# conjunction connecting wat/wie and its modifiers



## cheshire

Joannes said:
			
		

> Yes, both *wat* and *wie* can be used as fused relatives in Dutch:
> 
> *Wat jij gedaan hebt, is niet mooi!* 'The thing that you did, is not nice!'
> *Wie dat gemaakt heeft, is niet mooi.* 'The person who made that, is not beautiful.'


*(1) Wat jij gedaan hebt, is niet mooi!* 'The thing that you did, is not nice!'​ 

*(2) Wie dat gemaakt heeft, is niet mooi.* 'The person who made that, is not beautiful.'​Hello, everyone! This is my first post in Dutch forum! I got this answer from "Fused relative" thread in OL. I found (1) and (2) unparallel with each other. I think a conjunction connecting an antecedent and its modifier is missing in (1). (The red word for (2)) 

Question 1: If we were to add a conjunction in (1), what would it be like? Is "dat" or "den" OK?

Question 2: Can we drop "dat" in (2)?


----------



## Frank06

Hi,


cheshire said:


> *(1) Wat jij gedaan hebt, is niet mooi!*
> *(2) Wie dat gemaakt heeft, is niet mooi.*
> Question 1: If we were to add a conjunction in (1), what would it be like? Is "dat" or "den" OK?


I don't see the possibility of adding a conjunction in (1).
BTW, what do you mean by 'den'?



> Question 2: Can we drop "dat" in (2)?


In (2), the object of 'maken' is 'dat'. We cannot skip 'dat', since the verb 'maken' requires an object.

Groetjes,

Frank


----------



## Joannes

http://forum.wordreference.com/showpost.php?p=3513940&postcount=9


----------



## HKK

cheshire said:


> *(1) Wat jij gedaan hebt, is niet mooi!* 'The thing that you did, is not nice!'​*(2) Wie dat gemaakt heeft, is niet mooi.* 'The person who made that, is not beautiful.'​Hello, everyone! This is my first post in Dutch forum! I got this answer from "Fused relative" thread in OL. I found (1) and (2) unparallel with each other. I think a conjunction connecting an antecedent and its modifier is missing in (1). (The red word for (2))
> 
> Question 1: If we were to add a conjunction in (1), what would it be like? Is "dat" or "den" OK?
> 
> Question 2: Can we drop "dat" in (2)?



I think the linked posted explained it, but I found it hard to understand. Sorry Joannes 

The two phrases are not parallel. We observe a sentence, and a dependent clause which is its subject.

1) *Wat jij gedaan hebt, is niet mooi!
*2)*Wie dat gemaakt heeft, is niet mooi.

*The red parts are dependent clauses. You can switch them with a name, e.g. Bert is niet mooi. (Sorry to any Berts on the board).

So now we know the dependent clauses are, as a whole, subjects, we can analyze them further.

Wat jij gedaan hebt... 
Wie dat gemaakt heeft...

For these dependent clauses, the subject is in red (jij, wie). The object is in black (wat, dat). So for question 1: 'dat' is not an antecedent in this case. It can be sometimes, but it's just a demonstrative pronoun here. You can switch it with a noun, e.g. Wie Mona Lisa gemaakt heeft... 

Question 2: No, because gemaakt heeft requires an object.

This is quite hard matter  I hope I got it right.


----------



## cheshire

Thanks everyone! I'm sorry I was the one who's mistaken!

2)*Wie dat gemaakt heeft, is niet mooi.

*Can we change the word order of 2 and say the following?

3)Wie heeft gemaakt *dat*, is niet mooi.


----------



## Suehil

No, I'm afraid we can't, the verb must go at the end.


----------



## jeroen94704

> Question 1: If we were to add a conjunction in (1), what would it be like? Is "dat" or "den" OK?



I guess "Dat wat jij gedaan hebt, is niet mooi" would be correct. "Den" makes no sense.

However, note that in english it would also be ok to say "The thing you did, is not nice!"




> Question 2: Can we drop "dat" in (2)?



Nope.


----------



## elroy

I was first perplexed by your questions, but your English translations helped me understand your confusion. Let me try to clarify: 





cheshire said:


> *(1) Wat jij gedaan hebt, is niet mooi!* 'The thing that you did, is not nice!'​*(2) Wie dat gemaakt heeft, is niet mooi.* 'The person who made that, is not beautiful.'​


--In sentence 1, "wat" should not be translated as "the thing" but "what." The correct English translation shows you why a conjunction is not needed ("What you did is not nice"). If you did use "the thing" in Dutch" ("het ding"), you would indeed need a conjunction ("Het ding dat je gedaan hebt is niet mooi").

--In sentence 2, "dat" is not a conjunction, but a pronoun. The thing is that the Dutch word "wie" in this case corresponds to "the person who" (or "he who") - so not just "the person" (or "he"). "Dat" is then the object, not a conjunction. It comes before the verb because this is a dependent clause. In an ordinary independent clause (i.e. one in which "dat" is not emphasized) it comes after the finite verb ("Hij heeft dat gemaakt"). Using a simple verb makes it even clearer ("Hij maakte dat").

Since you know German, the German translations of the sentences might help:

_Was Du getan hast, ist nicht nett._
_Wer das gemacht hat, ist nicht nett._

I hope it's clearer now.


----------



## Joannes

jeroen94704 said:


> I guess "Dat wat jij gedaan hebt, is niet mooi" would be correct. "Den" makes no sense.


 
*Dat* is no conjunction in that case, but a demonstrative pronoun, *wat* introduces the relative clause.


----------



## cheshire

Thanks! I'm glad that we're blessed with a lot of intelligent people on WRF! I noticed my mistake when Joannes gave a detailed answer in the link. But additional answers are helpful too!

I'm beginning to learn that Dutch is more closer to German than to English.


----------

