Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

5.1.-human restriction on the formation of pronominal PPs

quickinfo

Dutch pronominal PPs have the same semantic value as prepositions followed by a pronoun in English. For example, English P + it would typically be translated by means of er + P in Dutch. This does not mean that all English P + pronoun combinations can or must be translated by means of a pronominal PP in Dutch. The discussion below will show that the formation of a pronominal PP is often blocked if the antecedent of the pronoun is +human (and the same may hold for pronouns referring to pets). A typical case is given in (12): whereas the pronoun hem in (12a) may refer to the +human antecedent, the R-pronoun in (12b) typically refers to a -human antecedent, that is, the music by Bach. Since the various functional/semantic types of pronouns differ with respect to the -human restriction, we will discuss them in separate subsections.

a.	Bach,	ik	ben	dol	op hem.
	Bach	I	am	fond	of him
	'Bach, I am fond of him.'

b.	Bach,	ik	ben	er	dol op.
	Bach	I	am	there	fond of
	'Bach, I am fond of it.'

I. Referential (personal) R-pronouns
- A. -human pronouns
  - 1. Singular -human pronouns
  - 2. Plural -human pronouns
- B. +human pronouns
  - 1. Singular +human pronouns
  - 2. Plural +human pronouns
II. Demonstrative R-pronouns
III. Relative R-pronouns
IV. Interrogative R-pronouns
V. Existentially quantified R-pronouns
VI. Universally quantified R-pronouns
VII. Summary

[+] I. Referential (personal) R-pronouns

Whether a pronominal PP can arise often depends on whether the complement of the preposition is +human or -human. This is especially clear in the case of referential personal pronouns. Resumptive pronoun constructions of the type in (13) make it possible to test the restrictions on the co-occurrence of certain types of antecedents and the R-pronoun.

a.	NP,	ik	ben	dol	op	pronoun.
	NP	I	am	fond	of	pronoun
	'NP, I am fond of pronoun.'

b.	NP,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
	NP	I	am	there	fond	of
	'NP, I am fond of pronoun.'

For completeness' sake, note that the resumptive pronoun er must appear in its phonetically strong form daar if it is placed in clause-initial position, as in (14).

		NP,	daar/*er	ben	ik	dol	op.
		NP	there	am	I	fond	of

This may be due to the fact that (with the exception of subject pronouns and the expletive er) phonetically weak elements cannot be placed in clause-initial position; the difference between (13b) and (14) is therefore similar in nature to the difference between the two examples in (15). We refer the reader to Section N5.2.1.1, sub VB for more detailed discussion.

a.	Jan,	ik	heb	'm	niet	gezien.
	Jan	I	have	him	not	seen
	'Jan, I havenʼt seen him.'

b.		Jan,	die/hem/*'m	heb	ik	niet	gezien.
		Jan	him	have	I	not	seen

We will discuss the behavior of -human and +human referential pronouns with respect to the resumptive pronoun test in separate subsections.

[+] A. -human pronouns

This subsection discusses the -human personal pronouns. The singular and plural forms are discussed in separate subsections. Note that we use the weak forms of the personal pronouns in the examples below, because strong pronouns normally can only be used to refer to +human antecedents; cf. Section N5.2.1.1, sub VC.

[+] 1. Singular -human pronouns

If a singular -human pronoun occurs as the complement of a preposition, the PP is obligatorily realized as a pronominal PP; this is indicated in (16a) by placing an asterisk in front of the P + pronoun sequence. The (b)- and (c)-examples show that a pronominal PP must appear in the resumptive pronoun constructions, regardless of the gender of the pronounʼs antecedent.

a.		*P+ 't/'m/'r ⇒	er +P
		P + it	there + P

b.	*	Dat boek,	ik	ben	dol	op	't.
		that book[+neuter]	I	am	fond	of	it

b'.	Dat boek,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
	that book[+neuter]	I	am	there	fond	of
	'That book, I am fond of it.'

c.	*	Die soep,	ik	ben	dol	op	'r.
		that soup[-neuter]	I	am	fond	of	her

c'.	Die soep,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
	that soup[-neuter]	I	am	there	fond	of
	'That soup, I am fond of it.'

[+] 2. Plural -human pronouns

The plural -human pronoun ze'them' cannot occur as the complement of a preposition either, regardless of the gender of the pronounʼs antecedent. We illustrate this in the (b)- and (c)-examples in (17) by means of the +neuter noun boeken'books' and the -neuter noun chocoladerepen'chocolate bars'.

a.		*P+ ze ⇒	er + op
		P + them	there + on

b.	*?	Die boeken,	ik	ben	dol	op	ze.
		those books[+neuter]	I	am	fond	of	them

b'.	Die boeken,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
	those books[+neuter]	I	am	there	fond	of
	'Those books, I am fond of them.'

c.	*?	Die chocoladerepen,	ik	ben	dol	op	ze.
		those chocolate bars[-neuter]	I	am	fond	of	them

c'.	Die chocoladerepen,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
	those chocolate bars[-neuter]	I	am	there	fond	of
	'Those chocolate bars, I am fond of them.'

Section 5.2 will show that some prepositions do not allow R-pronominalization. Since the -human restriction also holds for such prepositions, -human noun phrases can never be pronominalized in PPs headed by such prepositions. Example (18) illustrates this for the preposition volgens.

a.		Volgens	Jan/het weerbericht	gaat	het	vandaag	regenen.
		according.to	Jan/the weather.forecast	goes	it	today	rain

b.		Volgens	hem/*'t	gaat	het	vandaag	regenen.
		according.to	him/it	goes	it	today	rain

c.	*	Er	volgens	gaat	het	vandaag	regenen.
		there	according.to him/it	goes	it	today	rain

[+] B. +human pronouns

This subsection discusses the +human personal pronouns. The singular and plural forms are again discussed in separate subsections.

[+] 1. Singular +human pronouns

A +human pronoun like hem'him' or haar'her' is perfectly acceptable as the complement of a preposition. The alternative realization as a pronominal PP is possible but slightly marked. This is due to a general preference to interpret the pronominal PP er op as involving a -human entity; only if the antecedent is explicitly mentioned in the discourse is a +human interpretation of the R-pronoun available.

a.		P + hem/haar ⇒	(?)er + P
		P + him/her	there + P

b.	Mijn echtgenoot,	ik	ben	dol	op	hem.
	my husband	I	am	fond	of	him
	'My husband, I am fond of him.'

b'.	(?)	Mijn echtgenoot,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
		my husband	I	am	there	fond	of

Although judgments are subtle, it might be the case that a kind of scale is involved: for at least some people, the pronominal PP er op is close to perfect in examples such as (19b'), where the antecedent has some intrinsic relation to the speaker, but marked if it involves some other +human entity, as in (20a). The pronominal PP er op seems to be excluded if the antecedent of the R-pronoun is referred to by means of a proper noun, as in (20b).

a.	Die jongen,	ik	ben	dol	op	hem.
	that boy	I	am	fond	of	him
	'That boy, I am fond of him.'

a'.	?	Die jongen,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
		that boy	I	am	there	fond	of
		'That boy, I am fond of him.'

b.	Jan,	ik	ben	dol	op	hem.
	Jan	I	am	fond	of	him
	'Jan, I am fond of him.'

b'.	*	Jan,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
		Jan	I	am	there	fond	of
		'Jan, I am fond of him.'

In contrast to the non-neuter pronouns in (19), the neuter pronoun het in (21) must also be replaced by an R-pronoun if it refers to a +human entity, which suggests that it is not the feature ±human that is relevant here, but gender: prepositions simply cannot be followed by the pronoun het.

a.		*P+ het ⇒	er + P
		P + it	there + P

b.	*	Dat kind,	ik	ben	dol	op	het.
		that child[+neuter]	I	am	fond	of	it

b'.	Dat kind,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
	that child[+neuter]	I	am	there	fond	of
	'That child, I am fond of it.'

Note that in examples like these, grammatical gender can be overruled by sex. This will be clear from example (22a), in which the +neuter noun meisje'girl' refers to a young female person and the -R pronoun used is not the neuter form het'it' but the feminine form haar'her'.

a.		Dat meisje,	ik	ben	dol	op	haar/*het.
		that girl[+neuter]	I	am	fond	of	her/it

b.	Dat meisje,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
	that girl[+neuter]	I	am	there	fond	of
	'That girl, I am fond of her.'

[+] 2. Plural +human pronouns

The phonetically weak and strong plural third person +human pronouns, ze 'them' and hen'them' can both appear as the complement of a preposition, and the use of a pronominal PP is somewhat marked.

a.		P + hen/ze ⇒	(?)er + P
		P + them	there + P

b.	Mijn dochters,	ik	ben	dol	op	ze/hen.
	my daughters	I	am	fond	of	them
	'My daughters, I am fond of them.'

b'.	(?)	Mijn dochters,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
		my daughters	I	am	there	fond	of

As in the case of the singular +human pronouns, some scale may be involved: for at least some speakers, the pronominal PP er op is close to perfect in examples such as (23b'), where the antecedent has some intrinsic relation to the speaker, but marked if it involves some other +human entity, as in (24a). The pronominal PP er op is excluded if the antecedent of the R-pronoun is referred to by means of a proper noun, as in (24b).

a.	Die jongens,	ik	ben	dol	op	ze.
	those boys	I	am	fond	of	them
	'Those boys, I am fond of them.'

a'.	?	Die jongens,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
		those boys	I	am	there	fond	of

b.		Jan en Marie,	ik	ben	dol	op	ze/hen.
		Jan and Marie	I	am	fond	of	them

b'.	*	Jan en Marie,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
		Jan and Marie	I	am	there	fond	of

The examples in (25), which should be compared to the (a)-examples in (24), show, however, that pronominal PPs are fully acceptable in generic constructions with bare plurals. Example (25b) in fact sounds more natural than example (25a).

a.	?	Jongens,	ik	ben	dol	op	ze.
		boys[-neuter]	I	am	fond	of	them

b.	Jongens,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
	boys[-neuter]	I	am	there	fond	of
	'Boys, I am fond of them.'

Although (16) and (21) have shown that the neuter pronoun het can never appear as the complement of a preposition, the primeless examples in (26) show that its plural counterpart ze can. From this we conclude that it is only the singular +neuter pronoun het'it' that is excluded as a complement of a preposition, not its plural counterpart ze'them'. This is not so surprising given that the feature ±neuter normally does not play a role in the plural and the pronoun ze can therefore be said to simply lack this feature.

a.	Die kinderen,	ik	ben	dol	op	ze.
	that children[+neuter]	I	am	fond	of	them
	'Those children, I am fond of them.'

a'.	(?)	Die kinderen,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
		that children[+neuter]	I	am	there	fond	of

b.	Die meisjes,	ik	ben	dol	op	ze.
	those girls[+neuter]	I	am	fond	of	them
	'Those girls, I am fond of them.'

b'.	(?)	Die meisjes,	ik	ben	er	dol	op.
		those girls[+neuter]	I	am	there	fond	of

[+] II. Demonstrative R-pronouns

The demonstrative R-pronouns daar'there' and hier'here' from Table 1 are also preferably interpreted as referring to -human antecedents. Examples such as (27a) are perfectly natural if the speaker refers to some object, but distinctly odd if used to refer to a certain person. Example (27b) shows again that pronominal PPs are acceptable in generic constructions with +human bare plural antecedents.

a.	Die snoepjes/?die jongens,	ik	ben	daar	dol	op.
	those sweets/those boys	I	am	there	fond	of
	'I am fond of that.'

b.		Snoepjes/Jongens,	ik	ben	daar	dol	op.
		sweets/boys	I	am	there	fond	of

Although this is perfectly possible in subject or object position, demonstrative pronouns are at least marked if used as an independent argument (= without an accompanying noun) in the complement position of a preposition.

a.		Ik	ben	dol	op	deze/die	??(plaat/jongen).
		I	am	fond	of	that/this	record/boy

b.		Ik	ben	dol	op	dit/dat	*?(boek/meisje).
		I	am	fond	of	that/this	book/girl

[+] III. Relative R-pronouns

The examples in (29) show that relative pronouns with a +human antecedent can be realized both as regular relative personal pronouns and as relative R-pronouns. Despite the fact that normative grammars are generally opposed to (29b), it is this form that is normally found in colloquial speech. Observe that the preposition must be pied-piped by the -R pronoun, whereas preposition stranding is possible and even slightly better in the case of an [+R] pronoun. This confirms again that preposition stranding is possible with R-pronouns only; cf. example (3).

a.	de jongen	op wie	ik	wacht
	the boy	for whom	I	wait
	'the boy I am waiting for'

a'.

de jongen wie ik op wacht

b.	(?)	de jongen	waarop	ik	wacht
		the boy	where.for	I	wait
		'the boy I am waiting for'

b'.

de jongen waar ik op wacht

The examples in (30) show that the formation of a pronominal PP is obligatory if the antecedent of the relative pronoun is -human. This shows that the relative pronouns die/dat cannot occur as the complement of a preposition.

a.	*	de brief[-neuter]	op die	ik	wacht
		the letter	for which	I	wait

a'.	de brief	waar	ik	op	wacht
	the letter	where	I	for	wait
	'the letter I am waiting for'

b.	*	het boek[+neuter]	op dat	ik	wacht
		the book	for which	I	wait

b'.	de boek	waar	ik	op	wacht
	the book	where	I	for	wait
	'the book I am waiting for'

[+] IV. Interrogative R-pronouns

Interrogative pronominal PPs can only be used if the preposition has a -human complement. A speaker who knows that Jan is waiting for a person will not use the construction in (31b); this construction can only be used if the speaker expects that the answer will involve a -human entity, or if he has no expectation at all. The primed examples show that preposition stranding is excluded with the -R pronoun wie but fully acceptable, and even preferred, with the corresponding +R pronoun. From this we may again conclude that preposition stranding is possible with R-pronouns only.

a.	Op wie	wacht	je?
	for who	wait	you
	'For whom are you waiting?'

a'.

Wie wacht je op?

b.	?	Waarop	wacht	je?
		where.for	wait	you
		'What are you waiting for?'

b'.

Waar wacht je op?

The examples in (32) show that the formation of a pronominal PP is strongly preferred if the speaker expects that the answer will involve a -human entity; examples such as (32a) are only acceptable as echo-questions.

a.	#	Op wat	wacht	je?
		for what	wait	you

b.	Waar	wacht	je	op?
	where	wait	you	for
	'What are you waiting for?'

[+] V. Existentially quantified R-pronouns

Existentially quantified R-pronouns also refer strictly to -human entities. A speaker who uses (33b) expresses that the thing he is waiting for is not a +human entity. Something similar holds for the negative counterpart of this R-pronoun in (33b').

a.	Ik	wacht	op	iemand.
	I	wait	for	someone
	'I am waiting for someone.'

a'.	Ik	wacht	op	niemand.
	I	wait	for	no.one
	'I am waiting for no one.'

b.	Ik	wacht	ergens	op.
	I	wait	somewhere	for
	'I am waiting for something.'

b'.	Ik	wacht	nergens	op.
	I	wait	nowhere	for
	'I am not waiting for anything.'

It seems that, when the existentially quantified pronoun refers to a -human entity, the formation of the pronominal PP is more or less optional. This is shown in (34).

a.	Ik	wacht	op	iets.
	I	wait	for	something
	'I am waiting for something.'

a'.	Ik	wacht	ergens	op.
	I	wait	somewhere	for
	'I am waiting for something.'

b.	Ik	wacht	op	niets.
	I	wait	for	nothing
	'I am not waiting for anything.'

b'.	Ik	wacht	nergens	op.
	I	wait	nowhere/somewhere	for
	'I am not waiting for anything.'

If the complement of the preposition expresses sentence negation, it must be moved to a certain position in the middle field of the clause. This is clear from the fact that the PP-complement of the adjective in (35a) cannot occupy its regular postadjectival position but must precede the adjective; cf. Section A2.3.1, sub IIB2. The contrast between (35a') and (35b') shows that preposition stranding is possible (or, rather, obligatory) with the R-pronoun only. This again confirms our earlier claim that preposition stranding is restricted to R-pronouns.

a.	dat	Jan [op niemand]i	erg dol ti	is.
	that	Jan of no.one	very fond	is
	'that Jan isnʼt very fond of anyone.'

a'.

dat Jan

niemandi erg dol [op ti] is.

dat Jan

[nergens op]i erg dol ti is.

b'.	dat	Jan nergensi	erg dol	[op ti]	is.
	that	Jan nowhere	very fond	of	is
	'that Jan isnʼt very fond of anything.'

[+] VI. Universally quantified R-pronouns

In the case of universally quantified pronouns, pronominal PPs also refer strictly to -human entities. A speaker who uses (36b) expresses that the things the doctor is going to look at are not +human entities. So, (36a) can be used to express that the doctor will examine all patients, whereas (36b) expresses that the doctor will examine the patient(s) thoroughly.

a.	De dokter zal	naar iedereen	kijken.
	the doctor will	at everyone	look
	'The doctor will examine everyone.'

b.	De dokter zal	overal	naar	kijken.
	the doctor will	everywhere	at	look
	'The doctor will examine everything.'

The examples in (37) show that, as in the case of the existentially quantified pronouns, the formation of the pronominal PP is more or less optional if the universally quantified pronoun refers to a -human entity.

a.	De dokter kijkt	naar alles.
	the doctor looks	at everything
	'The doctor examines everything.'

b.	De dokter kijkt	overal	naar.
	the doctor looks	everywhere	at
	'The doctor examines everything.'

[+] VII. Summary

The previous subsections have shown that +human pronouns normally do not readily allow R-pronominalization, although two exceptions have been attested. First, although non-neuter referential personal pronouns only marginally allow it, R-pronominalization of neuter pronouns is easily possible and even obligatory if the neuter pronoun is singular. Second, R-pronominalization of +human relative pronouns seems to be the preferred option in colloquial speech. R-pronominalization of -human pronouns, on the other hand, is normally obligatory; only the (existentially and universally) quantified pronouns behave differently in this respect. The discussion from the previous subsections is summarized in Table 2, in which P stands for the preposition in question.

Table 2: Regular and pronominal PPs and the feature [±human]

			+human		-human
			P + pronoun	pronominal PP	P + pronoun	pronominal PP
referential	singular	non-neuter	✓P hem/haar 'P him/her'	?er P	*P hem/haar 'P it'	✓er P
		neuter	*P het 'P it'	✓er P	*P het 'P it'	✓er P
	plural	non-neuter	✓P ze/hen 'P them'	?er P	*P ze 'P them'	✓er P
		neuter	✓P ze/hen 'P them'	✓er P	*P ze 'P them'	✓er P
demonstrative		proximate	??P deze/dit 'P this'	*hier P	*P deze/dit 'P this'	✓hier P
		distal	??P die/dat 'P that'	*daar P	*P die/dat 'P that'	✓daar P
relative			✓P wie 'P whom'	✓waar P	*P wat 'P which'	✓waar P
interrogative			✓P wie 'P whom'	*waar P	*P wat 'P what'	✓waar P
existential		positive	✓P iemand 'P someone'	*ergens P	✓P iets 'P something'	✓ergens P
		negative	✓P niemand 'P no one'	*nergens P	✓P niets 'P nothing'	✓nergens P
universal			✓P iedereen 'P everyone'	*overal P	✓P alles 'P everything'	✓overal P

References:

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Hans Broekhuis

Category: Dutch Syntax

Keywords: Existentially Quantified R-PronounDemonstrative R-PronounGenderGenericityInterrogative R-PronounNeg-movementPronounProper NounQuantified R-PronounQuantified R-Pronoun: ExistentiallyQuantified R-Pronoun: UniversallyR-PronounReferential (personal) R-PronounRelative R-PronounUniversally Quantified R-Pronoun

Version: 1.0, December 2015

Version history:

version	editor(s)	date	remarks
1.0	Hans Broekhuis	December 2015

report errorprintcite

Jump to:

introduction
references
related articles