Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

7.1.2.Conversion: Non-verbal uses of participles and (te-)infinitives

quickinfo

For the description of verb clusters it is necessary to take into account that certain non-finite verb forms may undergo conversion: past/passive participles and te-infinitives, for example, may be used as adjectives, and bare infinitives may be used as heads of nominal phrases. If such cases are wrongly analyzed as verbs, we will get a severely distorted picture of the behavior of verb clusters. The examples in (15), for instance, show that whereas verbal past participles can normally occupy any position in the clause-final verb cluster they belong to, their adjectival counterparts functioning as complementives must precede the verb cluster. By not including adjectival participles like geïrriteerd in (15b), we eliminate the need for introducing complicated exception clauses in our generalization concerning word order in verb clusters.

a.	dat	Jan het boek	morgen	<gelezen>	zal <gelezen>	hebben <gelezen>.
	that	Jan the book	tomorrow	read	will	have
	'that Jan will have read the book tomorrow.'

b.	dat	Jan hierover	<geïrriteerd>	zal <*geïrriteerd>	raken <*geïrriteerd>.
	that	Jan here-about	annoyed	will	get
	'that Jan will become annoyed about this.'

The examples in (16) show that something similar holds for te-infinitives; while verbal te-infinitives normally follow their governing verb, most speakers require that te-infinitives functioning as complementives precede the clause-final verb cluster; cf. Section A6.5, sub IV. By not including adjectival te-infinitives like te lezen in (16b), we again eliminate the need to introduce complicated exception clauses in our generalization concerning word order in verb clusters.

a.	dat	Jan dat boek	<*te lezen>	probeert <te lezen>.
	that	Jan that book	to read	tries
	'that Jan is trying to read that book.'

b.	dat	dit boek	gemakkelijk	<te lezen>	is <%te lezen>
	that	this book	easy	to read	is
	'that this book is easy to read.'

The examples in (17) show that in the case of bare infinitives we have to take into account that they can be nominalized: whereas verbal bare infinitives normally follow the other verbs in the verb cluster, bare-inf nominalizations must precede the verb cluster. By not including nominalized bare infinitives like the first occurrence of zwemmen in (17b), we can simply say that bare infinitives must appear to the right of their governing verb in clusters containing three verbs.

a.	dat	ik	Jan <*zwemmenV>	wil	zien <zwemmenV>
	that	I	Jan	want	see
	'that I want to see Jan swim.'

b.	dat	Jan	<zwemmenN>	wil	leren <zwemmenV>
	that	Jan	swim	wants	learn
	'that Jan wants to learn swimming/to swim.'

In short, if we do not sufficiently take the possibility of conversion into account, we will not be able to express the proper word order generalizations. For this reason the following subsections will discuss a number of cases that must be excluded from our discussion of verb clusters and formulate a number of preliminary word order generalizations that will be the point of departure for our discussion of word order in verb clusters in Section 7.3. The discussion will be relatively brief given that more detailed discussions can be found in Sections A9 and N1.3.1.2.

I. Past/passive participles
II. Te-infinitives
III. Bare infinitives
IV. Aan het +infinitive
V. Summary

[+] I. Past/passive participles

The examples in (18) show that past and passive participles can normally appear either before or after the perfect/passive auxiliary.

a.	dat	Jan	het boek	nog niet	<gebracht>	heeft <gebracht>.	past
	that	Jan	the book	not yet	brought	has
	'that Jan hasnʼt brought the book yet.'

b.	dat	het boek	morgen	<gebracht>	wordt <gebracht>.	passive
	that	the book	tomorrow	brought	is
	'that the book will be brought tomorrow.'

A complicating factor is that past/passive participles sometimes exhibit adjectival behavior as is clear from the fact that they may be used in prenominal attributive position, which is normally reserved for adjectives; this is shown for the participle getrouwd'married' in the primeless examples in (19). That the participle is adjectival in nature in these examples is also clear from the fact that it exhibits adjectival inflection: in indefinite singular noun phrases headed by a neuter noun, it is inflected by the null affix -Ø, whereas it is inflected by -e in all other cases; see Section A1.2. The examples in (19) illustrate this for the neuter noun stel'couple' only; we added examples with the adjective aardig'nice' for comparison.

a.		een	getrouwd-Ø	stel
		a	married	couple

a'.		een	aardig-Ø	stel
		a	nice	couple

b.		het	getrouwd-e	stel
		the	married	couple

b'.		het	aardig-e	stel
		the	nice	couple

c.		(de)	getrouwd-e	stellen
		the	married	couples

c'.		(de)	aardig-e	stellen
		the	nice	couples

The adjectival use of past/present participle is easy to detect in examples such as (19), in which it is used as a prenominal attributive modifier, but it is more difficult in other cases. Consider the examples in (20). Example (20a) has two interpretations, which can be brought to the fore by means of adverbial modification. Example (20b) shows that (20a) can have an activity reading, which can be enhanced by using a temporal adverbial phrase like gisteren'yesterday' that refers to a relatively short time interval, and example (20c) shows that it also has a property reading which can be brought to the fore by means of adverbial phrases like nog steeds'still'.

a.		dat	het stel	getrouwd	is.
		that	the couple	married	is

b.	dat	het stel	gisteren	getrouwd	is.	activity
	that	the couple	yesterday	married	is
	'that the couple married yesterday.'

c.	dat	het stel	nog	steeds	getrouwd	is.	property
	that	the couple	yet	still	married	is
	'that the couple is still married.'

Section A9 accounted for these two readings of (20a) by assuming that this example is structurally ambiguous: on the activity reading we are dealing with a perfect-tense construction with the verbal complexis getrouwd (that is, with a verbal participle), whereas on the property reading we are dealing with a copular construction with a complementive (that is, an adjectival participle). That this distinction is in the right direction is clear from example (21): since the prefix on- can only occur with adjectives, we correctly predict it to be blocked by the presence of an adverbial phrase like gisteren'yesterday'.

dat	het stel	nog steeds/*gisteren	ongetrouwd	is.
that	the couple	yet still/yesterday	unmarried	is
'that the couple is still unmarried.'

Furthermore, we correctly predict that the participle has the distribution of an adjectival complementive if an adverbial phrase like nog steeds'still' is present: contrary to the past participle in (20b), the adjectival participle must occur left-adjacent to the verbs in clause-final position.

a.		dat	het stel	gisteren	<getrouwd>	is <getrouwd>.	activity
		that	the couple	yesterday	married	is

b.		dat	het stel	nog	steeds	<getrouwd>	is <??getrouwd>.	property
		that	the couple	yet	still	married	is

The claim that we are dealing with an adjectival participle in examples such as (22b) is important given that this enables us to put forward the word order generalization in (23) that past/passive participles may either precede of follow their auxiliary.

Generalization I: Past/passive participles either precede or follow their governing auxiliary.

Observe that the case discussed in this subjection is just one instantiation of a larger set of constructions that may involve adjectival participles; we refer the reader to Section 6.2.3 and Section 2.5.1.3, sub IID, for a discussion of more cases.

[+] II. Te-infinitives

Te-infinitives normally follow their governing verb. This is illustrated in the examples in (24) for the modal verb lijken and the semi-aspectual verb zitten.

a.	dat	Jan dat boek	<*te lezen >	blijkt <te lezen>.
	that	Jan that book	to read	turns.out
	'that Jan turns out to be reading that book.'

b.	dat	Jan dat boek	<*te lezen>	zit <te lezen>.
	that	Jan that book	to read	sits
	'that Jan is reading that book.'

A complicating factor is that te-infinitives are like past/passive participles in that they sometimes exhibit adjectival behavior. Example (25a) clearly shows that they may be used in prenominal attributive position, which is normally reserved for adjectives. Example (25b) shows that these so-called modal infinitives are also used as complementives: like run-of-the-mill adjectival complementives, they must precede the finite verb in clause-final position. For a detailed discussion of modal infinitives, we refer the reader to Chapter A9.

a.	de	gemakkelijk	te lezen	boeken
	the	easy	to read	books
	'the books that are easy to read'

b.	dat	deze boeken	gemakkelijk	<te lezen>	zijn <*te lezen>.
	that	these books	easy	to read	are
	'that these books are easy to read.'

The claim that we are dealing with adjectival te-infinitives in examples such as (25) is important given that this enables us to put such cases aside as irrelevant for the description of verb clusters and to put forward the word order generalization in (26) that te-infinitives must follow their governing verb.

Generalization II: Te-infinitives follow their governing verb.

The case of modal infinitives seems to be just one instantiation of a larger set of te-infinitives that can be used as complementives; another typical example is given in (27), which is again characterized by the fact that the te-infinitive exhibits the prototypical behavior of complementives that they occur left-adjacent to the verbs in clause-final position; we refer the reader to Section 6.2.3 for more examples of this sort and for more extensive discussion.

dat	de kat	te weinig	<te eten>	heeft	gekregen <*te eten>.
that	the cat	too little	to eat	has	gotten
'that the cat has had too little to eat.'

[+] III. Bare infinitives

The distribution of bare infinitives seems to be slightly more complex than that of participles and te-infinitives. Although they normally follow their governing verb, they are sometimes also able to precede it if the verb cluster consists of no more than two verbs. So, while (28a) has the stylistically marked option of placing the verb zwemmen'to swim' in front of its governing verb gaan'to go', this word order is unacceptable in examples such as (28b) with a more complex verb cluster.

a.	dat	Marie	<zwemmen>	gaat <zwemmen>.
	that	Marie	swim	goes
	'that Marie is going to swim.'

b.	dat	Marie	<*zwemmen>	zou <*zwemmen>	gaan <zwemmen>.
	that	Marie	swim	would	go
	'that Marie would be going to swim.'

A complicating factor is that bare infinitives may also be used as nominalizations, as is illustrated in (29); given that zwemmen functions as the subject of the clause, a nominalization analysis seems to be the only viable one; see Sections N1.3.1.2 and N2.2.3.2 for extensive discussion of this type of bare-inf nominalization.

		Zwemmen	is vermoeiend.
		swim	is tiring
		'Swimming is tiring.'

Of course, the possibility of nominalization does not create any problems in the case of aspectual non-main verbs like gaan'to go' in (28), as such verbs cannot take nominal complements. Things are different, however, with verbs like leren'to learn/teach', which can select a noun phrase as their complement. The examples in (30) show that zwemmen can be used with such verbs in the same positions as the noun phrase iets nieuws'something new'.

a.	dat	Marie iets nieuws/zwemmen	leert.
	that	Marie something new/swim	learns
	'that Marie is learning something new/swimming.'

b.	dat	Marie iets nieuws/zwemmen	zou	leren.
	that	Marie something new/swim	would	learn
	'that Marie would learn something new/swimming.'

Since (28b) has shown that bare infinitives must follow their governing verbs in clusters of three verbs, the acceptability of (30b) with zwemmen would be very surprising if zwemmen were part of the verb cluster, but it falls into place quite naturally if we consider it a nominalization.
Example (31a) shows that zwemmen does not have to appear in front of the verb in clause-final position, but may also follow it. We indicated by means of subscripts that this goes hand in hand with a difference in categorial status of the bare infinitive: if it follows the verb leren, it is not a nominalization but a regular verb. This difference in categorial status can be made visible by means of the distribution of the IPP-effect in the corresponding perfect-tense examples: if the bare infinitive following leren is truly verbal, we would expect it to trigger the IPP-effect; if the bare infinitive preceding leren is nominal, we would expect it not to be compatible with the IPP-effect. The (b)-example in (31) show that these expectations are borne out.

a.	dat Marie	<zwemmenN>	leert	<zwemmenV>.
	that Marie	swimming	learns	swim
	'that Marie is learning swimming/to swim.'

b.	dat	Marie heeft	leren/*geleerd	zwemmenV.
	that	Marie has	learn/learned	swim
	'that Marie has learned to swim.'

b'.	dat	Marie zwemmenN	heeft	geleerd/*leren.
	that	Marie swimming	has	learned/learn
	'that Marie has learned swimming.'

We refer the reader to Section 5.2.3.1 for a more extensive discussion of the differences in syntactic behavior of verbal and nominal bare infinitives. Here we will simply repeat the tests that were proposed there to determine the categorial status of bare infinitives.

	infinitival clause	nominalization
is part of the verbal complex	+	—
precedes/follows the governing verb	normally follows	precedes
triggers IPP-effect	+	—
allows focus movement	—	+
may follow negation expressed by niet'not'	+	—
can be preceded by the article geen'no'	—	+

Now that we have shown that examples in which bare infinitives precede the verb(s) in clause-final position must be instances of nominalizations, we can now put forward the generalization in (33). The part between parentheses is added to allow the option that bare infinitives precede their governing verb in clusters of no more than two verbs; we will return to that issue in Section 7.3.

Generalization III: Bare infinitives follow their governing verb (in clusters consisting of three or more verbs).

[+] IV. Aan het +infinitive

The progressive aan het + Vinf + zijn construction is problematic in the sense that it is not clear what the precise syntactic status of the aan het + Vinf sequence is. Section 1.5.3, sub I, argues that there are reasons for assuming that it is a complementive PP headed by the preposition aan, but that there are also reasons for assuming that it is merely a non-finite form of the verb. Although we have left the issue undecided, we will not include the progressive construction in our discussion of verb clusters for the simple reason that the aan-phrase has the external distribution of a complementive: example (34b) shows that the sequence aan het wandelen must precede the verb(s) in clause-final position, which is surprising in view of the fact that in general verbs may follow their governing verb. The assumption that the aan-phrase is a prepositional complementive also accounts for the fact illustrated in (34c) that the verb zijn appears as a past participle in the perfect tense; if the aan het + Vinf sequence were a non-finite verb form, we would wrongly expect the infinitival form wezen'to be', given that such complex perfect-tense constructions normally exhibit the IPP-effect. For completeness' sake, example (34c') shows that the aan het + Vinf sequence cannot follow the other clause-final verbs in the perfect tense either.

a.	Jan is aan het wandelen	op de hei.
	Jan is aan het walk	on the moor
	'Jan is walking on the moor.'

b.	dat	Jan <aan het wandelen>	is <*aan het wandelen>	op de hei.
	that	Jan aan het walk	is	on the moor
	'that Jan is walking on the moor.'

c.	dat	Jan aan het wandelen	is geweest/*wezen	op de hei.
	that	Jan aan het walk	is been/be	on the moor
	'that Jan has been walking on the moor.'

c'.	*	dat	Jan is wezen/geweest	aan het wandelen	op de hei.
		that	Jan is be/been	aan het walk	on the moor

[+] V. Summary

This section has shown that past/passive participles and (te-)infinitives can be non-verbal in nature: participles and te-infinitives sometimes exhibit adjectival behavior and bare infinitives can be nominalized. It implies that we must take care before concluding that such elements are part of a verb cluster: they may also function as a complementive or simply head a nominal direct object. This provides solid ground for excluding such cases from the discussion of verb clusters.

References:

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Hans Broekhuis, Norbert Corver

Category: Dutch Syntax

Keywords: AdjectiveConversionInfinitivePast Participle

Version: 1.0, January 2016

Version history:

version	editor(s)	date	remarks
1.0	Hans Broekhuis, Norbert Corver	January 2016

report errorprintcite

Jump to:

introduction
references
related articles