General introduction
9.2. The position of the verbs
This section discusses a number of basic facts concerning the placement of verbs in Dutch clauses. Subsection I starts by showing that in main clauses there are (at least) two verb positions; the so-called verb-first/second position, in which we find the finite verb, and the so-called clause-final verb position, where we find the remaining, non-finite verbs. In the (a)-examples in (12) the main verb is finite and therefore found in verb-first/second position whereas in the (b)-examples the main verb is non-finite and therefore found in clause-final position; the verb-first/second position in the (b)-examples is occupied by the finite auxiliary heeft ‘has’.
(12) x Main clauses
Subsection II will show that this asymmetry in the placement of finite and non-finite verbs does not occur in embedded clauses; non-finite and non-non-finite verbs all appear in clause-final position, as illustrated by (13). We will see that there are reasons for assuming that here the verb-second position is occupied by the complementizer dat ‘that’ or of ‘whether’
Word order: General introduction 1209 (13) x Embedded clauses
a. Ik weet dat Jan het boek morgen leest. [clause-final]
I know that Jan the book tomorrow reads
‘I know that Jan will read the book tomorrow.’
ac. Hij vroeg of Jan het boek morgen leest. [clause-final]
he asked if Jan the book tomorrow reads
‘He asked whether Jan will read the book tomorrow.’
b. Ik weet dat Jan het boek gisteren gelezen heeft. [clause-final]
I know that Jan the book yesterday read has
‘I know that Jan read the book yesterday.’
bc. Hij vroeg of Jan het boek gisteren gelezen heeft. [clause-final]
he asked if Jan the book yesterday read has
‘He asked whether Jan read the book yesterday.’
Subsection III will conclude the discussion of verb placement by giving the standard analysis in generative grammar of this difference between main and embedded clauses. Note that here we do not discuss the order of the verbs in clause-final position; this issue issue is dealt with extensively in Chapter 7.
I. Main clauses
Examples (14a&b) show that verbs may occur in various places in the main clause;
finite verbs occupy a position in the left periphery of the clause, whereas participles and infinitives occupy a position more to the right. Work in the structuralist tradition, such as Haeseryn et al. (1997), often refers to the position of the finite verb as the first pole of the clause and the position of the non-finite verb(s) as the second pole of the clause. Example (14c) shows that the second pole may remain empty when there are no non-finite verbs to fill it.
(14) a. Jan heeftfinite Marie deze ansichtkaart toegestuurdparticiple vanuit China.
Jan has Marie this postcard prt.-sent from China
‘Jan has sent Marie this postcard from China.’
b. Jan wildefinite Marie deze ansichtkaart toestureninf vanuit China.
Jan wanted Marie this postcard prt.-send from China
‘Jan wanted to send Marie this postcard from China.’
c. Jan stuurdefinite Marie deze ansichtkaart toe vanuit China.
Jan sent Marie this postcard prt from China
‘Jan sent Marie this postcard from China.’
Using the idea of the two poles, we can divide main can be divided into three subdomains. The first subdomain consists of the position preceding the finite verb.
This position is often occupied by the subject, as in the examples in (14) above, but the primeless examples in (15) show that it can also be occupied by, e.g., a questioned or topicalized direct object. The crucial observation, however, is that the finite verb can normally be preceded by just a single constituent; this will be clear from the fact illustrated in the primed examples in (15) that filling the position preceding the finite verb by a constituent other than the subject requires the subject to be placed after the finite verb; leaving the subject Jan in the position preceding the finite verb results in an ungrammatical sentence.
(15) a. Wat heeft Jan Marie toegestuurd vanuit China?
what has Jan Marie prt.-sent from China
‘What did Jan send Marie from China?’
ac. *Wat Jan heeft Marie toegestuurd vanuit China?
b. Deze ansichtkaart heeft Jan Marie toegestuurd vanuit China.
this postcard has Jan Marie prt.-sent from China
‘This postcard Jan has sent to Marie from China.’
bc. *Deze ansichtkaart Jan heeft Marie toegestuurd vanuit China.
Since the position preceding the finite verb can contain at most one constituent, this position is often referred to as the CLAUSE-INITIAL POSITION; in keeping with this, the position of the finite verb is often referred to as the SECOND POSITION of the clause in order to contrast it with the CLAUSE-FINAL POSITION occupied by the non-finite verbs. The examples in (15) show that the term clause-final position is somewhat misleading, given that verbs in this position can be followed by other elements. The examples in (16) show that this is easily possible in the case of PP-complements and even obligatory in the case of clausal PP-complements. The positions following the verb(s) in clause-final position will be referred to as POSTVERBAL POSITIONs.
(16) a. Jan wil Marie <*of zij komt> vragen <of zij komt>.
Jan wants Marie whether she comes ask
‘Jan wants to ask Marie whether she will come.’
b. Jan wil niet langer <op Marie> wachten <op Marie>.
Jan wants no longer for Marie wait
‘Jan doesnތt want to wait for Marie any longer.’
Given that the clause-initial position is normally filled by some constituent in declarative clauses and wh-questions, the term verb-second position is quite appropriate for such cases. There are, however, also cases in which the initial position remains empty so that the verb ends up in first position. This holds, e.g. for yes/no-questions such as (17).
(17) Heeft Jan Marie dit ansichtkaart toegestuurd vanuit China?
has Jan Marie this postcard prt.-sent from China
‘Has Jan sent Marie this postcard from China?’
The examples in (18) show that an adverbial phrase in the form of a PP or a clause can also occur in a postverbal position. Observe that °clause adverbial phrases differ from clausal complements in that they may occur both pre- and postverbally.
(18) a. Jan is <nadat hij gesproken had> snel vertrokken <nadat hij gesproken had>.
Jan is after he spoken had soon left
‘Jan left soon after he had addressed the meeting.’
b. Jan is <na de vergadering> snel vertrokken <na de vergadering>.
Jan is after the meeting soon left
‘Jan left quickly after the meeting.’
Word order: General introduction 1211 The postverbal field is normally occupied by PPs and clauses, but this does not exhaust the possibilities: some adverbs may also occur postverbally. This is illustrated in (19a) for the modal adverb waarschijnlijk ‘probably’.
(19) a. Jan zal dat boek <waarschijnlijk> graag lezen <waarschijnlijk>.
Jan will that book probably gladly read
‘Jan will probably be eager to read that book.’
Adverbial phrases indicating manner are special in that they categorically resist postverbal placement; the examples in (20) show that this holds not only for the manner adverbs but also for adverbial phrases in the form of a PP.
(20) a. Jan zal dat boek <aandachtig> lezen <*aandachtig>.
Jan will that book attentively read
‘Jan will read that book closely.’
b. Jan zal dat boek <met aandacht> lezen <*?met aandacht>.
Jan will that book with attention read
‘Jan will read that book closely.’
Observe that the examples in (21) show that the ungrammatical orders in (20) improve considerably if the postverbal phrases are preceded by an intonation break and assigned emphatic focus. In such cases the adverbials function as
AFTERTHOUGTHs, which are often taken to be external to the main clause, and thus belong to the class of elements to be discussed in Chapter 14.
(21) a. Jan zal dat boek lezen, ... AANDACHTIG. Jan will that book read attentively
‘Jan will read that book— closely.’
b. Jan zal dat boek lezen, ... met AANDACHT. Jan will that book read with attention
‘Jan will read that book—with care.’
The area between the verbs in second and clause-final position is often referred to as the MIDDLE FIELD of the clause. This part of the clause may contain virtually all constituent parts of the clause, with the notable exception of clausal arguments;
see (16a) above.
II. Embedded clauses
The most conspicuous property of main clauses is that they usually require their finite verb to occur in second position; the examples in (22) show that the embedded counterparts of the main clauses in (14) require that the finite verb be placed in clause-final position, just like the non-finite verbs.
(22) a. Peter zei [dat Jan Marie dit boek heeftfinite toegestuurdpart vanuit China].
Peter said that Jan Marie this book has prt.-sent from China
‘Peter said that Jan has sent Marie this book from China.’
b. Peter zei [dat Jan Marie dit boek wildefinite toestureninf vanuit China].
Peter said that Jan Marie this book wanted prt.-sent from China
‘Peter said that Jan wanted to send Marie this book from China.’
c. Peter zei [dat Jan Marie dit boek toestuurdefinite vanuit China].
Peter said that Jan Marie this book prt.-sent from China
‘Peter said that Jan sent Marie this book from China.’
This means that generally the examples in (14) cannot be embedded as such;
examples such as (23) can only be interpreted as direct/quoted speech. That these examples cannot be interpreted as involving indirect speech is not a trivial fact given that this is possible in German and, to a lesser extent, the eastern part of the Netherlands; cf. Haider (1985/2010) and Barbiers (2005: Section 1.3.1.8).
(23) a. #Peter zei [Jan heeftfinite Marie dit boek toegestuurdpart vanuit China].
Peter said Jan has Marie this book prt.-sent from China b. #Peter zei [Jan wildefinite Marie dit boek toestureninf vanuit China].
Peter said Jan wanted Marie this book prt.-sent from China c. #Peter zei [Jan stuurdefinite Marie dit boek toe vanuit China].
Peter said Jan sent Marie this book prt. from China
The examples in (24) show that the cases in (23) do not improve when we add the complementizer dat ‘that’. Again, this is not a trivial fact given that this is the natural way of forming embedded declarative clauses in, e.g., English; cf. John said that John has sent Mary the book from China.
(24) a. *Peter zei [dat Jan heeftfinite Marie dit boek toegestuurdpart vanuit China].
Peter said that Jan has Marie this book prt.-sent from China b. *Peter zei [dat Jan wildefinite Marie dit boek toestureninf vanuit China].
Peter said that Jan wanted Marie this book prt.-sent from China c. *Peter zei [dat Jan stuurdefinite Marie dit boek toe vanuit China].
Peter said that Jan sent Marie this book prt. from China
The requirement that the verb be clause-final is, however, not absolute; there are a number of adverbial clauses that do allow the verb in first/second position. The examples in (25), for instance, show that conditional clauses may be introduced by the complementizer-like element als ‘if’ and have the finite verb in clause-final position, but they may also occur without als and then have the finite verb in first position. Exceptional cases like these are discussed in Section 10.3.
(25) a. Als hij niet komt, dan krijgt hij niets.
if he not comes then gets he nothing
‘If he doesnތt come, he wonތt get anything.’
b. Komt hij niet, dan krijgt hij niets.
comes he not then gets he nothing
‘If he doesnތt come, he wonތt get anything.’
III. The standard analysis
The two subsections above have shown that main and embedded clauses differ in the position of finite verbs: they appear in second position in main clauses but in clause-final position in embedded clauses. The current standard analysis relates this difference to the distribution of complementizers: these are normally excluded in main but obligatory in embedded clauses. Paardekooper (1961) has shown that
Word order: General introduction 1213 complementizers in embedded clauses and finite verbs in main clauses are placed in the same position with respect to pronominal subjects. When we put subject-initial main clauses aside for the moment, the examples in (26) show that such subject pronouns are always right-adjacent to the finite verb in main clauses and the complementizer in embedded clauses.
(26) a. Gisteren was ik/je/hij voor zaken in Utrecht. [main clause]
yesterday was I/you/he on business in Utrecht
‘Yesterday, I was/you were/he was in Utrecht on business.’
ac. *Gisteren was voor zaken ik/je/hij in Utrecht.
b. dat ik/je/hij voor zaken in Utrecht was. [embedded clause]
that I/you/he on business in Utrecht was
‘that I was/you were/he was in Utrecht on business.’
bc. *dat voor zaken ik/je/hij in Utrecht was.
Paardekooper concludes from this that finite verbs in main clauses occupy the same position as complementizers in embedded clauses. He suggests that this similarity of placement is related to the fact that complementizers and finite verbs enter into a similar relationship with the subject of the clause, as is clear from the fact that in certain Dutch dialects (but not in Standard Dutch) complementizers and finite verbs may agree in number and person with the subject of the clause. Paardekooper illustrates this by means of the two examples in (27) taken from Van Haeringen (1939). Note that the complementizer as ‘when’ in these examples introduces temporal adverbial clauses, but that we find similar agreement in complement clauses introduced by the declarative complementizer dat ‘that’ or the interrogative complementizer of ‘whether’; see Haegeman (1992), Hoekstra & Smit (1997), Zwart (1997) and the references given there for examples and more information.
(27) a. Assg Wim kompsg, mot jԥ zorgԥ dat je tuis ben.
when Wim comes must you make.sure that you at.home are
‘When Wim comes, you must make sure to be at home.’
b. AzzΩpl Kees en Wim kommΩpl, mot jԥ zorgԥ dat je tuis ben.
when Kees and Wim come must you make.sure that you home are
‘When Kees and Wim come, you must make sure to be at home.’
Paardekooper did not discuss the relation between the two positions of the finite verb in main and embedded clauses. The nature of this relation became, however, an urgent matter in early transformational grammar, in which it was assumed that the surface representations of sentences are transformationally derived from more abstract underlying forms. The main issue was: which word order is more basic—
the one in main clauses or the one in embedded clauses? Koster (1975) convincingly argued that the order found in embedded clauses is more basic, on the basis of the following economy argument. If we assume that all verbs are base-generated in clause-final position, we only need a single VERB-SECOND rule that operates in main clauses and places the finite verb in second position: the rule in (28) simply expresses that finite verbs can be placed in second position in main clauses (X, Y and Z simply stand for a non-specified string of elements).
(28) x Verb-second (main clauses only) X Y Vfinite Z
֜
X Vfinite Y Z
If we assumed that verbs are all generated in second position, however, we would need at least two rules: (i) one rule that places all non-finite verbs in clause-final position and (ii) another rule that places the finite verb in clause-final position in embedded clauses. In fact, Koster (1975) argues that we need many more word order rules on this assumption, but we refer the interested reader to Koster’s classic article or to Zwart (2011: part II) for a more detailed technical introduction.
Building on Paardekooper’s insight, Den Besten (1983) added to Koster’s economy argument the claim that the verb-second rule can be formulated in such a way that we can appeal to positions independently needed by assuming that the finite verb moves into the position normally occupied by the complementizer in embedded clauses; cf. Emonds’ (1976) STRUCTURE PRESERVATION CONSTRAINT. The difference between main and embedded clauses is depicted in (29) on the basis of the structure proposed in (10). Note in passing that it is often assumed that head movement cannot skip intervening heads like T or X (but moves through them in a successive cyclic way); we have ignored this here but we will briefly return to it in Section 9.3.
(29)
[CP... [C ...] [TP... T [XP... X [VP... V ...]]]]
Complementizer insertion
Verb Second
If we take the examples in (26) to show that subject pronouns obligatorily occupy the specifier of TP, that is the position left-adjacent to the T-head, this combination of the findings by Paardekooper and Koster provides a simple formal account of the basic Standard Dutch facts discussed so far.
IV. Conclusion
This section has briefly discussed the placement of the verbs in main and embedded clauses. We have seen that verbs are normally placed in clause-final position with the exception of finite verbs in main clauses, which occur in second position. We argued that this second position is the same position as the position occupied by complementizers in embedded clauses. By means of the verb positions V and C, we can divide the clause into three parts, as indicated in Figure (30). Sections 9.3 to 9.5 will discuss these parts in more detail.
(30)
[CP... C [TP... T [XP ... X [VP... V ... ]]]]
Middle field
Clause-initial position Postverbal field
Verb second &
complementizer position
Clause-final verb position
Word order: General introduction 1215 9.3. The clause-initial position
Section 9.2 has shown that finite verbs occupy the second position in main clauses, that is, that they can be preceded by at most one constituent. This constituent can be the subject of the clause or a topicalized phrase in declarative clauses, or a wh-phrase in interrogative clauses.
(31) a. Mijn zuster heeft dit boek gelezen. [subject]
my sister has this book read
‘My sister has read this book.’
b. Dit boek heeft mijn zuster gelezen. [topicalization]
this book has my sister read
‘This book, my sister has read.’
c. Welk boek heeft mijn zuster gelezen? [wh-movement]
which book has my sister read
‘Which book has my sister read?’
The standard generative analysis of examples such as (31) is that they all involve movement of some constituent from a clause-internal position into the specifier of CP, that is, the position preceding the finite verb in the C-position in the structure in (32). By assuming that specifier positions of any projection (that is, the positions to the immediate left of the heads C, T, X and V) can contain at most one constituent, we derive the verb-second effect.
(32) [CP... [CVfin] [TP... T [XP... X [VP... V ...]]]]
The following subsections will briefly discuss the three construction types in (31) both in main and in embedded clauses. This discussion will lead to a slightly revised version of the proposal in (32).
I. Wh-movement
There are two types of questions: so-called yes/no-questions such as (33a), which request the addressee to provide the speaker with information about the truth of the proposition expressed by the clause, and wh-questions such as (33b), which request the addressee to provide the speaker with some piece of missing information related to the proposition. The clause-initial position of yes/no-questions remains phonetically empty (although it is perhaps lexically filled by a phonetically empty question °operator). In wh-questions, the wh-phrase is normally moved into clause-initial position.
(33) x Main clauses
a. Heeft mijn zuster dit boek gelezen? [yes/no-question]
has my sister this book read
‘Has my sister read this book?’
b. Wanneer heeft mijn zuster dit boek gelezen? [wh-question]
when has my sister this book read
when has my sister this book read