Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

8.2.2.Clause adverbials

quickinfo

This section discusses various types of clause adverbials, that is, adverbials that do not restrict the denotation of the verbal predicate but provide other, additional, information. The meaning contributions of these adverbials are quite varied: their main similarity is that they are located external to the lexical domain of the clause. The following subsections will discuss the subclasses in (57).

Polarity: negation (niet'not' ); affirmation (wel)

Focus particles: alleen'only', ook'too', zelfs'even', etc.

Aspectual: habitual; iterative; frequentative; continuative; etc.

Clause-degree (bijna'nearly'; amper'hardly', etc.)

Propositional modal (waarschijnlijk'probably'; blijkbaar'apparently')

Subject-oriented (stom genoeg'stupidly', wijselijk'wisely', etc.)

Subjective: factive (helaas'unfortunately' ); non-factive

Point-of-view (volgens Els'according to Els' )

Spatio-temporal: place; time

Contingency: cause; reason; condition; concession

Domain (juridisch gezien'legally', moreel gezien'morally', etc.)

Conjunctive (echter'however', derhalve'therefore', etc.)

Speech-act related (eerlijk gezegd'honestly', etc.)

We will investigate to what extent these adverbial types satisfy the scope test proposed in Section 8.1, sub III, repeated here as (58a): the test is illustrated in (58b) by means of the prototypical clause adverbial waarschijnlijk'probably'.

[clause... adverbial [VP ...]] ⇒ Het is adverbial zo [clause dat ... [VP ...]]

b.		Jan lacht	waarschijnlijk. ⇒	Het	is waarschijnlijk	zo	dat	Jan lacht.
		Jan laughs	probably	it	is probably	the.case	that	Jan laughs

I. Polarity adverbials
II. Focus particles
III. Aspectual adverbials
IV. Clause-degree adverbials
V. Propositional modal adverbials
VI. Subject-oriented adverbials
VII. Subjective adverbials
VIII. Point-of-view adverbials
IX. Spatio-temporal adverbials
X. Contingency adverbials
XI. Domain adverbials
XII. Conjunctive adverbials
XIII. Speech-act related adverbials

[+] I. Polarity adverbials

This section discusses the negative adverb niet'not' and its affirmative counterpart wel in (59). Note in passing that the adverb niet can also be used as constituent negation (cf. Section 13.3.2, sub IC), and that both niet and wel can also be used as intensifiers of adjectives; Jan is niet onaardig/Jan is wel aardig'Jan is quite nice' (cf. Section A3.3). These uses will not be discussed here.

a.	Jan heeft	Marie niet	ontmoet.	sentence negation
	Jan has	Marie not	met
	'Jan hasnʼt met Marie.'

b.	Jan heeft	Marie wel	ontmoet.	affirmation
	Jan has	Marie aff	met
	'Jan did meet Marie.'

Polarity adverbials are clearly not VP adverbials, as is shown by the fact that the sentences in (59) do not satisfy the two VP-adverbial tests. The primeless examples in (60) first show that the pronoun doet dat + adverb paraphrase does not give rise to a felicitous result: the left-right arrow with a slash (⇎) indicates that it leads to a contradiction in the case of niet'not' and the left-right arrow without a slash (⇔) indicates that it leads to a tautology in the case of wel. The primed examples show that the entailment test also fails: the entailment holds in neither direction in the case of niet and in both directions in the case of wel (at least in as far as the meaning expressed by traditional predicate calculus is concerned).

a.	$	Jan	heeft	Marie	ontmoet	en	hij	deed	dat	niet.	sentence negation
		Jan	has	Marie	met	and	he	did	that	not

a'.

Jan heeft Marie niet ontmoet. ⇎ Jan heeft Marie ontmoet.

b.	$	Jan	heeft	Marie ontmoet	en	hij	deed	dat	wel.	affirmation
		Jan	has	Marie met	and	he	did	that	aff

b'.

Jan heeft Marie wel ontmoet. ⇔ Jan heeft Marie ontmoet.

Polarity adverbials take scope over the proposition expressed by the lexical domain of the clause. This is the standard assumption for negation in predicate calculus, which treats negation as an operator taking scope over a well-formed expression Ф: ¬Ф. It is also clear from the fact that both negative and affirmative clauses pass the scope test in (58a): the examples in (59) can easily be paraphrased by the examples in (61).

a.	Het	is niet	zo	dat	Jan Marie heeft	ontmoet.	sentence negation
	it	is not	the.case	that	Jan Marie has	met
	'It is not the case that Jan has met Marie.'

b.	Het	is wel	zo	dat	Jan Marie heeft	ontmoet.	affirmation
	it	is aff	the.case	that	Jan Marie has	met
	'It is the case that Jan has met Marie.'

The polarity adverbials are located very low in the functional domain of the clause: they must be preceded by all the clause adverbials that will be discussed in the following subsections. This shows immediately that these other adverbials are also part of the functional domain of the clause and thus cannot function as VP adverbials, cf. Section 8.1, sub II.
It should also be pointed out that the negative adverbial niet is probably not in an adjoined position, but located in the specifier of a functional projection (NegP): the reason for assuming this is that this position is not only accessible to niet but arguably also functions as a landing site for negative phrases. This is especially clear if the negative phrase is part of a PP-complement of a complementive adjective, as in (62): while there is good reason for assuming that the PP is base-generated in a position following the adjective, it must occur in a position preceding the adjective if the nominal part of the PP is a negative phrase such as niemand'nobody'. This would follow if we assume that a negative phrase must be moved into the specifier of NegP, as indicated in (62c), in order for negation to be assigned scope over the complete proposition. We will not digress on this here but refer the reader to Section 13.3.1 for detailed discussion.

a.	dat	Jan	erg dol	op Peter/*niemand	is.
	that	Jan	very fond	of Peter/nobody	is
	'that Jan is very fond of Peter.'

b.	dat	Jan op niemand	erg dol	is.
	that	Jan of nobody	very fond	is
	'that Jan isnʼt very fond of anybody.'

c.		dat	Jan [NegP [PP	op niemand]i Neg [vP ... [AP	erg dol ti]	is]].
		that	Jan	of nobody	very fond	is

We want to conclude this section by noting that the semantic contributions of the two polarity adverbials differ considerably: from a logical point of view, the negative adverbial niet is needed to express negation (unless it is expressed in some other way) while the affirmative marker is superfluous. This is demonstrated in (63): omission of niet results in an affirmative expression whereas omission of wel results in a logically equivalent expression.

a.	Jan heeft	Marie	(#niet)	ontmoet.	sentence negation
	Jan has	Marie	not	met
	'Jan hasnʼt met Marie.'

b.	Jan heeft	Marie	(wel)	ontmoet.	affirmation
	Jan has	Marie	aff	met
	'Jan did meet Marie.'

It is therefore not surprising that the use of the affirmative marker wel is mainly pragmatically motivated: it is used to indicate contrast, to deny an assertion or a presupposition held by the hearer, to make a concession, etc. Illustrations are given in (64). The affirmative marker wel thus plays a prominent role in signaling that the background (the shared information of the discourse participants) needs to be updated, and its heavy informational load may be the reason why affirmative wel is always accented (contrary to the modifier wel discussed in Section A3.3, which never carries accent).

a.	Ik	kom	vandaag	niet,	maar	morgen	wel.	contrast
	I	come	today	not	but	tomorrow	aff
	'I wonʼt come today but tomorrow I will.'

b.	A.	Je	komt	morgen	toch	niet? B.	Ik	kom	wel.	denial
	A.	you	come	tomorrow	prt	not	I	come	aff
	'You wonʼt come tomorrow, will you? I will come.'

c.	Ik	kom	morgen,	maar	wel	wat	later.	concession
	I	come	tomorrow	but	aff	somewhat	later
	'I will come tomorrow, but it will be a bit later.'

[+] II. Focus particles

Sentence negation can be preceded by focus particles such as alleen'just/only', ook'also', and zelfs'even'. A number of typical examples are given in the primeless examples in (65). That these particles function as clause adverbials is clear from the fact that they satisfy the scope test in (58a), as is shown in the primed examples.

a.	Jan is een goed geleerde;	hij	is alleen	niet	geschikt	als decaan.
	Jan is a good scholar	he	is only	not	suitable	as dean
	'Jan is a good scholar; he is just not suitable as Dean.'

a'.		Het	is alleen	zo	dat	hij	niet	geschikt	is als decaan.
		it	is only	the.case	that	he	not	suitable	is as dean

b.	Marie komt	morgen	niet	en	Jan komt	ook	niet.
	Marie comes	tomorrow	not	and	Jan comes	also	not
	'Marie wonʼt come tomorrow and Jan won't come either.'

b'.		Het	is ook	zo	dat	Jan niet	komt.
		it	is also	the.case	that	Jan not	comes

c.	Jan heeft	het	druk:	hij	gaat	zelfs	niet	op vakantie.
	Jan has	it	busy	he	goes	even	not	on vacation
	'Jan is busy; he will not even take a vacation.'

c'.		Het	is zelfs	zo	dat	hij	niet	op vakantie	gaat.
		it	is even	the.case	that	he	not	on vacation	goes

As in the case of negation, there are reasons for assuming that focus particles are not in an adjoined position but in the specifier position of a functional projection (FocusP). In order to show this, it should first be noted that focus particles are not only used as independent adverbials but can also be used as narrow focus markers, in which case they form a constituent with the focused phrase. This can be seen in the examples in (66); the fact that the particle and the focused phrase co-occur in clause-initial position shows that they must be a constituent (cf. constituency test).

a.		[Alleen als decaan]	is Jan niet	geschikt.
		only as dean	is Jan not	suitable

b.		[Ook Jan]	komt	morgen	niet.
		also Jan	comes	tomorrow	not

c.		[Zelfs op vakantie]	gaat	Jan	niet.
		even on vacation	goes	Jan	not

The reason for assuming that the focus particles are in the specifier of FocusP is that this position is not accessible to focus particles only; it also functions as a landing site for narrowly focused phrases. This is especially clear if the focused phrase is a PP-complement of a complementive adjective, as in (67). It is uncontroversial that the PP is base-generated in a position following the adjective; however, it must precede the adjective if it is narrowly focused. This would follow if we assume that narrowly focused phrases must be moved into the specifier of FocusP, as indicated in (67c), in order to be assigned scope over the backgrounded part of the clause. We do not digress on this here but refer the reader to Section 13.3.2, sub IC, which also discusses a number of other focus particles.

a.	dat	Jan	erg dol	(*zelfs)	op Peter	is.
	that	Jan	very fond	even	of Peter	is
	'that Jan is very fond of Peter.'

b.	dat	Jan	zelfs op Peter	erg dol	is.
	that	Jan	even of Peter	very fond	is
	'that Jan is even very fond of Peter.'

c.		dat	Jan [FocusP [PP	zelfs op Peter]i Focus ... [vP ... [AP	erg dol ti]	is]].
		that	Jan	even of Peter	very fond	is

[+] III. Aspectual adverbials

Sentence negation can also be preceded by aspectual adverbs such as habitual gewoonlijk'usually', continuative nog (steeds)'still', terminative niet meer'no longer', iterative weer'again', and frequentative vaak'often'. Other adverbials that may belong to this group are al'already' and spoedig'soon' but these do not easily co-occur with the sentence adverbial niet. Some instances are provided in the primeless examples in (68); the primed examples show that these adverbials satisfy the scope test in (58a).

a.	dat	Jan gewoonlijk	niet	aanwezig	is.
	that	Jan usually	not	present	is
	'that Jan usually isnʼt present.'

a'.		Het	is gewoonlijk	zo	dat	Jan	niet	aanwezig	is.
		it	is usually	the.case	that	Jan	not	present	is

b.	dat	Jan nog steeds	niet	aanwezig	is.
	that	Jan still	not	present	is
	'that Jan still isnʼt present.'

b'.		Het	is nog steeds	zo	dat	Jan	niet	aanwezig	is.
		it	is still	the.case	that	Jan	not	present	is

c.	dat	Jan vaak	niet	aanwezig	is.
	that	Jan often	not	present	is
	'that Jan often isnʼt present.'

c'.		Het	is vaak	zo	dat	Jan	niet	aanwezig	is.
		it	is often	the.case	that	Jan	not	present	is

It should be noted that the frequency adverb vaak'often' can also be used as a VP adverbial; cf. Section 8.2.1, sub IIIA. The examples in (69) illustrate this by showing that it may either precede or follow the negative adverb niet'not'. The two examples differ in the relative scope of the adverbials vaak and niet, which can be brought out by the paraphrases in the primed examples.

a.	dat	Jan niet	vaak	aanwezig	is.	VP adverbial: not > often
	that	Jan not	often	present	is
	'that Jan isnʼt present often.'

a'.	Het	is niet	zo	dat	Jan	vaak	aanwezig	is.
	it	is not	the.case	that	Jan	often	present	is
	'It is not the case that Jan is present often.'

b.	dat	Jan vaak	niet	aanwezig	is.	clause adverbial: often > not
	that	Jan often	not	present	is
	'that Jan often isnʼt present.'

b'.	Het	is	vaak	zo	dat	Jan	niet	aanwezig	is.
	it	is	often	the.case	that	Jan	not	present	is
	'It is often the case that Jan isnʼt present.'

The scope difference becomes even clearer with frequency adverbials such as drie keer'three times'. Suppose we are dealing with a sequence of four lectures; then example (70a) expresses that Jan attended less than three meetings while (70b) expresses that Jan attended only one lecture. Example (70c) shows that the two uses can co-occur in a single sentence: in case we are dealing with six sequences of four lectures, (70c) expresses that for two of these sequences Jan attended less than three lectures.

a.	dat	Jan niet	drie keer	aanwezig	is geweest.	VP adverbial
	that	Jan not	three times	present	is been
	'that Jan hasnʼt been present three times.'

b.	dat	Jan drie keer	niet	aanwezig	is geweest.	clause adverbial
	that	Jan three times	not	present	is been
	'that three times Jan hasn't been present.'

c.	dat	Jan twee keer	niet	drie keer	aanwezig	is geweest.	co-occurrence
	that	Jan two times	not	three times	present	is been
	'that twice (in two sequences) Jan hasn't been present three times.'

A more complicated class of adverbs that may be considered aspectual consists of the adverbs helemaal'completely' and gedeeltelijk'partly' in (71a), which indicate whether the eventuality was or was not completely finished. That these adverbs are not VP adverbials is clear from the fact that they do not restrict the denotation of the verbal predicate, as appears from the fact that the entailment test in (71b) fails in the case of gedeeltelijk. However, it is not immediately evident either that these adverbs function as clause adverbials, as is clear from the fact that the scope test in (71c) produces questionable results.

a.	Jan heeft	de appel	helemaal/gedeeltelijk	opgegeten.
	Jan has	the apple	completely/partly	prt.-eaten
	'Jan has completely/partly eaten the apple.'

Jan heeft de appel gedeeltelijk opgegeten. ↛ Jan heeft de appel opgegeten.

c.	?	Het	is helemaal/gedeeltelijk	zo	dat	Jan de appel	heeft	opgegeten.
		it	is completely/partly	the.case	that	Jan the apple	has	eaten

There are nevertheless good reasons for supposing that we are dealing with clause adverbials, given that the adverb gedeeltelijk'partly' can precede sentence negation; cf. (72). It should be noted that the order niet gedeeltelijk is also possible if the adverb is accented; this case can be put aside because we are probably dealing with constituent negation in that case. Note also that examples similar to (72) are difficult to construct for helemaal, due to the fact that this adverb can be construed as a modifier of negation in helemaal niet'absolutely not'.

Jan heeft	de film	gedeeltelijk	niet	gezien.
Jan has	the movie	partly	not	prt.-seen
'Jan missed a part of the movie.'

[+] IV. Clause-degree adverbials

Adverbs like bijna'almost', echt'really', and haast'nearly' are referred to as clause-degree adverbs by Ernst (2002). These are clear cases of clause adverbials: they satisfy the scope test.

a.	Jan ging	bijna	kwaad	weg.
	Jan went	almost	angry	away
	'Jan almost went away angry.'

a'.		Het	was bijna	zo	dat	Jan kwaad	weg	ging.
		it	was nearly	the.case	that	Jan angry	away	went

b.	Jan werd	haast	overreden.
	Jan was	nearly	run.over
	'Jan was nearly run over (by a car).'

b'.		Het	was haast	zo	dat	Jan werd	overreden.
		it	was nearly	the.case	that	Jan was	run-over

It may be the case that (inherently negative) adverbs like amper'hardly' and nauwelijks'scarcely' in (74a) belong to the same class, although (74b) shows that they do not pass the scope paraphrase in a convincing way. We leave the problem with these adverbials for future research.

a.	Jan was amper/nauwelijks	thuis	toen Marie belde.
	Jan was hardly/scarcely	home	when Marie called
	'Jan was hardly/scarcely home when Marie called.'

b.	$	Het	was	amper/nauwelijks	zo	dat	Jan thuis	was toen	Marie belde.
		it	was	hardly/scarcely	the.case	that	Jan home	was when	Marie called

[+] V. Propositional modal adverbials

Propositional modality provides an evaluation of the factual status of propositions expressed by the lexical projection of the main verb. By uttering a sentence such as Marie is thuis'Marie is at home' the speaker normally commits himself to the truth of the proposition expressed by the lexical projection of the main verb. The speaker may, however, also comment on the factual status of the proposition. Palmer (2001) claims that these judgments may be of two different kinds: there are epistemic and evidential judgments. Epistemic judgments are concerned with the likelihood of the actual occurrence of a specific eventuality. Section 5.2.3.2, sub IIIA1, has shown that epistemic judgments can be expressed by means of modal verbs such as kunnen'may', moeten'must' and zullen'will'.

a.		Marie kan	nu	thuis	zijn.	speculative
		Marie may	now	at.home	be

b.		Marie moet	nu	thuis	zijn.	deductive
		Marie must	now	at.home	be

c.		Marie zal	nu	thuis	zijn.	assumptive
		Marie will	now	at.home	be

By uttering sentences such as (75a-c), the speaker provides three different epistemic judgments about (his commitment to the truth of) the proposition be at home(Marie). The modal verb kunnen'may' presents the proposition as a possible conclusion: the speaker is uncertain whether the proposition is true, but on the basis of the information available to him he is not able to exclude it. The modal verb moeten'must' presents the proposition as the only possible conclusion: on the basis of the information available the speaker infers that the proposition is true. The modal verb zullen'will' presents the proposition as a reasonable inference on the basis of the available evidence. A wider range of epistemic judgments can be expressed by means of the adverbial phrases in (76a).

Epistemic adverbials: gegarandeerd'certainly', hoogstwaarschijnlijk'most likely', misschien'maybe', mogelijk'possibly', naar alle waarschijnlijkheid'in all probability', natuurlijk'naturally/of course', noodzakelijk(erwijs)'necessarily', ongetwijfeld'undoubtedly', vermoedelijk'supposedly', waarschijnlijk'probably', zeker'certainly', etc.Epistemic adverbials: gegarandeerd'certainly', hoogstwaarschijnlijk'most likely', misschien'maybe', mogelijk'possibly', naar alle waarschijnlijkheid'in all probability', natuurlijk'naturally/of course', noodzakelijk(erwijs)'necessarily', ongetwijfeld'undoubtedly', vermoedelijk'supposedly', waarschijnlijk'probably', zeker'certainly', etc.

b.		Marie is misschien/zeker/natuurlijk/...	thuis.
		Marie is maybe/certainly/naturally	at.home

Evidential judgments are concerned with the source of information that the judgment is based on: cf. Section 5.2.3.2, sub IIIA2. Perception verbs such as zien'to see', for instance, are used in AcI-constructions such as Ik zag Peter vertrekken'I saw Peter leave' to express that the evidential judgment is based on direct sensory evidence: the speaker was an eye-witness of the eventuality. And modal verbs such as blijken'to turn out', lijken'to appear', and schijnen'to seem' indicate whether there is direct evidence in favor of the truth of the proposition, whether there are identifiable individuals that can be held responsible for the truth of the proposition, or whether we are dealing with hearsay/rumors; see Vliegen (2011).

a.	Uit deze feiten	blijkt	[dat	Jan de dader	is].	direct evidence
	from these facts	turns.out	that	Jan the perpetrator	is
	'These facts clearly show that Jan is the perpetrator.'

b.	Het	lijkt	mij/haar	[dat	Jan de dader	is].	identifiable source
	it	appears	me/her	that	Jan the perpetrator	is
	'It appears to me/her that Jan is the perpetrator.'

c.	Het	schijnt	[dat	Jan de dader	is].	hearsay/rumors
	it	seems	that	Jan the perpetrator	is
	'It seems that Jan is the perpetrator.'

Again a wider range of evidential judgments can be expressed by means of the adverbial phrases in (78a):

Evidential adverbials: blijkbaar'evidently', duidelijk'clearly', evident'evidently', kennelijk'obviously', klaarblijkelijk'apparently', ogenschijnlijk'apparently', onmiskenbaar'unmistakably', schijnbaar'seemingly', vermoedelijk'probably', zichtbaar'visibly/evidently', zo te zien'apparently/by the looks of it', etc.Evidential adverbials: blijkbaar'evidently', duidelijk'clearly', evident'evidently', kennelijk'obviously', klaarblijkelijk'apparently', ogenschijnlijk'apparently', onmiskenbaar'unmistakably', schijnbaar'seemingly', vermoedelijk'probably', zichtbaar'visibly/evidently', zo te zien'apparently/by the looks of it', etc.