Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistics in the Netherlands 2022
Edited by Jorrig Vogels and Sterre Leufkens
[Linguistics in the Netherlands 39] 2022
► pp. 2–20

The syntax of progressive and ingressive aanhet-constructions in Dutch

 | Leiden University Centre for Linguistics (LUCL)
 | Leiden University Centre for Linguistics (LUCL)
 | Leiden University Centre for Linguistics (LUCL)
This paper presents a novel syntactic analysis of the much-debated Dutch aanhet-construction, e.g. Pieter is aan het opruimen ‘lit. Peter is on the cleanup: Peter is cleaning up’. We show that the construction’s syntactic behavior varies with the matrix verb: progressive zijn ‘be’ versus ingressive gaan ‘go’ and slaan ‘hit’. Based on this variation, we argue that there are two aanhet-projections occupying different synchronic positions on a functional-to-lexical cline.
Keywords: Progressive aspect, Ingressive aspect, aan het-construction, Semi-lexicality, Dutch
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous accounts
  • 3.Comparison
    • 3.1IPP
    • 3.2High IA/Prt
    • 3.3Complex verb constructions
    • 3.4 Van-objects
    • 3.5R-extraction
    • 3.6Overview
  • 4.Coercion
  • 5.Analysis
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 4 November 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00058.bog
References (36)
References
Andree, Milou. 2022. Dus ik die scriptie schrijven: Een analyse van zinnen zonder persoonsvorm. BA thesis, Leiden University.
Barbiers, Sjef, Hans Bennis & Lotte Dros-Hendriks. 2018. “Merging verb cluster variation.” Linguistic Variation 181: 144–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beliën, Maaike. 2002. “Force dynamics in static prepositions.” Perspectives on prepositions, ed. by H. Cuyckens & G. Radden. 195–209. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bogaards, Maarten. 2020. Beyond Progressive Aspect. MA thesis, Leiden University. [URL]
. Under review. “Top-down vs. bottom-up approaches to aspect.” Journal of Germanic Linguistics.
Boogaart, Ronny. 1999. Aspect and temporal ordering. PhD diss., Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
. 2016a. “Passief en progressief?” Aries netwerk: Een constructicon, ed. by R. Boogaart, S. Lensink & A. Reuneker. 32–36. Leiden: Leiden University.Google Scholar
. 2016b. “Leuker kunnen we het niet maken.” Taalvoutjes, 18 May 2016, [URL]
Boogaart, Ronny & Maarten Bogaards. In preparation. “Aspect.” Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst, ed. by M. Beliën. 3rd ed. Leiden: INT.
Booij, Geert. 2008. “Constructional idioms as products of linguistic change.” Constructions and language change, ed. by A. Bergs & G. Diewald. 79–104. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
. 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Broekhuis, Hans. 2013. Syntax of Dutch: Adpositions and Adpositional Phrases. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Broekhuis, Hans, Norbert Corver & Riet Vos. 2015. Syntax of Dutch: Verbs and Verb Phrases, Volume 11. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Broekhuis, Hans & Norbert Corver. 2015. Syntax of Dutch: Verbs and Verb Phrases, Volume 21. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. “The expressive en maar-construction.” Crossroad Semantics, ed. by H. Reckman, L. Cheng, M. Hijzelendoorn & R. Sybesma. 305–325. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cavirani-Pots, Cora. 2020. Roots in progress. PhD diss., KU Leuven.
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Coppen, Peter-Arno. 2006. “Aan het discussiëren met docenten.” Taalprof Plein, 12 December 2006, [URL]
. 2009. Leren tasten in het duister. Inaugural lecture, Radboud University Nijmegen. [URL]
. 2021. “Het grootste ontleedmysterie.” Onze Taal 90(9): 33.Google Scholar
Coussé, Evie & Gerlof Bouma. 2022. “Semantic scope restrictions in complex verb constructions in Dutch.” Linguistics 601: 123–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Felser, Claudia. 2000. “Aspectual complement clauses and the (un-)availability of Verb Raising.” Verbal projections, ed. by H. Janßen. 163–193. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly. 1993. The rise of functional categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane. 2005. Words and structure. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Haeseryn, Walter, Kirsten Romijn, Guido Geerts, Jaap de Rooij & Maarten van den Toorn. (eds.). 1997. Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. 2nd ed. Groningen: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
IJbema, Aniek. 2003. “Grammaticalization and reanalysis in Dutch aspectual constructions.” Unpublished Ms., Universität Leipzig. [URL]
Lemmens, Maarten. 2015. “Zit je te denken of ben je aan het piekeren? Persistentie in het synchrone gebruik van de PREP- en POS-progressiefconstructies in het Nederlands.” Nederlandse Taalkunde 201: 5–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, Laura. 2004. “Type shifting in construction grammar.” Cognitive Linguistics 151: 1–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moens, Marc & Mark Steedman. 1988. “Temporal ontology and temporal reference.” Computational Linguistics 141: 15–28.Google Scholar
Schuurman, Ineke & Annet Wierenga. 1986. “Syntactische nomen-incorporatie bij infinitieven en deelwoorden.” Tabu 161: 339–350.Google Scholar
Smits, Rik. 1987. “Over de aan het constructie, lexicale morfologie en casustheorie.” Grammaticaliteiten, ed. by N. Corver & J. Koster. 273–329. Tilburg: KU Brabant.Google Scholar
de Swart, Henriëtte. 1998. “Aspect shift and coercion.” Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 161: 347–385. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Pottelberge, Jeroen. 2004. Der am-Progressiv. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verhagen, Arie. 1992. “Praxis of Linguistics: Passives in Dutch.” Cognitive Linguistics 31: 301–342. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwart, Jan-Wouter. 2011. The Syntax of Dutch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar