- 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
Section 7.2 has discussed the hierarchical order of verbs in verb clusters, and has shown that hierarchical order does not correspond in a one-to-one fashion to linear order. For example, verb clustering may linearize the hierarchical structure in (112a) in various ways, as indicated in the (b)-examples.
a. | Jan [moet [hebben [de film gezien]]]. |
b. | dat Jan die film moet hebben gezien. |
b'. | dat Jan die film moet gezien hebben. |
b''. | dat Jan die film gezien moet hebben. |
In order to be able to discuss in a satisfactory way the linearization of verb clusters, it is important to determine which strings of verbs do (not) constitute instantiations of such clusters; here we assume that the reader is familiar with the discussion of this issue in Section 7.1. That section also suggested that if we put aside those strings of verbs that do not make up verb clusters, the linearization of standard Dutch verb clusters can be described by means of the three generalizations in (113).
a. | Generalization I: Past/passive participles either precede or follow their governing auxiliary. |
b. | Generalization II: Te-infinitives follow their governing verb. |
c. | Generalization III: Bare infinitives follow their governing verb (in clusters consisting of three or more verbs). |
The present section investigates the linearization of verb clusters in more detail by taking these generalizations as its point of departure, and shows that they indeed provide a descriptively adequate account of the attested word order patterns found in standard Dutch, although we will also point out a number of complications.
Subsection I starts with a description of clusters of two verbs, subsection II continues with clusters of three (and more) verbs. The literature on verb clusters normally focuses on verb clusters including a finite verb, that is, clusters in finite embedded clauses such as (114a), but we will also look at the counterparts of such clusters in (extraposed) infinitival clauses such as (114b).
a. | Marie denkt | [dat | Jan dat boek | probeert | te lezen]. | |
Marie believes | that | Jan that book | tries | to read | ||
'Marie thinks that Jan is trying to read that book.' |
b. | Marie verzocht | Jani | [om PROi | dat boek | te proberen | te lezen]. | |
Marie requested | Jan | comp | that book | to try | to read | ||
'Marie requested Jan to try to read that book.' |
Furthermore, we will diverge from general practice by also discussing the word order of verb clusters in main clauses such as (115), that is, clauses in which the finite verb is not part of the cluster but occupies the second position of the clause. Of course, this only makes sense in structures with more than two verbs. Although it might be defensible to claim that (115) involves a clause-final cluster of no more than two verbs, we will discuss such examples in the discussion of verb clusters of three verbs for practical reasons.
Jan wil | dat boek | proberen | te lezen. | ||
Jan wants | that book | try | to read | ||
'Jan wants to try to read that book.' |
For an introduction to the notational conventions that will be used in the discussion in the following sections, we refer the reader to Section 7.2, sub I.
This section discusses the linearization of verb clusters of two verbs. In order to be able to evaluate the generalizations in (113), we will divide such clusters on the basis of the morphological form of the embedded main verb, as in (116). The numeral indices express the hierarchical relation between the verbs in question: Vi+1–Vi indicates that Vi+1 is superior to Vi, due to the fact that the former verb selects the projection of the latter verb as its complement.
a. | Aux2 + past/passive participle1 |
b. | V2 + te-infinitive1 |
c. | V2 + bare infinitive1 |
There are two types of verb clusters of the type Aux2 + Participle1, one with a perfect and one with a passive auxiliary. These will be discussed in separate subsections.
The examples in (117) show that past participles may either precede or follow the finite perfect auxiliary. When we consider the regional spread of the two word orders, it seems that the order Aux2–Part1 is only found in a restricted part of the Dutch-speaking area, which happens to include the prestigious varieties of the standard language spoken in the west/middle region of this area; the maps in Pauwels (1953), Gerritsen (1991) and Barbiers et al. (2005) all show that this order is rare in the varieties of Dutch spoken in Flanders and the more northern part of the Netherlands.
a. | dat | Jan dat boek | <gelezen> | heeft <%gelezen>. | |
that | Jan that book | read | has | ||
'that Jan has read that book.' |
b. | dat | Marie naar Utrecht | <gewandeld> | is <%gewandeld>. | |
that | Marie to Utrecht | walked | is | ||
'that Marie has walked to Utrecht.' |
Observe that, for ease of parlance, we will follow the general practice of describing the difference in regional distribution of these orders as a north/south or Dutch/Flemish distinction, but the reader should be aware that the varieties spoken in the more northern region of the Netherlands pattern with the southern/Flemish region in this respect.
Speakers who allow the order Aux2–Part1 normally also allow the order Part1– Aux2. There is reason for assuming that the latter order (part1–aux2) is in fact the unmarked one for such speakers given that Barbiers et al. (2005) found that they rarely invert this order in reproduction tasks. It seems generally accepted now that the use of the Aux2–Part1 order is characteristic of written Dutch and the more formal registers of spoken Dutch (despite that it also frequently occurs in the more casual speech of many speakers); see Haeseryn (1990:ch.2) for a good review of the relevant literature on this issue. A corpus analysis by De Sutter (2005/2007) suggests that even in written Dutch the Aux2–Part1 order is a secondary one given that this order is mainly used in relatively simple sentences; there is a negative correlation between the complexity of utterances and the frequency of the Aux2–Part1 order. We refer the reader to Section 6.2.1, sub III, for further discussion of such performance factors, and simply assume that standard Dutch allows the Aux2–Part1 order as a stylistically marked option.
The examples in (118) show that we find basically the same variation in te-infinitivals in extraposed position: both orders are acceptable (and occur frequently on the internet). It seems reasonable to assume that the Part1–Aux2 order is again the unmarked one, but to our knowledge this has not been investigated so far.
a. | dat | Jan denkt | het boek | al | <gelezen> | te hebben <%gelezen>. | |
that | Jan thinks | the book | already | read | to have | ||
'that Jan believes to already have read that book.' |
b. | dat | Jan denkt | al | van zijn ziekte | <hersteld> | te zijn <%hersteld >. | |
that | Jan thinks | already | from his illness | recovered | to be | ||
'that Jan believes to already have recovered from his illness.' |
Like past participles, passive participles may either precede or follow their auxiliary in the northern varieties of Standard Dutch, but it seems that the relative frequency of the order Aux2–Part1 is lower in passives than in perfect-tense constructions. The southern varieties are reported to allow the Part1–Aux2 order only; we indicated this in (119) by means of a percentage sign. See Haeseryn (1990: Section 2.2) and De Sutter (2005/2007) for detailed discussion.
a. | dat | er | buiten | <gevochten> | wordt <%gevochten>. | impersonal passive | |
that | there | outside | fought | is | |||
'that people are fighting outside.' |
b. | dat | hij | door de politie | <gevolgd> | wordt <%gevolgd>. | regular passive | |
that | he | by the police | followed | is | |||
'that heʼs followed by the police.' |
c. | dat | ze | een baan | <aangeboden> | kreeg <%aangeboden>. | krijgen-passive | |
that | she | a job | prt-offered | got | |||
'that she was offered a job.' |
That both orders are possible is confirmed by the infinitival passive constructions in (120), which show that te-infinitivals in extraposed position allow both orders in standard Dutch. We believe that the Part1–Aux2 order is again the preferred one, especially in the case of the krijgen-passive. This seems confirmed by a Google search (6/3/2013): whereas the string [aangeboden te krijgen] resulted in 374 hits, the string [te krijgen aangeboden] resulted in no more than 68 hits, several of which did not instantiate the intended passive construction.
a. | Jan beweert | door de politie | <gevolgd> | te worden <%gevolgd> | |
Jan claims | by the police | followed | to be | ||
'Jan claims to be followed by the police.' |
b. | Jan | denkt | snel | een baan | <aangeboden> | te krijgen <%aangeboden>. | |
Jan | thinks | soon | a job | prt-offered | to get | ||
'Jan believes to be offered a job soon.' |
Observe in passing that infinitival impersonal passive constructions do not occur. The reason for this is not immediately clear but may be related to the fact that propositional verbs like beweren'to claim' and denken'to think' trigger subject control, that is, require there to be an overt PRO-subject in the infinitival clause.
The findings in this section are entirely in line with generalization I in (113a): past/passive participles either precede of follow their governing auxiliary. It should be noted, however, that the Aux2–Part1 order is a stylistically marked one, which may not be part of Dutch core grammar but of the periphery (consciously learned part) of the grammar; taking this position seems consistent with the fact that this order has been promoted for a long time by normative grammarians; see Section 6.2.1, sub III, for discussion. If so, we may simplify (113a) by saying that the participle must precede the auxiliary; although we will not take this step here for the northern varieties of Standard Dutch, this indeed seems necessary in order to provide a descriptively adequate account of the variety of Standard Dutch spoken in Flanders.
In clusters of the type V2 + te-infinitive1, the superior verb V2 can be a main verb like the control verb proberen'to try' or the subject raising verb schijnen'appear', or a semi-aspectual main verb like zitten'to sit'. Given that these clusters all behave in the same way when it comes to linearization, it does not seem useful to discuss these cases in separate subsections. The clusters always behave in conformity with generalization II in (113b): te-infinitives follow their governing verb.
a. | dat | Jan dat boek | <*te lezen> | probeert <te lezen>. | Control | |
that | Jan that book | to read | tries | |||
'that Jan is trying to read that book.' |
b. | dat | Jan dat boek | <*te lezen> | lijkt <te lezen>. | Subject Raising | |
that | Jan that book | to read | appears | |||
'that Jan appears to be reading that book.' |
c. | dat | Jan dat boek | <*te lezen> | zit <te lezen>. | Semi-aspectual | |
that | Jan that book | to read | sits | |||
'that Jan is reading that book.' |
Given this finding, it does not come as a surprise that we find the same ordering restriction in the extraposed te-infinitivals in (122). We did not include cases with schijnen: infinitival clauses with evidential modal verbs normally give rise to a semantically infelicitous result. The rare examples with schijnen'appear', lijken'seem' and blijken'turn out' that we encountered on the internet do, however, behave in conformity with generalization II.
a. | dat | Jan ontkent | dat boek | <*te lezen> te proberen <te lezen>. | |
that | Jan denies | that book to read | to try | ||
'that Jan denies to be trying to read that book.' |
b. | dat | Jan ontkent | dat boek | <*te lezen> te zitten <te lezen>. | |
that | Jan denies | that book to read | to sit | ||
'that Jan denies to be reading that book.' |
Although bare infinitives normally follow their governing verb, it has been observed that this is not always the case in clusters of two verbs. This has been observed for modal verbs in Reuland (1983), Den Besten & Broekhuis (1989), Koopman (1994) and Haeseryn et al. (1997:1072-3).
a. | dat | hij | het vliegtuig | niet | <zien> | kan <zien>. | |
that | he | the airplane | not | see | is.able | ||
'that he canʼt see the airplane.' |
b. | dat | hij | haar | <spreken> | moet <spreken>. | |
that | he | her | speak | must | ||
'that he must speak to her.' |
The stylistically marked Main1-Modal2 order is pervasive in especially somewhat older literary prose and poetry, but can also be found in the literary work of the last century. For example, a manual search in Vestdijk's (600 page) novel Kind tussen vier vrouwen, which was written in 1933, resulted in 24 cases for the verb kunnen'may/be able', 6 cases for moeten'must/be obliged', 3 cases for mogen'be allowed', 8 cases for willen'want', and 31 cases for zullen'will'. The same novel also provided 8 cases with the aspectual verb gaan'to go'; examples are given in (124).
a. | ... | alsof | Jan Breedevoort hem | knijpen | ging. | Verzamelde Romans 1, 378 | |
... | as.if | Jan Breedevoort him | pinch | went | |||
'... as if Jan Breedevoort was going to pinch him.' |
b. | ... | alsof | hij | hen [...] | de keel | afsnijden | ging. | Verzamelde Romans 1, 473 | |
... | as.if | he | them | the throat | prt.-cut | went | |||
'... as if he was going to cut their throats.' |
There seems to be some disagreement in the literature on the question as to whether perception verbs allow the deviant order in AcI-constructions: Reuland (1983) claims that such orders are unacceptable, Haeseryn et al. consider them archaic, and Den Besten & Broekhuis (1989) and Koopman (1994) regard them as acceptable. For this reason we marked the examples in (125), adapted from Reuland and Den Besten & Broekhuis, with a percentage sign.
a. | dat | Marie Peter de ratten | <%vangen> | zag <vangen>. | |
that | Marie Peter the rats | catch | saw | ||
'that Marie saw Peter catch the rats.' |
b. | dat | Marie hem | <%lopen> | zag <%lopen>. | |
that | Marie him | walk | saw | ||
'that Marie saw him walk.' |
Examples with perception verbs were not found in Vestdijk's novel (although they can be encountered elsewhere), but it does have cases of AcI-constructions with laten'to make/let': example (126a) involves permissive and (126b) causative laten. Examples of this sort are also accepted by Den Besten & Broekhuis, but Koopman (1994) claims that examples like these are acceptable with a permissive reading only; examples like these are not discussed by Reuland and Haeseryn et al.
a. | ... | zoals | een poes | een gewond muisje | nog [...] | trippelen | laat. | VR 1, 226 | |
... | like | a cat | an injured mouse | still | trip | let | |||
'... like a cat lets an injured mouse trip for a while.' |
b. | Ik | wil | dat | je | het | vandaag | lezen | laat. | VR 1, 387 | |
I | want | that | you | it | today | read | make | |||
'I want that you make [someone] read it today.' |
That the order Main1-Modal2 is fairly special is clear from the fact that it can only occur if certain special conditions are met. Den Besten & Broekhuis note, for example, that this order is less acceptable if the object of the embedded main verb is indefinite and in a position adjacent to the verb cluster; this is illustrated in (127). They further suggest that this restriction is prosodic in nature, but since this suggestion has not been tested so far, we leave it to future research to investigate whether it is on the right track.
a. | dat | Marie dat boek | waarschijnlijk | lezen | wil. | |
that | Marie that book | probably | read | wants | ||
'that Marie probably wants to read that book.' |
b. | ? | dat | Marie waarschijnlijk | een boek | lezen | wil. |
that | Marie probably | a book | read | wants | ||
Intended: 'that Marie probably wants to read a book.' |
That the order Main1-Modal2 is special is also clear from the fact that it cannot occur in infinitival clauses. We illustrate this in (128) for clusters with a superior modal verb only.
a. | Jan | beweerde | het vliegtuig | niet | <*zien> | te kunnen <zien>. | |
Jan | claimed | the airplane | not | see | to be.able | ||
'Jan claimed not to be able to see the airplane.' |
b. | Jan hield | vol | haar | <*spreken> | te moeten <spreken>. | |
Jan insisted | prt. | her | speak | to had.to | ||
'Jan insisted on having to speak to her.' |
As far as we know, it has not been investigated to what extent the stylistically marked order Main1-Modal2 occurs in spontaneous speech of speakers of Standard Dutch, and consequently it is not clear whether it should be considered part of Dutch core grammar or of its periphery. This issue is important given that it may affect our evaluation of the various theoretical accounts of verb clustering. We have to leave the issue to future research for want of relevant information. We refer the reader to Barbiers (2008: Section 1.3.1) for a discussion of the dialectal distribution of the two word orders.
The subsections above investigated the generalizations in (113), repeated here in a slightly different form as (129). The generalizations as formulated here can account for the unmarked word orders in verb clusters of two verbs.
a. | Generalization I: Past/passive participles either precede or follow their governing auxiliary. |
b. | Generalization II: Te-infinitives follow their governing verb. |
c. | Generalization III: Bare infinitives follow their governing verb. |
It should be noted that generalization I is too permissive for the southern varieties of Standard Dutch, which seem to require the participle to precede the auxiliary. The formulation of generalization III in (129c) differs from the one in (113c) in that we omitted the supplementary clause that the generalization is restricted to clusters with more than two verbs. The reason for doing this is that it is not a priori clear at this point whether the order Main1-Modal2 should be considered part of Dutch core grammar: it may be restricted to the written/formal register and thus be part of the periphery of the grammar.
This section discusses the linearization of verb clusters of three (or more) verbs. In order to be able to evaluate the generalizations in (129), we will classify such clusters on the basis of the morphological form of the most deeply embedded main verb, as in (130). The numeral indices express the hierarchical relation between the verbs in question: Vi+1–Vi indicates that Vi+1 is superior to Vi since the former verb selects the projection of the latter verb as its complement.
a. | V3 + Aux2 + past/passive participle1 |
b. | V3 + V2 + te-infinitive1 |
c. | V3 + V2 + bare infinitive1 |
It is easily possible to form verb clusters of four or more verbs, but these are relatively rare in everyday use; a more or less natural example is dat Jan dat boek zou moeten hebben kunnen lezen'that Jan should have been able to read that book'. The principles that underlie the word order of such clusters do not differ from those that underlie the order of clusters of three verbs. We will therefore not systematically discuss such larger clusters, but simply discuss some cases if expedient. The following subsections will discuss the clusters in (130) in the order given there.
Past participles arise if a perfect auxiliary immediately governs the most deeply embedded main verb Main1; if a perfect auxiliary governs some higher verb Vn, where n > 1, we normally get the infinitivus-pro-participio (IPP) effect. This is illustrated in (131).
a. | dat | Jan | dat boek | morgen | moet | hebben | gelezen. | Modal3-Aux2-Main1 | |
that | Jan | that book | tomorrow | must | have | readpart | |||
'that Jan has to have read that book by tomorrow.' |
b. | dat | Jan dit boek | heeft | moeten/*gemoeten | lezen. | Aux3-Modal2-Main1 | |
that | Jan this book | has | must/mustpart | read | |||
'that Jan has had to read that book.' |
Passive participles are also found as the as the single most deeply embedded main verb (= Main1) only, for the simple reason that passivization of some higher verb Vn, where n >1, is normally not possible.
dat | de radio | moet | worden | gerepareerd. | Modal3-Aux2-Main1 | ||
that | the radio | must | be | repaired | |||
'that the radio must be repaired.' |
Consequently, when discussing the linear order of verb clusters with a past/passive participle, we can focus on strings of the form V3 + Aux2 + Participle1. We will show that generalization I, according to which past/passive participles either precede of follow their governing auxiliary is correct for the variety of Standard Dutch spoken in the Netherlands, but not for that spoken in Belgium. We will further show that the participles need not be adjacent to their auxiliary but can actually occur in several positions in the cluster. We conclude with a discussion of one notable exception to the otherwise robust generalization that participles are the most deeply embedded verb in verb clusters, viz., cases in which a passive auxiliary is governed by a perfect auxiliary.
We start our discussion of perfect-tense constructions with main clauses, that is, structures in which the finite verb is in second position. Structures of this type do not seem to show an exceptional behavior: the examples in (133) show that the past participle may either precede or follow the auxiliary. We should, however, make the same proviso as in Subsection IA, that the Aux2–Part1 order is only found in a restricted part of the Dutch-speaking area, which happens to include the prestigious varieties of the standard language spoken in the west/middle region of this area. More generally, the Part1–Aux2 order seems to be the more common one in speech.
a. | Jan moet | dat boek | morgen | <gelezen> | hebben <%gelezen>. | |
Jan must | that book | tomorrow | readpart | have | ||
'Jan must have read that book by tomorrow.' |
b. | Els zal | vanmorgen | <vertrokken> | zijn <%vertrokken>. | |
Els will | this.morning | leftpart | be | ||
'Els will have left this morning.' |
The examples in (134) show that the placement options of past participles in embedded clauses are a little surprising. As the participle is governed by the auxiliary, we would expect these verbs to be adjacent, but as a matter of fact they can easily be separated by the finite modal verb.
a. | dat | Jan dat boek | <gelezen> | moet <gelezen> | hebben <%gelezen>. | |
that | Jan that book | readpart | must | have | ||
'that Jan must have read that book.' |
b. | dat | Els vanmorgen | <vertrokken> | zal <vertrokken> | zijn <%vertrokken>. | |
that | Els this.morning | leftpart | will | be | ||
'that Els will have left this morning.' |
For many speakers, the three word orders are simply more or less free alternatives, with the modal3–Aux2–Part1 order moet hebben gelezen again being the stylistically most marked one. The varieties of standard Dutch spoken in the Netherlands and Belgium also seem to differ in that they exhibit different order preferences: several types of research reveal that speakers from the Netherlands prefer the part1–modal3–aux2 order gelezen moet hebben, whereas speakers from Belgium prefer the modal3–part1–aux2 order moet gelezen hebben. Other orders can be attested in some varieties of Dutch, but these are normally considered to be dialectal in nature; see Section 6.2.1, sub IV, for a more detailed discussion.
That speakers from the Netherlands have a preference to put the participle first in the verb cluster is also clear from the extraposed te-infinitivals in (135); placement of the participle in position <2> gives rise to a degraded result for these speakers, whereas some of our Flemish informants readily accept this placement. Placement of the participle in position <1> is again restricted to the variety of Standard Dutch spoken in the Netherlands. Note that there is not much information about the regional spread of the verb orders in (135), so more careful research would be welcome.
a. | Jan beweert | dat boek | morgen | <gelezen> | te moeten <2> | hebben <1>. | |
Jan claims | that book | tomorrow | readpart | to must | have | ||
'Jan claims to have to have read that book by tomorrow.' |
b. | Els zegt | morgen | al | <vertrokken> | te zullen <2> | zijn <1>. | |
Els says | tomorrow | already | left | to will | be | ||
'Els says that she will already have left tomorrow.' |
The examples in (136) provide similar instances with a subject raising verb such as schijnen, which does not trigger extraposition of its infinitival complement but instead requires verb clustering; note that while (136a) is quite natural, some speakers may consider (136b) somewhat artificial due to the fact that more or less the same message can be expressed without the modal zullen. Placement of the participle in position <2> again gives rise to a degraded result for speakers from the Netherlands, whereas some of our Flemish informants have no qualms about accepting it. Placement of the participle in position <1> is again restricted to the Dutch variety of standard Dutch. Again, it should be mentioned that more careful research on the regional spread of the orders in (136) would be welcome.
a. | Jan schijnt | dat boek | morgen | <gelezen> | te moeten <2> | hebben <1>. | |
Jan seems | that book | tomorrow | readpart | to must | have | ||
'Jan seems to have to have read that book by tomorrow.' |
b. | Els schijnt | morgen | al | <vertrokken> | te zullen <2> | zijn <1>. | |
Els seems | tomorrow | already | left | to will | be | ||
'It seems that Els will already have left tomorrow.' |
Clusters with more than three verbs are possible but not very common in colloquial speech. It seems that participles can appear in all positions in the cluster, as is illustrated in (137) by means of the embedded counterparts of (136a). Example (137a) and (137b) seem again restricted to the varieties of standard Dutch spoken in, respectively, the Netherlands and Flanders. The orders in (137c) and, especially, (137d) seem to be the more generally accepted ones. It goes without saying that more careful research on the regional spread of these orders would be welcome.
a. | % | dat | Jan dat boek | morgen | schijnt | te moeten | hebben | gelezen. |
that | Jan that book | tomorrow | seems | to must | have | readpart | ||
'Jan seems to have to have read that book by tomorrow.' |
b. | % | dat Jan dat boek morgen schijnt te moeten gelezen hebben. |
c. | dat Jan dat boek morgen schijnt gelezen te moeten hebben. |
d. | dat Jan dat boek morgen gelezen schijnt te moeten hebben. |
Clusters with four verbs in which the superior non-finite verbs are all bare infinitives have been researched in more detail. The literature reviewed in Haeseryn (1990:70ff.) suggests that the orders in (138a&d) are the ones commonly found in the northern varieties of Standard Dutch, and that the order in (138c) is more favored than the one in (138b). In the varieties of Standard Dutch spoken in Belgium, on the other hand, the order in (138b) seems to be a common one.
a. | % | dat | Jan die film | zou | kunnen | hebben | gezien. |
that | Jan that movie | wouldmodal | maymodal | haveaux | seenmain | ||
'that Jan could have seen that movie.' |
b. | dat Jan die film zou kunnen gezien hebben. |
c. | dat Jan die film zou gezien kunnen hebben. |
d. | dat Jan die film gezien zou kunnen hebben. |
These acceptability judgments on the examples in (138) seem to be in line with what we found for the examples in (137), but an important difference is that all orders in (138) seem acceptable in the variety of Standard Dutch spoken in the Netherlands: while speakers of this variety consider examples such as (137b) to be degraded, examples such as (138b) are merely considered to be stylistically marked.
We start our discussion of passive constructions with main clauses, that is, structures in which the finite verb is in second position. Structures of this type again seem to be quite ordinary in that the examples in (139) show that the passive participle may either precede or follow the auxiliary, with the proviso that the aux-part order is only found in a restricted part of the Dutch-speaking area which happens to include the prestigious varieties of the standard language spoken in the west/middle region of this area. More generally, it seems that the part-aux order is the more common one in speech.
a. | Er | zal | buiten | <gevochten> | worden <%gevochten>. | impersonal passive | |
there | will | outside | fought | be | |||
'People will be fighting outside.' |
b. | Hij | moet | door Marie | <geholpen> | worden <%geholpen>. | regular passive | |
he | must | by Marie | helped | be | |||
'He needs to be helped by Marie.' |
c. | Zij | zal | de baan | <aangeboden> | krijgen <%aangeboden>. | krijgen-passive | |
she | will | the job | prt-offered | get | |||
'Sheʼll be offered the job.' |
The examples in (140) show that in embedded clauses, the passive participle may occupy any position in the clause-final verb cluster in the northern varieties of Dutch, although placement of the participle in final position seems less frequent than in the perfect-tense construction, and that intermediate placement is relatively rare. The southern varieties do not allow the participle in final position and further seem to differ from the northern varieties in exhibiting a preference for placing the participle in the intermediate position of the verb cluster. We refer the reader to Haeseryn (1990: Section 2.3.2) for a more detailed discussion of these regional differences in frequency.
a. | dat | er | buiten | <gespeeld> | mag < gespeeld > | worden <%gespeeld >. | |
that | there | outside | played | be.allowed | be | ||
'It will be allowed to play outside.' |
b. | dat | hij | door Marie | <geholpen> | moet <geholpen> | worden <%geholpen>. | |
that | he | by Marie | helped | must. | be | ||
'that he needs to be helped by Marie.' |
c. | dat | ze | de baan | <aangeboden> | zal <aangeboden> | krijgen <%aangeboden>. | |
that | she | the job | prt-offered | will | get | ||
'that sheʼll be offered the job.' |
That speakers from the Netherlands prefer to place the participle first in the verb cluster is also clear from the extraposed te-infinitivals in (141), in which placement of the participle in position <2> gives rise to a degraded result; cf. Smits (1987). Some of our Flemish informants, on the other hand, do allow placement of the participle in position <2>. Placement of the participle in position <1> is again restricted to variety of standard Dutch spoken in the Netherlands. Note that we do not provide examples of the impersonal passive as these cannot occur in infinitival clauses of this type for independent reasons; cf, subsection IA.
a. | Jan beweert | door Marie | <geholpen> | te moeten <2> | worden <1>. | |
Jan claims | by Marie | helped | to must | be | ||
'Jan claims that he needs to be helped by Marie.' |
b. | Zij | denkt | een baan | <aangeboden> | te zullen <2> | krijgen <1>. | |
she | thinks | a job | prt.-offered | to will | get | ||
'She thinks that sheʼll get offered a job.' |
The examples in (141) involve the propositional verb beweren, which triggers extraposition of its infinitival complement. In (142), we find similar examples with the subject raising verb schijnen; note that whereas the (a)- and (b)-examples are quite natural, some speakers may consider the (c)-example artificial as more or less the same message can be expressed without the modal zullen. Placement of the participle in position <2> again gives rise to a degraded result for speakers from the Netherlands, whereas some of our Flemish informants are quite comfortable with this placement. Placement of the participle in position <1> is again restricted to the variety of standard Dutch spoken in the Netherlands.
a. | Er | schijnt | buiten | gespeeld | te mogen <2> | worden <1>. | |
there | seems | outside | played | to be.allowed | be | ||
'It seems to be allowed to play outside.' |
b. | Jan schijnt | door Marie | <geholpen> | te moeten <2> | worden <1>. | |
Jan seems | by Marie | helped | to must | be | ||
'It seems that Jan needs to be helped by Marie.' |
c. | Zij | schijnt | een baan | <aangeboden> | te zullen <2> | krijgen <1>. | |
she | seems | a job | prt.-offered | to will | get | ||
'It seems that sheʼll get offered a job.' |
The embedded counterparts of (142) exhibit more or less the same pattern; we demonstrate this in (143) for the regular passive in (142b) only. The percentage signs in (143a) and (143b) again express that the marked orders are restricted to the variety of standard Dutch spoken in, respectively, the Netherlands and Flanders. The orders in (137c) and, especially, in (137d) seem to be the more generally accepted ones.
a. | % | dat | Jan door Marie | schijnt | te moeten | worden | geholpen. |
that | Jan by Marie | seems | to must | be | helped | ||
'that Jan seems to need to be helped by Marie.' |
b. | % | dat Jan door Marie schijnt te moeten geholpen worden. |
c. | dat Jan door Marie schijnt geholpen te moeten worden. |
d. | dat Jan door Marie geholpen schijnt te moeten worden. |
The clusters in (143) contain a te-infinitive as a non-finite superior verb. Clusters with four verbs in which the superior non-finite verbs are all bare infinitives have been researched in greater detail. The literature reviewed in Haeseryn (1990:70ff.) suggests that the orders in (144a&d) are the ones commonly found in the northern varieties of Standard Dutch, and that the order in (144c) is more favored than the one in (144b). In the varieties of Standard Dutch spoken in Belgium, on the other hand, the order in (144b) seems to be a common one. This is in keeping with what we found for the examples in (143), but an important difference is that all orders in (144) seem acceptable for speakers of the variety of Standard Dutch spoken in the Netherlands: whereas such speakers consider examples such as (143b) as degraded, example (144b) is merely considered as stylistically marked.
a. | % | dat | hij | door Marie | zou | moeten | worden | geholpen. |
that | he | by Marie | would | must | be | helped | ||
'that he should be helped by Marie.' |
b. | dat | hij door Marie zou moeten geholpen worden. |
c. | dat | hij door Marie zou geholpen moeten worden. |
d. | dat | hij door Marie geholpen zou moeten worden. |
For completeness' sake, example (145) provides similar examples for the krijgen-passive, for which the same observations can be made as for (144).
a. | % | dat | ze | de baan | zou | moeten | krijgen | aangeboden. |
that | she | the job | would | must | get | prt-offered | ||
'that she should be offered the job.' |
b. | dat | ze de baan zou moeten aangeboden krijgen. |
c. | dat | ze de baan zou aangeboden moeten krijgen. |
d. | dat | ze de baan aangeboden zou moeten krijgen. |
The subsections above have shown that perfect-tense and passive constructions behave in full accordance with generalization I in (129a): past participles may follow or precede the perfect auxiliary. In fact, participles seem to be able to occur in any position in the verb cluster. This is illustrated in (146), in which Vn stands for zero or more verbs in the verb cluster besides the auxiliary and the main verb.
a. | dat ..... <Part> Auxfinite <Part> |
b. | dat ..... | <Part> Vfinite <Part> Aux <Part> |
c. | dat ..... | <Part> Vfinite <Part> Vinf <Part> Aux <Part> |
d. | dat ..... | <Part> Vfinite <Part> Vinf <Part> Vinf <Part> Aux <Part> |
e. | etc. |
The order Aux2–Part1 seems, however, to be a stylistically marked one that is restricted to the northern varieties of standard Dutch. In the southern varieties we tend to find the pattern in (147).
a. | dat ..... <Part> Auxfinite |
b. | dat ..... | <Part> Vfinite <Part> Aux |
c. | dat ..... | <Part> Vfinite <Part> Vinf <Part> Aux |
d. | dat ..... | <Part> Vfinite <Part> Vinf <Part> Vinf <Part> Aux |
e. | etc. |
The northern and southern varieties further seem to differ in that the former prefers the participle to come first in the verb cluster (e.g., part1–V3–aux2), whereas the latter prefers it to be in some intermediate position (e.g., V3–part1–aux2). The northern varieties further seem to be special in that they prohibit placement of the participle between a te-infinitive and the auxiliary: * ... Vte-inf <Part> Aux.
Passive constructions are special in that they do not exhibit the IPP-effect in the perfect tense: this implies that passive constructions constitute an exception to the general rule that verb clusters do not contain more than one participle. This is illustrated in (148) by means of a krijgen-passive; the past/passive participles are italicized.
a. | dat | Jan het boek | toegestuurd | krijgt. | |
that | Jan the book | prt.-sent | gets | ||
'that Jan was sent the book.' |
b. | dat | Jan het boek | toegestuurd | heeft | gekregen. | |
that | Jan the book | prt.-sent | has | gotten | ||
'that Jan has been sent the book.' |
The examples in (149) show that this exceptional behavior with respect to the IPP-effect goes hand in hand with another special attribute: whereas the northern varieties of standard Dutch allow the main verb to either precede or follow the passive auxiliary krijgen in imperfect-tense constructions, the main verb must precede the auxiliary in the corresponding perfect constructions; cf. Den Besten (1985).
a. | dat | Jan het boek | toe | <gestuurd> | krijgt <gestuurd>. | |
that | Jan the book | prt. | sent | gets | ||
'that Jan gets sent the book.' |
b. | dat | Jan het boek | toe | <gestuurd> | heeft <gestuurd> | gekregen <*gestuurd>. | |
that | Jan the book | prt. | sent | has | gotten | ||
'that Jan has been sent the book.' |
The examples in (150) show that larger verb clusters in which the passive auxiliary appears as a past participle exhibit more or less the same behavior: the participial main verb gestuurd may be placed in all positions indicated by "✓", but not in the position following the participial passive auxiliary gekregen.
a. | dat | Jan het boek | toe | gestuurd | moet ✓ | hebben ✓ | gekregen. | |
that | Jan the book | prt | sent | must | have | gotten | ||
'that Jan must have been sent the book.' |
b. | dat | Jan het boek | toe | <gestuurd> | zou ✓ | moeten ✓ | hebben ✓ | gekregen. | |
that | Jan the book | prt | sent | would | must | have | gotten | ||
'that Jan should have been sent the book.' |
Whether we find the same effect in regular passives such as (151) is more difficult to answer: judgments of speakers of the southern variety of Dutch are not helpful since they do not easily allow the Aux2–Part1 order in (151a) anyway, and speakers of the northern varieties consider the overt expression of the perfect auxiliary geworden in (151b) marked or archaic at best. However, insofar as (151b) is accepted by the latter group, they agree that the passive participle geslagen must precede the passive auxiliary geworden; placing the passive participle after the auxiliary leads to a completely unacceptable result. Many speakers of the southern varieties do accept the orders in (151b) that are marked by two question marks, possibly with the passive auxiliary geweest instead of geworden; cf. Section 6.2.2, sub II.
a. | dat | de hond | <geslagen> | wordt <geslagen>. | |
that | the dog | beaten | is | ||
'that the dog is beaten.' |
b. | dat | de hond | <??geslagen> | is <??geslagen> | geworden <*geslagen>. | |
that | the dog | hit | has | been | ||
'that the dog has been beaten.' |
Subsection IB has shown that clusters of the form V2 + Main1, in which Main1 is a te-infinitive, have a rigid word order; the superior verb V2 must precede the te-infinitive. For convenience, the examples that were used to illustrate this are repeated here as (152).
a. | dat | Jan dat boek | <*te lezen> | probeert <te lezen>. | Control | |
that | Jan that book | to read | tries | |||
'that Jan is trying to read that book.' |
b. | dat | Jan dat boek | <*te lezen> | lijkt <te lezen>. | Subject Raising | |
that | Jan that book | to read | appears | |||
'that Jan appears to be reading that book.' |
c. | dat | Jan dat boek | <*te lezen> | zit <te lezen>. | Semi-aspectual | |
that | Jan that book | to read | sits | |||
'that Jan is reading that book.' |
If we extend the verb clusters by means of an additional verb, the order of V2 and Main1 remains unchanged. In the examples (153) to (155), we will illustrate this for the cluster in (152a) consisting of the control verb proberen and the te-infinitival te lezen. In (153) we added a subject raising verb: the main clause in (153a) shows that this does not affect the word order possibilities of the clause-final cluster. The embedded clause in (153b) shows further that the raising verb must precede the control verb when it is part of the verb cluster, which is of course what we expect on the basis of generalization II, given that this verb requires the control verb proberen to surface as a te-infinitive.
a. | Jan schijnt | dat boek | <*te lezen> | te proberen <te lezen>. | |
Jan seems | that book | to read | to try | ||
'Jan seems to try to read that book.' |
b. | dat | Jan dat boek | schijnt | te proberen | te lezen. | |
that | Jan that book | seems | to try | to read | ||
'that Jan seems to try to read that book.' |
The situation does not change, however, if the control verb surfaces as a bare infinitive, e.g., when proberen is selected by a modal verb such as moeten. The main clause in (154a) shows that the control verb again must precede the embedded te-infinitive. The embedded clause in (154b) shows further that the modal must precede the control verb when it is part of the verb cluster, which is of course in accordance with generalization III.
a. | Jan moet | dat boek | <*te lezen> | proberen <te lezen>. | |
Jan must | that book | to read | try | ||
'Jan must try to read that book.' |
b. | dat | Jan dat boek | moet | proberen | te lezen. | |
that | Jan that book | must | try | to read | ||
'that Jan must try to read that book.' |
The control verb proberen also appears as a bare infinitive in perfect-tense constructions as a result of the IPP-effect. The examples in (155) show that such cases behave just like those in (154).
a. | Jan heeft | dat boek | <*te lezen> | proberen <te lezen>. | |
Jan has | that book | to read | try | ||
'Jan has tried to read that book.' |
b. | dat | Jan dat boek | heeft | proberen | te lezen. | |
that | Jan that book | has | tried | to read | ||
'that Jan has tried to read that book.' |
Section 7.2, sub III, has shown that a subject raising verb such as schijnen cannot easily be embedded under some other verb. We therefore only give perfect-tense examples with the IPP-effect. For those speakers who accept such constructions, the verb orders must be as given in (156); any change in the word order of the clause final verb clusters will make the sentences completely unacceptable.
a. | ? | Jan heeft | dat boek | lijken | te lezen. |
Jan has | that book | appear | to read |
b. | ? | dat | Jan dat boek | heeft | lijken | te lezen. |
that | Jan that book | has | appear | to read |
Embedding of semi-aspectual verbs under some other verb is easily possible, but a problem that arises is that the complement of the semi-aspectual verb tends to assume a bare infinitival form in such cases; cf. Section 6.3.1, sub III. However, insofar as realization of te is accepted in the main clauses in (157), it is clear that the te-infinitive must follow the infinitival form of the semi-aspectual verb; the examples in which the te-infinitive precedes the semi-aspectual verb are far more degraded than the examples in which the te-infinitive follows it.
a. | Jan schijnt | dat boek | daar | <*te lezen> | te zitten <?te lezen>. | |
Jan seems | that book | there | to read | to sit | ||
'Jan seems to read that book over there.' |
b. | Jan gaat | dat boek | daar | <*te lezen> | zitten < ?te lezen>. | |
Jan goes | that book | there | to read | sit | ||
'Jan is going to be reading that book over there.' |
The examples in (158) provide the embedded clauses corresponding to those in (157). The given word order of the verb clusters is the only possible one; any change in the word order of the verb clusters will be severely detrimental to the result, regardless of the presence of te.
a. | dat | Jan dat boek | daar | schijnt | te zitten | (??te) | lezen. | |
that | Jan that book | there | seems | to sit | to | read | ||
'that Jan seems to be reading that book over there.' |
b. | dat | Jan dat boek | daar | gaat | zitten | (??te) | lezen. | |
that | Jan that book | there | goes | sit | to | read | ||
'that Jan is going to read that book over there.' |
The findings on the basis of the marked examples in (157) and (158) are confirmed by perfect-tense constructions such as (159), which are normally judged as fully acceptable with te. These examples show that the semi-aspectual verb must precede the infinitive, regardless of whether or not te is present.
a. | Jan heeft | dat boek | daar | <*te lezen> | zitten <te lezen>. | |
Jan has | that book | there | to read | sit | ||
'Jan has been reading that book over there.' |
b. | dat | Jan dat boek | daar | heeft | zitten | (te) | lezen. | |
that | Jan that book | there | has | sit | to | read | ||
'that Jan has been reading that book over there.' |
The examples in (160), finally, show that te-infinitives also follow their governing verb in clusters of three verbs in extraposed te-infinitivals; any change in the order of the verb clusters will make these examples unacceptable. For completeness' sake, note that omitting te seems to be much preferred in examples such as (160b), which is in line with the fact that examples with te are rare on the internet (contrary to cases without te). Note further that we did not include an example with the subject raising verb schijnen because infinitival clauses with this verb are generally unacceptable for semantic reasons.
a. | dat | Jan ontkent | dat boek | te hebben | proberen | te lezen. | |
that | Jan denies | that book | to have | try | to read | ||
'that Jan denies having tried to read that book.' |
b. | dat | Jan ontkent | dat boek | daar | te hebben | zitten | (te) | lezen. | |
that | Jan denies | that book | there | to have | sit | to | read | ||
'that Jan denied to have been reading that book over there.' |
This discussion in this subsection has shown that the data are fully consistent with generalization II in (129b) that te-infinitives must follow their governing verb in verb clusters, despite the fact that it is sometimes difficult to construct clusters of three verbs in which the most deeply embedded verb has the form of a te-infinitive.
Subsection IC, has shown that, at least in literary prose and poetry, clusters of the form V2 + bare infinitive1 can be linearized in two ways: although the order V2–bare infinitive1 is the unmarked one, the order bare infinitive1–V2 is possible as a stylistically marked option. There is some discussion whether the marked option is possible with all verbs selecting a bare infinitive, or whether it occurs with a subset only. Since we have seen that it is beyond doubt that the marked option is available for modal verbs, we will restrict our investigation of larger verb clusters to extensions of the clusters of the type Modal2 + bare infinitive1. Two sentences with such clusters are repeated in (161).
a. | dat | Jan het vliegtuig | niet | <zien> | kan <zien>. | |
that | Jan the airplane | not | see | is.able | ||
'that Jan canʼt see the airplane.' |
b. | dat | Jan haar | <spreken> | moet <spreken>. | |
that | Jan her | speak | must | ||
'that Jan has to speak to her.' |
The verb clusters in the example in (161) can be extended in three ways: (i) by the addition of a verb that selects a te-infinitive, (ii) by the addition of a verb that selects a bare infinitive, and (iii) by adding a perfect auxiliary (thanks to the IPP-effect). We illustrate the first option by means of the subject raising verb schijnen'to seem'. The main clauses in (162) show that the addition of schijnen blocks the stylistically marked order bare infinitive1–Modal2. Given this, it does not come as a surprise that the order of the verb clusters is also rigid in the corresponding embedded clauses in the primed examples.
a. | Jan schijnt | het vliegtuig | niet | <*zien> | te kunnen <zien>. | |
Jan seems | the airplane | not | see | to be.able | ||
'Jan seems not to be able to see the airplane.' |
a'. | dat | Jan het vliegtuig | niet | schijnt | te kunnen | zien. | |
that | Jan the airplane | not | seems | to be.able | see | ||
'that Jan seems not to be able to see the airplane.' |
b. | Jan schijnt | haar | <*spreken> | te moeten <spreken>. | |
Jan seems | her | speak | to must | ||
'Jan seems to have to speak to her.' |
b'. | dat | Jan haar | schijnt | te moeten | spreken. | |
that | Jan her | seems | to must | speak | ||
'that Jan seems to have to speak to her.' |
Given that Subsection I has shown that the marked option cannot occur in extraposed te-infinitivals of propositional verbs like beweren in (163) either, this may suggest that the impossibility of the marked order is related to the fact that the modal verbs are realized as te-infinitives: te kunnen/te moeten.
a. | Jan beweerde | het vliegtuig | niet | <*zien> | te kunnen <zien>. | |
Jan claimed | the airplane | not | see | to be.able | ||
'Jan claimed not to be able to see the airplane.' |
b. | Jan hield | vol | haar | <*spreken> | te moeten <spreken>. | |
Jan insisted | prt. | her | speak | to have.to | ||
'Jan insisted on having to speak to her.' |
That the form of the modal verb is not the decisive factor, however, is shown by the fact that the marked order is also excluded in examples such as (164), in which the modal surfaces as a bare infinitive. In the main clauses in the primeless examples the embedded main verb must follow the modal verb, and the primed examples show that embedded clauses require that the clusters linearize as Modal3-Modal2-Main1.
a. | Jan zal | het vliegtuig | niet | <*zien> | kunnen <zien>. | |
Jan will | the airplane | not | see | be.able | ||
'Jan wonʼt be able to see the airplane.' |
a'. | dat | Jan het vliegtuig | niet | zal | kunnen | zien. | |
that | Jan the airplane | not | will | be.able | see | ||
'that Jan wonʼt be able to see the airplane.' |
b. | Jan zal | haar | <*spreken> | moeten <spreken>. | |
Jan will | her | speak | must | ||
'Jan will have to speak to her.' |
b'. | dat | Jan haar | zal | moeten | spreken. | |
that | Jan her | will | must | speak | ||
'that Jan will have to speak to her.' |
The perfect-tense constructions in (165) show that IPP-constructions behave in just the same way. In main clauses the embedded main verb must follow the modal and the embedded clauses require that the clusters linearize as Aux3-Modal2-Main1.
a. | Jan heeft | het vliegtuig | niet | <*zien> | kunnen <zien>. | |
Jan has | the airplane | not | see | be.able | ||
'Jan hasnʼt been able to see the airplane.' |
a'. | dat | Jan het vliegtuig | niet | heeft | kunnen | zien. | |
that | Jan the airplane | not | has | be.able | see | ||
'that Jan hasnʼt been able to see the airplane.' |
b. | Jan heeft | haar | <*spreken> | moeten <spreken>. | |
Jan has | her | speak | must | ||
'Jan has had to speak to her.' |
b'. | dat | Jan | haar | heeft | moeten | spreken. | |
that | Jan | her | has | must | speak | ||
'that Jan has had to speak to her.' |
The examples in (166) provide examples of verb clusters of three verbs in extraposed te-infinitival clauses; again, any change in the order of the verb clusters will make these examples unacceptable. We did not include examples with the subject raising verb schijnen as this verb does not normally appear in infinitival clauses for semantic reasons. Some speakers may find the primeless examples somewhat artificial owing to the fact that more or less the same message can be expressed without the modal zullen.
a. | Jan denkt | het vliegtuig | niet | te zullen | kunnen | zien. | |
Jan thinks | the airplane | not | to will | be.able | see | ||
'Jan thinks that he wonʼt be able to see the airplane.' |
a'. | Jan zegt | het vliegtuig | niet | te hebben | kunnen | zien. | |
Jan says | the airplane | not | to have | be.able | see | ||
'Jan says that he hasnʼt been able to see the airplane.' |
b. | Jan denkt | haar | te zullen | moeten | spreken. | |
Jan thinks | her | to will | must | speak | ||
'Jan thinks heʼll have to speak to her.' |
b'. | Jan hield | vol | haar | te zullen | moeten | spreken. | |
Jan insisted | prt. | her | to will | must | speak | ||
'Jan insisted that he would have to speak to her.' |
The discussion above has shown that clusters of the form V3 + V2 + bare infinitive1 must be linearized as V3–V2–bare infinitive1 regardless of the form of V3 and V2; this confirms generalization III in (129c), according to which bare infinitives must follow their governing verb. Longer verb clusters are also in accordance with this generalization: we illustrate this in (167) for clusters with four verbs, which all must be spelled out in the order V4–V3–V2–Main1.
a. | dat | Marie Jan | moet | hebben | zien | vertrekken. | |
that | Marie Jan | must | have | see | leave | ||
'that Marie must have seen Jan leave.' |
b. | dat | Marie Jan | dat boek | zou | moeten | helpen | lezen. | |
that | Marie Jan | that book | would | must | help | read | ||
'that Marie should help Jan read that book.' |
c. | dat | Marie Jan | die sonate | wil | helpen | leren | spelen. | |
that | Marie Jan | that sonata | wants | help | learn | play | ||
'that Marie wants to help Jan learn to play that sonata.' |
This section has investigated whether the generalizations in (168) provide a descriptively adequate description of the word orders found in standard Dutch verb clusters. The answer can be affirmative although we have to add a number of caveats.
a. | Generalization I: Past/passive participles either precede or follow their governing auxiliary. |
b. | Generalization II: Te-infinitives follow their governing verb. |
c. | Generalization III: Bare infinitives follow their governing verb. |
The formulation of generalization I is intended to describe the situation in the northern varieties of standard Dutch, but it is too permissive when it comes to describing the situation in the southern varieties, in which the participle normally precedes the auxiliary. It seems that the order Aux2-Part1 is in fact somewhat artificial and has come into existence as a result of normative pressure; see Coussée (2008:ch.10) and Van der Horst (2008:1984ff.) for more detailed discussion. It might be defensible to assume that this order is part of the periphery (consciously learned part) of the grammar, and should thus be excluded from our syntactic description, but we decided not to do so because of the pervasiveness of this order in the speech of many speakers of Standard Dutch as an alternative realization of the part-aux order; see also taaladvies.net/taal/advies/tekst/36. Furthermore, it is important to point out that generalization I does not say anything about adjacency between the auxiliary and the participle, thus allowing the participle to occupy several positions in the verb cluster.
a. | dat | je | die film | zou | moeten | hebben | gezien. | |
that | you | that movie | would | must | have | seen | ||
'that you should have seen that movie.' |
b. | dat je die film zou moeten gezien hebben. |
c. | dat je die film zou gezien moeten hebben. |
d. | dat je die film gezien zou moeten hebben. |
Although the orders in (169b-d) are all acceptable, there are regional differences in preference: the order in (169d) seems the preferred one in the Netherlands, whereas the order in (169b) is the preferred one in Flanders; these preferences are not expressed by generalization I. This generalization does not express either that participles are normally the most deeply embedded verb, because this is the result of the IPP-effect; cf. (170). The only exception is formed by perfect passive examples, but we have seen that these are special in various other respects as well.
a. | dat | je | die film | moet hebben | gezien/*zien. | Modal3–Aux2–Main1 | |
that | you | that film | must have | seen/see |
b. | dat | je | die film | hebt | moeten/*gemoeten | zien. | Aux3–Modal2–Main1 | |
that | you | that film | have | mustinf/mustpart | see |
Generalization II appears to be unproblematic, and consistent with the full set of data we discussed. Generalization III is accurate for all cases but one; in finite embedded clauses with clusters of two verbs, the embedded main verb may also precede its governing verb. We have the impression that this option is found especially in literary writing, but this should be investigated more thoroughly in the future. It should be noted that the generalizations do not say anything about adjacency of the governing verb and its dependent; this is not an accidental omission but needed for reasons that are discussed in Section 7.4.
- 2005Syntactic atlas of the Dutch dialectsAmsterdamAmsterdam University Press
- 2005Syntactic atlas of the Dutch dialectsAmsterdamAmsterdam University Press
- 2008Syntactic atlas of the Dutch dialectsAmsterdamAmsterdam University Press
- 1985The ergative hypothesis and free word order in Dutch and GermanToman, Jindřich (ed.)Studies in German GrammarDordrecht/CinnaminsonForis Publications23-65
- 1989Woordvolgorde in de werkwoordelijke eindreeksGLOT1279-137
- 1989Woordvolgorde in de werkwoordelijke eindreeksGLOT1279-137
- 2008Motivaties voor volgordevariatie. Een diachrone studie van werkwoordsvolgorde in het NederlandsUniversity of GhentThesis
- 1991Atlas van de Nederlandse dialecten (AND). deel IAmsterdamP.J. Meertens Instituut
- 1990Syntactische normen in het Nederlands. Een empirisch onderzoek naar woordvolgordevariatie in de werkwoordelijke eindgroepUniversity of NijmegenThesis
- 1990Syntactische normen in het Nederlands. Een empirisch onderzoek naar woordvolgordevariatie in de werkwoordelijke eindgroepUniversity of NijmegenThesis
- 1990Syntactische normen in het Nederlands. Een empirisch onderzoek naar woordvolgordevariatie in de werkwoordelijke eindgroepUniversity of NijmegenThesis
- 1990Syntactische normen in het Nederlands. Een empirisch onderzoek naar woordvolgordevariatie in de werkwoordelijke eindgroepUniversity of NijmegenThesis
- 1990Syntactische normen in het Nederlands. Een empirisch onderzoek naar woordvolgordevariatie in de werkwoordelijke eindgroepUniversity of NijmegenThesis
- 1997Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunstGroningenNijhoff
- 2008Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse syntaxisLeuvenUniversitaire Pers Leuven
- 1994Licensing headsLightfoot, David & Hornstein, Norbert (eds.)Verb movementCambridge (UK)/New YorkCambridge University Press261-296
- 1994Licensing headsLightfoot, David & Hornstein, Norbert (eds.)Verb movementCambridge (UK)/New YorkCambridge University Press261-296
- 1994Licensing headsLightfoot, David & Hornstein, Norbert (eds.)Verb movementCambridge (UK)/New YorkCambridge University Press261-296
- 1953De plaats van hulpwerkwoord, verleden deelwoord en infinitief in de Nederlandse bijzinLeuvenDrukkerij M. & L.Symons
- 1983Government and the search for <i>aux</i>es, Vol. 1Heny, Frank & Richards, Barry (eds.)Linguistic categories: auxiliaries and related puzzlesDordrechtReidel99-168
- 1983Government and the search for <i>aux</i>es, Vol. 1Heny, Frank & Richards, Barry (eds.)Linguistic categories: auxiliaries and related puzzlesDordrechtReidel99-168
- 1987Over de <i>aan het</i> constructie, lexicale morfologie en casustheorieCorver, Norbert & Koster, Jan (eds.)GrammaticaliteitenUniversity of Tilburg281-324
- 2005Rood, groen, corpus! Eeen taalgebruikersgebaseerde analyse van woordvolgordevariatie in tweeledige werkwoordelijke eindgroepenUniversity of LeuvenThesis
- 2005Rood, groen, corpus! Eeen taalgebruikersgebaseerde analyse van woordvolgordevariatie in tweeledige werkwoordelijke eindgroepenUniversity of LeuvenThesis
- 2007Naar een corpusgebaseerde, cognitief-functionele verklaring van de woordvolgordevariatie in tweeledige werkwoordelijke eindgroepenNederlandse Taalkunde12302-330
- 2007Naar een corpusgebaseerde, cognitief-functionele verklaring van de woordvolgordevariatie in tweeledige werkwoordelijke eindgroepenNederlandse Taalkunde12302-330