Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch1
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

9.2.1.Past and present participles

quickinfo

Section 9.1 has shown that participles can be divided into two groups: present participles like vechtend'fighting' and past/passive participles like gekust'kissed'. Both types can be used as attributive adjectives, which is clear from the fact that they are inflected in prenominal position; see Table 1 and Table 3 in Section 9.1, subsection I starts with a discussion of the verb types of the participles that can be attributively used. Since attributively used participles often exhibit verbal behavior, subsection II continues with an investigation of the categorial status of attributively used participles, subsection III concludes with a brief discussion of the temporal and aspectual properties of noun phrases with an attributively used participle.

I. Verb types
II. Categorial status
III. Tense and aspect
- A. Present participles
- B. Past/passive participles

[+] I. Verb types

Whether a certain past/passive or present participle can be used attributively depends on the verb type involved; we will see that this is related to the fact that attributively used present and past/passive participles must enter into a well-defined logical relation with the noun they modify; cf. Koster (1978) and Hoekstra (1984a).

[+] A. Transitive verbs

That attributively used present and past/passive participles enter into different logical relations with the nouns they modify can be illustrated by means of the transitive sentence in (18a) and the corresponding attributive constructions. If we use the present participle of the verb slachten'to butcher' attributively, the modified noun corresponds to the subject of the sentence; (18b) expresses that it is the butcher that slaughters the lambs. If we use the past/passive participle, however, the head noun corresponds to the direct object of the sentence, as shown in (18c).

a.		De slager	slacht	de lammeren.
		the butcher	slaughters	the lambs

b.	de	(de lammeren)	slachtende	slager
	the	the lambs	slaughtering	butcher
	'the butcher that is slaughtering (the lambs)'

c.	de	(door de slager)	geslachte	lammeren
	the	by the butcher	slaughtered	lambs
	'the lambs that are slaughtered (by the butcher)'

The examples in (18) therefore show that the attributively used present and past/passive participle enter into different logical relations with the noun they modify. This is confirmed by the fact that the examples in (19) are only compatible with the less common readings on which the butcher functions as a theme and the lambs as the agent.

a.	#	de	geslachte	slager
		the	slaughtered	butcher
		Not: 'the butcher that is slaughtering (the lambs)'

b.	#	de	slachtende	lammeren
		the	slaughtering	lambs
		Not: 'the lambs that are slaughtered (by the butcher)'

The noun phrase de lammeren in (18b) and the agentive door-phrase in (18c), which correspond to, respectively, the direct object and the subject of the sentence in (18a), can be omitted. This seems to be related to the fact that the noun phrase de lammeren can in principle also be dropped in (18a), and that the door-phrase is optional in the corresponding passive construction. If an argument is obligatory in a transitive construction, as in (20a), it must normally also be realized in the attributive construction. The number signs in (20) indicate that the examples are acceptable without the noun phrase de vazen. but only if the nominative argument is interpreted as theme (“the boy is breaking down"), which is of course not relevant here.

a.	De jongen	breekt	#(de vazen).
	the boy	breaks	the vases
	'The boy is breaking the vases.'

b.	de	#(de vazen)	brekende	jongen
	the	the vases	breaking	boy
	'the boy who is breaking the vases'

Not all transitive verbs that have a participle can be used attributively. The (a)-examples in (21) show, for instance, that the present and past/passive participle of main verb hebben'to have' cannot be used attributively, and the (b)-examples show that the same thing holds for the present (but not the past/passive) participle of the verb krijgen'to get'.

a.	Jan heeft	nog	een platenspeler.
	Jan has	still	a record player
	'Jan still has a record player.'

b.	Peter	kreeg	een CD-speler.
	Peter	got	a CD-player
	'Peter was given a CD-player.'

a'.	*	de	een platenspeler	hebbende	man
		the	a record player	having	man

b'.	??	de	een CD-speler	krijgende	man
		the	a CD player	getting	man

a''.	*	de	gehadde	platenspeler
		the	had	record player

b''.		de	gekregen	CD-speler
		the	gotten	CD player

Note in passing that the idiomatic combinations gelijk hebben'to be right' and gelijk krijgen'to be backed up' can be used attributively with the present participle hebbende. Attributive use of the past/passive participles is categorically excluded, however.

a.	(?)	een	altijd	gelijk	hebbende	jongen
		an	always	right	having	boy
		'a boy who is always right'

a'.

het (door de jongen) gehadde gelijk

b.	(?)	een	altijd	gelijk	krijgende	jongen
		an	always	right	getting	boy
		'a boy with whom everybody always agrees in the end'

b'.

het (door de jongen) gekregen gelijk

The examples in (23) show that the attributive use of participles of stative verbs like weten'to know' and kennen'to be familiar with' often give rise to a degraded result as well.

a.		Jan	weet	het antwoord.
		Jan	knows	the answer

b.		Jan	kent	dat restaurant
		Jan	knows	that restaurant

a'.	?	de	het antwoord	wetende man
		the	the answer	knowing man

b'.	?	de	dat restaurant	kennende	man
		the	that restaurant	knowing	man

a''.	?	het	geweten	antwoord
		the	known	answer

b''.	*	het	gekende	restaurant
		the	known	restaurant

The degraded status of the primed and doubly-primed examples in (21) and (23) may be related to the fact that these transitive verbs cannot be used in the passive voice either. We leave it to future research to establish whether this is the proper generalization.

[+] B. Ditransitive verbs

The examples in (24) show that the participles of ditransitive verbs essentially behave like transitive verbs. The only thing that needs mentioning here is that the indirect object can be expressed overtly in the attributive construction. The question mark in (24b) intends to express that many speakers prefer to realize the indirect object by means of an aan-PP if it is a full noun phrase.

a.		Jan geeft	de jongen/hem	een boek.
		Jan gives	the boy/him	a book

het

?(aan)

de jongen

gegeven

boek

b'.		het	(aan)	hem	gegeven	boek
		the	to	the boy/him	given	book

We will see in Subsection I 1, however, that there is more to say about ditransitive verbs, but in order not to complicate matters unnecessarily we will confine ourselves here to the examples in (24).

[+] C. Intransitive verbs and verbs that take a PP-complement

Since past/passive participles of transitive verbs cannot be used attributively if the head of the noun phrase corresponds to the subject, we expect that in the case of intransitive verbs only present participles can be used attributively. This expectation is indeed borne out, as is illustrated in (25) by means of the intransitive verbs huilen'to weep' and dromen'to dream'.

a.		De jongen	huilt.
		the boy	weeps

b.		het meisje	droomt.
		the girl	dreams

a'.		de	huilende	jongen
		the	weeping	boy

b'.		het dromende	meisje
		the dreaming	girl

a''.	*	de	gehuilde	jongen
		the	wept	boy

b''.	#	het	gedroomde	meisje
		the	dreamt	girl

The examples in (26) show that verbs with a PP-complement essentially behave like intransitive verbs. Given that examples of the type in (26c) do occur in English (the looked-at portrait), the ungrammaticality of (26c) seems to be related to the fact that Dutch does not allow pseudo-passives; see the contrast between English The portrait was stared at and Dutch *Het portret werd naar gestaard.

a.		De jongen	staarde	naar het portret.
		the boy	stared	at the portrait

b.		de	naar het portret	starende	jongen
		the	at the portrait	staring	boy

c.	*	het	door de jongen	(naar)	gestaarde	portret
		the	by the boy	at	looked	portrait

[+] D. Monadic unaccusative verbs

Subjects of unaccusative verbs are referred to in this work as DO-subjects, since they are assumed to originate in a similar position and stand in a similar logical relation to the verb as direct objects of transitive verbs; subjects of unaccusative verbs and objects of transitive verbs are both themes. Given this, it will not come as a surprise that past/passive participles of unaccusative like verbs sterven ‘to die’ or struikelen'to stumble' in the doubly-primed examples of (27) differ from past/passive participles of intransitive verbs like huilen'to weep' or dromen'to dream' in (25) in that they can modify nouns that correspond to their subject; as expected, the former behave just like the past/passive participles of transitive verb slachten'to butcher' in (18) towards their objects. The primed examples in (27) show, however, that present participles of unaccusative verbs are unlike present participles of transitive verbs in that they can modify nouns that correspond to their theme argument.

a.		De jongen sterft.
		the boy dies

b.		De jongen struikelt.
		the boy stumbles

a'.		de stervende jongen
		the dying boy
		'the boy that is dying'

b'.		de struikelende jongen
		the stumbling boy
		'the boy that is stumbling'

a''.		de gestorven jongen
		the died boy
		'the boy that has died'

b''.		de gestruikelde jongen
		the stumbled boy
		'the boy that has stumbled'

In short, DO-subjects behave like direct objects if it comes to attributive modification by a past/passive participle but like subjects of (in)transitive verbs when it comes to attributive modification by a present participle. This shows that the attributive use of past/passive participles is related to the thematic function (agent/theme) of the argument that corresponds to the modified noun, whereas the attributive use of present participles is instead related to the syntactic function (subject/object) of the argument related to the modified noun.
The examples in (28) show that the present and past/passive participles of unaccusatively used motion verbs, like springen'to jump', can also be used in attributive position. Attributive use of the past/passive participle requires that the predicatively used PP be present: omitting the directional postposition PP de sloot in in (28c) results in unacceptability. This is, of course, not surprising given that motion verbs without a complementive PP are always intransitive.

a.	Jan springt	de sloot	in.
	Jan jumps	the ditch	into
	'Jan jumps into the ditch.'

b.	de	de sloot	in	springende	jongen
	the	the ditch	into	jumping	boy
	'the boy that is jumping into the ditch'

c.	de	*(de sloot	in)	gesprongen	jongen
	the	the ditch	into	jumped	boy
	'The boy that has jumped into the ditch.'

The English renderings of the attributive examples in (27) and (28) intend to express that the difference between the attractively used past and present participles is aspectual in nature: whereas past participles express perfective aspect in the sense that the process involved is completed, present participles express durative or imperfective aspect in the sense that the process is still ongoing. Observe that the past/passive and present participles in (18) and (25) exhibit the same aspectual difference.

[+] E. Dyadic unaccusative verbs

Dyadic unaccusative verbs, which are generally called nom-dat verbs, differ from the monadic unaccusative verbs discussed in the previous subsection in that they take an additional object, which would be assigned dative case in German; cf. Section V2.1.3. The behavior of the participles of these nom-dat verbs seems to depend on auxiliary selection. The examples in (29) show that the present and the past participle can both be used attributively if the nom-dat verb selects the perfect auxiliary zijn.

a.	De vakantie	is ons	goed	bevallen.
	the holiday	is us	good	pleased
	'The holiday (has) pleased us very much.'

b.	de	ons	goed	bevallende	vakantie
	the	us	good	pleasing	holiday
	'the holiday that pleases us very much'

c.	de	ons	goed	bevallen	vakantie
	the	us	good	pleasing	holiday
	'the holiday that has pleased us very much'

The examples in (30), on the other hand, show that attributive use of the past/perfect participle is excluded if the auxiliary hebben is selected; only the present participle gives rise to an acceptable result in this case.

a.	De moed	heeft	ons	ontbroken.
	the courage	has	us	lacked
	'We lacked the courage.'

b.	de	ons	ontbrekende	moed
	the	us	lacking	courage
	'the courage we lack'

c.	*?	de	ons	ontbroken	moed
		the	us	lacked	courage

[+] F. Psychological verbs

Like the nom-dat verbs discussed in the previous subsection, object experiencer psych-verbs like opwinden'to excite' in (31a) arguably have a derived subject; cf. Section V2.5.1.3. With respect to the attributive use of their participles, however, such psych-verbs behave like regular transitive verbs like slachten'to butcher' in (18): the present participle opwindend'exciting' in (31b) modifies a head noun that corresponds to the nominative subject, whereas the past participle opgewonden'excited' in (31c) modifies a head noun that corresponds to the object of the active verb.

a.	Het avontuur	wond	de jongen	op.
	the adventure	excited	the boy	prt.
	'The adventure excited the boy.'

b.		het	(de jongen)	opwindende	avontuur
		the	the boy	prt.-exciting	adventure

c.		de	opgewonden	jongen
		the	excited	boy

Note that, although the participles of psych-verbs like opwinden behave on a par with transitive verbs if it comes to attributive use, the present participles of these verbs exhibit different behavior in predicative constructions: the examples in (32) show that present participles of psych-verbs can be used in copular constructions, whereas present participles of transitive verbs cannot; see Section 9.3.1, sub II, for more discussion.

a.	*	De slager	is	slachtend.
		the butcher	is	slaughtering

b.		Het avontuur	is erg opwindend.
		the adventure	is very exciting

[+] G. Verbs with a resultative complementive

The examples in (33) show that participles of verbs in resultative constructions can be used attributively, provided that the complementive adjective is present as well; see Section 6.2.1, sub II, for a comprehensive discussion of the resultative construction.

a.		Jan loopt	zijn schoenen	*(kapot).
		Jan walks	his shoes	worn.out

b.		de	zijn schoenen	*(kapot)	lopende	jongen
		the	his shoes	worn.out	walking	boy

c.		de	*(kapot)	gelopen	schoenen
		the	worn.out	walked	shoes

The fact that the noun phrase zijn schoenen'his shoes' in (33a) is not an argument of the intransitive verb lopen'to walk' but the logical subject of the adjective kapot'worn-out' conclusively shows that nouns modified by an attributively used past/passive participle need not correspond to arguments of the corresponding active verb. The same thing can be argued on the basis of the transitive (b)-examples in (34), given that the noun phrase de kwast clearly does not function as the theme of the transitive verb verven'to paint'.

a.		Jan	verft	de muur	(geel).
		Jan	paints	the wall	yellow

b.		Jan	verft	de kwast	#(kapot).
		Jan	paints	the brush	worn.out

a'.		de	de muur (geel)	vervende	man
		the	the wall yellow	painting	man

b'.		de	de kwast #(kapot)	vervende	man
		the	the brush worn.out	painting	man

a''.		de (geel) geverfde	muur
		the yellow painted	wall

b''.		de	#(kapot)	geverfde	kwast
		the	worn.out	painted	brush

For completeness’ sake, we give comparable examples with the unaccusative verb slibben in (35).

a.		De sloot	slibt	*(dicht).
		the ditch	silts	shut

b.		de	*(dicht)	slibbende	sloot
		the	shut	silting	ditch

c.		de	*(dicht)	geslibde	sloot
		the	shut	silted	ditch

[+] H. Summary

The findings on the attributive use of the past/passive and present participles from the previous subsections are summarized in Table 4. The headers indicate that all present participles express durative aspect, whereas all past/passive participles express perfective aspect. The second and third columns indicate what the syntactic function of the modified noun is in the corresponding active sentence: the present and past/passive participles of a transitive verb, for instance, can be used to modify a noun that corresponds to, respectively, the subject and the direct object of the corresponding active verb. The marking n.a. simply expresses that the past/passive participle in question cannot be used attributively. Table 4 does not include our finding from Subsection G, that participles of verbs occurring in resultative constructions can also be used attributively.

Table 4: Verb types and attributively used adjectival participles

verb type	present participle durative aspect	past/passive participle perfective aspect
intransitive verb	subject	n.a.
(di-)transitive verb	subject	direct object
unaccusative verb	DO-subject	DO-subject
nom-dat verbs that select zijn	DO-subject	DO-subject
nom-dat verbs that select hebben	DO-subject	n.a.
object experiencer psych-verbs	(derived) subject	object

[+] I. Some special cases

This subsection discusses two special cases. The first involves ditransitive verbs like betalen'to pay' and voeren'to feed'; we will show that the attributively used past/passive participles of these verbs are able to modify not only the theme of the active verb, but also the goal. The second involves contraction verbs like gaan'to go': we will show that the past/passive and present participles of these verbs cannot be used in prenominal attributive position.

[+] 1. Ditransitive verbs

All of the examples in the previous subsections, with the exception of the resultative constructions discussed in Subsection IG, involve modification of a noun corresponding to the agent (subject) or the theme (direct object/DO-subject) of the relevant verbal construction. At first sight, this seems to exhaust the possibilities; the participles corresponding to the ditransitive verb aanbieden'to offer' in (36a), for instance, cannot modify the noun that corresponds to the goal argument (indirect object) of the verb. The number signs indicate that the noun directeur'the manager' in (36b&c) can be interpreted as corresponding to, respectively, the agent and the theme of the active verb, but this is of course not relevant for our present discussion.

a.	De man	bood	de directeur	een groot bedrag	aan.
	the man	offered	the manager	a large sum	prt.
	'The man offered the manager a large sum.'

b.	#	de	een groot bedrag	aanbiedende	directeur
		the	a large sum	prt.-offered	manager
		Intended meaning: 'the manager that was (being) offered a large sum'

c.	#	de	aangeboden	directeur
		the	prt.-offered	manager
		Intended meaning: 'the manager that has been offered (something)'

Some care must be taken, however, with a small class of ditransitive verbs that are special in that they do not require that the direct object be present. Two examples are the verbs betalen'to pay' and voeren'to feed' in (37).

a.	De firma	betaalt	zijn werknemers	(een goed loon).
	the firm	pays	his employees	a good wage
	'The firm pays its employees a good wage.'

De bezoeker