This paper presents the results of a corpus-based investigation into the occurrence of the particle ‘dan’ in Dutch conditional sentences introduced by the conjunction ‘als’. Depending on the word order in the matrix, ‘als’-conditionals in which the protasis precedes the apodosis (als p, q) can be subdivided into three distinct main clause types: inversion (1), ‘dan’ + inversion (2), and the straightforward verb-second pattern (3).

(1) Als het morgen regent, blijven we thuis. [If it rains tomorrow, we will stay at home.]

(2) Als het morgen regent, dan blijven we thuis. [If it rains tomorrow, then we will stay at home.]

(3) Als je dorst hebt, er is limonade in de koelkast. [If you are thirsty, there is lemonade in the refrigerator.]

These three types correspond to three different degrees of clause integration, which are referred to as integration (1), resumption (2) and non-integration (3) respectively (König & Van der Auwera 1988) and which each take their place along the cline of clause combining, as defined within the framework of grammaticalization (Hopper & Traugott 1993). Non-integration is generally considered an exceptional case because it only occurs in conditionals involving a very specific kind of connection between protasis and apodosis. The integrative type 1-word order, on the other hand, is the prototypical construction, but according to standard grammars can always be replaced with a resumptive type 2-structure without any semantic consequences.

On a semantico-pragmatic level the connection between protasis and apodosis may take on different forms. Following Sweetser’s proposal (1990) we distinguish three major categories: content conjunction, epistemic or inferential conjunction, and speech act conjunction. In the case of content conjunction the protasis and apodosis make up a single complex proposition, which is assertable in its entirety. Sentences (1 – 2) may serve as examples. In the case of epistemic conjunction, however, the conditional indicates a condensed line of reasoning: the apodosis expresses a conclusion drawn from the premisse given in the protasis (4).

(4) Als hij het weet, moet er een lek geweest zijn. [If he knows, there must have been a leak.]

Finally, in the case of speech act conjunction, of which (3) is a fine example, the protasis enables or justifies the speech act in the apodosis, in that it produces an appropriate context in which the speech act can be adequately performed. This kind of relationship is, however, not restricted to the non-integrative word order of (3), but can also be expressed by either type 1- or type 2-constructions (cfr. 5):

(5) Als je tijd hebt, (dan) kun je me misschien even helpen. [If you have a moment, (then) perhaps you could help me out.]

Within the framework of grammaticalization a hypothesis of diagrammatic iconicity has been formulated which states that the degree of syntactic integration of two sentences tends to be directly proportionate to their semantico-pragmatic integration. With respect to the use of ‘dan’ (resumption) this entails that – even though the particle is basically not subject to any kind of restrictions – it will probably prevail in less integrated constructions.

To a large extent, this hypothesis is corroborated by the findings of our corpus-based research: most occurrences of ‘dan’ are indeed found in conditional sentences with less integration. Still, the use of ‘dan’ may be determined by other factors as well. Certain phenomena of protasis word order and the use of modal particles both appear to favour resumptive patterns.