if | Els him | want | help | ||
'Jan would appreciate it if Els is willing to help him.' |
The examples in (75) provide further support: the anticipatory pronoun het can be replaced by the resumptive pronoun dat in sentence-initial position with left-dislocateddat-clauses. The primed examples, on the other hand, show that resumptive dat is excluded with left-dislocated conditional als-clauses.
a. | [Dat | hij | niet | kon | komen], | dat betreurde | Jan zeer. | |
that | he | not | could | come | that regretted | Jan a.lot | ||
'That he couldnʼt come, Jan regretted very much.' |
a'. | * | [Als | hij | niet | kan | komen], | dat | zou | Jan zeer | betreuren. |
if | he | not | can | come | that | would | Jan a.lot | regret |
b. | [Dat | Els hem | wou | helpen], | dat | waardeerde Peter zeer. | |
that | Els him | wanted | help | that | appreciated Peter a.lot | ||
'That Els was willing to help him, Peter appreciated very much.' |
b'. | * | [Als | Els hem | wil | helpen], | dat | zou | Peter zeer | waarderen. |
if | Els him | want | help | that | would | Peter a.lot | appreciate |
The primeless examples in (76) further show that resumptive dat is normally not used when the dat-clause is not followed by an intonation break. The primed examples, on the other hand, show that such constructions without dat do not arise with als-clauses either.
a. | [Dat | hij | niet | kon | komen] | betreurde | Jan zeer. | |
that | he | not | could | come | regretted | Jan a.lot | ||
'That he couldnʼt come, Jan regretted very much.' |
a'. | * | [Als | hij | niet | kan | komen] | zou | Jan | zeer | betreuren. |
if | he | not | can | come | would | Jan | a.lot | regret |
b. | [Dat | Els hem | wou | helpen] | waardeerde | Peter zeer. | |
that | Els him | wanted | help | appreciated | Peter a.lot | ||
'That Els was willing to help him, Peter greatly appreciated.' |
b'. | * | [Als | Els hem | wil | helpen] | zou | Peter zeer | waarderen. |
if | Els him | want | help | would | Peter a.lot | appreciate |
Adding an object pronoun like dat or het to the primeless examples in (76) would make these examples ungrammatical, which may be due to the fact that the object position is already occupied by a trace; cf, subsection III. Adding an object pronoun to the primeless examples in (76), on the other hand, makes these examples fully acceptable.
a. | * | [Dat | hij | niet | kon | komen] | betreurde | Jan het/dat | zeer. |
that | he | not | could | come | regretted | Jan it/that | a.lot |
a'. | [Als | hij | niet | kan | komen] | zou | Jan het/dat | zeer | betreuren. | |
if | he | not | can | come | would | Jan it/that | a.lot | regret | ||
'If he couldnʼt come, Jan would regret it/that very much.' |
b. | * | [Dat | Els hem | wou | helpen] | waardeerde | Peter het/dat | zeer. |
that | Els him | wanted | help | appreciated | Peter it/that | a.lot |
b'. | [Als | Els hem | wil | helpen] | zou | Peter het/dat | zeer | waarderen. | |
if | Els him | want | help | would | Peter it/that | a.lot | appreciate | ||
'If Els is willing to help him, Peter would greatly appreciate it/that.' |
The primed examples in (77) strongly suggest that conditional als-clauses and object pronouns have different syntactic functions. This is also supported by the fact that als-clauses in left-dislocation constructions can be associated with the resumptive adverbial element dan'then', which also surfaces in regular conditional constructions: cf. Als het regent, dan kom ik niet'If it rains, (then) I won't come'. Now note that the object pronoun het/dat must also be expressed when resumptive dan is present.
a. | [Als | hij | niet | kan | komen], | dan | zou | Jan | *(het/dat) | zeer | betreuren. | |
if | he | not | can | come | then | would | Jan | it/that | a.lot | regret | ||
'If he canʼt come, then Jan would regret it/that very much.' |
b. | [Als | Els hem | wil | helpen], | dan | zou | Peter | *(het/dat) | zeer | waarderen. | |
if | Els him | want | help | then | would | Peter | it/that | a.lot | appreciate | ||
'If Els is willing to help him, then Peter would greatly appreciate it.' |
The fact that an object pronoun must co-occur with resumptive dan conclusively shows that object pronouns and conditional als-clauses have different (logical) syntactic functions: object versus adverbial adjunct. Consequently, object pronouns cannot function as anticipatory or resumptive pronouns associated with such als-clauses. It goes without saying that this also shows that the fact that the conditional als-clauses in the primeless examples in (73) can apparently be replaced by the nominal direct objects in the primed examples in (73) is not sufficient ground for concluding that conditional als-clauses are object clauses.
The conclusion that dat- and als-clauses have different syntactic functions can also be supported by means of the coordination facts in (79). While (79a&b) show that two dat- and two als-clauses can easily be coordinated, (79c) shows that this is impossible for a dat- and an als-clause. The claim that the two clause types have different syntactic functions straightforwardly derives this.
a. | Jan waardeert | het | [[dat | Marie komt] | en | [dat | Els opbelt]]. | |
Jan appreciates | it | that | Marie comes | and | that | Els prt.-calls | ||
'Jan appreciates it that Marie will come and that Els will ring.' |
b. | Jan waardeert | het | [[als | Marie komt] | en | [als | Els opbelt]]. | |
Jan appreciates | it | if | Marie comes | and | if | Els prt.-calls | ||
'Jan appreciates it if Marie will come and if Els will ring.' |
c. | * | Jan waardeert | het | [[als | Marie komt] | en | [dat | Els opbelt]]. |
Jan appreciates | it | if | Marie comes | and | that | Els prt.-calls |
For completeness' sake, note that the left-dislocation test can also be applied to other cases in which one might be tempted to analyze a clause, or some other phrase, as a direct object. For example, the phrases introduced by alsof/als in the primeless examples in (80) resemble direct objects in that they cannot be omitted just like that, but the fact that the left-dislocation construction does not allow the resumptive dat but requires the manner adverb zo shows immediately that we are dealing with adverbial phrases.
a. | Jan gedraagt | zich | *(alsof | hij | gek | is). | |
Jan behaves | refl | as.if | he | crazy | is | ||
'Jan behaves as if heʼs crazy.' |
a'. | Alsof hij gek is, zo/*dat gedraagt Jan zich. |
b. | Jan gedraagt | zich | #(als een popster) | |
Jan behaves | refl | as a pop.star | ||
'Jan behaves like a pop star.' |
b'. | Als een popster, zo/*dat gedraagt Jan zich. |
- 2000The right periphery in SOV languages: English and DutchSvenonius, Peter (ed.)The derivation of VO and OVAmsterdam/PhiladelphiaJohn Benjamins45-67
- 1993Case dependencies: the case of predicate inversionThe Linguistic Review10303-336
- 1997Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunstGroningenNijhoff
- 1997Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunstGroningenNijhoff
- 1984Transitivity. Grammatical relations in government-binding theoryDordrecht/CinnaminsonForis Publications
- 1970FactBierwisch, Manfred & Heidolph, Karl Erich (eds.)Progress in linguisticsThe Hague/ParisMouton143-173
- 1979Paardekoopers notie <i>aanloop</i> and het bestaansrecht van subjectzinnenGramma387-223
- 1978Why subject sentences don't existKeyser, S. Jay (ed.)Recent transformational studies in European languages53-64
- 1983Subjects across categoriesThe Linguistic Review2285-312