This chapter provides an exhaustive discussion of dependent clauses that function as either arguments or complementives. Section 5.1 begins with finite argument clauses; we will look in detail at subject, direct object, and prepositional clauses.

Section 5.1 also contains a discussion of fragment clauses and wh-extraction. A typical example of fragment clauses is given in (2a), where the wh-word who is interpreted in the same way as the embedded clause in Ik weet niet [wie Jan gisteren heeft bezocht]I do not know who Jan has visited yesterday. Wh-extraction is illustrated in (2b) by wh-movement of the direct object of the complement clause; the trace ti indicates the normal position of the topicalized direct object.

Section 5.2 discusses three types of formally distinct infinitival clauses: Om + te-infinitivals, te-infinitivals, and bare infinitivals; some typical examples are given in (3). Infinitival clauses usually have an implicit (phonetically empty) subject pronoun, represented as PRO; an important question will be what are the constraints on the interpretation of PRO (control theory).

Section 5.2 also discusses subject raising and accusativus-cum-infinitivo (AcI) constructions like (4). We will give reasons to assume that the nominative subject in (4a) is extracted from the infinitival clause (i.e. is an argument of the verb kopento buy), and that the object pronoun in (4b) is the subject of the infinitival clause, but is assigned accusative case by the matrix verb horento hear.

Section 5.3 concludes with a discussion of complementives, i.e. clauses that function as secondary predicates; we examine a number of possible cases, including the copular constructions in (5), and conclude that clauses probably cannot be used as predicates.