Nouns and Noun Phrases - University of Macau Library

626 Syntax of Dutch: nouns and noun phrases
the selection restrictions of the verb can apparently be satisfied by the noun
embedded in the van-phrase. This is illustrated by means of example (140a)
involving the quantifier noun aantal ‘number’. Both under the partitive and under
the pseudo-partitive reading the plurality requirement imposed by the verb is
apparently satisfied by the plural noun studenten ‘students’. This follows from the
analysis proposed in the previous section. The structure associated with the partitive
reading is given in (140b): the quantifier noun is followed by an empty noun
functioning as N2 and since the quantifier noun requires this empty noun to be
plural, the latter can satisfy the selection restriction of zich verenigen ‘to unit’ in the
same way as an overt N2 in a QC. The structure associated with the pseudo-partitive
reading is given in (140b′): we are dealing with a regular QC in which N2 has the
form of a spurious PP, and given that this spurious PP refers to a non-singleton set,
the semantic requirement of the verb is satisfied.
(140) a. Een aantal van die studenten verenigen zich.
a number of those students unite REFL
b. [Een aantal epl [PP van die studenten]] verenigen zich.
Partitive: ‘A number of those students (over there) united.’
b′. [Een aantal [NP van die studenten]] verenigen zich.
Pseudo-partitive: ‘A number of students (you know the type I mean) united.’
Recall that the part, container and collective nouns always function as the
syntactic head of a QC and therefore block agreement between the verb and N2, so
it will not come as a surprise that they cannot enter constructions like (140). We
have seen, however, that they do allow N2 to satisfy certain more semantic selection
restrictions that do not have a syntactic reflex: example (141a) shows that the N2
spinazie can satisfy the requirement imposed by the verb eten ‘to eat’ that the direct
object be edible. It is furthermore important to note that example (141b) is
pragmatically odd due to the fact that it only allows a reading in which both the
plate and the spinach have been eaten by Jan; apparently the complement of the PPadjunct
cannot satisfy the selection restriction imposed by the verb.
(141) a. Jan heeft een bord spinazie opgegeten.
Jan has a plate [of] spinach prt.-eaten
b. $ Jan heeft een bord met spinazie opgegeten.
Jan has a plate with spinach prt.-eaten
Example (142a) shows that, under both the partitive and the pseudo-partitive
reading, the selection restriction imposed by eten ‘to eat’ is apparently satisfied by
the noun spinazie in the van-phrase. Again, this follows from the proposed analysis.
The structure associated with the partitive reading is given in (142b): the quantifier
noun is followed by an empty noun functioning as N2, which is construed as
identical to the complement of the van-PP, and since this empty N2 can satisfy the
selection restriction of eten in the same way as an overt N2 in a QC the result is
pragmatically felicitous. The structure associated with the pseudo-partitive reading
is given in (142b′): we are dealing with a regular QC in which N2 has the form of a
spurious PP, and given that this spurious PP refers to an edible substance, the
semantic requirement of the verb is satisfied.