• Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Saterfrisian
  • Afrikaans
Show all
15.5.Bibliographical notes
quickinfo

The division of the noun phrase into a lexical domain (NP) and a functional domain (DP) with intermediate functional projections was first introduced in Abney (1987) and has since become widely accepted in generative grammar; cf. Alexiadou et al. (2007: Part II) for the historical background of the proposal and an overview of the empirical evidence that has been presented in support of this claim. Alexiadou et al. also include a detailed discussion of nominal features.

Most traditional Dutch grammars contain sections on noun classification. See, for example, Den Hertog (1973:53ff.), Rijpma & Schuringa (1978:95ff.), Van den Toorn (1981:149ff.), Luif (1986:110-1), Van Bart et al. (1998:10-13), Haeseryn et al. (1997:140ff.), and Klooster (2001:64-5). Rijkhoff (2002) provides a more typological classification of nouns.

For comprehensive overviews of noun formation, see De Haas & Trommelen (1993), Haeseryn et al. (1997), Putten (1997), Booij (2002/2020a), and Van der Wouden (2020). For a discussion of the restrictions on input verbs of deverbal constructions of various kinds, see Knopper (1984), Hoeksema (1984a), and Baaijen (1989). For discussions of er-nominalizations, see Booij (1986a, 1986b), Hoekstra (1986), and De Caluwe (1992, 1995). Discussions of the behavior of inf and ing-nominalizations can be found in Ten Cate (1977), Van Haaften et al. (1985), Dik (1985a), Hoekstra & Wehrmann (1985), Van Haaften et al. (1985), Hoekstra (1986), and Don (2015), while Van den Hoek (1972) and Mackenzie (1985a) deal exclusively with ge-nominalizations.

A more detailed discussion of the inheritance of arguments can be found in Chapter 16. Publications on this topic include Hoekstra (1984a, 1986), Dik (1985a, 1985b), Mackenzie (1985a, 1986), Booij (1986a, 1988, 1992b, 2002), and Booij & Van Haaften (1987). We have treated deverbal nouns and their complements in terms of inheritance because this seems to be generally accepted in various linguistic frameworks, but we should note that the inheritance approach is not uncontroversial. Van der Putten (1997:159-60), for example, has pointed out that the process of er-nominalization is not fully productive: not every verb can be an input to the process, and the denotation of the resulting noun is not fully predictable. For this reason, he argues for a lexical approach that describes deverbal nouns like er-nouns in terms of prototypes and marginal members, based on such lexical/semantic features as the animacy of the denoted entity and its original thematic role. Several other competing proposals have been put forward in generative grammar. The best-known example is the debate between the lexicalist and transformational approaches (Chomsky 1970), which focuses on the question of whether all nominalizations involve derivation (and, if not, which types involve derivation and which types are included in the lexicon as alternative realizations of an abstract lexical item). Another example is the distinction between the categorial and the thematic view (Hoekstra 1986), which focuses on the question of exactly what material is inherited in the case of nominalization. For a more detailed discussion, the reader is referred to the review in Alexiadou et al. (2007: Part IV), which also covers a number of more recent contributions to the discussion.

We are grateful to Hoeksema (2013) for his review of the earlier version of our discussion of nouns and noun phrases in this and the following chapters; we have made good use of most (but not all) of his critical points in preparing the revised version presented here; some disagreements are addressed where appropriate.

References

  • Abney, Steven. 1987. The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. MIT: PhD thesis.
  • Alexiadou, Artemis, Liliane Haegeman & Melita Stavrou. 2007. Noun phrases in the generative perspective. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Audring, Jenny. 2020. Nominal inflection. Taalportaal, taalportaal.org/taalportaal/topic/pid/topic-14073089406232725.
  • Baayen, R. Harald. 1989. A corpus-based approach to morphological productivity. Statistical analysis and psycholinguistic interpretation Free University Amsterdam: PhD thesis.
  • Booij, Geert. 1986a. ER als vormer van subjectsnamen: de verhouding tussen morfologie en syntaxis. Glot 9: 1-14.
  • Booij, Geert. 1986b. Form and meaning in morphology: the case of Dutch 'agent nouns'. Linguistics 24: 503-518.
  • Booij, Geert. 1992b. Morphology, semantics and argument structure. In Thematic structure: its role in grammar, ed. Iggy Roca, 47-64. Berlin/New York: Foris Publications.
  • Booij, Geert. 1996. Verbindingsklanken in samenstellingen en de nieuwe spellingregeling. Nederlandse Taalkunde 1: 126-134.
  • Booij, Geert. 2002. The morphology of Dutch. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Booij, Geert. 2020a. Word formation. In Taalportaal (accessed March 3, 2021): www.taalportaal.org/taalportaal/topic/pid/topic-14029029700962378.
  • Booij, Geert & Ton van Haaften. 1987. De externe syntaxis van afgeleide woorden. Spektator 16: 421-436.
  • Booij, Geert & Ton van Haaften. 1988. On the external syntax of derived words: evidence from Dutch. Yearbook of Morphology 1: 29-44.
  • Chomsky, Noam. 1970. Remarks on nominalization. In Readings in English Transformational Grammar, eds. R.A. Jacobs and P.S. Rosenbaum, 184-221. Waltham, MA: Ginn.
  • Cornips, Leonie & Gunther De Vogelaer. 2009. Variatie en verandering in het Nederlandse genus: een multidisciplinair perspectief. In Perspectieven op het genus in het Nederlands (Taal en Tongval, themanummer 22), eds. Leonie Cornips and Gunther De Vogelaer, 1-12.
  • De Caluwe, Johan. 1992. Deverbaal -er als polyseem suffix. Spektator 21: 137-148.
  • De Caluwe, Johan. 1995. Categoriale polysemie en familiegelijkenis: deverbaal -er revisited. Tabu 25: 3-13.
  • De Haan, Ger. 1979. Onafhankelijke PP-komplementen van nomina. Spektator 8: 330-339.
  • De Haas, Wim & Mieke Trommelen. 1993. Morfologisch handboek van het Nederlands: een overzicht van de woordvorming. 's-Gravenhage: SDU Uitgeverij.
  • Den Hertog, C.H. 1973. Nederlandse spraakkunst, tweede stuk: de leer van de samengestelde zin. Derde druk, Ingeleid en bewerkt door H.Hulshof. Amsterdam: Versluys.
  • Dik, Simon C. 1985a. Nederlandse nominalisaties in een Functionele Grammatica. Forum der Letteren 26: 81-107.
  • Dik, Simon C. 1985b. Valentie en valentie-operaties in Functionele Grammatica. In Valentie in Functionele Grammatica. Interdisciplinair Tijdschrift voor Taal- en Tekstwetenschap 5/2, ed. Simon C. Dik, 95-114.
  • Dik, Simon C. 1997. The theory of functional grammar. Part 1: the structure of the clause, 2nd revised edition: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Don, Jan. 2015. Vrouwelijke persoonsnamen in het Nederlands. Nederlandse Taalkunde/Dutch Linguistics 20: 315-337.
  • Fillmore, Charles. 1968. The case for case. In Universals in linguistic theory, eds. Emmon Bach and R.T. Harms, 1-88. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
  • Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Guéron, Jacqueline. 1980. On the syntax and semantics of PP extraposition. Linguistic Inquiry 11: 637-678.
  • Haeseryn, Walter et al. 1997. Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunst, 2nd, revised edition. Groningen: Nijhoff.
  • Hoeksema, Jack. 1984a. Categorial morphology. University of Groningen: PhD thesis.
  • Hoeksema, Jack. 2013. Book review: Syntax of Dutch. Noun and Noun Phrases, volumes 1 and 2. Lingua: 385-390.
  • Hoekstra, Teun. 1984a. Transitivity. Grammatical relations in government-binding theory. Dordrecht/Cinnaminson: Foris Publications.
  • Hoekstra, Teun. 1986. Deverbalization and inheritance. Linguistics 24: 549-584.
  • Hoekstra, Teun. 1986. Overerving bij nomina agentis. Glot 9: 42-56.
  • Hoekstra, Teun & Pim Wehrmann. 1985. De nominale infinitief. Glot 8: 257-275.
  • Kaan, Edith. 1992. A minimalist approach to extraposition. University of Groningen: MA thesis.
  • Keizer, Evelien. 1992b. Predicates as referring expressions. In Layered structure and reference in a functional perspective, eds. Michael Fortescue et al. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
  • Kester, Ellen-Petra. 1996. The nature of adjectival inflection. Utrecht University: PhD thesis.
  • Klooster, Wim. 2001. Grammatica van het hedendaags Nederlands. Een volledig overzicht. Den Haag: SDU Uitgeverij.
  • Knopper, Rob. 1984. On the morphology of ergative verbs and the polyfunctionality principle. In Linguistics in the Netherlands 1984, eds. Hans Bennis and W.U.S. Van Lessen Kloeke, 119-127. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
  • Kruisinga, E. 1949. A grammar of modern Dutch. London: Allen Unwin.
  • Luif, Jan. 1986. In verband met de zin. Leiden: Nijhoff.
  • Mackenzie, Lachlan. 1985a. Genominaliseer. In Valentie in Functionele Grammatica. Interdisciplinair Tijdschrift voor Taal- en Tekstwetenschap 5/2, 177-198.
  • Mackenzie, Lachlan. 1986. Aspects of nominalization in English and Dutch. Working Papers in Functional Grammar 15.
  • Philippa, Marlies et al. 2018. Etymologisch woordenboek van het Nederlands (accessed Augus 30, 2023): www.etymologie.nl.
  • Rijkhoff, J. 2002. The noun phrase. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Rijpma, E. & F.G. Schuringa. 1978. Nederlandse spraakkunst. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.
  • Schultink, H. 1978. The prefix ge- in Dutch and German past participles. In Linguistic and literary studies in honor of Archibald H. Hill, eds. M.A. Jazayery et al. Den Haag: Mouton.
  • Smessaert, Hans. 2014. Telwoorden en kwantoren: syntaxis versus semantiek. Nederlandse Taalkunde/Dutch Linguistics 19: 77-86.
  • Tálasi, Zsófia. 2009. Het Nederlandse prefix ge- in historisch perspectief. Ge-+werkwoordstam afleidingen in grammatica's, woordenboeken en teksten. Leiden University: PhD thesis.
  • Ten Cate, A.P. 1977. -En of -ing: een kwestie van aspecten? Spektator 6: 395-401.
  • Van Bart, Peter, Johan Kerstens & Arie Sturm. 1998. Grammatica van het Nederlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
  • Van den Hoek, Theo. 1972. Ge-afleidingen en Chomsky's lexicalistische hypothese. Spektator 2: 405-420.
  • Van den Toorn, Maarten C. 1981. Nederlandse grammatica, 7. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff: 7th revised edition.
  • Van der Putten, Frans. 1997. Mind and matter in morphology. Syntactic and lexical deverbal morphology in Dutch. Leiden University: PhD thesis.
  • Van der Wouden, Ton. 2020. Nouns. In Taalportaal (accessed June 19, 2023): taalportaal.org/taalportaal/topic/pid/topic-14248791857824119.
  • Van Haaften, Ton et al. 1985. Nominalisaties in het Nederlands. Glot 8: 67-104.
  • Van Santen, Ariane. 1992. Semantische factoren bij de vorming van denominale persoonsnamen op -er. Spektator 21: 189-201.
  • Vossen, Piek. 1995. Grammatical and conceptual individuation in the lexicon. Amsterdam: IFOTT.
  • readmore
    References:
      report errorprintcite