• Dutch
  • Frisian
  • Saterfrisian
  • Afrikaans
Show all
22.1.4.Subject noun phrases in expletive er constructions
quickinfo

The expletive er construction is exemplified in (75): it involves the use of the expletive element erthere, which immediately precedes or follows the finite verb in main clauses, as in the (a)-examples, and immediately follows the complementizer in embedded clauses, as in the (b)-example.

75
The position of the expletive er there
a. Er stond waarschijnlijk een man voor de deur.
  there stood probably a man in.front.of the door
  'There was probably a man standing in front of the door.'
a'. Zojuist stond er waarschijnlijk een man voor de deur.
  just.now stood there probably a man in.front.of the door
b. dat er waarschijnlijk een man voor de deur stond.
  that there probably a man in.front.of the door stood

The distribution of the expletive er in the examples in (75) suggests that it occupies the canonical subject position; the subject (if present) occupies some lower position in the clause, to the right of the modal adverbs, presumably its base position within the VP. If so, the expletive construction is just another case (in addition to canonical A-scrambling discussed in Section 22.1.3) showing that indefinite noun phrases resist leftward movement within the middle field of the clause.

Expletive constructions are typically used to introduce a new entity into the domain of discourse, expressed by the subject. The subject is usually an indefinite or weak noun phrase, a restriction referred to as the definiteness effect. This effect is illustrated by the examples in (76), which differ from the examples in (75) in that the indefinite subject een man is replaced by its definite counterpart de man; A-scrambling of the definite noun phrase to a position preceding the modal adverb does not improve the result.

76
Definiteness effect
a. * Er stond waarschijnlijk de man voor de deur.
  there stood probably the man in.front.of the door
a'. * Zojuist stond er waarschijnlijk de man voor de deur.
  just.now stood there probably the man in.front.of the door
b. * dat er waarschijnlijk de man voor de deur stond.
  that there probably the man in.front.of the door stood

However, it is not correct to conclude that definite noun phrases are categorically excluded in the expletive construction. If the expletive construction contains a definite subject that is explicitly marked as introducing a new topic, the result is acceptable. This marking typically involves the adjective volgendefollowing, which is used to announce a list of new topics, as in (77a&b). Another option that seems to favor this construction is the adverb nogstill in (77b&b'). Note that examples such as (77b') are also possible with noun phrases introduced by the distal demonstrative pronoun, but not with the proximate one; cf. Section 19.2.3.2, sub IIB.

77
a. Er waren de volgende gastsprekers op de conferentie: ...
  there were the following invited.speakers at the conference
b. .. en dan zijn er nog de volgende problemen: ten eerste, ...
  .. and then are there still the following problems first
  '.. and then we still have the following problems: first ...'
b'. .. maar dan/nu is er ook nog het probleem van de afvalverwerking.
  .. but then/now is there also still the problem of the waste disposal
  '.. but then/now we still have the problem of waste disposal.'
readmore
[+]  I.  Specific/non-specific readings

An indefinite subject in an expletive construction can be either specific or non-specific. The most plausible reading of (78a) is the non-specific one, in which the speaker is unable to identify the person in question, while the most plausible reading of (78b) is the specific one, in which at least the speaker is able to identify the person in question in the discourse. These examples also show that the non-specific indefinite subject in (78a) must follow the adverb, i.e. it cannot be scrambled. The specific indefinite subject in (78b), on the other hand, can more easily be placed before the adverb, indicating that it can at least marginally be scrambled. In the case of a quantifier like iemandsomeone in (78c), scrambling is even the normal means of distinguishing between the two interpretations: if the quantifier follows the adverb, it is preferably interpreted as non-specific, whereas it is usually interpreted as specific if it precedes the adverb.

78
a. Er is <*een man> gisteren <een man> overreden.
  there is a man yesterday run.over
  'A man was run over yesterday.'
b. Er is <?een broer van mij> gisteren <een broer van mij> overreden.
  there is a brother of mine yesterday run.over
c. Er is <iemand> gisteren <iemand> overreden.
  there is someone yesterday run.over

The examples in (79) show that non-specific indefinite subjects are not commonly used without the expletive, whereas the specific ones can be used without the expletive. For completeness’ sake, note that we have put aside the fact that in some varieties of Dutch, examples such as (79a) are also acceptable without the expletive; we are only discussing the varieties that do not allow this.

79
a. Gisteren is *(er) een man overreden.
  yesterday is there a man run.over
b. Gisteren is (er) een broer van mij overreden.
  yesterday is there a brother of mine run.over
c. Gisteren is (er) iemand overreden.
  yesterday is there someone run.over

Note, however, that the expletive is sensitive not only to the type of its subject, but also to the presence or absence of other presuppositional material in the clause; cf. Bennis (1986). Consider the examples in (80). In (80a) the adverbial phrase voor mijn huis follows the indefinite subject and is interpreted as part of the focus of the clause: since there is no other presupposition, the expletive must be realized. However, if the adverbial phrase precedes the subject, it can (but does not have to) be interpreted as a presupposition; in this case, the expletive can be omitted.

80
a. Gisteren is *(er) een man voor mijn huis overreden.
  yesterday is there a man in.front.of my house run.over
  'Yesterday, a man was run over in front of my house.'
b. Gisteren is (er) voor mijn huis een man overreden.
  yesterday is there in.front.of my house a man run.over

Something similar can be seen in (81). Although, for some unknown reason, (81a) may be somewhat marked on a non-specific interpretation of the subject, it seems that this reading requires the presence of the expletive, which is consistent with the fact that the indefinite object een boek is preferably interpreted as non-specific. In (81b), which again may be somewhat marked on a non-specific interpretation of the subject, the expletive can easily be left out; this is related to the fact that the definite object het boek can (but need not) be interpreted as part of the presupposition of the clause. In (81c), which easily allows for a non-specific interpretation of the subject, the expletive cannot be used; this is due to the fact that the object pronoun het must be interpreted as part of the presupposition of the clause; cf. Broekhuis (2007/2008) for further discussion.

81
a. dat ?(er) een man een boek gekocht heeft.
  that there a man a book bought has
b. dat (?er) een man het boek gekocht heeft.
  that there a man the book bought has
c. dat (*er) een man het gekocht heeft.
  that there a man it bought has

The data in (79) to (81) shows that, in the absence of a presupposition, the expletive must be realized when the subject is non-specific. An exception must be made, however, for non-specific indefinite subjects modified by certain attributive adjectives or restrictive relative clauses. The primed examples in (82) show that they can be placed in the regular subject position, i.e. the position occupied by the expletive in the primeless examples; we have added the particle nog to these examples to make it visible that the subjects in the primeless and primed examples do indeed occupy different positions. Apparently, the attributive adjective/relative clause makes the noun phrase sufficiently specific to occupy the canonical subject position.

82
a. Daarna werd er nog een tachtig jaar oude man binnengelaten.
  after.that was there prt an eighty year old man prt.-admitted
a'. Daarna werd een tachtig jaar oude man nog binnengelaten.
  after.that was an eighty year old man prt prt.-admitted
b. Daarna werd er nog een man die te laat kwam binnengelaten.
  after.that was there prt a man who too late came prt.-admitted
b'. Daarna werd een man die te laat kwam nog binnengelaten.
  after.that was a man who too late came prt.-admitted

The examples in (83) illustrate that modified noun phrases show a clear preference for being placed in the regular subject position when the clause contains sentential negation. Note that these examples should not be confused with examples such as Er is een tachtig jaar oude man niet goed gewordenAn eighty-year-old man became unwell, where the negative adverb is construed with the adjectival predicate. In these cases we are probably dealing with constituent negation (niet goednot wellonwelill).

83
a. ? Er werd een tachtig jaar oude man niet binnengelaten.
  there was an eighty year old man not prt.-admitted
a'. Een tachtig jaar oude man werd niet binnengelaten.
  an eighty year old man was not prt.-admitted
b. ?? Er werd een man die te laat kwam niet binnengelaten.
  there was a man who too late came not prt.-admitted
b'. Een man die te laat kwam, werd niet binnengelaten.
  a man who too late came was not prt.-admitted

A second exception concerns examples in which the head of the indefinite subject is contrastively stressed. Thus, while an indefinite subject such as een man in (84a) does not normally occur without the expletive, it may occur without the expletive if the noun man is contrastively stressed, as in (84a'). If the noun phrase contains a numeral or quantifier, as in (84b), the expletive may also be omitted if the numeral/quantifier is contrastively stressed, although in this case the noun phrase is likely to receive a partitive reading; cf. De Hoop (1992).

84
a. *? Een man is gearresteerd.
  a man has.been arrested
a'. Een man is gearresteerd (niet een vrouw).
  a man has.been arrested not a woman
b. Er zijn twee studenten gearresteerd.
  there have.been two students arrested
  'Two students have been arrested.'
b'. Twee studenten zijn gearresteerd (niet drie).
  two students have.been arrested not three
  'Two (of the) students have been arrested.'

Finally, it should be noted that there are regional differences in the licensing of er in expletive constructions with an adjunct in sentence-initial position, like those in (79), (80) and (82); cf. Grondelaers et al. (2008), briefly summarized in Grondelaers et al. (2020:75-6), for some differences between Dutch and Belgian speakers.

[+]  II.  Partitive/non-partitive readings

That non-specific indefinite subjects usually show a preference for being introduced by an expletive is also clear from the fact that indefinite subjects induce special semantics when they occur in the regular subject position. Consider the two (a)-examples in (85). Example (85a), in which the determiner is normally pronounced as [ən], simply asserts that some student has been arrested. When the indefinite subject is placed in the regular subject position, the indefinite article is preferably stressed (i.e. pronounced as [e:n]), so that we cannot directly distinguish whether we are dealing with the article or the numeral éénone. The preferred reading of the primed example is a partitive one: it is claimed that a certain student from a contextually determined set of students has been arrested — the interpretation of the indefinite subject comes rather close to één van de studentenone of the students; cf. Section 20.4, sub I. The (b)-examples in (85) show that the same phenomenon can be found in cases that unambiguously involve a numeral or a quantifier.

85
a. Er is gisteren een student gearresteerd.
  there is yesterday a student arrested
  'A student was arrested yesterday.'
a'. Eén student is gisteren gearresteerd.
  one student is yesterday arrested
b. Er zijn gisteren twee/enkele studenten gearresteerd.
  there were yesterday two/some students arrested
  'Two/some students were arrested yesterday.'
b'. Twee/enkele studenten zijn gisteren gearresteerd.
  two/some students were yesterday arrested
  'Two/some of the students were arrested yesterday.'

As noted above, it is not immediately clear whether we are dealing with the indefinite article or the numeral éénone in (85a'). The fact illustrated in (86) that the indefinite plural subject studenten cannot occur in the regular subject position suggests the latter.

86
a. Er zijn gisteren [NP studenten] gearresteerd.
  there are yesterday students arrested
  'Students were arrested yesterday.'
b. *? [NP ∅ Studenten] zijn gisteren gearresteerd.

This supports our earlier conclusion in Subsection I that unmodified non-specific indefinite noun phrases do not normally occur in the regular subject position, but remain in their VP-internal base position.

[+]  III.  Generic/non-generic readings

Another difference between the expletive construction and the construction with the indefinite subject in the regular subject position is that in the former the noun phrase can never be interpreted generically. Consider the examples in (87): the indefinite subject in the expletive construction in (87a) cannot be interpreted generically, whereas example (87b) must be interpreted generically. The difference can be made clearer by putting the examples in the past tense: (87a') is perfectly acceptable and expresses that it used to be the case that a hippo was lying in the water; (87b'), on the other hand, is strange because it suggests that hippos in general have changed their habit of lying in the water. Note that (87b') becomes acceptable on a specific or partitive interpretation if we stress een: it used to be the case that a certain hippo or one of the hippos was lying in the water.

87
a. Er ligt meestal een nijlpaard in het water.
  there lies generally a hippopotamus in the water
a'. Er lag meestal een nijlpaard in het water.
  there lay generally a hippopotamus in the water
b. Een nijlpaard ligt meestal in het water.
  a hippopotamus lies generally in the water
b'. $ Een nijlpaard lag meestal in het water.
  a hippopotamus lay generally in the water

The examples in (88) show that the same pattern arises in the case of plural indefinite subjects; ∅ indicates the indefinite null article. Again, the primed (b)-example is not entirely acceptable for non-syntactic reasons, since it suggests that hippos in general have changed their habit of lying in the water.

88
a. Er liggen meestal [NP ∅ nijlpaarden] in het water.
  there lie generally ∅ hippopotami in the water
a'. Er lagen meestal [NP ∅ nijlpaarden] in het water.
  there lay generally ∅ hippopotami in the water
b. [NP ∅ Nijlpaarden] liggen meestal in het water.
  ∅ hippopotami lie generally in the water
b'. $ [NP ∅ Nijlpaarden] lagen meestal in het water.
  ∅ hippopotami lay generally in the water
[+]  IV.  Conclusion

This section has shown that (unmodified) non-specific indefinite subjects introduced by the indefinite article een/∅ must normally be part of an expletive construction. Specific indefinite subjects, on the other hand, can either be part of an expletive construction or occupy the regular subject position. Finally, indefinite subjects with a partitive or generic interpretation, cannot occur in an expletive construction but must occupy the regular subject position.

89 Filler of the regular subject position
subject expletive
non-specific indefinite subject +
specific indefinite subject + +
partitive/generic indefinite subject +

It should be noted that the general rule that non-specific indefinite subjects headed by an indefinite article do not occur in the regular subject position can be waived in narratives. A story may well begin as in (90), where the function of the noun phrase een man is clearly to introduce a new discourse entity, without the implication that the speaker CAN uniquely identify the intended referent. The sentence in (90) is only acceptable if the discourse continues with a story about the person sitting in the waiting room.

90
Een man zit in de wachtkamer bij de dokter en ...
  a man sits in the waiting.room of the doctor and
'A man sits in the waiting room of the doctor, and ...'
References:
    report errorprintcite