Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

7.2.1.1.Pre-determiner bare heel

quickinfo

This section discusses the meaning of pre-determiner bare heel. In Subsection I, we start with its core semantics, which is quantificational in nature. Subsection II will show, however, that pre-determiner heel can also be used to express condescension in clauses that contain implicit or explicit negation.

I. Core semantics: exhaustive partitioning of structured units
II. Negative polarity

[+] I. Core semantics: exhaustive partitioning of structured units

The core semantics of noun phrases with pre-determiner bare heel is quantificational in nature and can best be captured under the rubric of exhaustive partitioning of structured units; cf.Zwarts (1992: Ch. 7). What we mean by this is that heel gives an instruction to the addressee to partition the unit denoted by the head noun into all of its relevant subparts, and to select the sum total of these subparts as the reference of the noun phrase. The semantic characterization of heel just given can be decomposed into three elementary building blocks: it involves (i) a structured unit, (ii) a partitioning, and (iii) exhaustivity. Each of these aspects will be addressed in the following subsections.

[+] A. Structured unit

The notion of structured unit itself consists of two subparts, viz., being structured and being a unit. The claim that the referent of the noun phrase must be “structured” can be illustrated with reference to the contrast between the examples in (162) involving proper nouns. A proper noun like Europa can readily be preceded by pre-determiner heel, because the geographical entity “Europe”is normally construed as constituting a structured set of basically equivalent objects, viz. member states. A proper noun like Jan, on the other hand, cannot be combined with heel, because a person is normally not seen as a structured homogeneous set of objects such as cells, organs or limbs.

162

a.		heel	Europa/Duitsland/Hongarije/Italië/Amsterdam
		all	Europe/Germany/Hungary/Italy/Amsterdam

b.	$	heel	Jan
		all	Jan

Example (163a) shows that the same thing is normally true for a noun phrase headed by a +animate common noun phrase like de man'the man'. However, once a context is provided which allows the animate noun phrase de man to refer to the set of a personʼs limbs, as in (163b), a grammatical, though slightly marked, result arises. The examples in (163a&b) also show that a similar but somewhat stronger contrast can be found in -animate noun phrases like zijn arm'his arm'.

163

a.	$	heel	de man/zijn arm
		all	the man/his arm

b.	Heel	?de man/zijn arm	zat	onder de schrammen.
	all	the man/his arm	sat	under the scratches
	'The man/His arm was profusely covered with scratches.'

Note that examples such as (163b) alternate with sentences in which the semantics of heel is contributed by the adverb helemaal'altogether': cf. De man/Zijn arm/Jan zat helemaal onder de schrammen'The man/his arm/Jan was completely covered with scratches'. Helemaal can also be used with proper nouns, which, even in the contexts given in (163b), give rise to a marginal result at best with heel, as will be clear from the contrast between (165a&b). The syntax of helemaal is discussed in Section 7.2.4.

164

a.	*?	Heel	Jan zat	onder de schrammen.
		all	Jan sat	under the scratches

b.	Jan	zat helemaal	onder de schrammen.
	Jans sat	altogether	under the scratches
	'Jan was completely covered with scratches'

The fact that some noun phrases readily allow an interpretation as a structured unit with heel, whereas other noun phrases require a special context for this interpretation to become available suggests that it is the speakerʼs conceptualization of the material world that is responsible for the difference: a proper noun like Europa is simply stored in the mental lexicon as a structured unit consisting of member states, whereas a proper noun like Jan is stored as an atomic unit referring to some individual.
So far, we have focused on the requirement that the referent of the noun phrase must be structured, that is, be construed as consisting of several subparts. That the referent of the noun phrase must be a unit is highlighted by the interpretation of example (165a); the indirect object is conceived of as a unit, all of whose parts are affected equally and collectively by the event expressed by the verb phrase. The unit reading expressed by (165a) can be primed by means of the paraphrase in (165a'). In (165b), we find a similar example taken from the internet that involves a PP-complement; again it is possible to provide a paraphrase with in zʼn geheel.

165

a.	Ik	heb	heel	het huis	een opknapbeurt	gegeven.
	I	have	all	the house	a cleaning	given
	'I gave the entire house a cleaning.'

a'.	Ik	heb	het huis	in zʼn geheel	een opknapbeurt	gegeven.
	I	have	the house	in its whole	a cleaning	given
	'I gave the house in its entirety a cleaning.'

bieden

integrale zorg,

die kijkt

naar heel de mens

niet

alleen

naar

lever,

hart

of nieren ...

offer

complete care

that looks

at all the person

and

not

only

liver

heart

or kidneys

b'.		We	bieden	integrale zorg,	die kijkt	naar de mens	in zʼn geheel	(en niet ...)
		we	offer	complete care	that looks	at the person	in its whole	and not

The primeless examples in (165) contrast with the examples in (166), in spite of the fact that the syntactic function of the heel phrases in these examples is the same, viz. indirect object and complement of a PP-complement of the verb.

166

a.	??	Ik	heb	heel	de film	mijn volle aandacht	gegeven.
		I	have	all	the movie	my full attention	given
		'I gave the entire movie my full attention.'

b.	*?	Ik	heb	aandachtig	naar	heel	de film	zitten	kijken.
		I	have	attentively	to	all	the movie	sit	look
		'I watched the entire movie attentively.'

The difference in acceptability between (165) and (166) therefore seems to be of a semantico-pragmatic nature. Insofar as the latter examples are acceptable, the objects receive an intrinsically distributive interpretation (with attentiveness being distributed equally across the object), and it is apparently difficult for bare heel phrases to receive such a distributive interpretation. This seems to lend further confirmation to the importance of the unit part of the semantic characterization of pre-determiner bare heel; while the house in (165) is conceived of as a unit whose parts are collectively affected by the event expressed by the verb phrase, the verbal events in (166) affect the subparts of the movie not as a group or a unit but only in a distributive fashion.
The structured unit requirement is also reflected by the fact illustrated in (167a) that plural noun phrases normally cannot be combined with pre-determiner bare heel; in the general case, plurals do not constitute a unit but a set of units. Systematic exceptions to the ban on pre-determiner heel construed with plural noun phrases are pluralia tantum, like de tropen in (167b), and formal plurals that denote a conventionally fixed unit, like de Antillen in (167c).

167

a.	*	heel	de/die/deze/∅	steden
		all	the/those/these/∅	towns

b.		El Niño heeft	het klimaat in heel de tropen	aangetast.
		El Niño has	the climate in all the tropics	affected

c.		Hij	is	de bekendste politicus	van	heel	de Antillen.
		he	is	the best-known politician	of	all	the Antilles

Though the plurals in (167b&c) behave like regular plurals in their external syntactic distribution in, e.g., triggering plural agreement on the finite verb, their denotation is that of a unit. The fact that pre-determiner bare heel can quantify pluralia tantum and plurals that denote a single unit confirms the structured unit ingredient of its semantics.

[+] B. Partitioning

The partitioning part of the semantics of heel can be illustrated with reference to example (168), which seems to imply that all of the rooms (and other relevant subparts) of the house have been cleaned, that is, all of the constituent parts that together make up the house have been affected.

168

		Heel	het huis	is schoongemaakt.
		all	the house	is clean.made

Since heel partitions the entity denoted by the noun phrase it quantifies into its constituent parts, we expect an anomalous output to arise if these parts cannot be individually affected by the event denoted by the verb phrase. This seems to be confirmed by (169): (169a) is unacceptable because it is only the motorboat as a unit that can be rocking, that is, the parts of the motorboat cannot be individually affected; (169b) is awkward since mud typically covers the house as a unit, not all of its constituent parts (i.e., the individual rooms) separately. Some caution is needed here, however, since not all speakers agree that (169b) is indeed anomalous.

169

a.	*?	Heel	de motorboot	gaat	heen en weer.
		all	the motorboat	goes	to and fro (≈ is rocking)

b.	%	Heel	het huis	is bedolven	onder de modder.
		all	the house	is buried	under the mud

[+] C. Exhaustivity

Exhaustivity, the third ingredient of the meaning of pre-determiner bare heel, is illustrated in (170). In (170a), heel prompts a reading in which all of the individual office spaces comprising the office block have been rented out. Although judgments are somewhat delicate, it seems that addition of an “except”-clause, which overrules the interpretation “in all of its constituent parts” assigned by heel, leads to a somewhat awkward result. Example (170b&c) illustrates the same point; again, addition of the “except”-clause gives a marked result.

170

a.		Heel het kantoorgebouw	(?behalve de begane grond)	is verhuurd.
		all the office block	except the ground floor	is rented.out

b.		Heel de Veiligheidsraad	(?behalve China)	stemde	voor de resolutie.
		all the Security Council	except China	voted	in favor of the resolution

c.		Ik	heb	heel de serie	(??behalve deel 28).
		I	have	all the series	except volume 28

The exhaustivity part of the meaning of pre-determiner bare heel is eminently present in the Dutch rendering of the introduction to Asterix the Gaul by Goscinny and Uderzo, given in (171). The part that is interesting for our current discussion is given in italics: the claim that the whole of Gallia (heel Gallië) is occupied is refuted by pointing at a small settlement, which continues to offer resistance.

171

		Dutch rendering: “Zoʼn 2000 jaar geleden was heel Gallië [...] bezet door soldaten van Caesar, de Romeinse veldheer. Héél Gallië? Nee, een kleine nederzetting bleef moedig weerstand bieden aan de overweldigers en ...”Dutch rendering: “Zoʼn 2000 jaar geleden was heel Gallië [...] bezet door soldaten van Caesar, de Romeinse veldheer. Héél Gallië? Nee, een kleine nederzetting bleef moedig weerstand bieden aan de overweldigers en ...”
		Gloss: About 2000 year ago, the whole of Gaul was occupied by the soldiers of Caesar, the Roman commander. The whole of Gaul? No, a small settlement continued to offer resistance to the usurpers and ...
		'English rendering: “The year is 50 B.C. Gaul is entirely occupied by the Romans. Well, not entirely ... One small village of indomitable Gauls still holds out against the invaders. And ...”'

In agreement with the characterization of the semantics of pre-determiner bare heel in terms of exhaustive partitioning of structured units, we find that bare heel normally does not alternate with half'half'. This is especially the case if the noun phrase hosting heel/half is “totally affected” by the event denoted by the verb phrase, as in (172): bezaaid liggen met means “to be totally covered with” and leegroven means “to rob empty”, that is, to rob in such a way that the entire object is emptied as a result. Such “totally affecting” verbal predicates only allow partitioning of their surface subject if the partitioning is exhaustive: substituting half for heel yields an anomalous result since half differs from heel precisely in not being exhaustive.

172

a.	Heel/*Half	het eiland	lag	bezaaid	met bloemen.
	all/half	the island	lay	be-seeded	with flowers
	'The island was completely/for a large part covered with flowers.'

b.		Heel/*Half	het dorp	werd	leeggeroofd.
		all/half the	village	was	robbed.empty

The verb phrases in (173), on the other hand, are not “totally affecting” in the sense that they apply to the inhabitants of the island/village only, and now the modifier heel does alternate with half. The reason for this is that these verbal predicates allow but do not demand exhaustive partitioning of the surface subject.

173

a.		Heel/%Half	het eiland	leeft	van het toerisme.
		all/half	the island	lives	of the tourism

b.		Heel/%Half	het dorp	liep	uit	om	hem	te zien.
		all/half	the village	ran	out	comp	him	to see

Note that the percentage sign in (173) indicates that some speakers find half categorically impossible in pre-determiner position; examples such as (173) can be readily found on the internet, however. It must also be noted that we have seen several other cases with half on the internet that seem to be of some different nature than the examples in (173), so that further investigation of the alternation between heel and half would certainly be welcome.

[+] II. Negative polarity

Alongside its core use as a quantifier, discussed in Subsection I, pre-determiner bare heel can also be used in a rather different fashion. We will show below that the semantic contribution of heel in examples of the type in (174) seems best described in terms of a combination of negative polarity and condescension. The examples in (174) are fully acceptable but are given a question mark within parentheses, since they are somewhat marked compared to similar constructions featuring post-determiner inflectible heel, which will be discussed in Section 7.2.1.2.2, sub III.

174

a.	(?)	Ik	ken	heel die vent	niet.
		I	know	all that guy	not
		'I donʼt know that guy at all.'

b.	(?)	Ik	was	heel	die toestand	alweer	vergeten.
		I	was	all	that situation	again	forgotten
		'Iʼd forgotten about this whole affair.'

The sentences in (174) are negative, with negation being expressed syntactically by the negative adverb niet in (174a), and lexically by the verb vergeten'to forget/to not know anymore' in (174b). The examples in (175) show that counterparts of (174) in which negation is absent are unacceptable. This suggests that heel is a negative polarity item.

175

a.	*	Ik	ken	heel die vent.
		I	know	all that guy

b.	*	Ik	heb	heel die toestand	altijd	onthouden.
		I	have	all that situation	always	remembered

It should be noted, however, that if heel is indeed a negative polarity item in these examples, its licensing must be less strict than for other negative polarity items. In particular, ordinary negative polarity items like ook maar iemand'anyone' do not occur in the position occupied by heel die toestand in (174b) as the negative component of the verb vergeten will not suffice to license them; see Den Dikken (2002) for discussion.
Examples such as (174) are typically used as statements revealing the speakerʼs lack of appreciation or interest in the entity referred to by the heel phrase. Consistent with this is that the distal demonstrative in (174), which can be used to express a negative evaluation on the part of the speaker (cf. Section 5.2.3.2, sub IID), cannot readily be replaced by other determiners, as is shown by the awkwardness of (176).

176

a.		Ik	ken	heel	*de/??deze	vent	niet.
		I	know	all	the/this	guy	not

b.		Ik	was	heel	*de/??deze	toestand	allang	weer	vergeten.
		I	was	all	the/this	situation	already.long	again	forgotten

Our judgments on the examples in (174) and (176) seem confirmed by a Google search (December 2008) on the strings [heel DET vent] and [heel DET vent], with DET ranging over die, de and deze. For die, we found 38 relevant examples, for de only two, and for deze only three.

References:

Dikken, Marcel den2002Direct and parasitic polarity item licensingJournal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics535-66
Zwarts, Joost1992X'-syntax - X'-semantics: on the interpretation of functional and lexical headsUniversity of UtrechtThesis

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Hans Broekhuis, Marcel den Dikken

Category: Dutch Syntax

Keywords: Demonstrative PronounDistal Demonstrative PronounNegationNegativeNegative PolarityNounPronounProper NounProximate Demonstrative Pronoun

Version: 1.0, December 2015

Version history:

version	editor(s)	date	remarks
1.0	Hans Broekhuis, Marcel den Dikken	December 2015

report errorprintcite

Jump to:

introduction
references
related articles