When the Double Infinitive Does Not Apply

Level 5

While Dutch usually replaces a past participle with an infinitive when another verb follows (the Double Infinitive or IPP rule), certain verbs are exceptions. These verbs keep their participle form (e.g., gekregen, gestaan) even when used in a cluster.

How It Works

In Dutch, the Infinitivus Pro Participio (IPP) rule states that if a verb governs another verb in the perfect tense, you use two infinitives instead of a participle. But there are specific cases where this does not apply:

1. Resultative Constructions
Verbs like krijgen (to get) and hebben (to have) often describe a state or a result when paired with a past participle. In these cases, they do not change to an infinitive. For example: Ik heb het gedaan gekregen (I got it done). Posture verbs like staan (to stand) or liggen (to lie) follow the IPP rule when governing an infinitive (Ik heb staan wachten), but remain participles when paired with another participle (De auto heeft daar geparkeerd gestaan).

2. The 'Te-Infinitive' vs. Bare Infinitive
For verbs like helpen (to help) and leren (to learn/teach), the use of IPP depends on the construction:

  • If you use a te-infinitive, you must use the participle: Ik heb hem geholpen te koken.
  • If you use a bare infinitive, you must use IPP and drop the 'te': Ik heb hem helpen koken.

Verbs that always require 'te', such as proberen (to try), almost always remain participles: Ik heb geprobeerd te bellen.

Word Order Note: While standard IPP requires the auxiliary (hebben/zijn) to precede the cluster, resultative constructions with participles are more flexible. In a subclause, you can say ...dat ik het geprobeerd heb or ...dat ik het heb geprobeerd. In complex resultative clusters, the auxiliary can even be interposed: ...dat ik het gedaan heb gekregen.

Examples (5)

  1. Ik heb het rapport eindelijk geschreven gekregen.

    I finally got the report written.

    Word by Word: I have the report finally written gotten.

    Here, 'krijgen' is a resultative exception. Even though it follows 'afgeschreven', it stays as the participle 'gekregen'.

  2. De auto heeft de hele middag fout geparkeerd gestaan.

    The car was parked incorrectly all afternoon.

    Word by Word: The car has the whole afternoon wrong parked stood.

    When 'staan' is used with a participle like 'geparkeerd', it remains 'gestaan' rather than switching to the infinitive.

  3. Ik heb hem geholpen te verhuizen.

    I helped him move (formal).

    Word by Word: I have him helped to move.

    Because 'te' is used, 'helpen' remains a participle ('geholpen'). In informal speech, you might hear 'Ik heb hem helpen verhuizen' (IPP).

  4. Zij heeft geprobeerd de deur te openen.

    She tried to open the door.

    Word by Word: She has tried the door to open.

    'Proberen' almost always takes a 'te-infinitive', so it stays as the participle 'geprobeerd'.

  5. We hebben het huis verkocht gekregen.

    We managed to get the house sold.

    Word by Word: We have the house sold gotten.

    Another example of 'krijgen' acting as a resultative exception.

Common Mistakes

  • Using the double infinitive for 'krijgen' in resultative clusters.

    Ik heb het gedaan krijgen.
    Ik heb het gedaan gekregen.

    Learners often over-apply the IPP rule. 'Krijgen' does not trigger IPP when it follows a past participle.

  • Omitting 'te' when using the participle form of 'proberen'.

    Ik heb geprobeerd bellen.
    Ik heb geprobeerd te bellen.

    If you use the participle 'geprobeerd', you must use the 'te + infinitive' construction.

How It Connects

Tap a pattern to see what it builds on and what it leads to.

When the Double Infinitive Does Not ApplyLevel 5

Learn This First

To understand IPP exceptions, you first need to be familiar with the standard Double Infinitive (IPP) construction in the perfect tense. You also need to recognize strong past participles (ending in -en), as these are the forms that 'exception' verbs use instead of the infinitive.