- Dutch
- Frisian
- Saterfrisian
- Afrikaans
-
- Phonology
- Segment inventory
- Phonotactics
- Phonological processes
- Phonology-morphology interface
- Word stress
- Primary stress in simplex words
- Monomorphemic words
- Diachronic aspects
- Generalizations on stress placement
- Default penultimate stress
- Lexical stress
- The closed penult restriction
- Final closed syllables
- The diphthong restriction
- Superheavy syllables (SHS)
- The three-syllable window
- Segmental restrictions
- Phonetic correlates
- Stress shifts in loanwords
- Quantity-sensitivity
- Secondary stress
- Vowel reduction in unstressed syllables
- Stress in complex words
- Primary stress in simplex words
- Accent & intonation
- Clitics
- Spelling
- Morphology
- Word formation
- Compounding
- Nominal compounds
- Verbal compounds
- Adjectival compounds
- Affixoids
- Coordinative compounds
- Synthetic compounds
- Reduplicative compounds
- Phrase-based compounds
- Elative compounds
- Exocentric compounds
- Linking elements
- Separable complex verbs (SCVs)
- Gapping of complex words
- Particle verbs
- Copulative compounds
- Derivation
- Numerals
- Derivation: inputs and input restrictions
- The meaning of affixes
- Non-native morphology
- Cohering and non-cohering affixes
- Prefixation
- Suffixation
- Nominal suffixation: person nouns
- Conversion
- Pseudo-participles
- Bound forms
- Nouns
- Nominal prefixes
- Nominal suffixes
- -aal and -eel
- -aar
- -aard
- -aat
- -air
- -aris
- -ast
- Diminutives
- -dom
- -een
- -ees
- -el (nominal)
- -elaar
- -enis
- -er (nominal)
- -erd
- -erik
- -es
- -eur
- -euse
- ge...te
- -heid
- -iaan, -aan
- -ief
- -iek
- -ier
- -ier (French)
- -ière
- -iet
- -igheid
- -ij and allomorphs
- -ijn
- -in
- -ing
- -isme
- -ist
- -iteit
- -ling
- -oir
- -oot
- -rice
- -schap
- -schap (de)
- -schap (het)
- -sel
- -st
- -ster
- -t
- -tal
- -te
- -voud
- Verbs
- Adjectives
- Adverbs
- Univerbation
- Neo-classical word formation
- Construction-dependent morphology
- Morphological productivity
- Compounding
- Inflection
- Inflection and derivation
- Allomorphy
- The interface between phonology and morphology
- Word formation
- Syntax
- Preface and acknowledgements
- Verbs and Verb Phrases
- 1 Characterization and classification
- 2 Projection of verb phrases I:Argument structure
- 3 Projection of verb phrases II:Verb frame alternations
- Introduction
- 3.1. Main types
- 3.2. Alternations involving the external argument
- 3.3. Alternations of noun phrases and PPs
- 3.3.1. Dative/PP alternations (dative shift)
- 3.3.1.1. Dative alternation with aan-phrases (recipients)
- 3.3.1.2. Dative alternation with naar-phrases (goals)
- 3.3.1.3. Dative alternation with van-phrases (sources)
- 3.3.1.4. Dative alternation with bij-phrases (possessors)
- 3.3.1.5. Dative alternation with voor-phrases (benefactives)
- 3.3.1.6. Conclusion
- 3.3.1.7. Bibliographical notes
- 3.3.2. Accusative/PP alternations
- 3.3.3. Nominative/PP alternations
- 3.3.1. Dative/PP alternations (dative shift)
- 3.4. Some apparent cases of verb frame alternation
- 3.5. Bibliographical notes
- 4 Projection of verb phrases IIIa:Selection of clauses/verb phrases
- 5 Projection of verb phrases IIIb:Argument and complementive clauses
- Introduction
- 5.1. Finite argument clauses
- 5.2. Infinitival argument clauses
- 5.3. Complementive clauses
- 6 Projection of verb phrases IIIc:Complements of non-main verbs
- 7 Projection of verb phrases IIId:Verb clusters
- 8 Projection of verb phrases IV: Adverbial modification
- 9 Word order in the clause I:General introduction
- 10 Word order in the clause II:Position of the finite verb (verb-first/second)
- 11 Word order in the clause III:Clause-initial position (wh-movement)
- Introduction
- 11.1. The formation of V1- and V2-clauses
- 11.2. Clause-initial position remains (phonetically) empty
- 11.3. Clause-initial position is filled
- 12 Word order in the clause IV:Postverbal field (extraposition)
- 13 Word order in the clause V: Middle field (scrambling)
- 14 Main-clause external elements
- Nouns and Noun Phrases
- 1 Characterization and classification
- 2 Projection of noun phrases I: complementation
- Introduction
- 2.1. General observations
- 2.2. Prepositional and nominal complements
- 2.3. Clausal complements
- 2.4. Bibliographical notes
- 3 Projection of noun phrases II: modification
- Introduction
- 3.1. Restrictive and non-restrictive modifiers
- 3.2. Premodification
- 3.3. Postmodification
- 3.3.1. Adpositional phrases
- 3.3.2. Relative clauses
- 3.3.3. Infinitival clauses
- 3.3.4. A special case: clauses referring to a proposition
- 3.3.5. Adjectival phrases
- 3.3.6. Adverbial postmodification
- 3.4. Bibliographical notes
- 4 Projection of noun phrases III: binominal constructions
- Introduction
- 4.1. Binominal constructions without a preposition
- 4.2. Binominal constructions with a preposition
- 4.3. Bibliographical notes
- 5 Determiners: articles and pronouns
- Introduction
- 5.1. Articles
- 5.2. Pronouns
- 5.3. Bibliographical notes
- 6 Numerals and quantifiers
- 7 Pre-determiners
- Introduction
- 7.1. The universal quantifier al 'all' and its alternants
- 7.2. The pre-determiner heel 'all/whole'
- 7.3. A note on focus particles
- 7.4. Bibliographical notes
- 8 Syntactic uses of noun phrases
- Adjectives and Adjective Phrases
- 1 Characteristics and classification
- 2 Projection of adjective phrases I: Complementation
- 3 Projection of adjective phrases II: Modification
- 4 Projection of adjective phrases III: Comparison
- 5 Attributive use of the adjective phrase
- 6 Predicative use of the adjective phrase
- 7 The partitive genitive construction
- 8 Adverbial use of the adjective phrase
- 9 Participles and infinitives: their adjectival use
- 10 Special constructions
- Adpositions and adpositional phrases
- 1 Characteristics and classification
- Introduction
- 1.1. Characterization of the category adposition
- 1.2. A formal classification of adpositional phrases
- 1.3. A semantic classification of adpositional phrases
- 1.3.1. Spatial adpositions
- 1.3.2. Temporal adpositions
- 1.3.3. Non-spatial/temporal prepositions
- 1.4. Borderline cases
- 1.5. Bibliographical notes
- 2 Projection of adpositional phrases: Complementation
- 3 Projection of adpositional phrases: Modification
- 4 Syntactic uses of the adpositional phrase
- 5 R-pronominalization and R-words
- 1 Characteristics and classification
- Phonology
-
- General
- Phonology
- Segment inventory
- Phonotactics
- Phonological Processes
- Assimilation
- Vowel nasalization
- Syllabic sonorants
- Final devoicing
- Fake geminates
- Vowel hiatus resolution
- Vowel reduction introduction
- Schwa deletion
- Schwa insertion
- /r/-deletion
- d-insertion
- {s/z}-insertion
- t-deletion
- Intrusive stop formation
- Breaking
- Vowel shortening
- h-deletion
- Replacement of the glide w
- Word stress
- Clitics
- Allomorphy
- Orthography of Frisian
- Morphology
- Inflection
- Word formation
- Derivation
- Prefixation
- Infixation
- Suffixation
- Nominal suffixes
- Verbal suffixes
- Adjectival suffixes
- Adverbial suffixes
- Numeral suffixes
- Interjectional suffixes
- Onomastic suffixes
- Conversion
- Compositions
- Derivation
- Syntax
- Verbs and Verb Phrases
- Characteristics and classification
- Unergative and unaccusative subjects
- Evidentiality
- To-infinitival clauses
- Predication and noun incorporation
- Ellipsis
- Imperativus-pro-Infinitivo
- Expression of irrealis
- Embedded Verb Second
- Agreement
- Negation
- Nouns & Noun Phrases
- Classification
- Complementation
- Modification
- Partitive noun constructions
- Referential partitive constructions
- Partitive measure nouns
- Numeral partitive constructions
- Partitive question constructions
- Nominalised quantifiers
- Kind partitives
- Partitive predication with prepositions
- Bare nominal attributions
- Articles and names
- Pronouns
- Quantifiers and (pre)determiners
- Interrogative pronouns
- R-pronouns
- Syntactic uses
- Adjective Phrases
- Characteristics and classification
- Complementation
- Modification and degree quantification
- Comparison by degree
- Comparative
- Superlative
- Equative
- Attribution
- Agreement
- Attributive adjectives vs. prenominal elements
- Complex adjectives
- Noun ellipsis
- Co-occurring adjectives
- Predication
- Partitive adjective constructions
- Adverbial use
- Participles and infinitives
- Adposition Phrases
- Characteristics and classification
- Complementation
- Modification
- Intransitive adpositions
- Predication
- Preposition stranding
- Verbs and Verb Phrases
-
- General
- Morphology
- Morphology
- 1 Word formation
- 1.1 Compounding
- 1.1.1 Compounds and their heads
- 1.1.2 Special types of compounds
- 1.1.2.1 Affixoids
- 1.1.2.2 Coordinative compounds
- 1.1.2.3 Synthetic compounds and complex pseudo-participles
- 1.1.2.4 Reduplicative compounds
- 1.1.2.5 Phrase-based compounds
- 1.1.2.6 Elative compounds
- 1.1.2.7 Exocentric compounds
- 1.1.2.8 Linking elements
- 1.1.2.9 Separable Complex Verbs and Particle Verbs
- 1.1.2.10 Noun Incorporation Verbs
- 1.1.2.11 Gapping
- 1.2 Derivation
- 1.3 Minor patterns of word formation
- 1.1 Compounding
- 2 Inflection
- 1 Word formation
- Morphology
- Syntax
- Adjectives and adjective phrases (APs)
- 0 Introduction to the AP
- 1 Characteristics and classification of APs
- 2 Complementation of APs
- 3 Modification and degree quantification of APs
- 4 Comparison by comparative, superlative and equative
- 5 Attribution of APs
- 6 Predication of APs
- 7 The partitive adjective construction
- 8 Adverbial use of APs
- 9 Participles and infinitives as APs
- Nouns and Noun Phrases (NPs)
- 0 Introduction to the NP
- 1 Characteristics and Classification of NPs
- 2 Complementation of NPs
- 3 Modification of NPs
- 3.1 Modification of NP by Determiners and APs
- 3.2 Modification of NP by PP
- 3.3 Modification of NP by adverbial clauses
- 3.4 Modification of NP by possessors
- 3.5 Modification of NP by relative clauses
- 3.6 Modification of NP in a cleft construction
- 3.7 Free relative clauses and selected interrogative clauses
- 4 Partitive noun constructions and constructions related to them
- 4.1 The referential partitive construction
- 4.2 The partitive construction of abstract quantity
- 4.3 The numerical partitive construction
- 4.4 The partitive interrogative construction
- 4.5 Adjectival, nominal and nominalised partitive quantifiers
- 4.6 Kind partitives
- 4.7 Partitive predication with a preposition
- 4.8 Bare nominal attribution
- 5 Articles and names
- 6 Pronouns
- 7 Quantifiers, determiners and predeterminers
- 8 Interrogative pronouns
- 9 R-pronouns and the indefinite expletive
- 10 Syntactic functions of Noun Phrases
- Adpositions and Adpositional Phrases (PPs)
- 0 Introduction to the PP
- 1 Characteristics and classification of PPs
- 2 Complementation of PPs
- 3 Modification of PPs
- 4 Bare (intransitive) adpositions
- 5 Predication of PPs
- 6 Form and distribution of adpositions with respect to staticity and construction type
- 7 Adpositional complements and adverbials
- Verbs and Verb Phrases (VPs)
- 0 Introduction to the VP in Saterland Frisian
- 1 Characteristics and classification of verbs
- 2 Unergative and unaccusative subjects and the auxiliary of the perfect
- 3 Evidentiality in relation to perception and epistemicity
- 4 Types of to-infinitival constituents
- 5 Predication
- 5.1 The auxiliary of being and its selection restrictions
- 5.2 The auxiliary of going and its selection restrictions
- 5.3 The auxiliary of continuation and its selection restrictions
- 5.4 The auxiliary of coming and its selection restrictions
- 5.5 Modal auxiliaries and their selection restrictions
- 5.6 Auxiliaries of body posture and aspect and their selection restrictions
- 5.7 Transitive verbs of predication
- 5.8 The auxiliary of doing used as a semantically empty finite auxiliary
- 5.9 Supplementive predication
- 6 The verbal paradigm, irregularity and suppletion
- 7 Verb Second and the word order in main and embedded clauses
- 8 Various aspects of clause structure
- Adjectives and adjective phrases (APs)
-
- General
- Phonology
- Afrikaans phonology
- Segment inventory
- Overview of Afrikaans vowels
- The diphthongised long vowels /e/, /ø/ and /o/
- The unrounded mid-front vowel /ɛ/
- The unrounded low-central vowel /ɑ/
- The unrounded low-central vowel /a/
- The rounded mid-high back vowel /ɔ/
- The rounded high back vowel /u/
- The rounded and unrounded high front vowels /i/ and /y/
- The unrounded and rounded central vowels /ə/ and /œ/
- The diphthongs /əi/, /œy/ and /œu/
- Overview of Afrikaans consonants
- The bilabial plosives /p/ and /b/
- The alveolar plosives /t/ and /d/
- The velar plosives /k/ and /g/
- The bilabial nasal /m/
- The alveolar nasal /n/
- The velar nasal /ŋ/
- The trill /r/
- The lateral liquid /l/
- The alveolar fricative /s/
- The velar fricative /x/
- The labiodental fricatives /f/ and /v/
- The approximants /ɦ/, /j/ and /ʋ/
- Overview of Afrikaans vowels
- Word stress
- The phonetic properties of stress
- Primary stress on monomorphemic words in Afrikaans
- Background to primary stress in monomorphemes in Afrikaans
- Overview of the Main Stress Rule of Afrikaans
- The short vowels of Afrikaans
- Long vowels in monomorphemes
- Primary stress on diphthongs in monomorphemes
- Exceptions
- Stress shifts in place names
- Stress shift towards word-final position
- Stress pattern of reduplications
- Phonological processes
- Vowel related processes
- Consonant related processes
- Homorganic glide insertion
- Phonology-morphology interface
- Phonotactics
- Morphology
- Syntax
- Afrikaans syntax
- Nouns and noun phrases
- Characteristics of the NP
- Classification of nouns
- Complementation of NPs
- Modification of NPs
- Binominal and partitive constructions
- Referential partitive constructions
- Partitive measure nouns
- Numeral partitive constructions
- Partitive question constructions
- Partitive constructions with nominalised quantifiers
- Partitive predication with prepositions
- Binominal name constructions
- Binominal genitive constructions
- Bare nominal attribution
- Articles and names
- Pronouns
- Quantifiers, determiners and predeterminers
- Syntactic uses of the noun phrase
- Adjectives and adjective phrases
- Characteristics and classification of the AP
- Complementation of APs
- Modification and Degree Quantification of APs
- Comparison by comparative, superlative and equative degree
- Attribution of APs
- Predication of APs
- The partitive adjective construction
- Adverbial use of APs
- Participles and infinitives as adjectives
- Verbs and verb phrases
- Characterisation and classification
- Argument structure
- Verb frame alternations
- Complements of non-main verbs
- Verb clusters
- Complement clauses
- Adverbial modification
- Word order in the clause: Introduction
- Word order in the clause: position of the finite Verb
- Word order in the clause: Clause-initial position
- Word order in the clause: Extraposition and right-dislocation in the postverbal field
- Word order in the middle field
- Emphatic constructions
- Adpositions and adposition phrases
The mental lexicon must encode in some way the form and meaning of the lexical items as well as certain syntactic information. We have seen, however, that there seem to be specific systematic relations between the relevant semantic and syntactic information; agents, for example, are normally external arguments and therefore typically appear as the subject of an active clause. Given that we do not want to include predictable information like this in the lexicon, it is an important question as to whether more of such correlations can be established. This section therefore aims at linking the syntactic classification in Section 1.2.2, sub II, to the aspectual event classifications based on participant roles in Section 1.2.3, sub II.
An advantage of aspectual event classifications based on participant roles, such as the one in (77), repeated here as (94), is that they are explicitly linked to syntactic verb classifications of the kind sketched in Section 1.2.2. Van Voorst (1988), for instance, claims that originators and delimiters typically correspond to, respectively, external agent/cause and internal theme arguments. Such linking is a priori desirable because form and meaning can normally be considered two sides of the same coin.
Activity: | |
Achievement: | |
Accomplishment: |
The requirement that the syntactic and semantic classifications should be linkable may also prevent these classifications from diverging too much, and can thus be used to evaluate individual proposals. The examples in (95), for instance, suggest that the traditional distinction between monadic (intransitive) and dyadic (transitive) verbs is incompatible with the aspectual event classification in (94) because it does not succeed in providing a natural account for the fact that while lachen'to laugh' denotes an activity, overlijden'to die' denotes an achievement.
a. | Jan lacht. | activity | |
Jan laughs | |||
'Jan is laughing.' |
b. | Jan verongelukte. | achievement | |
Jan was.killed.in.an.accident |
The alternative syntactic classification developed in Section 1.2.2, sub II, fares better in this respect, as it distinguishes two types of monadic verbs: the contrast between the two examples in (95) follows from Van Voorst's (1988) claim that external arguments of intransitive verbs like lachen'to laugh' typically function as originators, while internal theme arguments of unaccusative verbs like overlijden'to die' typically function as delimiters. This clearly favors the alternative classification in Table 3 of Section 1.2.2, sub III, which is repeated here as Table 6, over the traditional one.
name | external argument | internal argument(s) | |
no internal argument | intransitive | nominative (agent) | — |
impersonal | — | — | |
one internal argument | transitive | nominative (agent) | accusative (theme) |
unaccusative | — | nominative (theme) | |
two internal arguments | ditransitive | nominative (agent) | dative (goal) accusative (theme) |
nom-dat verb | — | dative (experiencer) nominative (theme) | |
undative verb | — | nominative (goal) accusative (theme) |
Dyadic verbs can likewise denote states, activities, achievements or accomplishments. The traditional classification with an undifferentiated set of dyadic verbs provides no means to describe these differences, whereas according to the alternative classification in Table 6 at least the verb hebben differs from all other verbs in (96) in that it is an undative verb and thus does not have an agentive argument. If it turns out that undative verbs typically denote states, this can again be seen as an argument in favor of the alternative classification.
a. | De jongen | heeft | een kat. | state | |
the boy | has | a cat |
b. | De jongen | droeg | een kat. | activity | |
the boy | carried | a cat |
c. | De jongen | ontdekte | een kat. | achievement | |
the boy | descried | a cat |
d. | De jongen | verborg | een kat. | accomplishment | |
the boy | hid | a cat |
Of course, it may be the case that the semantic and the syntactic classification do not reflect each other in all respects. The semantic distinctions between the examples in (96b-d), for instance, are reflected neither by the traditional nor by the alternative syntactic classification and may thus be due to additional restrictions imposed by the verb on their arguments in the way indicated in table (97): although originators and delimiters may typically correspond to, respectively, external agentive and internal theme arguments, it may be the case that external and internal arguments do not necessarily function as originators and delimiters; see also the linking rules in Levin and Rappaport Hovav (1995: Section 4.1).
external argument = originator | internal argument = delimiter | |
dragen'to carry' | + | — |
ontdekken'to discover' | — | + |
verbergen'to hide' | + | + |
The discussion of the examples in (96) therefore suggests that the distinction between (96a) and (96b-d) is syntactic, whereas the distinctions between the examples in (96b-d) may be of a purely semantic nature. This may also account for the sharp contrast between the attributive (a)-examples in (98), on the one hand, and the remaining ones, on the other.
a. | *? | de | een kat | hebbende | jongen |
the | a cat | having | boy |
a'. | * | de | gehadde | kat |
the | had | cat |
b. | de | een kat | dragende | jongen | |
the | a cat | carrying | boy |
b'. | de | gedragen | kat | |
the | carried | cat |
c. | de | een kat | ontdekkende | jongen | |
the | a cat | descrying | boy |
c'. | de | ontdekte kat | |
the | descried cat |
d. | de | een kat | verbergende | jongen | |
the | a cat | hiding | boy |
d'. | de | verborgen | kat | |
the | hidden | cat |
Subsection I has shown that the traditional syntactic classification based on the adicity of the verb cannot straightforwardly be linked to the aspectual event classifications of the type in (94) and that the alternative proposal in Table 6 based on both the number of arguments and the distinction between internal and external arguments fares much better in this respect. This subsection will show that, on the assumption that (depending on the semantic properties of the verb) external arguments are optionally interpreted as originators and internal theme arguments are optionally interpreted as delimiters, it is indeed possible to relate the syntactic classification in Table 6 to the aspectual event classification in (94). Given that goal, but not experiencer, arguments may function as the "new location" of a theme, we will also briefly consider whether the second internal argument can be interpreted as a terminus (a point of termination) in the sense of Tenny (1994); see the discussion of example (82) in Section 1.2.3, sub II, for this notion.
In order to maximize contrasts and to highlight a number of potential problems, we will group the verbs on the basis of their adicity. We will not discuss impersonal verbs like regenen'to rain' and vriezen'to freeze', because we have little to say about them in this context. Note further that the discussion below is occasionally somewhat tentative in nature and presents a research program in progress rather than a set of well established facts/insights; the discussion below will therefore point out that there are still a number of questions that require further investigation.
At first sight the case of monadic verbs seems rather simple: as predicted, verbs with the behavior of prototypical intransitive verbs like lachen'to laugh' denote activities, whereas verbs with the behavior of prototypical unaccusative verbs like arriveren'to arrive' denote achievements.
a. | Jan heeft/*is | gelachen. | |
Jan has/is | laughed |
a'. | Jan is/*heeft | gearriveerd. | |
Jan is/has | arrived |
b. | * | de | gelachen | jongen |
the | laughed | boy |
b'. | de | gearriveerde | jongen | |
the | arrived | boy |
c. | Er | werd | gelachen. | |
there | was | laughed |
c'. | * | Er | werd | gearriveerd. |
here | was | arrived |
There are, however, a number of monadic verbs exhibiting mixed behavior and seem to refer to states: this is illustrated for the verbs drijven'to float' and bloeden'to bleed' in (100). The selection of the auxiliary hebben as well as the impossibility of using the past participle attributively suggest that we are dealing with intransitive verbs, whereas the impossibility of impersonal passivization suggests that we are dealing with unaccusative verbs.
a. | Jan heeft/*is | gebloed. | |
Jan has/is | bled |
a'. | Jan heeft/*is | op het water | gedreven. | |
Jan has/is | on the water | floated |
b. | * | de | gebloede | jongen |
the | bled | boy |
b'. | * | de | gedreven | jongen |
the | floated | boy |
c. | * | Er | werd | gebloed. |
there | was | bled |
c'. | * | Er | werd | gedreven. |
there | was | floated |
That we are not dealing with an activity is clear from the fact that the subject can be inanimate, whereas the subjects of verbs denoting an activity normally take animate subjects or a small set of inanimate subjects like computer that can be construed as performing the action. That we are not dealing with an achievement is clear from the fact that there is no logically implied endpoint.
a. | Jan/de wond | bloedt | heftig. | |
Jan/the wound | bleeds | fiercely |
b. | Jan/de band | drijft | op het water. | |
Jan/the tire | floats | on the water |
Given that we have adopted as our working hypothesis that internal and external arguments only optionally function as, respectively, originators and delimiters, there is no a priori reason for assuming intransitive or unaccusative status for these verbs. If we assume that drijven and bloeden are unaccusative, we have to conclude that selection of the auxiliary zijn'to be' and attributive use of the past participle are sufficient but not necessary conditions for assuming unaccusativity; Subsection B2 will show that there is indeed reason for assuming that auxiliary selection and attributive use of the past participle not only depend on unaccusativity of the verb but are subject to additional aspectual conditions; see Mulder (1992) and Levin & Rappaport Hovav (1995) for similar conclusions.
Table 6 distinguishes three types of dyadic verbs: transitive, nom-dat and undative verbs. The following subsections will discuss these three groups.
The examples in (97b-d), repeated here as (102), have already illustrated that prototypical transitive verbs can denote activities, achievements and accomplishments. In fact, this was the original motivation for our claim that internal and external arguments only optionally assume the roles of originator and delimiter; see Table (97) in Subsection I.
a. | De jongen | droeg | een kat. | activity | |
the boy | carried | a cat |
b. | De jongen | ontdekte | een kat. | achievement | |
the boy | descried | a cat |
c. | De jongen | verborg | een kat. | accomplishment | |
the boy | hid | a cat |
Nom-dat verbs are characterized by the fact that the subject can follow the object, which appears as a dative noun phrase in German in the unmarked case. Given that this also holds for passivized ditransitive verbs, Den Besten (1985) concluded that the subjects of nom-dat verbs are internal theme arguments.
a. | dat | die meisjesnom | Peter/hemdat | direct | opvielen. | |
that | those girls | Peter/him | immediately | prt.-struck | ||
'that Peter/he noticed those girls immediately.' |
b. | dat | Peter/hemdat | die meisjesnom | direct | opvielen. | |
that | Peter/him | those girls | immediately | prt.-struck |
This analysis immediately accounts for the fact that examples such as (103) are interpreted as achievements: nom-dat verbs are like monadic unaccusative verbs in that they lack external arguments that could function as originators and that their internal arguments may function as delimiters. The Nom-dat verbs we have discussed so far furthermore exhibit all the typical properties of monadic unaccusative verbs: they select the auxiliary zijn, their past participles can be used attributively to modify a head noun that corresponds to the subject of the clause, and they resist passivization.
a. | dat | die meisjes | Peter/hem | direct | zijn/*hebben | opgevallen. | |
that | those girls | Peter/him | immediately | are/have | prt.-struck |
b. | de | hem | direct | opgevallen | meisjes | |
the | him | immediately | prt.-struck | girls |
c. | * | Er | werd | Peter/hem | direct | opgevallen. |
there | was | Peter/him | immediately | prt.-struck |
The claim that internal arguments only optionally function as delimiters predicts, however, that there are also nom-dat verbs that do not involve some implied endpoint and thus denote simple states. And, in fact, Den Besten (1985) does list a number of nom-dat verbs with this property. One example is the verb smaken'to taste' in (105).
a. | dat | de broodjes | Peter/hem | smaakten. | |
that | the buns | Peter/him | tasted | ||
'that Peter/he enjoyed his buns.' |
b. | dat | Peter/hem | de broodjes | smaakten. | |
that | Peter/him | the buns | tasted |
Although the relative order of the object and the subject in (105b) unambiguously shows that the subject de broodjes is an internal argument, it should be noted that verbs like smaken do not exhibit all of the properties that we find in (104). Like all unaccusative verbs, they do not allow impersonal passivization, but they select the auxiliary hebben instead of zijn, and their past participles cannot be used attributively to modify a head noun that corresponds to the subject of the clause.
a. | dat | Peter/hem | de broodjes | hebben/*zijn | gesmaakt. | |
that | Peter/him | the buns | have/are | tasted |
b. | de Peter/hem | gesmaakte | broodjes | |
the Peter/him | tasted | buns |
c. | * | Er | werd | Peter/hem | gesmaakt. |
there | was | Peter/him | tasted |
It is interesting to note that the pattern in (106) is like the pattern established for the stative verbs drijven'to float' and bloeden'to bleed' in (100). This supports the suggestion in Subsection A that the verbs drijven and bloeden are also unaccusative verbs and that their mixed behavior with respect to the unaccusativity tests should be accounted for by assuming that auxiliary selection and attributive use of past participles are subject to both syntactic and aspectual conditions.
Undative verbs do not have an external argument and we would therefore expect that there is no originator; undative verbs therefore denote either states or achievements depending on whether their internal theme argument functions as a delimiter or not. The examples in (107) show that this prediction is indeed borne out: depending on the verb in question, we are dealing with a state, an achievement, or a special type of state that we may call an anti-achievement.
a. | Jan heeft | het boek. | state | |
Jan has | the book |
b. | Jan krijgt | het boek. | achievement | |
Jan gets | the book |
c. | Jan houdt | het boek. | anti-achievement | |
Jan keeps | the book |
The achievement reading in (107b) may be due to the fact that the IO-subject Jan functions as a goal, which, in turn, triggers a delimiter interpretation of the internal theme argument; if so, this would support our suggestion in the introduction to this section that goals function as a terminus (point of termination) in the event.
This claim that goals function as a terminus may also account for the fact that the IO-subjects of cognition verbs like weten/kennen'to know' in (108a), which we will show in Section 2.1.4 to be part of a second set of undative verbs, must be interpreted as experiencers; the fact that these verbs normally denote states would then be incompatible with a goal/terminus interpretation of the dative phrase. The dyadic verb leren'to learn' in (108b) stands in an anti-causative relationship to the triadic accomplishment verb leren'to teach'; cf. Marie leert Jan de fijne kneepjes van het vak'Marie is teaching Jan the tricks of the trade'. The indirect object of the triadic and the subject of the dyadic verb both act as a goal, which introduces a point of termination in the event; this leads to the achievement reading of (108b).
a. | Jan kent | de fijne kneepjes van het vak. | state | |
Jan knows | the detailed tricks of the trade | |||
'Jan knows the tricks of the trade.' |
b. | Jan leert | de fijne kneepjes van het vak. | achievement | |
Jan learns | the detailed tricks of the trade |
Given the discussion of the examples in (108), it may be tempting to analyze other ditransitive verbs with experiencer subjects, like the perception verbs horen'to hear' and zien'to see', likewise as undative verbs; we will leave it to future research to investigate whether this might be on the right track.
Indirect objects of ditransitive verbs normally function as goals. If goal arguments introduce a terminus, we would expect that (definite) theme arguments would normally function as a delimiter. If so, we would also expect that, depending on whether the subject functions as an originator or not, ditransitive verbs would normally denote achievements or accomplishments. The examples in (109) show that this expectation is indeed borne out.
a. | Zijn succes | gaf | Peter een prettig gevoel. | achievement | |
his success | gave | Peter a nice feeling |
b. | Jan | stuurde | Peter | een mooi boek. | accomplishment | |
Jan | sent | Peter | a nice book |
It seems that the semantic classification in (94) and the syntactic classification in Table 6 can to a certain extent be linked. At present, we are able to show this only for the more prototypical cases; future research will have to show whether this is also possible with less prototypical cases. We expect such research to reveal certain potential problems for some of the claims adopted in the discussion above. For example, the unaccusative verbs overlijden'to die', arriveren'to arrive' and vertrekken'to leave' in (110) seem to differ in the extent to which the subject is able to control the event. Whereas the subject of overlijden has no control at all, the subject of vertrekken does have control over the event; the subject of arriveren seems to take some intermediate position in this respect.
a. | Jan overlijdt | morgen. | |
Jan dies | tomorrow |
b. | Jan vertrekt/arriveert | morgen. | |
Jan leaves/arrives | tomorrow |
The contrast might be accounted for either by assuming that the internal argument of an unaccusative verb is not only able to function as a delimiter but also as an originator, or by assuming that assignment of the property of control is not linguistic in nature but reflects our knowledge of the world. Given that the former would open many new classification options, we can only determine whether such an approach would be feasible by investigating whether the newly predicted verb classes do indeed exist.
- 1985The ergative hypothesis and free word order in Dutch and GermanToman, Jindřich (ed.)Studies in German GrammarDordrecht/CinnaminsonForis Publications23-65
- 1985The ergative hypothesis and free word order in Dutch and GermanToman, Jindřich (ed.)Studies in German GrammarDordrecht/CinnaminsonForis Publications23-65
- 1995Unaccusativity at the syntax-lexical semantics interfaceCambridge, MA/LondonMIT Press
- 1995Unaccusativity at the syntax-lexical semantics interfaceCambridge, MA/LondonMIT Press
- 1992The aspectual nature of syntactic complementationLeidenUniversity of LeidenThesis
- 1994Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interfaceDordrechtKluwer
- 1988Event structureAmsterdam/PhiladelphiaJohn Benjamins
- 1988Event structureAmsterdam/PhiladelphiaJohn Benjamins