Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

6.3.Supplementive use of the adjective

quickinfo

This section discusses the supplementive use of adjectives, subsection I starts by pointing out some differences between complementive and supplementive adjectives. These involve the semantic relation between the adjective and the verbal predicate, the noun phrase the adjective is predicated of, and the position of the adjective within the clause, subsection II continues by briefly discussing how supplementives can be distinguished from manner adverbs, subsection III goes on to show that the supplementive adjectives must be divided into two groups on the basis of both semantic and syntactic criteria, subsection IV concludes with a discussion of the restrictions on the supplementive use of the adjective.

I. Differences between complementives and supplementives
II. Differences between supplementives and manner adverbs
III. Two types of supplementives
IV. Restrictions on the adjective and the verb
- A. Restrictions on the adjective: stage- vs. individual-level predicates
- B. Restrictions on the verb

[+] I. Differences between complementives and supplementives

Complementive and supplementive adjectives are both predicated of noun phrases, which typically function as the subject or the direct object of their clause. For supplementives this is illustrated in (119a) and (119b), respectively; the predication relation is indicated by italics.

119

a.	Jan ging	dronken	naar huis.
	Jan went	drunk	to home
	'Jan went home drunk.'

b.	Marie zet	de fles	leeg	in de kast.
	Marie puts	the bottle	empty	into the cupboard
	'Marie is putting the bottle into the cupboard empty.'

The examples in (120) show that the supplementive cannot be predicated of an indirect object or a prepositional complement: in (120a) the supplementive may be predicated of the subject Jan but not of the indirect object Marie, and (120b) has no interpretation at all.

120

a.	*?	Jan gaf	Marie	de fles	dronken.
		Jan gave	Marie	the bottle	drunk
		'Jan gave Marie the bottle drunk.'

b.	*	Marie keek	naar de fles	leeg.
		Marie looked	at the bottle	empty

Note, however, that the unaccusative constructions in the primeless examples of (121) also contain an indirect object; cf. Section V2.1.3. Although judgments are a bit unclear, examples like these seem to give rise to a better result than example (120a). The examples improve even further if the supplementive is placed in clause-initial position, as in the primed examples.

121

a.	??	Er	verschijnen	haar/Marie	dronken	altijd	roze olifantjes.
		there	appear	her/Marie	drunk	always	pink elephants
		'When sheʼs drunk, pink elephants always appear to her/Marie.'

a'.

Dronken verschijnen er haar/Marie altijd roze olifantjes.

b.	?	Er	zijn	Peter/hem	dronken	nog nooit	ongelukken	overkomen.
		there	are	Peter/him	drunk	yet never	accidents	happened
		'While he was drunk, accidents never happened to him/Peter.'

b'.

Dronken zijn Peter/hem nog nooit ongelukken overkomen.

c.	?	De argumenten van de dokter	bevallen	mij	ziek	altijd	beter.
		the arguments of the doctor	please	me	ill	always	better
		'When Iʼm ill, the arguments of the doctor always please me more.'

c'.

Ziek bevallen de argumenten van de dokter mij altijd beter.

Supplementive and complementive adjectives differ in various respects. Some of these differences are discussed in Subsections A-C; Subsection IV will discuss the differences with respect to the types of adjectives that can be used in complementive and supplementive functions.

[+] A. The relation between the adjective and the verbal predicate

The most conspicuous difference between supplementives and complementives is that the former can be freely added to almost any clause that contains an activity verb (cf. Subsection IV), whereas the latter occur only with a restricted set of verbs (cf. Section 6.2). Further, the optionality of the supplementive adjectives in (122) suggests that they can be appropriately characterized as adjuncts.

122

a.		Jan vertrok	(kwaad).
		Jan left	angry

b.	Jan ging	(dronken)	naar huis.
	Jan went	drunk	to home
	'Jan went home drunk.'

c.	Jan zong	(vrolijk)	een liedje.
	Jan sang	merry	a song
	'Jan sang a song, merry.'

The complementive adjectives in (123a-c), on the other hand, are obligatorily present, which suggests that they act as complements of the verb. The obligatoriness of the complementives is due to the fact that they are needed to license the noun phrases de hond/het gras. The fact that the complementive is optional in (123d) is of course due to the fact that the noun phrase de hond can be licensed either as the subjectof the complementive or as the patient argument of the transitive verb slaan'to hit'. See Section 6.2.1, sub II, for more detailed discussion.

123

a.		De hond	is *(dood).
		the dog	is dead

b.		Marie vindt	de hond	*(aardig).
		Marie considers	the dog	nice

c.		Peter loopt	het gras	*(plat).
		Peter walks	the grass	flat

d.		Jan	slaat	de hond	(dood).
		Jan	beats	the dog	dead

The bond between the complementive adjective and the verb is thus much stronger than between the supplementive adjective and the verb, which is also reflected in that the meaning of the supplementive constitutes a substantial part of the core proposition expressed by the clause. The semantic contribution of the supplementive, on the other hand, is often assumed to be “supplementary" with respect to the core proposition: the semantic relation between the supplementive and the remainder of the clause is often described by means of the loose notion of “simultaneousness". In (122a), for instance, it is expressed that the event of leaving and the state of being angry apply simultaneously to the referent of the noun phrase Jan. Crucially, neither of the two predicates is really dependent on the other: the supplementive merely provides additional information about the subject or the direct object.

[+] B. The noun phrase the adjective is predicated of

Complementive and supplementive adjectives are predicated of either the subject or the direct object of their clause. With complementives, the predication relation is always unambiguously determined. When there is no accusative object, as in the copular construction in (123a), the complementive is predicated of the subject of the clause. However, if an accusative object is present, the complementive must be predicated of this object: example (123b) cannot be interpreted in such a way that it is Marie that is considered kind; (123c) expresses that the grass becomes flat.
The examples in (124), on the other hand, show that ambiguity may arise with supplementive adjectives. Example (124a), for example, can express either that Marie is drunk or that the guests are drunk (but not both). Although some speakers may prefer one of the two readings, we can readily demonstrate that we are dealing with a genuine case of ambiguity by replacing one of the animate arguments by an inanimate one: the supplementive must be predicated of the subject in (124b), but of the object in (124c).

124

a.	dat	Marie de gasten	dronken	naar huis	bracht.
	that	Marie the guests	drunk	to home	brought
	'that Marie brought the guests home, while she/they was/were drunk.'

b.	dat	Marie de boeken	dronken	naar huis	bracht.
	that	Marie the books	drunk	to home	brought
	'that Marie brought the books home, while she was drunk.'

c.	dat	de taxi	de gasten	dronken	naar huis	bracht.
	that	the taxi	the guests	drunk	to home	brought
	'that the taxi brought the guests home, while they were drunk.'

The examples in (125) provide two more cases, in which meaning determines whether the supplementive is predicated of the subject or the object.

125

a.	dat	Marie zulke dingen	alleen	dronken	zegt.
	that	Marie such things	only	drunk	says
	'that Marie says such things only if sheʼs drunk.'

b.	dat	Marie die fles	leeg	in de kast	zet.
	that	Marie that bottle	empty	into the cupboard	puts
	'that Marie puts that bottle into the cupboard empty.'

The examples in (126) show that he supplementive adjective must follow the noun phrase it is predicated of: although (126a) is fully acceptable, it differs from (124a) in that dronken cannot be predicated of the direct object de gasten; it is Marie that is drunk. The examples in (126b&c) further show that whereas the supplementive adjective may precede the direct object in (125a), in which it is predicated of the subject, this is not possible in (125b), in which it is predicated of the object.

126

a.		dat	Marie dronken	de gasten	naar huis	bracht.
		that	Marie drunk	the guests	to home	brought

b.		dat	Marie zulke dingen	alleen	dronken	zegt.
		that	Marie such things	only	drunk	says

c.	*	dat	Marie leeg	die fles	in de kast	zet.
		that	Marie empty	that bottle	into the cupboard	puts

Another difference between complementives and supplementives is that the noun phrase the adjective is predicated of can only be left unexpressed in the latter case. For example, if we passivize example (125a), as in (127a), the supplementive adjective dronken can be felicitously used regardless of whether the passive door-phrase is present or not. This is, however, only possible if the supplementive cannot be predicated of the subject of the passive construction for semantic reasons; example (127b) cannot be interpreted in such a way that it is the implied agent who is drunk.

127

a.	dat	zulke dingen	(door Marie)	alleen	dronken	worden	gezegd.
	that	such things	by Marie	only	drunk	are	said
	'that such things are only said (by Marie) drunk.'

b.	dat	de gasten	dronken	naar huis	werden	gebracht.
	that	the guests	drunk	to home	were	brought
	'that the guests were brought home drunk.'

[+] C. The position of the adjectives within the clause

In the northern varieties of Dutch, complementives are immediately left-adjacent to the verbs in clause-final position in the unmarked case; cf. Section 6.2.2, example (58). The examples in (124) show, however, that this does not hold for supplementives; their position can be more to the left. Furthermore, if a clause contains both a supplementive and a complementive adjective, they are always strictly ordered: the examples in (128) show that the former must precede the latter. The number sign in (128b') indicates that this examples may receive the—in this context irrelevant—interpretation in which ergerlijk acts as modifier of dronken: “drunk in an annoying way".

128

a.	dat	Jan dronken	al gauw	ziek	is.
	that	Jan drunk	already quickly	sick	is
	'that Jan tends to get sick, when drunk.'

a'.

dat Jan al gauw ziek dronken is.

b.	dat	ik	Jan dronken	al snel	ergerlijk	vind.
	that	I	Jan drunk	already quickly	annoying	consider
	'that I tend to consider him to be annoying, when heʼs drunk.'

b'.

dat ik Jan al snel ergerlijk dronken vind.

c.	dat	hij	zijn overhemden	altijd	nat	glad	strijkt.
	that	he	his shirts	always	wet	smooth	irons
	'that he irons his shirts smooth, while they are wet.'

c'.

dat hij zijn overhemden altijd glad nat strijkt.

In some cases, such as (128a&b), the supplementive adjective must precede not only the complementive adjective, but also adverbial phrases like al gauw'already quickly' and al snel'already quickly'.

129

a.	*	dat	Jan al gauw	dronken	ziek	is.
		that	Jan already quickly	drunk	sick	is

b.	*	dat	ik	Jan al snel	dronken	ergerlijk	vind.
		that	I	Jan already quickly	drunk	annoying	consider

In other cases, however, the supplementive can follow the adverbial phrase. In (128c), for example, the supplementive nat'wet' follows the adverb altijd'always'. In some cases, the supplementive is not even able to precede the adverbial phrase, as in (130). The factors that determine the relative position of these adverbial phrases and supplementives are discussed in Subsection III.

130

a.	dat	Jan al weken	ziek	in bed ligt.
	that	Jan for weeks	ill	in bed lies
	'that Jan has been lying ill in bed for weeks.'

dat Jan ziek al weken in bed ligt.

[+] II. Differences between supplementives and manner adverbs

Supplementives can easily be confused with adverbially used adjectives, like the ones given in (131), which should be distinguished from the supplementives on semantic grounds; whereas the supplementives are predicated of noun phrases, manner adverbs specify the manner in which the action denoted by the verb (phrase) proceeds. The adverbially used adjectives beleefd'politely', voorzichtig'carefully' and snel'quickly', for example, are not predicated of the noun phrase Jan (Jan may be rude, careless or slow in various respects), but indicate the way in which the action denoted takes place. More differences between supplementives and manner adverbs are discussed in Section 8.2.2.

131

a.	Jan spreekt	zijn begeleider	beleefd	aan.
	Jan addresses	his supervisor	politely	prt.
	'Jan addresses his supervisor politely.'

b.	Jan pakte	zijn boeken	voorzichtig	op.
	Jan took	his books	carefully	up
	'Jan picked up his books carefully.'

c.	Jan liep	snel	weg.
	Jan walked	quickly	away
	'Jan walked away quickly.'

[+] III. Two types of supplementives

This subsection shows that there are two types of supplementives, which exhibit differences in meaning, distribution and syntactic behavior. For lack of a better alternative we will refer to the two types as supplementive-I and supplementive–II.

[+] A. Supplementive-I and –II: their position in the clause

The relation between the supplementive adjective and the clause is generally described as one of “simultaneousness"; cf. Haeseryn et al. (1997:1184). This notion correctly suggests that (132a) is interpreted in such a way that the event of going home and the state of being satisfied apply to the referent of the noun phrase Jan at the same time, and that (132b) is interpreted in such a way that the event of being ironed and the state of being wet simultaneously apply to the shirts.

132

a.	Jan gaat	tevreden	naar huis.
	Jan goes	satisfied	to home
	'Jan goes home and he is satisfied.'

b.	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	nat.
	Jan irons	his shirts	wet
	'Jan irons his shirts, while theyʼre wet.'

Sometimes, however, the term simultaneousness seems to be less appropriate. Consider the examples in (133). The most natural interpretation of (133a), for instance, does not seem to be that the activity of speaking incomprehensible nonsense and the state of being drunk apply to Jan simultaneously at one particular time. The supplementive and the clause are instead in a conditional relationship, in which the supplementive (and the noun phrase it is predicated of) acts as the antecedent (= the when-part) and the clause as the consequent (= the then-part): when Jan is drunk, then he talks garbage. The same thing holds for (133b), as is indicated by means of the English paraphrase.

133

a.	Jan kraamt	dronken	onbegrijpelijke onzin	uit.
	Jan speaks	drunken	incomprehensible nonsense	prt.
	'Whenever heʼs drunk, Jan talks incomprehensible nonsense.'

b.	Jan eet	ziek	pap.
	Jan eats	ill	porridge
	'Whenever heʼs ill, Jan eats porridge.'

Note that the notion of simultaneousness is also retained in examples such as (133), given that the English rendering involves the temporal connectives when ..., then ...; the purely conditional paraphrase if ..., then ... is not appropriate. In Dutch, this distinction between the two types of conditional clauses cannot be made as easily; both involve the connectives als ..., dan ...
The semantic difference between the examples in (132) and (133) is associated with various other differences. The first involves the intonation patterns of the examples: the supplementive adjectives in (133) are followed by a rise in the intonation contour, whereas this is impossible in (132a).
Second, when we add clausal adverbs like waarschijnlijk'probably' or altijd'always' (cf. Section 8.2.1), it becomes clear that the difference in interpretation between (132) and (133) correlates with a difference in word order. The examples in (134) show that the supplementive adjectives tevreden and nat from (132) must follow the adverb (although one could imagine situations in which the orders that are marked ungrammatical are possible in a conditional reading).

134

a.	Jan gaat <*?tevreden>	altijd <tevreden>	naar huis.
	Jan goes satisfied	always	to home
	'Whenever Jan goes home, heʼs satisfied.'

b.	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	<*nat>	altijd <nat>.
	Jan irons	his shirts	wet	always
	'Whenever Jan irons his shirts, they are wet.'

The examples in (135), on the other hand, show that the supplementives dronken and ziek from (133) preferably precede the clausal adverbs (the unacceptable word orders may be marginally possible if the supplementive is explicitly represented as belonging to the new information of the clause, e.g., as an answer to the question: Wanneer kraamt Jan altijd onbegrijpelijke onzin uit?'When does Jan always talk incomprehensible nonsense?').

135

a.	Jan kraamt	<dronken>	altijd <*dronken>	onbegrijpelijk onzin	uit.
	Jan speaks	drunken	always	incomprehensible nonsense	prt.
	'Whenever heʼs drunk, Jan talks incomprehensible nonsense.'

b.	Jan eet	<ziek>	altijd <*ziek>	pap.
	Jan eats	ill	always	porridge
	'Whenever heʼs ill, Jan eats porridge.'

For ease of reference, we will refer to the supplementive adjectives in (135), which precede the clausal adverbs, as supplementive-I, and to the supplementive adjectives in (134), which follow them, as supplementive-II.
The addition of the clausal adverb altijd in (134) excludes the simultaneity reading of the examples in (132): the examples in (134) are instead interpreted as conditionals also, although the logical implications of (134) are of a different nature than those of (135): whereas the clause acts as the consequent in (135), it acts as the antecedent in (134). The respective implications are represented in (136) and (137), in which ⇒ and ⇏ are interpreted as “always implies" and “does not imply", respectively.

136

Jan goes home ⇒ Jan is satisfied

a'.

Jan is satisfied ⇏ Jan goes home

Jan irons his shirts ⇒ his shirts are wet

b'.

his shirts are wet ⇏ Jan irons them

137

Jan talks nonsense ⇏ Jan is drunk

a'.

Jan is drunk ⇒Jan talks nonsense

Jan eats porridge ⇏ Jan is ill

b'.

Jan is ill ⇒ Jan eats porridge

A minimal pair is given in (138): in (138a), the adjective precedes the clausal adverb altijd'always' and we are therefore dealing with a supplementive-I, which is also clear from the validity of the logical implication in (138a''); in (138b) the adjective nat follows the clausal adverb altijd and we are therefore dealing with a supplementive-II, which is also clear from the validity of the logical implication in (138b'). Note that the adjective glad is not a supplementive, but a resultative adjective.

138

a.	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	nat	altijd	glad.	supplementive-I
	Jan irons	his shirts	wet	always	smooth
	'Whenever his shirts are wet, Jan irons them smooth.'

a'.

Jan irons his shirts smooth ⇏ his shirts are wet

a''.

his shirts are wet ⇒ Jan irons his shirts smooth

b.	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	altijd	nat	glad.	supplementive-II
	Jan irons	his shirts	always	wet	smooth
	'Whenever Jan irons his shirts smooth, they are wet.'

b'.

Jan irons his shirts smooth ⇒ his shirts are wet

b''.

his shirts are wet ⇏ Jan irons his shirts smooth

Observe that replacement of the universally quantified adverb altijd'always' in (134) and (135) by an adverb like meestal'generally' would have the semantic effect that the implications in (136) and (137) do not always hold but only generally. In other words, the arrow is then interpreted not as “always implies" but as “generally implies". In our representations, the semantic contribution of the clausal adverb is thus captured in the interpretation of the arrow; a formal semantic representation would involve an operator quantifying over time. In the examples below, we will generally make use of the adverb altijd, because this enable us to keep the semantic representations of these examples as simple as possible, that is, as simple material implications without making use of modal operators and possible worlds in the sense of predicate logic.
The examples in (138) also show that supplementive-I and supplementive-II both precede the complementive, in this case the adjective glad'smooth'. The examples in (139) show that they also precede prepositional complements of the verb (unless the latter is assigned focus and moved leftward).

139

a.	Jan praat	dronken	altijd	over zijn problemen.	supplementive-I
	Jan talks	drunk	always	about his problems
	'Whenever heʼs drunk, Jan talks about his problems.'

b.	Jan praat	altijd	tevreden	over zijn carrière.	supplementive-II
	Jan talks	always	satisfied	about his career
	'Whenever Jan talks about his career, he is/sounds satisfied.'

Summarizing the discussion above, we may say that the use of supplementive-II, that is, placement of the adjective after the quantified adverb altijd, implies that if the proposition expressed by the verbal part of the clause is true, the predicate expressed by the adjective also applies (but not vice versa), whereas supplementive-I implies that the reversed situation holds.

[+] B. Co-occurrence of supplementive-I and -II

Supplementive-I and supplementive-II may co-occur within one clause. As is to be expected on the basis of the examples in the previous subsection, the former necessarily precedes the latter. Some examples are given in (140). The fact that supplementive-I and -II may co-occur suggests that they are not two different applications of one and the same grammatical function, but instantiations of two different grammatical functions. For completeness’ sake, the primed examples in (140) provide the valid implications; the reversed implications do not hold.

140

a.	Jan gaat	dronken	(altijd)	ziek	naar bed.
	Jan goes	drunk	always	sick	to bed
	'When drunk, Jan always goes to bed sick.'

a'.

Jan is drunk ⇒ Jan goes to bed sick

b.	Jan gaat	ziek	(altijd)	humeurig	naar kantoor.
	Jan goes	ill	always	bad.tempered	to office
	'When ill, Jan always goes to his office bad-tempered.'

b'.

Jan is ill ⇒ Jan goes to his office bad-tempered

In (140), supplementive-I and –II are both predicated of the nominative subject Jan. The examples in (141) show that it is also possible that the two supplementives are predicated of different arguments in the clause. In (141a), supplementive-I nat'wet' is predicated of the direct object de overhemden'the shirts', whereas supplementive-II opgewekt'cheerful' is predicated of the subject Jan. In (141b), it is supplementive-I that is predicated of the subject, and supplementive-II that is predicated of the direct object.

141

a.		dat	Jan de overhemden	nat	altijd	opgewekt	glad	strijkt.
		that	Jan the shirts	wet	always	cheerful	smooth	irons

b.		dat	Jan de overhemden	opgewekt	altijd	nat	glad	strijkt.
		that	Jan the shirts	cheerful	always	wet	smooth	irons

It is however not possible to have two supplementives-I referring to two different arguments in the clause. The (a)-examples in (142) are uninterpretable. It is less clear whether the same thing holds for supplementive-II: although the (b)-examples are marked, they are certainly better than the (a)-examples.

142

dat Jan de overhemden opgewekt nat altijd glad strijkt.

a'.

dat Jan de overhemden nat opgewekt altijd glad strijkt.

dat Jan de overhemden altijd opgewekt nat glad strijkt.

b'.

dat Jan de overhemden altijd nat opgewekt glad strijkt.

Note that (142a) improves if the supplementive opgewekt is followed by an intonation break, which is indicated in (143a) by means of a dash, but nat then seems to be interpreted as a supplementive-II. Perhaps this is due to the fact that frequency adverbs need not be interpreted as clausal adverbs, but can occasionally also be interpreted as VP-adverbs; cf. Section 8.2.2, sub III. Example (142a') also seems to improve somewhat if nat is followed by an intonation break.

143

a.	?	dat Jan de overhemden opgewekt — nat altijd glad strijkt.
		'When Jan is cheerful, he always irons his shirt smooth while wet.'

b.	??	dat Jan de overhemden nat — opgewekt altijd glad strijkt.
		'Whenever the shirts are wet, Jan irons them smooth cheerful.'

[+] C. Distribution of the two supplementive types

The distribution of supplementive-II and supplementive-I may depend on certain properties of the clause they are part of. These will be discussed in the following two subsections.

[+] 1. Position of the event on the time axis

The examples in the previous subsections are all given in the present tense. It should be noted, however, that the present tense in these examples refers to an undetermined time interval and not to a specific point on the time axis (the “now"). When we revise these examples such that a punctual time reading is forced, e.g., by adding the adverb of time nu'now', it turns out that only supplementive-II can be used. This is illustrated in (144) by adding nu'now' to the examples in (132a) and (133a) from Subsection A.

144

a.	Jan gaat	nu	waarschijnlijk	tevreden	naar huis.
	Jan goes	now	probably	satisfied	to home
	Impossible: 'Probably, when Jan goes home now, heʼll be satisfied.'
	Available: 'Probably, Jan will be going home now, while heʼs satisfied.'

b.	*	Jan kraamt	nu	dronken	waarschijnlijk	onbegrijpelijke onzin	uit.
		Jan speaks	now	drunk	probably	incomprehensible nonsense	prt.

As the English paraphrase in (144a) indicates, only the simultaneity reading is available for supplementive-II. In accordance with this, the conditional reading for the supplementive-I dronken in (144b) is also blocked, and the example is unacceptable as a result. This shows that whereas supplementive-II is compatible with both a simultaneity and a conditional reading, supplementive-I has only a conditional reading. Note that this also correctly predicts that the two supplementive phrases cannot be combined if nu'now' is present. This is illustrated in the examples in (145), which sharply contrast with those in (140).

145

a.	*	Jan gaat	nu	dronken	(waarschijnlijk)	ziek	naar bed.
		Jan goes	now	drunk	probably	sick	to bed

b.	*	Jan gaat	nu	ziek	(waarschijnlijk)	humeurig	naar kantoor.
		Jan goes	now	ill	probably	bad-tempered	to office

[+] 2. Modification

Modification of the verb (phrase) seems to be relevant, too. The examples in (146a&b) show that a VP like naar bed gaan can be combined both with supplementive-II and with supplementive-I: in (146a) the supplementive follows, and in (146b) it precedes the quantified adverb altijd'always'. However, as is demonstrated in the primed examples, if the VP is modified by an adverb like vroeg'early' or snel'quickly', the use of supplementive-II leads to a degraded result.

146

a.	Jan gaat	altijd	tevreden	naar bed.	supplementive-II
	Jan goes	always	satisfied	to bed
	'Whenever Jan is going to bed, heʼs satisfied.'

a'.	*?	Jan gaat	altijd	tevreden	vroeg	naar bed.
		Jan goes	always	satisfied	early	to bed

b.	Jan gaat	dronken	altijd	naar bed.	supplementive-I
	Jan goes	drunk	always	to bed
	'Whenever Jan is drunk, he goes to bed.'

b'.	Jan gaat	dronken	altijd	vroeg	naar bed.
	Jan goes	drunk	always	early	to bed
	'Whenever Jan is drunk, he goes to bed early.'

Something similar holds if we modify a resultative adjective. Consider again the examples in (138a&b), repeated here as (147a&b), which show that both types of supplementive can co-occur with the resultative adjective glad'smooth'. However, if we modify the resultative by the degree adverb erg'very', the use of supplementive-II becomes impossible. The same thing holds if we use the comparative form gladder (or the other degrees of comparison like het gladst/even glad als'the smoothest/as smooth as'). This is illustrated in the primed examples.

147

a.	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	altijd	nat	glad.	supplementive-II
	Jan irons	his shirts	always	wet	smooth
	'When Jan irons his shirts smooth, they are always wet.'

a'.	*	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	altijd	nat	erg glad/gladder.
		Jan irons	his shirts	always	wet	very smooth/smoother
		Intended: 'When Jan irons his shirts very smooth/smoother, they are always wet.'

b.	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	nat	altijd	glad.	supplementive-I
	Jan irons	his shirts	wet	always	smooth
	'When his shirts are wet, Jan always irons them smooth.'

b'.	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	nat	altijd	erg glad/gladder.
	Jan irons	his shirts	wet	always	very smooth/smoother
	'When his shirts are wet, Jan always irons them very smooth/smoother.'

Although more research is needed before we can draw any firm conclusions, the contrasts between the (a)- and (b)-examples of (146) and (147) might be related to the fact that the modification of the VP and the resultative implicitly results in the comparison of two states of affairs. The primeless examples in (146), for instance, do not imply that Janʼs going to bed is an exceptional event, that is, something that only occurs under special conditions, whereas the primed examples in (146) at least suggest that Janʼs going to bed early is something special. Possibly, this implicit comparison forces a reading in which the state expressed by supplementives is the condition under which the exceptional event takes place, that is, that the implication is as given in (148a&b). The infelicity of (146a') may therefore be due to the fact that the actual implication relation associated with supplementive-II is instead the inverse one shown in (148a'). The acceptability of (146b'), on the other hand, follows from the fact that the supplementive adjective dronken'drunk' does express the condition under which the exceptional event of going to bed early may take place; cf. (148b&b').

148

required interpretation of (146a'): Jan is satisfied ⇒ Jan goes to bed early

a'.

actual interpretation of (146a'): Jan goes to bed early ⇒ Jan is satisfied

required interpretation of (146b'): Jan is drunk ⇒ Jan goes to bed early

b'.

actual interpretation of (146'): Jan is drunk ⇒ Jan goes to bed early

Note that this account of the unacceptability of (146a') does not imply that supplementive-II can never be combined with a VP adverb: a manner adverb is blocked only if this results in implicit comparison. This seems to be correct, given the acceptability of example (149), which contains the intensifier flink'very'.

149

		Marie heeft	hem	boos	flink	uitgescholden.
		Marie has	him	angry	very	called.names

A similar account for the contrast between the two primed examples in (146) can be given for the contrast between the primed examples of (147), that is, the fact that erg glad and gladder can only be combined with supplementive-I. Example (150a) shows that in the case of the comparative gladder'smoother' in (147b'), the alternative of the supplementive nat can made explicit by means of a dan-phrase. Observe that (150b) is not synonymous with (150a): whereas (150b) seems to imply that (150c) is true, this does not necessarily follow from (150a).

150

a.	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	nat	altijd	gladder	dan	droog.
	Jan irons	his shirts	wet	always	smoother	than	dry
	'When they are wet, Jan irons his shirt smoother than when they are dry.'

b.	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	droog	altijd	minder glad	dan	nat.
	Jan irons	his shirts	wet	always	less smooth	than	wet
	'When they are dry, Jan irons his shirt less smooth than when they are wet.'

c.	Jan strijkt	zijn overhemden	zowel droog als nat	altijd	glad.
	Jan irons	his shirts	both dry and wet	always	smooth
	'Regardless of whether theyʼre wet or dry, Jan irons his shirts smooth.'

For completeness’ sake, note that if the element nog'even' is placed in front of the comparative minder glad'less smooth' in (150b), the implication seems to be that Jan never succeeds in ironing his shirts smooth; cf. the discussion of this element nog in Section 4.1.1, sub II.

[+] D. Topicalization/Wh-movement of the two supplementive types

To conclude our discussion on the distribution of supplementive-I and -II, we will consider topicalization and wh-constructions, and show that the two types exhibit different behavior with respect to these movements.

[+] 1. Topicalization

The fact that the primeless examples in (151) are acceptable shows that both types of supplementive can be topicalized. However, if we add a clausal adverb, as in the primed examples, topicalization of supplementive-II seems to give rise to an unacceptable result. Insofar as (151a') is interpretable, tevreden'satisfied' seems to act as supplementive-I: the interpretation that is forced upon us is “when Jan is satisfied, he goes home".

151

a.	Tevreden	gaat	Jan naar huis.	supplementive-II
	satisfied	goes	Jan to home
	'Jan goes home, while heʼs satisfied.'

a'.	??	Tevreden	gaat	Jan altijd	naar huis.
		satisfied	goes	Jan always	to home

b.	Dronken	kraamt	Jan onbegrijpelijke onzin	uit.	supplementive-I
	drunk	speaks	Jan incomprehensible nonsense	prt.
	'When heʼs drunk, Jan talks nonsense.'

b'.		Dronken	kraamt	Jan altijd	onbegrijpelijke onzin	uit.
		drunk	speaks	Jan always	incomprehensible nonsense	prt.

The unacceptability of (151a') suggests that the presence of a clausal adverb blocks topicalization of supplementive-II by making the VP into a weak island for extraction of supplementive-II. If this is indeed the case, we correctly predict that the adjective dronken'drunk' in (152a) must be interpreted as a supplementive-I; example (152a) corresponds to (152b), not to (152c). This becomes especially clear in these examples because (152c), but not (152a&b), allows the hyperbolic interpretation “Jan is always drunk".

152

a.	Dronken	zwalkt	Jan altijd	over straat.
	drunk	wanders	Jan always	over street
	Available reading: 'When heʼs drunk, Jan always wanders about the streets.'
	Not: 'When Jan wanders about the streets, heʼs drunk/Jan is always drunk.'

b.	Jan zwalkt	dronken	altijd	over straat.
	Jan wanders	drunk	always	over the.street
	'When heʼs drunk, Jan always wanders about the streets.'

c.	Jan zwalkt	altijd dronken	over straat.
	Jan wanders	always drunk	over the.street
	'When Jan wanders about the streets, heʼs drunk/Jan is always drunk.'

Of course, if the adverb altijd is dropped in (152a), as in (153a), both readings are available. This example can however be disambiguated by means of intonation: if assigned accent, the adjective dronken is preferably interpreted as a supplementive-I; if not, the interpretation as a supplementive-II is most salient.

153

Dronken zwalkt Jan over straat.

b.		Dronken zwalkt Jan over straat.
		Preferred reading: 'When heʼs drunk, Jan always wanders about the streets.'

c.		Dronken zwalkt Jan over straat.
		Preferred reading: 'Jan wanders about the streets, while heʼs drunk.'

The claim that the clausal adverb makes the VP into a weak island for extraction of supplementive-II also correctly predicts the contrast between (154b) and (154c). It is not clear in this case, however, whether it is the clausal adverb that is responsible for this contrast, given that the same facts can be observed if the adverb is absent. This suggests that supplementive-I also blocks topicalization of supplementive-II (which can probably be seen as a relativized-minimality effect).

154

a.	Jan gaat	dronken	altijd	ziek	naar bed.
	Jan goes	drunk	always	sick	to bed
	'Whenever heʼs drunk, Jan goes to bed sick.'

Dronken gaat Jan (altijd) ziek naar bed.

Ziek gaat Jan dronken (altijd) naar bed.

[+] 2. Wh-movement

The wh-constructions in (155), which correspond to the primeless examples in (151), show that only supplementive-II can be questioned by means of the interrogative intensifier hoe'how'; wh-movement of supplementive-I is never possible.

155

a.		Hoe	tevreden	gaat	Jan naar huis?
		how	satisfied	goes	Jan to home

b.	*	Hoe	dronken	kraamt	Jan onbegrijpelijke onzin	uit?
		how	drunk	speaks	Jan incomprehensible nonsense	prt.

However, as in the case of topicalization, questioning of supplementive-II is blocked if it crosses a clausal adverb or a supplementive-I. This is illustrated in the (b)-examples of (156), which correspond to (154c).

156

a.	*	Hoe dronken	gaat	Jan (altijd)	ziek	naar bed?
		how drunk	goes	Jan always	sick	to bed

b.	*	Hoe ziek	gaat Jan (*altijd)	naar bed?
		how ill	goes Jan always	to bed

b'.	*	Hoe ziek	gaat Jan (*dronken)	naar bed?
		how ill	goes Jan drunk	to bed

The contrast in acceptability between the topicalization constructions in (151b') and (154b), on the one hand, and the wh-constructions in (155b) and (156a), on the other, may be related to the fact that supplementive-I cannot easily be modified by an intensifier: after all, the adverb hoe is the interrogative counterpart of the degree adverb erg in (157); cf. Section 3.1.2, sub IV.

157

a.	*?	Jan gaat	erg dronken	altijd	ziek	naar bed.
		Jan goes	very drunk	always	ill	to bed

b.		Jan gaat	dronken	altijd	erg ziek	naar bed.
		Jan goes	drunk	always	very ill	to bed

The examples in (158) further show that supplementive-II, but not supplementive-I, can be questioned by means of the wh-element hoe'how'. The examples in (159) show that supplementive-I can at least marginally be questioned by means of wanneer'when'; this contrast may be related to the fact illustrated by the doubly primed (b)-examples that wanneer can question a condition, whereas hoe cannot.

158

a.		Hoe	gaat	Jan naar huis?	questioning of supplementive-II
		how	went	Jan to home

a'.		Tevreden.	answer
		satisfied

b.		Hoe	gaat	Jan altijd	ziek	naar bed?	questioning of supplementive-I
		how	goes	Jan always	ill	to bed

b'.	*	Dronken.	answer
		drunk

b''.	*	Als	hij	dronken	is.	answer
		When	he	drunk	is

159

a.		Wanneer	gaat	Jan naar huis?	questioning of supplementive-II
		when	goes	Jan to home

a'.	*	Tevreden.	answer
		satisfied

b.		Wanneer	gaat	Jan altijd	ziek	naar bed?	questioning of supplementive-I
		when	goes	Jan always	ill	to bed

b'.	?	Dronken.	answer
		drunk

b''.		Als	hij dronken	is.	answer
		when	he drunk	is

[+] IV. Restrictions on the adjective and the verb

There are several restrictions on the occurrence of supplementives. First, the set-denoting adjective must refer to a transitory property, that is, it cannot be an individual-level predicate. Second, there are several (sometimes poorly understood) restrictions on the syntactic frame a supplementive may occur in.

[+] A. Restrictions on the adjective: stage- vs. individual-level predicates

Adjectives that refer to an “inherent" or “permanent" property of the modified noun phrase do not give rise to a felicitous result if used as a supplementive. This is illustrated in (160) by means of the contrast between the stage-level adjective vermoeid'tired' and the individual-level adjective intelligent, which denote a temporary and a more permanent property, respectively.

160

a.	Jan gaat	vermoeid/%intelligent	naar school.
	Jan goes	tired/intelligent	to school
	'Jan goes to school tired/intelligent.'

b.		Jan gaat	vermoeid/%intelligent	nooit	naar school.
		Jan goes	tired/intelligent	never	to school

c.		Jan gaat	nooit	vermoeid/%intelligent	naar school.
		Jan goes	never	tired/intelligent	to school

The contrasts in the examples in (160) are probably related to the fact that similar contrasts can be observed in their paraphrases in (161). The conditional paraphrases in (161b-c) associated with (160b-c), for example, are equally strange: apparently, both the when- and the then-clause of a conditional when(ever) ... then-sentence must denote temporary situations in everyday use. Something similar holds in case of the simultaneity reading of (160a), which can be paraphrased as in (161a).

161

a.	Jan gaat	naar school	terwijl	hij	vermoeid/%intelligent	is.
	Jan goes	to school	while	he	tired/intelligent	is
	'Jan goes to school, while heʼs tired/intelligent.'

b.	Als	Jan vermoeid/%intelligent	is,	dan	gaat	hij	nooit	naar school.
	if	Jan tired/Intelligent	is	then	goes	he	never	to school
	'Whenever Jan is tired/intelligent, he doesnʼt go to school.'

c.	Als	Jan naar school	gaat,	dan	is hij	nooit	vermoeid/%intelligent.
	if	Jan to school	goes	then	is he	never	tired/intelligent
	'Whenever Jan goes to school, he isnʼt tired/intelligent.'

Note that example (162) is not a counterexample to our claim since the adjective intelligent is not predicated of the noun phrase Jan in this case. The adjective instead modifies the VP and we are therefore dealing with a manner adverb; cf. Section 8.2.2.

162

Jan loste	het raadsel	intelligent	op.
Jan solved	the riddle	intelligently	prt.
'Jan solved the riddle in an intelligent way.'

Observe further that we do not claim that individual-level adjectives can never be used in conditionals; the examples in (163) show that they can. The difference between (161b-c) and (163a) is that the latter does not involve quantification over times due to the fact that the frequency adverb nooit'never' is replaced by the negative marker niet'not'. Note also that the appropriate translations of the examples in (163) involve the connectives if ..., then ..., and not when ..., then ...; see the discussion below example (133) in Subsection IIIA.

163

a.	Als	Jan intelligent	is,	dan	gaat	hij	niet	naar school.
	if	Jan intelligent	is	then	goes	he	not	to school
	'if Jan is tired/intelligent, he doesnʼt go to school.'

b.	Als	Jan naar school	gaat,	dan	is hij	niet	intelligent.
	if	Jan to school	goes	then	is he	not	intelligent
	'If Jan goes to school, he isnʼt tired/intelligent.'

[+] B. Restrictions on the verb

The verb must denote an action: if a supplementive is added to a clause that contains a stative verb, such as kennen'to know', the use of a supplementive adjective gives rise to a severely degraded result.

164

a.		Jan	leerde	vermoeid	zijn huiswerk.
		Jan	learned	tired	his homework

b.	*?	Jan	kende	vermoeid	zijn huiswerk.
		Jan	knew	tired	his homework

Further, the use of a supplementive often gives rise to an unacceptable result if the verb is intransitive, as in (165a). If we are dealing with an unaccusative verb, on the other hand, the result is fully acceptable, as is shown by (165b).

165

a.	*	Jan heeft	razend/vrolijk	gelopen.
		Jan has	furious/merry	walked

b.	Jan is	razend/vrolijk	vertrokken.
	Jan is	furious/merry	left
	'Jan left furious/merry.'

Since the addition of a predicative locational PP may turn an intransitive verb of movement into an unaccusative verb, we expect that the addition of such a PP to the verb lopen licenses the presence of a supplementive. That this expectation is borne out is shown in (166a). Example (166b) shows that, for some reason, the predicative PP naar de directeur cannot be topicalized if a supplementive is present; this is possible if the supplementive is omitted.

166

a.		Jan is razend	naar de directeur	gelopen.
		Jan is furious	to the director	walked

b.		Naar de directeur	is Jan (*razend)	gelopen.
		to the director	is Jan furious	walked

Note that the addition of a locational adverbial phrase like over straat also seems to improve example (165a), but it might well be that in this case the marginal status of (167a) is the result of interpreting the adjectives razend/vrolijk as manner adverbs. Example (167b) shows that this is especially possible with the adjective vrolijk'merry'; this sentence does not express that the subject of the clause is merry, but that the laughing/chattering makes a merry impression. See Section 8.2.2, sub I, for more discussion.

167

a.		Hij	heeft	?razend/(?)vrolijk	over straat	gelopen.
		he	has	furious/merry	on the.street	walked

b.		Jan	lacht/babbelt	vrolijk.
		Jan	laughs/chatters	merrily

The primeless examples in (168) show that supplementives can readily be used with transitive verbs and verbs that take a prepositional complement. However, if the direct or the prepositional object is omitted the result degrades, unless the sentence contains a progressive auxiliary like zitten'to sit'.

168

a.		Jan las	bezorgd	??(de brief).
		Jan read	worried	the letter

a'.	Jan zat	bezorgd	(de brief)	te lezen.
	Jan sat	worried	the letter	to read
	'Worried, Jan was reading the letter.'

b.		Jan wachtte	ongerust	?(op zijn vader).
		Jan waited	worried	for his father

b'.	Jan zat ongerust	(op zijn vader)	te wachten.
	Jan sat worried	for his father	to wait
	'Worried, Jan was waiting (for his father).'

References:

Haeseryn, Walter, Romijn, Kirsten, Geerts, Guido, Rooij, Jaap de & Toorn, Maarten C. van den1997Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunstGroningenNijhoff

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Hans Broekhuis

Category: Dutch Syntax

Keywords: AdjectiveAdverbComparisonComplementationDepictiveFocusIntransitive VerbLocational PPManner AdverbModificationPPRelativized Minimality EffectStage-level AdjectiveStative VerbSupplementiveTopicalizationTransitive VerbUnaccusative VerbVP AdverbVerbWh-movementWord Order

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