Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

7.1.1.Semantics of al and alle'all'

quickinfo

This section discusses the meaning contribution of al/alle'all'. Subsection I will show that the core semantics involves universal quantification. Since the core semantics of pre-determiner bare al and inflected alle is the same, it has been suggested by, e.g., Verkuyl (1981), Paardekooper (1986), De Jong (1991), Coppen (1991), and Haeseryn et al. (1997) that alle is actually a “fused” form of pre-determiner bare al and the definite determiner; see Perridon (1997) for an opposing view. Under this view the invariant schwa ending on alle could be seen as the remaining part of the definite article de after its “fusion” with al. This approach to the final schwa of alle does not carry over, however, to attested cases with singular neuter nouns like alle geknoei, given that the neuter definite article het, with which al has putatively fused, does not end in a schwa. Subsections II and III will provide more arguments against the “fusion” approach to inflected alle: these subsections discuss, respectively, the specific and generic uses of al/alle and the fact that alle, but not al, can be used to express high degree quantification. Subsection IV concludes by showing that the universal and the high degree quantifiers differ in that noun phrases modified by the former are strong whereas noun phrases modified by the latter quantifier are weak.

I. Core semantics: universal quantification
II. Specificity/genericity
III. High degree quantification
IV. Weak and strong quantifiers

[+] I. Core semantics: universal quantification

As was discussed in the introduction to this chapter, the core meaning of al/alle involves universal quantification: it indicates that all members of the denotation set of the noun phrase are part of the denotation set of the predicate. If combined with count nouns, al/alle applies to sets, not to structured units. The difference between these two notions can be clarified by means of the pairs in (7). While, at a certain level of abstraction, the noun phrases de bomen'the trees' and het bos'the forest' can refer to the same entity in the extra-linguistic universe, they are linguistically distinct in that the former refers to a set of entities while the latter refers to a unit, which is structured in the sense that it happens to consist of a set of entities. The primeless examples in (7) show that al/alle can be used in noun phrases that refer to sets but not in noun phrases that refer to structured units. The primed examples show that al is fundamentally different in this regard from the pre-determiner heel'all/whole': cf. Section 7.2.1.1 for more discussion.

a.		al de/alle	bomen
		all the/all	trees

a'.	*	heel	de bomen
		whole	the trees

b.	*	al het/alle	bos
		all the/all	forest

b'.		heel	het bos
		whole	the forest

Al/alle can also precede non-count nouns. This holds both for concrete, substance nouns like wijn'wine' and for abstract, psychological predicates like ellende'sorrow'. In these cases al indicates that the full contextually determined quantity of the entity denoted by the noun is intended.

a.		al de/alle	wijn
		all the/all	wine

b.		al de/alle	ellende
		all the/all	sorrow

[+] II. Specificity/genericity

An important difference between pre-determiner bare al and inflected alle concerns the generic interpretations of noun phrases. It comes to the fore most clearly with nouns like zebra that may refer to a species. As is discussed in 5.1.1.5, a bare plural like zebraʼs in (9a) can have either a non-generic reading, in which case it refers to a certain set of zebras, or a generic reading. in which case it refers to typical members of the species. A definite noun phrase like de zebraʼs, on the other hand, can normally only be used in specific statements; (9b) is ungrammatical as a generic statement about zebras and, since zebras happen to all be striped, it is also awkward as a statement about a specific set of zebras.

a.		Zebraʼs	zijn	gestreept.
		zebras	are	striped

b.	#	De zebraʼs	zijn	gestreept.
		the zebras	are	striped

When we now turn to examples featuring the universal quantifiers alle and al, we find that noun phrases involving inflected alle behave like bare plurals, and that noun phrases involving pre-determiner bare al behave like definite noun phrases. That is, the universally quantified noun phrase alle zebraʼs in (10) is ambiguous between a specific and a generic interpretation, whereas the noun phrase al de zebraʼs in (11) normally has a specific reading.

a.		Alle zebraʼs	kwamen	plotseling	op ons	af.	specific
		all zebras	came	suddenly	at us	prt.

b.		Alle zebraʼs	zijn	gestreept.	generic
		all zebras	are	striped

a.	Al de zebraʼs	kwamen	plotseling	op ons	af.	specific
	all the zebras	came	suddenly	at us	prt.
	'All the zebras suddenly came running towards us.'

b.	#	Al de zebraʼs	zijn	gestreept.	generic
		all the zebras	are	striped

Another way to describe these data is by saying that the noun phrase alle zebraʼs can be used either to refer to the set of zebras in the domain of discourse (domain D), or simply to all zebras in the speakerʼs conception of the universe. The noun phrase al de zebraʼs, on the other hand, can only be used to refer to the zebras in domain D. This means that the meaning of this noun phrase is strictly compositional: the noun phrase de zebraʼs refers to the zebras in domain D and the pre-determiner al emphasizes that literally all the entities in domain D that satisfy the description of the NP zebraʼs are included in the set referred to by the definite noun phrase. The fact that alle and al de differ in this way suggests that a “fusion” approach to alle, according to which alle is a contracted form of the pre-determiner al and the definite determiner, cannot be upheld.

[+] III. High degree quantification

That a fusion “approach” to alle is not feasible is also suggested by the fact that alle, but not al de, can be used to express high degree quantification. Examples of this use are given in (12): that the semantic contribution of alle in (12a) is not universal quantification but degree modification is clear from the fact that alle tijd does not mean “all time(s)” but “lots of time”. This example also shows that the pre-determiner al cannot be used in this way. Other examples of the same type are given in (12b&c). Note in passing, that using all in the English translation of (12a) is impossible (although it does occur in the translation of the saying Ik heb alle tijd in de wereld'I have all the time in the world'); examples (12b&c), however, can be rendered in English with the aid of the quantifier every.

a.	Ik	heb	alle/*al	de tijd.
	I	have	all/all	the time
	'I have lots of time.'

b.	Er	is alle/*al	de reden	tot klagen.
	there	is all/all	the reason	to complaining
	'There is every reason to complain.'

c.	Er	was alle/*al	de gelegenheid	tot het stellen van vragen.
	there	was all/all	the opportunity	to the posing of questions
	'There was every opportunity to ask questions.'

The high degree reading is frequently found in noun phrases with alle headed by abstract non-count nouns, especially if these noun phrases are embedded in PPs headed by in'in' or voor'for'. Some examples are given in (13). Note that the semantics of in alle eerlijkheid/redelijkheid in (13a) is accurately rendered in English with the aid of all (in all honesty/fairness), which suggests that high degree quantification is possible with English all as well. Dutch uses alle in this high degree meaning rather more profusely than English, though.

a.		in	alle	helderheid/eerlijkheid/redelijkheid/rust
		in	all	clarity/honesty/fairness/rest

b.		voor	alle	duidelijkheid/zekerheid
		for	all	clarity/security

[+] IV. Weak and strong quantifiers

Noun phrases quantified by high-degree alle in (12) behave like weak noun phrases in the sense of Section 6.2.1, sub II: as a subject they typically appear in expletiveer constructions like (12b&c), and they may also occur as the object in existential possessive sentences such as (12a). In this respect, these noun phrases are fundamentally different from the noun phrases headed by the universal quantifier alle, discussed in sub I, which is a strong quantifier: the examples in (14) show that a noun phrase modified by the universal quantifier alle cannot occur in the expletive er construction.

a.		Alle/*∅	mannen	zijn	in de kamer.
		all/∅	men	are	in the room

b.		Er	zijn	∅/*alle	mannen	in de kamer.
		there	are	∅/all	men	in the room

A similar argument cannot be reproduced for the pre-determiner al given that it never combines with bare plurals (cf. Section 7.1.2.1); the contrast between the examples in (15) can therefore be attributed to the presence of the definite article. Nevertheless, the fact that Subsection I has shown that al expresses universal quantification combined with the fact that universal quantifier alle is strong makes it reasonable to assume that pre-determiner bare al is also a strong quantifier, although the point is difficult to prove.

a.		(Al)	de mannen	zijn	in de kamer.
		all	the men	are	in the room

b.	*	Er	zijn	(al)	de mannen	in de kamer.
		there	are	all	the men	in the room

References:

Coppen, Peter-Arno1991Specifying the noun phraseAmsterdamThesis Publishers
Haeseryn, Walter, Romijn, Kirsten, Geerts, Guido, Rooij, Jaap de & Toorn, Maarten C. van den1997Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunstGroningenNijhoff
Jong, Francisca de1991Determiners: features and filtersUtrechtUniversity of UtrechtThesis
Paardekooper, P.C1986Beknopte ABN-syntaksisEindhovenP.C. Paardekooper
Perridon, Harry1997Totaliteit. Over het gebruik van de woorden al(le), heel, ieder en elkElffers, Els, Horst, Joop van der & Klooster, Wim (eds.)Grammaticaal spektakel. Artikelen aangeboden aan Ina Schermer-Vermeer bij haar afscheid van de Vakgroep Nederlandse Taalkunde aan de Universiteit van AmsterdamDutch department, University of Amsterdam181-190
Verkuyl, Henk J1981Numerals and quantifiers in X-bar syntax and their semantic interpretationGroenendijk, Jeroen & Janssen, T.M.V. (eds.)Formal methods in the study of languageAmsterdamMathematisch Centrum567-599

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Hans Broekhuis, Marcel den Dikken

Category: Dutch Syntax

Keywords: Expletive ConstructionGenericitySpecificity

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