The examples in (118) show that the determiner of det-inf nominalizations can be realized by the definite article, a demonstrative, or a possessive pronoun; a genitive form of a proper noun is also possible. These examples also show that det-inf nouns have the feature [+neuter]: they take the definite article het and the neuter demonstrative determiners datthat and ditthis; cf. Table 1 in Section 15.1.

Although det-inf nouns can be preceded by a definite determiner, they do not usually occur with an indefinite article, as shown in (119a). Still, there are some cases where the indefinite article eena can be used. These concern noun phrases like (119b&b'), which are headed by nouns derived from input verbs denoting sound emission, and in which the infinitive is usually pre or postmodified.

In addition, there are occasional inf-nouns that are obligatorily combined with the indefinite article. This particular use of the infinitive is either completely unproductive, as in the idiomatic constructions in (120a), or very restricted, as in the more or less fixed template het op een Vinfinitive zetten (120b), in which the position Vinfinitive can only be filled by a limited number of verbs.

Another difference with most nouns is that inf-nouns cannot be pluralized. They also differ from true nouns in that they cannot be quantified or questioned. These characteristics are illustrated in (121).

All inf-nouns denote abstract entities, more precisely the states of affairs denoted by the verb from which they derive, and exhibit a number of properties characteristic of verbs. First, (122a) shows that inf-nominalizations can be modified for manner, frequency or duration. Second, (122b) shows that in the det-inf pattern, the adverbial (= bare) form of the adjective can be used alongside the adjectival form, ending in -e. Note that it cannot be determined which of the two forms is used in the bare-inf pattern in (122a), since the -e ending only appears when the adjective is preceded by a definite determiner.

Unlike the case with the deverbal ing, ge and er-nouns, the theme argument of bare-inf nouns can appear as a noun phrase in prenominal position, as shown in (123a); realizing it as a postnominal van-PP, as in (123b), is also possible, but this is a less preferred option. Again, this is a property typical of verbs, not nouns.

The preferred pattern for realizing the theme in det-inf nominalizations like those in (124) is the opposite of that in bare-inf nominalizations: the theme can appear as a prenominal noun phrase, as in (124a), but the preference is to have it as a postnominal van-PP, as in (124b); cf. Section 16.2.3.2 for further discussion.

The acceptability of prenominal realization of the theme as a noun phrase reveals another and probably more distinctive property of verbs: the ability to assign case. This is not visible in the case of complete noun phrases, because these are not morphologically marked for case in Dutch, but it is possible in the case of pronouns: in examples such as (125) the prenominal pronoun must appear in its object form.

An inf-noun derived from an intransitive verb always has one argument (typically the agent). However, unlike in verbal constructions, the realization of the agent is not compulsory. If the agent is realized, it can appear either postnominally in the form of a van-PP, or in the form of a prenominal possessor (i.e. a genitive noun phrase or a possessive pronoun). This is illustrated in (126b&b') for the nominal infinitive derived from the intransitive verb lachento laugh. Note that although this is a case of nominalization, the deverbal noun is given the category INF-N, rather than N, in order to signal the special nature of the nominal infinitive with its combination of nominal and verbal features.

An inf-nominalization of a transitive verb inherits both arguments of the input verb. This is illustrated in (127a) for the inf-noun derived from the verb verzamelento collect. Example (127b) shows that, as in the case of the agent, the realization of the theme is optional.

When the agent is realized, the theme must usually be expressed by a prenominal noun phrase or a postnominal van-PP. This is illustrated in (128) for cases where the agent is expressed by a prenominal genitive noun phrase or possessive pronoun.

When the agent is expressed as a postnominal PP, its form depends on the realization of the theme: when the theme argument occurs prenominally as a noun phrase, the agent is expressed by a van-PP, as shown in (129b); when the theme is realized postnominally as a van-PP, the agent is usually realized by a door-PP, as shown in (129b). To indicate that (129b) is the usual way of expressing the intended proposition, the alternatives in (128)/(129a) are marked with a question mark.

Note, however, that in constructions with a postnominal theme PP introduced by van, it is sometimes possible to add an agent PP also introduced by van. Example (130a) shows that such constructions are perfectly acceptable only when the determiner takes the form of a demonstrative. The acceptability contrast between (130a) and (130b) further suggests that the theme must be indefinite in order to be followed by an agent in a van-PP. This restriction is probably perceptual in nature: in the case of a definite noun phrase, the second van-PP is likely to be construed as a postmodifier of the noun postzegels (i.e. with Peter as the possessor of the stamps); cf. Section 16.2.3.2, sub I, for more details.

Deverbal nouns derived from ditransitive verbs also inherit the argument structure of the input verb, but cases in which all three arguments are explicitly mentioned are not very common: the realization of the recipient (and the agent) is typically optional, whereas the theme argument is normally present. Like the theme argument, the recipient can appear as a noun phrase in prenominal position; cf. (131b). As in clauses, the recipient may also be realized as an aan-PP, in which case it can occur in either pre or postnominal position; cf. (131b'). If the theme argument is realized as van-PP, the recipient cannot appear in prenominal position: realization in postnominal position, as in (131b''), is the preferred option in such cases.

Inf-nouns can also be derived from unaccusative verbs. The theme argument is inherited from the input verb, but cannot occur as a prenominal noun phrase; the (b)-examples in (132) show that it can only be realized as a postnominal van-PP. Since bare-inf nouns prefer the realization of their arguments as prenominal noun phrases, they typically occur when the theme argument can be left implicit, as in the generic example in (132b).

Verbs such as jagento hunt, which select a PP-theme, can also be nominalized: the nominalization inherits the preposition selected by the input verb. In the bare-inf nominalization in (133b), the PP-theme is acceptable in both prenominal and postnominal position, while in the det-inf nominalization in (133b') there is a clear preference for placing the PP-theme in postnominal position.