- Dutch
- Frisian
- Saterfrisian
- Afrikaans
-
- 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
- Coordination and Ellipsis
- Nouns and noun phrases (JANUARI 2025)
- 15 Characterization and classification
- 16 Projection of noun phrases I: Complementation
- 16.0. Introduction
- 16.1. General observations
- 16.2. Prepositional and nominal complements
- 16.3. Clausal complements
- 16.4. Bibliographical notes
- 17 Projection of noun phrases II: Modification
- 17.0. Introduction
- 17.1. Restrictive and non-restrictive modifiers
- 17.2. Premodification
- 17.3. Postmodification
- 17.3.1. Adpositional phrases
- 17.3.2. Relative clauses
- 17.3.3. Infinitival clauses
- 17.3.4. A special case: clauses referring to a proposition
- 17.3.5. Adjectival phrases
- 17.3.6. Adverbial postmodification
- 17.4. Bibliographical notes
- 18 Projection of noun phrases III: Binominal constructions
- 18.0. Introduction
- 18.1. Binominal constructions without a preposition
- 18.2. Binominal constructions with a preposition
- 18.3. Bibliographical notes
- 19 Determiners: Articles and pronouns
- 19.0. Introduction
- 19.1. Articles
- 19.2. Pronouns
- 19.3. Bibliographical notes
- 20 Numerals and quantifiers
- 20.0. Introduction
- 20.1. Numerals
- 20.2. Quantifiers
- 20.2.1. Introduction
- 20.2.2. Universal quantifiers: ieder/elk ‘every’ and alle ‘all’
- 20.2.3. Existential quantifiers: sommige ‘some’ and enkele ‘some’
- 20.2.4. Degree quantifiers: veel ‘many/much’ and weinig ‘few/little’
- 20.2.5. Modification of quantifiers
- 20.2.6. A note on the adverbial use of degree quantifiers
- 20.3. Quantitative er constructions
- 20.4. Partitive and pseudo-partitive constructions
- 20.5. Bibliographical notes
- 21 Predeterminers
- 21.0. Introduction
- 21.1. The universal quantifier al ‘all’ and its alternants
- 21.2. The predeterminer heel ‘all/whole’
- 21.3. A note on focus particles
- 21.4. Bibliographical notes
- 22 Syntactic uses of noun phrases
- 23 Referential dependencies (binding)
- Syntax
-
- General
This section discusses relative constructions with more than one relative clause. The relative clauses in such constructions can be stacked, nested, or coordinated. Some examples are given in (362). In example (362a), the two subclauses are stacked: as indicated by the indices, the first relative clause modifies the antecedent studentstudent, while the second relative clause modifies the sequence student die hiernaast woontstudent who lives next door. Such constructions differ from cases of nesting, illustrated in (362b), where the second relative clause modifies a noun phrase contained in the first relative clause. Both types of construction differ from cases of simple coordination of relative clauses, as in (362c), in which each relative clause modifies the same antecedent. As we will see in the following subsections, stacking of relative clauses is fully acceptable only with restrictive relative clauses (as in example (362a)); coordination and nesting are possible with both restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses.
| a. | De [[studenti | [diei hiernaast woont]]j | [diej Engels studeert]] | komt | uit Japan. | |
| the student | who next.door lives | who English studies | is | from Japan | ||
| 'The student who lives next door who studies English, is from Japan.' | ||||||
| b. | De studenti | [diei net een boekj kocht | [datj | over WO II gaat]] | is mijn vriend. | |
| the student | who just a book bought | which | about WW II goes | is my friend | ||
| 'The student who has just bought a book which is about WW II is my friend.' | ||||||
| c. | De mani | [diei hier net was] | en | [diei Russisch sprak] | is een bekend schrijver. | |
| the man | who here just was | and | who Russian spoke | is a well-known writer | ||
| 'The man who was just here and who spoke Russian is a well-known writer.' | ||||||
Subsection I will discuss stacking and coordination of relative clauses of the same type. Subsection II will then discuss nesting of restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses. Finally, Subsection III will consider constructions with relative clauses of different types, i.e. combinations of a restrictive and a non-restrictive relative clause.
This subsection discusses the difference between stacking and coordination of relative clauses, the differences between restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses in this regard, and the circumstances under which stacking of restrictive relative clauses is allowed.
The primeless examples in (363) show that stacking of restrictive relative clauses leads to a perfectly acceptable result. In (363a) the two restrictive relative clauses each fulfill a restrictive function in turn. The first relative clause restricts the set of possible referents of the antecedent noun studentstudent to those that were just present. The addition of the second restrictive clause has the implication that this restricted set has a cardinality greater than one, and that only after applying this second restriction can the referent intended by the speaker be uniquely identified. Similarly, in (363b) the set of entities denoted by the noun man is first restricted to those men who were just at the indicated place, and then narrowed down to the one who spoke Russian. Thus, by restricting the set of potential referents twice, the speaker enables the hearer to pick out the intended referent. Note that although both sentences are restrictive, there is a preferred order from the general to the specific. In (363b), for instance, the set of men who were present will normally be larger than the set of men who spoke Russian, and for this reason inverting the order of the relative clauses, as in (363b'), will lead to a less acceptable result: this inverted order is only possible if the relative clause die hier net was receives (contrastive) emphasis, by which the speaker can indicate that this information is to be construed as the most specific.
| a. | De [[studenti | [diei hier net was]]j | [diej Engels studeert]] | is mijn vriend. | |
| the student | that here just was | that English studies | is my friend | ||
| 'The student who was just here who studies English is my friend.' | |||||
| b. | De [[mani | [diei hier net was]]j | [diej Russisch sprak]] | is een bekend schrijver. | |
| the man | that here just was | that Russian spoke | is a well-known writer | ||
| 'The man who was just here who spoke Russian is a well-known writer.' | |||||
| b'. | ?? | De man die Russisch sprak die hier net was is een bekend schrijver. |
The examples in (364) show that the two relative clauses can also be coordinated. These examples differ from those in (363) in that the two relative clauses have the same antecedent. This also relates to a difference in meaning: whereas (363a) implies that more students were just present, such an implication is absent from the construction in (364a), where the two relative clauses merely restrict the set of students to the one student who was just here and who studies English. The same is true for sentence (364b), in which the set of men is restricted to the one who was just present and who spoke Russian. Since in coordinated constructions the two relative clauses restrict the same antecedent set, it is possible to reverse the order of the two relative clauses. This is shown in (364b').
| a. | De studenti | [[diei hier net was] | en | [diei Engels studeert]] | is mijn vriend. | |
| the student | who here just was | and | who English studies | is my friend | ||
| 'The student who was just here yesterday who studies English, is my friend.' | ||||||
| b. | De mani | [[diei hier net was] | en | [diei Russisch sprak]] | is een bekend schrijver. | |
| the man | who here just was | and | who Russian spoke | is a well-known writer | ||
| 'The man who was just here and who spoke Russian is a well-known writer.' | ||||||
| b'. | De mani [[diei Russisch sprak] en [diei hier net was]] is een bekend schrijver. |
From a syntactic point of view, both stacking and coordination are unlimited; in practice, however, sentences soon become too complex, both syntactically and semantically, and thus uninterpretable.
Stacking of non-restrictive relative clauses seems to be restricted, but not completely impossible. The examples in (365a&b), in which the antecedent is followed by two non-restrictive relative clauses, are highly marked and may even be considered unacceptable by some speakers. However, when two different relative pronouns are used, like die and wie in examples (365c) and dat and waar in (365d), the result seems more acceptable.
| a. | ?? | De studenti , | [diei hier net was], | [diei Engels studeert] , | is mijn vriend. |
| the student | who here just was | who English studies | is my friend | ||
| 'The student, who was just here (and) who studies English, is my friend.' | |||||
| b. | ?? | De mani , | [diei hier net was], | [diei Russisch sprak], | is een bekend schrijver. |
| the man | who here just was | who Russian spoke | is a well-known writer | ||
| 'The man, who was just here (and) who spoke Russian, is a well-known writer.' | |||||
| c. | ? | Jani, | [diei net vertrokken is], | [van wiei ik geen adres heb] , | is onvindbaar. |
| Jan | who just left is | of whom I no address have | is untraceable | ||
| 'Jan, who has just left (and) of whom I have no address, is untraceable.' | |||||
| d. | ? | In het noordeni, | [dati onbewoond is], | [waari weinig toeristen komen], | is de natuur | nog ongerept. | ||
| in the north | which uninhabited is | where few tourists come | is the nature | still unspoiled | ||||
| 'In the north, which is uninhabited and has few tourists, nature is still unspoiled.' | ||||||||
The markedness of the examples in (365) may be due to the fact that they can only be given a coordinated reading, with both relative clauses modifying the same antecedent. This means that these examples compete with the examples in (366), where this reading is made explicit by the conjunction enand.
| a. | De studenti , [[diei hier net was] en [diei Engels studeert]] , is mijn vriend. |
| b. | De mani , [[diei hier net was] en [diei Russisch sprak]] , is een bekend schrijver. |
| c. | Jani , [[diei net vertrokken is] en [van wiei ik geen adres heb]] , is onvindbaar. |
| d. | In het noordeni , [[dati onbewoond is] en [waari weinig toeristen komen]] , is de natuur nog ongerept. |
This subsection discusses the nesting of relative clauses, i.e. cases in which a relative clause modifies a constituent of another relative clause, so that the former is embedded in the latter. An example involving restrictive relative clauses can be found in (367): the first relative clause, introduced by the pronoun die, modifies the antecedent manman; the second relative clause, headed by the pronoun dat, modifies the noun boekbook in the first relative clause.
| Hij is de mani [RC | diei | een boekj [RC | datj | over de oorlog | gaat] | kocht]. | ||
| he is the man | who | a book | which | about the war | goes | bought | ||
| 'He is the man who has bought a book which is about the war.' | ||||||||
When the two relative pronouns are of the same form, ambiguity may arise between a stacked and a nested reading. Thus, in example (368a), the two relative clauses can be either stacked or nested. In the former case, the second relative clause is interpreted as modifying the phrase man die onlangs getrouwd is met een schrijfster; in the latter interpretation, the relative clause modifies the schrijfster. The two analyses are given in (368b&b').
| a. | de man | die | getrouwd | is met een schrijfster | die | ik | net | heb | ontmoet ... | |
| the man | who | married | is to a writer | who | I | just | have | met |
| b. | de [NP [NP mani diei getrouwd is met een schrijfster]j diej ik net heb ontmoet] ... |
| b'. | de [NP mani diei getrouwd is met een [NP schrijfsterj diej ik net heb ontmoet]] ... |
Although Subsection I has shown that stacking of non-restrictive relative clauses is not easily possible, nesting of non-restrictive relative clauses is unproblematic: each new relative clause can, in principle, take as its antecedent a noun phrase from the preceding relative clause. This is clear from (369b), since the relative pronoun waarwhere can only take the location in Utrecht as its antecedent. Because of this difference in acceptability between stacking and nesting, ambiguity does not arise easily. This is clear from the fact that the most likely interpretation of example (369b) is that in which the second relative clause modifies the proper noun Marie, not the proper noun Jan: to obtain the latter reading, the relative clauses must be coordinated.
| a. | Ik | ga | naar Peteri, [RC | diei in Utrechtj woont, [RC | waarj hij een baan heeft]]. | |
| I | go | to Peter | who in Utrecht lives | where he a job has | ||
| 'I am going to Peter, who lives in Utrecht, where he has a job.' | ||||||
| b. | Jan, | die | getrouwd | is met Marie, | die | uit Duitsland | komt, | gaat in Berlijn werken. | ||
| Jan | who | married | is with Marie | who | from Germany | comes | goes in Berlin work | |||
| 'Jan, who is married to Marie, who is from Germany, is going to work in Berlin.' | ||||||||||
Like stacking and coordination, nesting of relative clauses is syntactically unlimited; in practice, however, sentences soon become too complex, both syntactically and semantically, and thus uninterpretable.
Restrictive relative clauses always precede non-restrictive ones: in (370a), for example, the first relative clause restricts the set of men denoted by its antecedent man, while the second relative clause provides additional information about the resulting referent set of the noun phrase man die de vergadering leiddeman who chaired the meeting. Example (370b) shows that the restrictive clause cannot follow the non-restrictive one; at best, this example can be interpreted (marginally) with a non-restrictive reading of the second clause.
| a. | De man [RC | die de vergadering | leidde], [RC | die | een vriend van mij | is], ... | |
| the man | who the meeting | led | who | a friend of me | is | ||
| 'The man who chaired the meeting, who is a good friend of mine, ...' | |||||||
| b. | # | De man, die een goede vriend van mij is, die de vergadering leidde ... |
This word order restriction can be accounted for by the structure of the noun phrase proposed in 17.3.2.1: the restrictive relative clause (RRC) must be part of the NP-domain, since it affects the denotation of the NP, whereas the non-restrictive relative clause (NRC) does not have this effect and must therefore be outside this domain (but within the DP-domain; cf. Section 17.1.2, sub II). This leads to the structure in (371), from which the word order restriction follows immediately.
| [DP D [NP [... N ...]i [RRC RELi ... ti ... ]]j , [NRC RELj ... tj ... ]] , ... |
