/ instituut voor de Nederlandse taal / Taalportaal
bibliography glossary about
  • Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Saterfrisian
  • Afrikaans
Show all
    The third construction
    quickinfo

    If the two verbs are not adjacent, they may behave as if some form of clause union had taken place. This type of construction is referred to as the third construction:

    1
    ?Omdat er har doe pas doarde mei har wurk te helpen
    because he her then only dared with her work to help
    Because only then he dared to help her with her work

    In the example above, the arguments of the main verb helpe help are found on either side of the selecting verb doare dare. Clause-union entails that the middle field (also referred to as extended projection) of a selected (main) verb is joined at some level of representation to the middle field of a selecting verb. As a result, arguments of the main verb can appear in the domain (or middle field or extended projection) of the selecting verb, which is also the case when verb clusters are formed.

    readmore

    In Dutch the third construction may exhibit the IPP-effect, but this effect is not present in Frisian, neither in the domain of the third construction nor outside it. The third construction is found, as we saw in (1), with verbs such as doare dare which is usually found in a clause-union structure or a verb cluster. In addition, the third construction is also found with verbs which are often found to select an independent clause, such as miene suppose . In the example below, this verb selects an independent clause:

    2
    Omdat se juster miende hjoed mei him oer it probleem prate te kinnen
    because she yesterday supposed today with him about the problem talk to can
    Because yesterday she supposed that she could talk with him about the problem today

    In the example below, this verb is accompanied by a third construction:

    3
    Omdat se mei him miende oer it probleem prate te kinnen
    because she with him supposed about the problem talk to can
    Because she supposed that she could talk with him about the problem

    The Adposition Phrase (PP) arguments of the main verb appear on either side of the tensed verb. They cannot appear in between prate talk and kinnen can because clause-union and verb raising are obligatory for the selecting verb. Furthermore, it seems that temporal adverbs are interpreted in the clause in which they are found: the following is ungrammatical:

    4
    *Omdat se juster hjoed miende mei him oer it probleem prate te kinnen
    because she yesterday today supposed with him about the problem talk to can
    Because yesterday she supposed that she could talk with him about the problem today

    If the second time adverb hjoed today could be interpreted in (reconstructed to) the embedded infinitival complement, this sentence would be grammatical. The next question is what happens in case the arguments of the main verb are distributed over both temporal domains, as in the example below:

    5
    Omdat se juster mei him miende hjoed oer it probleem prate te kinnen
    because she yesterday with him supposed today about the problem talk to can
    Because yesterday she supposed that she could talk with him about the problem today

    If the sentence above is grammatical, then it must be concluded that the PP argument mei him with him is interpreted inside the infinitival clause but the time adverb juster yesterday is not. A to-infinitival verb must be realised to the right of its selecting verb, in the case of verbal to-infinitives. As a result, the following sentence is ungrammatical:

    6
    *Omdat er my dat boek ferbiede te kinnen miende te lêzen
    because he me that book forbid to can supposed to read
    Because he supposed that he could forbid me to read that book

    Here the tensed verb selects the to-infinitival cluster ferbiede te kinnen forbid to can and this cluster must be found to the right of it, as in the grammatical example in (7) (and not to the left of it, as in the ungrammatical example in (6)):

    7
    Omdat er my dat boek miende ferbiede te kinnen te lêzen
    because he me that book supposed forbid to can to read
    Because he supposed that he could forbid me to read that book

    For the same reason, the following is also ungrammatical:

    8
    *Omdat er my dat boek ferbiede miende wolle te kinnen te lêzen
    because he me that book forbid supposed want to can to read
    Because he supposed that he could want to forbid me to read that book

    Here the verb ferbiede forbid is not part of the to-cluster of verbs wolle te kinnen want to can, and these two auxiliaries obligatorily induce verb-raising: the verb ferbiede forbid has been left out of this cluster in violation of this requirement, given the further obligatoriness of the rightward placement of to-infinitival verbs (with accompanying auxiliaries in case these induce verb-raising). In the case of these complex sentences, there may be conflicting judgments.

    extra
    Literature

    More details can be found in De Haan (1993) and Reuland (1990).

    References
    • Haan, Germen J. de1993The Third Construction in FrisianAbraham, Werner & Bayer, Josef (eds.)DialektsyntaxOpladen117-139
    • Reuland, Eric1990Infinitieven in het Fries en de aard van functionele categorieënInterdisciplinair Tijdschrift voor Taal- en Tekstwetenschap9287-309
    About this article
    Author(s): Eric Hoekstra
    Category: Frisian Syntax
    Keywords: to-infinitivethird construction
    Version: 1.0, December 2015
    Version history:
    version editor(s) date remarks
    1.0 Eric Hoekstra December 2015
    printreport errorcite
    Jump to:
    X