Beginner level | Intermediate level | Advanced level | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cycle 1 | Cycle 2 | Cycle 3 | Cycle 4 | Cycle 5 | Cycle 6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Main | Lesson 1 | Lesson 2 | Lesson 3 | Lesson 4 | Lesson 5 | Lesson 6 | Lesson 7 | Lesson 8 | Lesson 9 | Lesson 10 | Lesson 11 | Lesson 12 | Lesson 13 | Lesson 14 | Lesson 15 | Lesson 16 | Lesson 17 | Lesson 18 | Lesson 19 | Lesson 20 | Lesson 21 | Lesson 22 | Lesson 23 | Main | |||
Practice | Lesson 1A | Lesson 2A | Lesson 3A | Lesson 4A | Lesson 5A | Lesson 6A | Lesson 7A | Lesson 8A | Lesson 9A | Lesson 10A | Lesson 11A | Lesson 12A | Lesson 13A | Lesson 14A | Lesson 15A | Lesson 16A | Practice | ||||||||||
Examples | Vb. 1 | Vb. 2 | Vb. 3 | Vb. 4 | Vb. 5 | Vb. 6 | Vb. 7 | Vb. 8 | Vb. 9 | Vb. 10 | Vb. 11 | Vb. 12 | Vb. 13 | Vb. 14 | Vb. 15 | Vb. 16 | Examples | ||||||||||
Quiz | Quiz | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Main page | Introduction | Pronunciation | Vocabulary | Index | News |
Advanced level: cycle 6 |
Lesson 21 ~ Lesson 21
That difficult word order...
•Syntax: Issues |
•SVO versus SOV |
•Place of adverbs and objects |
•Negation |
Word order in Dutch is not easy for speakers of English or one of the Romance languages. We have already seen a number of issues above that may well drive Anglophone learners of Dutch a little crazy. The three main ones are:
These three issues are mainly concerned with the verbs in the sentence.
However, adverbial pronouns are also separable (SeeLesson 8) and this is part of a more general, fourth issue: the position of other parts of the sentence, like adverbial expressions or objects. It is also different from English.
Obviously in a Dutch sentence these four issues may very well combine and interfere with each other.
This lesson will try to tie the issues together a bit and expand on the fourth issue.
In English a sentence typically has a basicSVO structure:subject -verb -object
Dutch has the same order in this case
But this resemblance is a bit deceptive. This becomes clear when we have a compound verb in the sentence.In EnglishSVO continues to hold for the perfect tense for example:
But in Dutch this isnot the case. The finite part of the verb 'has' – 'heeft' remains in the same position, but the participle 'geploegd' moves to end of the sentence, forming a second verbal pole:
That means that Dutch is not really anSVO language. We could say that the Dutch structure has two verbal poles:SV1OV2
The second pole does not just attract past participles, but also infinitives, e.g. in the future tense
Also the adverbial prefix of a separable verb, like omhakken, moves to the second pole:
In reunites with the perfect participle in the perfect tenses
In fact everything goes to the second pole except for the finite verb, e.g. in the perfect conditional:
In a dependent clause the role of the second pole even becomes dominant, because even the finite verb moves toV2:
(Both versions occur: Dutch word order is less uniform than the English one).
So, yes, we are back at one pole, but it is a different one than the one used in English and the Romance languages.In either case the order isSOV!
In English the order simply remainsSVO:
Adverbial expressions typically end upbetween the two poles.
E.g.gisteren –yesterday
Notice that in Dutch the adverbial expression typically comesbefore the object. It is possible to swap the object and the adverbial expression, -which resembles English word order more-, but this tends to put emphasis on the adverb:
It also possible to put the adverbial expression up front, but then it triggers inversion of the subject and the finite verb:
In the front position there is a mild emphasis on the adverb, but often it is just a way to accommodate more than one adverbial expression. Compare:
The order of the adverbial expressions in usuallywhen –how –where:
Negation in Dutch is done by adding the adverbniet. It gets its own position:
We could put it beforegisteren, but that changes the meaning to: not yesterday (but today).
Sometimes, however, the negation is put between the adverbs, after the time expression:
The order of the adverbial expressions is usuallywhen –not –how –where:
Deviations from this order are possible, but imply that emphasis is put on something, e.g.
As we have seen negation involves the negative articlegeen in many indefinite cases. This word becomes part of the object it belongs to.
Put the following sentences in the negative; only negate the dependent clause if applicable
Put the following sentence in the negative in a dependent clause initiated by: "Ze zeggen dat .."
In Dutch the indirect object can be expression either with or without the prepositionaan. This is comparable to the situation in English:
Notice that in both languages the real indirect object and its prepositional stand in have a different position in the sentence. This becomes clearer if we add some adverbial expressions to the Dutch sentences
Notice that the direct object gravitates towards the first pole. The prepositional version goes to the second.
We can swap most of the items in the sentence for emphasis, but not the indirect object one. Since Dutch has lost its case endings around 1600 in the spoken language there is only the word order to markme as an indirect object.
In the written language there is exactly one exception: the third person plural (them) has two forms: hun for indirect objects and hen for direct and prepositional ones:
However, this distinction was artificially created in the 1630s by a grammarian and despite four centuries of schoolmasters hammering it in, the artificial word 'hen' will seldom be heard in the spoken language.
There are more prepositional objects in Dutch besides the one with 'aan'. Many verbs show fixed combination with certain prepositions, e.g.:
When the noun 'wedstrijd' is to replaced by a pronoun, Dutch turns the prepositional object into a adverbial pronouns:
However, adverbial pronouns are separable and the locative part (er, hier, daar, waar) tends towards the first pole, whereas the prepositional one tends towards the second. This becomes apparent when we add adverbial expressions.
In a dependent clause this remains the case