/ instituut voor de Nederlandse taal / Taalportaal
bibliography glossary about
  • Dutch1
  • Frisian
  • Saterfrisian
  • Afrikaans
Show all
    4.1.3.The comparative als/dan/van-phrase
    quickinfo

    The equative degree of the adjective can be supplemented with an als-phrase that expresses the comparison set (the entities involved in the comparison). Similarly, the comparative degree of the adjective can be supplemented with a dan/als-phrase, and the superlative can be supplemented by means of a van-phrase. Some examples are given in (52). The use of parentheses expresses that the als/dan/van-phrase can be omitted if the comparison set can be determined on the basis of the linguistic or non-linguistic context.

    52
    a. Marie is even intelligent (als Jan).
      Marie is as intelligent   as Jan
    b. Marie is slimmer (dan/als Jan).
      Marie is brighter   than Jan
    c. Marie is het slimst (van de klas).
      Marie is the brightest   of the group

    It is generally assumed that there are at least two types of als/dan-phrases, which are known in the generative literature as comparative deletion and comparative subdeletion constructions. These phrases are characterized by the fact that als/dan takes a clausal complement, which contains a certain type of interpretative gap. We will see that in addition to these types of als/dan-phrases, there is a third type in which als/dan takes a non-clausal complement and which does not involve any interpretative gap. We will start by briefly introducing these three types of als/dan-phrase.
          The comparative deletion construction, which is illustrated in (53), has the following properties: it contains an interpretative gap that (i) functions as a constituent of the complement of als/dan and (ii) corresponds to the constituent in the matrix clause that contains the comparative morpheme. The comparative phrase in (53a), for example, has an interpretative gap e that functions as the direct object of the verb lezen'to read' and corresponds to the direct object meer boeken'more books' of the matrix clause, which contains the comparative form meer. We will see in Subsection I that the complement of als/dan is always sentential in nature in this construction, which means that we are dealing with reduced clauses in examples such as (53b), in which the finite verb heeft is deleted under identity with the finite verb in the matrix clause.

    53
    Comparative Deletion
    a. Jan heeft meer boeken dan hij [e] gelezen heeft.
      Jan has  more books  than  he  read  has
    b. Jan heeft meer boeken dan Marie [e] heeft

    The comparative subdeletion construction is illustrated in (54). It is generally assumed that phrases of this type contain an interpretative gap that in a sense corresponds to the comparative morpheme. One reason for this is that, just like the comparative form meer, the postulated empty element blocks the insertion of degree modifiers like veel'many'; cf. Jan heeft meer boeken dan Marie (*veel) CDs heeft and Jan heeft meer boeken dan (*veel) CDs.

    54
    Comparative subdeletion
    a. Jan heeft [meer boeken] dan Marie [[e] CDs] heeft.
      Jan has   more books  than  Marie  CDs  has
    b. Jan heeft [meer boeken] dan [[e] CDs].
      Jan has   more books  than CDs

    The third type, in which als/dan takes a non-clausal complement and which does not involve any interpretative gap, is illustrated in (55).

    55
    a. Jan heeft meer boeken gelezen dan alleen Oorlog en vrede.
      Jan has  more books  read  than  just  War and Peace
      'Jan has read books than just War and Peace.'

          This section will discuss the internal structure of the comparative als/dan/van-phrases more extensively, subsection I starts with a discussion of the comparative deletion construction, which is followed in Subsection II by a discussion of the comparative subdeletion construction, subsection III will discuss constructions of the type in (55). We will conclude the discussion in Subsections IV and V, with a number of comments on the categorial status of the elements als/dan and the placement of the comparative als/dan/van-phrases. We will not be able to do justice here to the ever growing body of literature on the internal structure of als/dan/van-phrases, but fortunately we can refer the reader to Corverʼs (2006) review of some of the major contributions to the discussion of this topic.

    readmore
    [+]  I.  Comparative deletion construction

    This subsection discusses the internal structure of comparative als/dan-phrases in comparative deletion constructions. The first subsection argues that van and als/dan differ in that the former is a regular preposition that takes a noun phrase as its complement, whereas the latter are special in that they take a clause as their complement. The second subsection shows that the clause can be reduced in the sense that any element can be omitted from it as long as it is identical to some element in the clause containing the equative/comparative phrase. However, the reduced clause contains one constituent that can never be spelled out overtly, namely the constituent that corresponds to the constituent in the matrix clause that contains the comparative morpheme. The third subsection briefly discusses the nature of this constituent.

    [+]  A.  The complement of comparative als/dan/van-phrases

    Consider again the examples in (52), repeated here as (56). We will see later that the comparative van-phrase van de klas (56c) functions as a regular PP headed by van, which takes the noun phrase de klas as its complement. There are reasons, however, to assume that the als/dan-phrases in (56a&b) cannot be analyzed as regular PPs with noun phrase complements.

    56
    a. Marie is even intelligent (als Jan).
      Marie is as intelligent   as Jan
    b. Marie is slimmer (dan/als Jan).
      Marie is brighter   than Jan
    c. Marie is het slimst (van de klas).
      Marie is the brightest   of the group

    If we assume that dan and als in (56a&b) are prepositions that take the noun phrase Jan as their complement, we would expect them to assign objective case to it. The examples in (57) show, however, that his expectation is not borne out and that the case of the noun phrase instead depends on the noun phrase to which it is compared; the noun phrase in the als/dan-phrase receives nominative case if it is compared to the nominative argument in the matrix clause, whereas it receives accusative case if it is compared to the accusative argument in the main clause.

    57
    a. Zijnom is even intelligent als hijnom.
      she  is as intelligent  as  he
    a'. Zijnom is slimmer dan/als hijnom.
      she  is brighter  than  he
    b. Ik vind haaracc even intelligent als hemacc.
      I  consider  her  as intelligent  as  him
    b'. Ik vind haaracc slimmer dan/als hemacc.
      I  consider  her  brighter  than  him

    The examples in (57) therefore show that Standard Dutch als and dan differ from their English counterparts as and than in that they normally do not assign objective case to the noun phrase following them. It should be noted, however, that there are certain varieties of Dutch that are like English in allowing object pronouns in the (a)-examples of (57), but these are normally stigmatized as substandard or abusive language use; cf. taaladvies.net/taal/advies/vraag/355/, and the references given there. Note that substituting a subject pronoun for the object pronoun in the (b)-examples in (57) is never possible. This is illustrated by the examples in (58).

    58
    a. % Zijnom is even intelligent als hemacc.
      she  is as intelligent  as  him
    a'. % Zijnom is slimmer dan/als hemacc.
      she  is brighter  than  him
    b. * Ik vind haaracc even intelligent als hijnom.
      I  consider  her  as intelligent  as  he
    b'. * Ik vind haaracc slimmer dan/als hijnom.
      I  consider  her  brighter  than  he

    Given that nominative case is normally restricted to subjects of finite clauses, the fact that the pronouns in the (a)-examples of (57) have the nominative form strongly suggests that the complement of als and dan is clausal in nature. That the complement can be clausal in nature is also clear from the examples in (59), which feature a finite verb in the complement of als/dan. For completeness’ sake, note that the subject pronouns in the (a)-examples in (59) cannot be replaced by an object pronoun in any variety of Dutch.

    59
    a. Zijnom is even intelligent als hijnom is.
      she  is as intelligent  as  he  is
    a'. Zijnom is slimmer dan/als hijnom is.
      she  is brighter  than  he  is
    b. Ik vind haaracc even intelligent als ik hemacc vind.
      I  consider  her  as intelligent  as  I  him consider
    b'. Ik vind haaracc slimmer dan/als ik hemacc vind.
      I  consider  her  brighter  than  I  him  consider

    The fact that the subject pronoun can also be used in the (a)-examples in (57) can now be accounted for by assuming that these examples are derived from the (a)-examples in (59) by deletion of the finite verb under identity with the finite verb of the main clause. Similarly, the (b)-examples in (57) can be derived from the (b)-examples in (59) by deletion of the finite verb and the subject under identity with the finite verb and the subject of the main clause. That identity is required for deletion is clear from the difference in acceptability between the (b)-examples in (58) and the examples in (60); the ungrammatical (b)-examples in (58) cannot be derived from the acceptable examples in (60) by deletion of the copular given that it is not identical to the finite verb of the main clause.

    60
    a. Ik vind haaracc even intelligent als hijnom is.
      I  consider  her  as intelligent  as  he  is
    b. Ik vind haaracc slimmer dan/als hijnom is.
      I  consider  her  brighter  than  he  is

    Note, finally, that although the examples in (59) are certainly acceptable, they are marked compared to those in (57). This suggests that deletion is preferred whenever that is an option.
          From the discussion in this subsection, we can conclude that the complement of als/dan is normally clausal in nature in the comparative deletion construction. This does not, however, hold for the complement of the comparative van-phrase in superlative constructions; the complement of van is always assigned objective case and never contains a finite verb. This shows that the van-PP is just a regular PP consisting of a preposition that takes a noun phrase as its complement.

    61
    a. Marie is het slimste van ons/*wij allemaal
      Marie is the smartest  of  us/we  all
    b. Marie is het slimste van de klas (*is)
      Marie is the smartest  of the group     is
    [+]  B.  The reduced clause in als/dan-phrases

    It seems that there are few restrictions on the reduction of the clausal complement of als/dan apart from the one we have already established in Subsection A, that the omitted content must be recoverable under identity with some element in the matrix clause containing the comparative. For example, in (57) everything but the logical subject of the AP is deleted from the complement clause. But the examples in (62) show that the remaining part may also perform other functions. In (62a) the comparative meer'more' functions as a clausal adverb of degree, and in the comparative dan-phrase everything except the noun phrase that corresponds to the direct object of the main clause is omitted. In (62b) meer functions as a direct object and in the comparative phrase everything except the noun phrase that corresponds to the indirect object is omitted. In (62c), everything is deleted apart from the PP-complement of the adjective; (62d), finally, shows that an entire object clause can be omitted.

    62
    a. Ik bewonder Jan meer dan Peter.
      I  admire  Jan more  than Peter
    b. Dit bedrijf discrimineert en betaalt mannen meer dan vrouwen.
      this company  discriminates  and  pays  men  more than women
    c. Jan is meer gesteld op rundvlees dan/als op varkensvlees.
      Jan is more keen  on beef   than  on pork
      'Jan is keener on beef than on pork.'
    d. De gang is breder dan ik dacht (dat hij was).
      the hall  is wider  than  I thought   that he was

    Despite the fact that there are few restrictions on the reduction, it is clear that one element can never be overtly expressed in the als/dan-phrases discussed so far, namely the adjective that corresponds to the adjective in the equative/comparative form in the matrix clause. The examples in (63) show this for the counterparts of the examples in (57), in which the element in the comparison set corresponds to the subject of the AP, and those in (64) do so for the counterparts of the more miscellaneous cases in (62), subsection C will discuss the nature of this obligatorily suppressed element.

    63
    a. Zijnom is even intelligent als hijnom (*intelligent) is.
      she  is as intelligent  as  he    intelligent  is
    a'. Zijnom is slimmer dan/als hijnom (*slim) is.
      she  is brighter  than  he   bright  is
    b. Ik vind haaracc even intelligent als ik hemacc (*intelligent) vind.
      I  consider  her  as intelligent  as  I  him consider
    b'. Ik vind haaracc slimmer dan/als ik hemacc (*slim) vind.
      I  consider  her  brighter  than  I  him   bright  consider
    64
    a. Ik bewonder Jan meer dan ik Peter (*erg) bewonder.
      I  admire  Jan more  than Peter much  admire
    b. Dit bedrijf betaalt mannen meer dan het vrouwen (*veel) betaalt.
      this company  pays  men  more than  it  women  much  pays
    c. Jan is meer gesteld op rundvlees dan/als hij op varkensvlees (*gesteld) is.
      Jan is more keen  on beef  than  he  on pork      keen  is
      'Jan is keener on beef than on pork.'
    d. De gang is breder dan ik dacht dat hij (*breed) was.
      the hall  is wider  than I thought  that  he  was
    [+]  C.  The nature of the interpretative gap

    The nature of interpretative gap has been the topic of a long-lasting and still on-going debate; cf. Corver (2006) for an overview. Probably the most influential proposal is the one in Chomsky (1977), according to which the interpretative gap arises as result of wh-movement, and subsequent deletion of the moved phrase under identity with the adjective in the matrix clause (in the same way as relative pronouns in English relative constructions such as the man (whoi) I met ti yesterday can be omitted).
          One reason for claiming this is that comparative deletion seems unbounded in the same sense that wh-movement is. We have already seen one instance of this in (64d), repeated here in a slightly different form as (65a), in which the interpretative gap is found in a more deeply embedded clause. For completeness’ sake, (65b) provides the corresponding example with wh-movement for comparison.

    65
    a. De gang is breder dan [ik dacht [dat hij [e] was]].
      the hall  is wider  than   I  thought   that  he  was
    b. Hoe breedi denk je dat de gang ti is?
      how wide  think  you  that  the hall  is

    If comparative deletion does in fact involve wh-movement, we predict that examples such as (65a) are possible if the embedded clause is the complement of a so-called bridge verb like denken'to think', but not if it is the complement of a non-bridge verb like betwisten'to contest'. Example (66a) shows that this prediction is indeed correct; (66b) again provides the corresponding examples with wh-movement.

    66
    a. * De tafel is breder dan [ik betwistte [dat hij [e] was]].
      the table  is wider  than   I  disputed   that  he  was
    b. * Hoe breed betwistte je dat de gang ti is?
      how wide  disputed  you  that  the hall  is

    A second reason for assuming that comparative deletion involves wh-movement is that it cannot occur in so-called islands for extraction. We illustrate this by means of the (b)-examples in (67), which show that comparative deletion cannot apply to the complement of a PP, just as wh-movement of the complement of a PP is excluded. Example (67a) just serves to show that examples of comparable complexity in which the interpretative gap serves as direct object are fully acceptable.

    67
    a. Els heeft meer boeken gerecenseerd dan Jan [e] gelezen heeft.
      Els has  more books  reviewed  than  Jan  read  has
      'Els has reviewed more books than Jan has read.'
    b. * Els heeft over meer boeken geschreven dan Jan [PP naar [e]] gekeken heeft.
      Els has  about more books written  than Jan  at  looked  has
    b'. * Hoeveel boekeni heeft Jan [PP naar ti ] gekeken?
      how.many books  has  Jan  at   looked

    The fact that the wh-movement approach can account for the unacceptability of (65b) and (67b) by means of independently motivated constraints is generally seen as strong support for Chomskyʼs (1977) proposal. We refer the reader to Section V11.3.5 for more detailed discussion.

    [+]  II.  Comparative subdeletion

    This subsection discusses the internal structure of the comparative als/dan-phrase in comparative subdeletion constructions such as (68).

    68
    a. Jan heeft [meer boeken] dan Marie [[e] CDs] heeft.
      Jan has   more books  than  Marie  CDs  has
    a'. Jan heeft [meer boeken] dan [[e] CDs].
      Jan has   more books  than CDs
    b. Deze tafel is even lang als die tafel [[e] breed] is.
      this table  is as long  as  that table  wide is
    b'. Deze tafel is even lang als [[e] breed].
      this table  is as long  as  wide

    It is generally assumed that constructions like these involve an interpretative gap that in a sense corresponds to the morpheme expressing the comparison in the matrix clause. One reason for assuming this is that, just like the comparative morpheme meer, the postulated empty element in the (a)-examples blocks the insertion of quantifiers like veel'many'. Similarly, the empty element in the (b)-examples blocks the insertion of measure phrases like anderhalve meter'one and a half meter', just like the equative morpheme even.

    69
    a. * Jan heeft [meer boeken] dan Marie [veel CDs] heeft.
      Jan has   more books  than  Marie   many CDs  has
    a'. * Jan heeft [meer boeken] dan [veel CDs].
      Jan has   more books  than   many  CDs
    b. * Deze tafel is [even lang] als die tafel [anderhalve meter breed] is.
      this table  is  as long  as  that table   one.and.a.half meter  wide  is
    b'. * Deze tafel is [even lang] als [anderhalve meter breed].
      this table  is  as long  as   one.and.a.half meter  wide

    Given that Section 4.3 will argue that comparison and degree modification have much in common, it does not really come as a surprise that the empty element has been identified as a degree phrase; cf. Bresnan (1973). Given that it will be easier for what follows to represent this phonetically empty degree phrase by means of the Greek capital Δ, we will assign the examples in (68) the structures in (70).

    70
    a. Jan heeft [meer boeken] dan Marie [ΔCDs] heeft.
    a'. Jan heeft [meer boeken] dan [Δ CDs].
    b. Deze tafel is [even lang] als die tafel [Δ breed] is.
    b'. Deze tafel is [even lang] als [Δ breed].
    [+]  A.  Support for the postulation of an empty degree phrase Δ

    Bresnanʼs proposal can be supported by appealing to the fact that quantitative er can be used in comparative subdeletion contexts. Quantitative er is normally used in contexts like (71), in which it licenses a phonetically empty nominal projection [e]; in this case the content of the empty noun is determined by the nominal phrase (mooie) boeken in the first conjunct. Quantitative er requires that the empty nominal projection be preceded by a weak quantifier or a cardinal number; (71a) becomes completely unacceptable if the quantifier veel is dropped. This means that if the occurrence of er in (71b) is also quantitative, we have independent evidence in favor of the empty degree phrase Δ postulated; cf. Bennis (1977).

    71
    a. Jan heeft weinig (mooie) boeken maar Marie heeft er [veel [e]].
      Jan has  few beautiful books  but  Marie has  er   many
    b. Ik heb meer boeken dan jij er [Δ [e]] hebt.
      I  have  more books  than  you  er  have

    There is actually little doubt that we are dealing with quantitative er in (71b). Example (72a) shows that the empty nominal projection cannot be associated with a non-count noun. The fact that (72b) is also unacceptable therefore unambiguously shows that we are dealing with quantitative er.

    72
    a. * Jan heeft veel geld maar Piet heeft er [weinig [e]].
      Jan has  much money  but  Piet has  er   little
    b. * Ik heb meer geld dan jij er [Δ [e]] hebt.
      I  have  more money  than  you  er  have

    Furthermore, the primeless examples in (73) show that the empty nominal projection can be combined with postnominal modifiers but not with prenominal attributive adjectives; the contrast between the two primed examples again supports the claim that we are dealing with quantitative er.

    73
    a. Jan heeft veel boeken over muziek en ik heb er [veel [e] over wijn].
      Jan has  many books about music  and  I  have  er   many   about wine
    a'. Jan heeft meer boeken over muziek dan ik er [Δ [e] over wijn] heb.
      Jan has  more books about music  than I er  about wine  have
    b. * Jan heeft veel blauwe knikkers en ik heb er [veel groene [e]].
      Jan has  many blue marbles  and  I  have  er  many green
    b'. * Jan heeft meer blauwe knikkers dan ik er [Δ groene [e]] heb.
      Jan has  more blue marbles  than  I  er  green  have
    [+]  B.  The nature of the interpretative gap

    Section 4.1.3, sub IC, has shown that there are reasons for assuming that the interpretative gap in the comparative deletion construction is the result of wh-movement and subsequent deletion of the moved phrase. If this is correct, we might expect that the comparative subdeletion construction would likewise involve wh-movement, but this subsection will show that this does not seem to be borne out, and that the distribution of the interpretative gap Δ differs considerably from that of wh-phrases. One way in which the distributions of the interpretative gap and wh-phrases differ is illustrated in (74) and (75). The (a)-examples in (74) show that wh-movement of interrogative quantifiers like hoeveel'how many' obligatorily pied-pipes the remainder of the modified noun phrase; extraction of the quantifier from the noun phrase leads to an ungrammatical result. The fact that the interpretative gap indicated by Δ in (74b) occupies the same position as the wh-trace in (74a') therefore suggests that wh-movement is not involved in this example.

    74
    a. [Hoeveel boeken]i heb jij ti?
      how.many books  have  you
      Intended reading: 'How many books do you have?'
    a'. * Hoeveeli heb jij [ti boeken]?
      how.many  have  you  books
    b. Els heeft meer CDs dan jij [Δ boeken] hebt.
      Els has  more CDs than  you  books  have
      'Els has more CDs than you have books.'

    The examples in (75) show something similar