On participial imperatives
-
Johan Rooryck
Abstract
Apart from bare imperatives and infinitival imperatives, Dutch features a third type, the participial imperative, with a syntax quite different from the other types. First we present an inventory of the properties of the participial imperative. It will turn out that (the core set of) these imperatives observe pragmatic restrictions (they are restricted to the here-and-now), semantic restrictions (having to do with temporal and locational specification; incompatibility with negation), syntactic restrictions (they instantiate a distinctive type of verb fronting), morphological restrictions (they tend to be particle verbs with the particle op ), and lexical restrictions (they comprise only ‘go away’ and ‘look out’ verbs). We will show that these imperatives contain the ‘speaker-oriented particle (SOP)’ op , fi rst discovered by den Dikken (1998) . We hold the presence of this particle responsible for most of the restrictions on these imperatives. We will argue that den Dikken’s identifi cation of this SOP as being speaker-oriented should be modified to a speech-act orientation, i.e. it is oriented to the speaker and the here-and-now.
Abstract
Apart from bare imperatives and infinitival imperatives, Dutch features a third type, the participial imperative, with a syntax quite different from the other types. First we present an inventory of the properties of the participial imperative. It will turn out that (the core set of) these imperatives observe pragmatic restrictions (they are restricted to the here-and-now), semantic restrictions (having to do with temporal and locational specification; incompatibility with negation), syntactic restrictions (they instantiate a distinctive type of verb fronting), morphological restrictions (they tend to be particle verbs with the particle op ), and lexical restrictions (they comprise only ‘go away’ and ‘look out’ verbs). We will show that these imperatives contain the ‘speaker-oriented particle (SOP)’ op , fi rst discovered by den Dikken (1998) . We hold the presence of this particle responsible for most of the restrictions on these imperatives. We will argue that den Dikken’s identifi cation of this SOP as being speaker-oriented should be modified to a speech-act orientation, i.e. it is oriented to the speaker and the here-and-now.
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- List of contributors vii
- Imperative clauses in generative grammar 1
- On the periphery of imperative and declarative clauses in Dutch and German 95
- Featuring the subject in Dutch imperatives 113
- Clitic climbing in Spanish imperatives 135
- Topics in imperatives 153
- Embedded imperatives 181
- How to say no and don’t 205
- Analysing word order in the English imperative 251
- On participial imperatives 273
- ‘Inverted’ imperatives 297
- Pronominal clitics and imperatives in South Slavic 323
- Index of languages 341
- Index of names 343
- Index of subjects 347
Chapters in this book
- Prelim pages i
- Table of contents v
- List of contributors vii
- Imperative clauses in generative grammar 1
- On the periphery of imperative and declarative clauses in Dutch and German 95
- Featuring the subject in Dutch imperatives 113
- Clitic climbing in Spanish imperatives 135
- Topics in imperatives 153
- Embedded imperatives 181
- How to say no and don’t 205
- Analysing word order in the English imperative 251
- On participial imperatives 273
- ‘Inverted’ imperatives 297
- Pronominal clitics and imperatives in South Slavic 323
- Index of languages 341
- Index of names 343
- Index of subjects 347
