Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

Separable complex verbs (SCVs)

quickinfo

Separable complex verbs (SCVs), referred to as "scheidbaar samengestelde werkwoorden" or "samenkoppelingen" in grammars of Dutch, are combinations of a verb (sometimes also a noun or an adjective) and some other word. Examples are aanvallen to attack, opsommen to sum up and opfrissen to freshen up. These combinations have both word-like and phrasal properties. The following sentences illustrate the use of SCVs in embedded clauses (1a-5a)) and main clauses (1b-5b)):

dat de leeuw het hert aan-val-t

CONJ DEF.C.SG lion(C)SG DEF.SG.N deer(N)SG at-fall-3SG.PRS

that the lion attacks the deer

De leeuw val-t het hert aan

DEF.SG.C lion(C)SG fall-3SG.PRS DEF.SG.N deer(N)SG at

the lion attacks the deer

dat Vader neer-stort-te

CONJ Father down-fall-3SG.PST

that Father fell down

Vader stort-te neer

Father fall-3SG.PST down

Father fell down

dat Jan het huis schoon-maak-te

CONJ Jan DEF.SG.N house(N)SG clean-make-3SG.PST

that Jan cleaned the house

Jan maak-te het huis schoon

Jan make-3SG.PST DEF.SG.N house(N)SG clean

Jan cleaned the house

dat Rebecca piano-speel-de

CONJ Rebecca piano-play-3SG.PST

that Rebecca played the piano

Rebecca speel-de piano

Rebecca play-3SG.PST piano

Rebecca played the piano

dat Wim ons teleur-stel-de

CONJ Wim 3SG.OBL sad-put-3SG.PST

that Wim disappointed us

Wim stel-de ons teleur

Wim put-3SG.PST 3SG.OBL sad

Wim disappointed us

According to the rules of Dutch orthography, SCVs have to be written as one word when the two parts are adjacent, reflecting the status of these word combinations as lexical units.

The word in front of the verb in SCVs is called preverb. Preverbs can come from different lexical categories: adpositions (1), adverbs (2), adjectives (3), nouns (4) and bound roots (5).

Preverbally used adpositions are also referred to as particles, and the SCV is then referred to as a particle verb. Particle verbs form a productive class of SCVs. SCVs with a noun as preverb are also treated under the heading of quasi noun incorporation.

The semantics of SCV is often not fully predictable.

The addition of a particle may change an intransitive verb into a transitive one. Compare: juichen to cheer (intransitive) - iemand toe-juichen to cheer somebody, lopen to walk - de straten af-lopen to tramp the streets.

In linguistic research, SCVs have been the subject of much debate, particular for their intermediate status between words and phrases. The following references are key publications for further reading: Blom (2004, 2005a, 2005b); Blom and Booij (2003), Booij (2002, 2010); (Los et al. 2012), Neeleman (1994); Neeleman and Weerman (1993).

Distinguishing SCVs from prefixed verbs
The idiosyncratic semantics of SCVs
The preverb
Creating particle verbs from other lexical categories
The morphological potential of SCVs
The syntax of SCVs

[+]Distinguishing SCVs from prefixed verbs

The main property of SCVs is the separability of the preverb from the stem. This is what distinguishes them from prefixed verbs, which may look similar in some environments, as some particles correspond with prefixes. Consider the following uses of the particle verb voorkomen /ˈvorˌkomən/ to happen and the prefixed verb voorkomen /ˌvorˈkomən/ to prevent:

Ongelukken komen 'voor.

accident-PL come-3PL.PRS for

Accidents may happen

Goede regels voor-'komen ongelukken

good-PL rule-PL for-come.3PL.PRS accident-PL

Good rules prevent accidents.

In contrast to the particles, the prefixes cannot be separated from the stem. Moreover, prefixed verbs carry main stress on the verbal stem, while SCVs are stressed on the non-verbal constituent. Compare the following pairs:

Table 1

SCV	Prefixed verb
doorboren /ˈdoorˌboren/ to go on drilling	doorboren /ˌdoorˈboren/ to perforate
omblazen /ˈomˌblazen/ to blow down	omblazen /ˌomˈblazen/ to blow around
ondergaan /ˈonderˌgaan/ to go under	ondergaan /ˌonderˈgaan/ to undergo
overkomen /ˈoverˌkomen/ to come over	overkomen /ˌoverˈkomen/ to happen to
voorkomen /ˈvoorˌkomen/ to occur	voorkomen /ˌvoorˈkomen/ to prevent

extra

Words or phrases? Morphology or syntax?

The main argument for a phrasal analysis is that SCVs are separable: in root clauses, the tensed verbal form appears in second position, whereas the other part of the SCV is stranded in its underlying position, as in Hans belt zijn moeder op Hans calls his mother. We also see the separability of SCVs in the phenomenon of Verb Raising. Sentence (7a) represents the underlying SOV word order. The main verb wilde wanted selects a sentential complement with a particle verb. When the verb of an embedded clause is raised to the matrix clause, the SCV can be split, as in (7b), but it can also be treated as a unit, as in (7c):

dat Hans zijn moeder op-bell-en wil-de

CONJ Hans POSS.M.SG mother(C)SG up-call-INF want-3SG.PST

that Hans wanted to call his mother

dat Hans zijn moeder op wil-de bell-en

CONJ Hans POSS.M.SG mother(C)SG up want-3SG.PST call-INF

that Hans wanted to call his mother

dat Hans zijn moeder wil-de op-bell-en

CONJ Hans POSS.M.SG mother(C)SG want-3SG.PST up-call-INF

that Hans wanted to call his mother

Sentence (7c) shows that there is the possibility that the SCV forms a unit for Verb Raising. They can also behave as a unit in the Progressive construction aan het + infinitive at the V-INF V-ing (example (8a)), though aan het can also occur between the preverb and the verb, as in (8b).

Hans is zijn moeder aan het op-bell-en

Hans be.3SG.PRS POSS.M.SG mother(C)SG at DEF.N.SG up-call-INF

Hans is calling his mother

Hans is zijn moeder op aan het bell-en

Hans be.3SG.PRS POSS.M.SG mother(C)SG up at DEF.N.SG call-INF

Hans is calling his mother

Whereas opbellen can appear after aan het (example (8a)), this is not the case for the VP zijn moeder bellen (example (9a)). The only possible construction is (9b), where the object precedes aan het. This shows that opbellen has a special syntactic status.

iii

*Hans is aan het zijn moeder bell-en

Hans be.3SG.PRS at DEF.N.SG POSS.M.SG mother(C)SG call-INF

Hans is calling his mother

Hans is zijn moeder aan het bell-en

Hans be.3SG.PRS POSS.M.SG mother(C)SG at DEF.N.SG call-INF

Hans is calling his mother

Moreover, the separability of Dutch SCVs can be observed in the location of the infinitival particle te that occurs between the two constituents of SCVs, as in op te bellen, and in the form of the past participle, with the prefix ge- in between the particle and the verbal stem: opgebeld op-ge-bel-d. Past participles are formed in Dutch by means of the simultaneous attachment of the prefix ge- and the suffix -t/-d/-en. Ablauting verbs choose the suffix -en, regular verbs select -t when the stem ends in a voiceless obstruent, and -d otherwise. In derivational morphology, SCVs behave similarly; for instance, the ge-nominalization of opbellen is opgebel op-ge-bel, with the nominalizing prefix ge- between the particle and the verbal stem.

The separability of the two constituents of SCVs has prompted some linguists to give a syntactic account of such complex predicates. This account usually takes the form of a so-called Small Clause-analysis: the particle is considered as the predicate of a Small Clause (SC), a subject-predicate combination without a copula, which is then raised to the matrix clause, and Chomsky-adjoined to the verb of the matrix clause (Hoekstra 1988). In such an analysis the following surface structure is assigned to the verb phrase het huiswerk afmaken to finish one’s homework (t is the trace of the moved PP af ‘finished’): [[het huiswerk](NP)[t(i)]](PP)](SC) [[af(i)](PP)[maken](V)](V). The SCV afmaken is a structural unit, which can thus take part in Verb Raising. The particle in this structure expresses the result of the action expressed by the verb. In such an analysis, particle verbs are instantiations of regular syntactic structures that express a resultative meaning (Hoekstra 1988).

The word-like properties, however, have led a number of linguists to take the opposite view that particle verbs are morphological constructions created by a pre-syntactic morphological component (Ackema 1999a, 1999b, Neeleman 1994, Neeleman & Weerman 1993). Such analyses necessitate a weakening of the principle of Lexical Integrity by allowing syntactic rules to move parts of complex words.

The debate on the proper analysis of SCVs as being either morphology or syntax reflects a view of the architecture of the grammar in which there is sharp divide between morphological operations and the lexion on the one hand and syntax on the other. This sharp boundary between lexicon and syntax has been challenged in the theoretical framework of Construction Grammar. In particular the notion 'constructional idiom' has been used to do justice to both the phrasal and the word-like properties of SCVs. The following analysis is proposed in Booij (2010):

Preverbs are words that have the status X0 (bare head), which means that they do not project a full phrase. SCVs consist of these non-projecting elements and a verb. They have the syntactic structure [X0 V0]V' where X0 = P, Adv, A or N. The V'-node, a level of projection directly above V, captures their phrasal nature and hence their syntactic separability.

The conventionalized aspect of the meaning of SCVs is expressed as a property of the whole construction. Subcases with specific meanings may form semantic chains, related by semantic extension mechanisms like metaphor and metonymy. For instance, the particle op, which is also a locative adposition, shows up with the following meanings in particle verbs (Blom 2004: 14):

a.	`to (cause to) move upward'
	optillen	to lift up
	opgooien	to toss up
	opgraven	to dig up

b.	`to (cause to) surface'
	opborrelen	to bubble up
	opgraven	to dig up
	opduiken	to bring to the surface, to surface

c.	`to (cause to) appear / become visible'
	opduiken	to turn up
	opdienen	to serve up
	opzoeken	to look up

d.	`to (cause to) become perceptually / cognitively accessible'
	opvragen	to ask for
	opbellen	to phone up
	oppiepen	to beep up

[+]The idiosyncratic semantics of SCVs

In many cases, the meaning of an SCV is not fully predictable. This can be illustrated by the different SCVs with the verb vallen to fall:

aanvallen

to attack

afvallen

to lose weight

bijvallen

to agree with/ applaud

invallen

to invade/ to set in/ to replace temporarily

meevallen

to turn out better than expected

opvallen

to draw attention

tegenvallen

to disappoint

This means that SCVs have to be stored in the lexicon. Lexical storage of SCVs is also necessary for another reason: the preverbs and the verbs themselves do not always occur as independent words. Consider: gadeslaan to watch but *gade, nabootsen to imitate but *bootsen, omkukelen to fall down but *kukelen, opkalefateren to restore but *kalefateren.

A different group of examples has complex preverbs that fail to occur on their own: teleurstellen to disappoint, tenietdoen nullify, tentoonstellen to exhibit. The bases teleur, teniet and tentoon derive from lexicalized PPs with the preposition te to.

[+]The preverb

The preverb, the left-hand part of an SCV, can stem from different lexical categories: adpositions, adverbs, adjectives, nouns and bound roots. Adpositional preverbs are also referred to as particles, and the SCV is referred to as a particle verb. Particle verbs form a productive category of SCVs. For example, productive use can be observed for the particles af,door,aan,in,op, and uit:

Table 2

Simplex verb	Particle verb
rijden to drive	afrijden to take one's driving examination
drinken to drink	doordrinken to drink on
delen to share	opdelen to divide
huren to rent	inhuren to hire
leveren to deliver	aanleveren to deliver
splitsen to split	opsplitsen to split
schatten to estimate	inschatten to estimate
sturen to steer	aansturen to steer
testen to test	uittesten to test

In the first two examples, the particle changes the meaning of the verb by adding a specific (aspectual) meaning:af can be used productively to form telic verbs, while door creates durative verbs. These are cases of "bound meanings" (Marchand 1969): meanings of words tied to specific constructions.

extra

Recurrent bound meanings of particles can be accounted for by assuming constructional idioms for each of these particles. A constructional idiom is a (phrasal or morphological) pattern in which some positions are specified, and others are left open. For instance, we may assume a construction idiom for particle verbs with the particle door, which expresses continuation: [door-V](V’) to continue V-ing(Booij 2002).

In the other examples, by contrast, the meaning contribution of the particles is very vague, and sometimes fully absent. The only general difference between such simplex verbs and their particle verb counterparts is that the particle verb is always obligatorily transitive, whereas the simplex verb may be used without an overt direct object. That is, the primary function of these particles is on the level of syntactic valency.

Like many SCVs, SCVs with an adjectival or adverbial preverb often have an idiosyncratic meaning:

bloot-staan

naked-stand

to be exposed

goed-keuren

good-judge

to approve

groot-brengen

big-bring

to raise (a child)

vreemd-gaan

strange-go

to sleep around

That such constructions are SCVs rather than free syntactic constructions can be seen from two properties: their behaviour under Verb Raising and the fact that the adjective or adverb cannot be modified. With regard to raising, we see the two options that are typical for SCVs: separating preverb and verb (12a) and treating them as one unit (12b). Option b) is not available for ordinary syntactic constructions in which the adverb is a free element modifying the verb (13b).

hij beloof-de dat hij niet meer vreemd zou gaan

3SG.M promise-3SG.PST CONJ 3SG.M not more strange AUX go.INF

he promised not to sleep around anymore

hij beloof-de dat hij niet meer zou vreemd-gaan

3SG.M promise-3SG.PST CONJ 3SG.M not more AUX strange-go.INF

he promised not to sleep around anymore

hij beloofde dat hij niet meer vreemd zou lopen

3SG.M promise-3SG.PST CONJ 3SG.M not more strange AUX walk.INF

he promised not to walk funnily anymore

*hij beloof-de dat hij niet meer zou vreemd-lopen

3SG.M promise-3SG.PST CONJ 3SG.M not more AUX strange-walk.INF

he promised not to walk funnily anymore

Similarly, SCVs do not allow modification of the adverb (14a), a process that is unproblematic for adverbs outside SCVs (14b).

*Hij ging heel vreemd

3SG.M go-3SG.PST very strange

He slept around a lot.

Hij liep heel vreemd

3SG.M walk-3SG.PST very strange

He walked very funnily.

Syntactically speaking, this restriction on SCVs follows from the proposed structure since the left constituent is specified as a bare adjective, not as an AP. Hence, it is impossible to modify the adjective in that position.

There are quite a number of adverbs that can be used in Dutch SCVs, including complex locational and temporal adverbs such as omlaag down and achtereen continuously. (15a) contains a simple adverb, (15b) a complex one:

thuis-brengen

home-bring

to bring home, to identify

om-laag-brengen

down-low-bring

to lower

extra

The following adverbs can serve as preverbs in SCVs:

a.	simplex adverbs
heen
neer
samen
terecht
thuis
voort
weg

b.	complex adverbs that denote a direction
achteraan
achteraf
achterna
achterom
achterop
achteruit
omhoog
omlaag
vooraan
vooraf
voorin
voorop
vooruit

c.	complex adverbs that denote a state
aaneen
bijeen
dooreen
ineen
opeen
uiteen
achterover
voorover
omver
onderuit

The meaning of separable complex verbs with these adverbs is usually quite transparent, and the meaning of the verb is preserved. In this respect, they differ from particle verbs, which often have an idiosyncratic meaning.

Most of the SCVs with adjectives are cases of lexicalization; only a few patterns, such as the open-V combination, are productive.

[+]Creating particle verbs from other lexical categories

Particle verbs can be formed not only from verbs, but also from adjectives and nouns. The following examples illustrate the category-determining power of the construction (the particle verbs are given in their stem form):

Table 3

Adjectival base	Particle verb
helder clear	ophelder clarify
hoog high	ophoog raise
knap clever, beautiful	opknap tidy up, do up
leuk nice	opleuk make nicer

Table 4

Nominal base	Particle verb
hoop heap	ophoop heap up
luister lustre	opluister add lustre
som sum	opsom sum up

In all these examples, the corresponding simple verbs (i.e. without particles) do not exist independently (with the exception of luisteren listen, which has a completely unrelated meaning). Hence it is the combination with the particle that makes these adjectives and nouns function as verbs.

[+]The morphological potential of SCVs

SCVs may form the bases for other derived verbs, nouns and adjectives. They also occur as left-hand members of compound nouns. Some examples:

Table 5: Verbs

SCV	Derived verb
invoeren to introduce, to enter	herinvoeren to reintroduce
uitgeven to publish	heruitgeven to republish
uitzenden to transmit, broadcast	heruitzenden to retransmit

Table 6: Nouns

SCV	Derived noun
aanbieden to offer	aanbieder offerer
aankomen to arrive	aankomst arrival
opbellen to phone	opgebel (repeated) phoning

Table 7: Adjectives

SCV	Derived adjective
aantonen to demonstrate	aantoonbaar demonstrable
aantrekken to attract	aantrekkelijk attractive

Table 8: Compounds

SCV	Compound
doorkiezen to dial through	doorkiesnummer direct number
doorkijken to see through	doorkijkbloes transparent blouse
opbergen to store	opbergdoos storage box

Nouns that are formed from particle verbs by conversion always have common gender.

extra

Derived nouns and grammatical gender

There is a systematic correlation between the gender of a converted noun and the form of the corresponding verb. If a verb is simplex, the converted noun has common gender and selects the definite article de in the singular; if the verb is prefixed, the corresponding noun has neuter gender and selects the definite article het: bouwen to build > de bouw the construction, vallen to fall > de val the fall, but besturen to govern > het bestuur the board/ administration/ management, gebruiken to use > het gebruik the use. Prefixed verbs correspond with het-nouns, but particle verbs with de-nouns. This is exactly what is expected, since conversion operates on the head of the particle verb which is simplex in nature: aanvallen to attack > de aanval the attack, aftrappen to kick off > de aftrap the kick-off.

Such nominalizations of particle verbs may reflect the fact that such verbs are often multiply polysemous: nominalizations sometimes have different forms for different submeanings. The following examples illustrate this phenomenon:

uit-geven

Table 9

to spend	uitgave expense
to publish	uitgave issue
to issue	uitgifte distribution, Belgian Dutch: uitgeving distribution

aan-nemen

Table 10

to assume	aanname assumption
to contract	aanneming contract- as in aannemingsbedrijf contract company

op-nemen

Table 11

to record	opname recording
to hospitalize	opname hospitalization
ascend to heaven	opneming ascension

uit-voeren

Table 12

to export	uitvoer export
to perform	uitvoering performance

Adjectives derived from SCVs exhibit a systematic difference in main stress location from adjectives derived from other types of complex verbs: the former move the main stress to the syllable right before the adjectival suffix, the latter retain the stress of the verbal base.

Table 13

Adjectives derived from SCVs	Adjectives derived from other complex verbs
ínzet employ > inzétbaar employable	beínvloed influence > beínvloedbaar impressionable
úitsteek excel > uitstékend excellent	verwáarloos neglect > verwáarloosbaar negligible

Participles of SCVs show their phrasal nature: the prefixal part ge- of the participial form appears in between the preverb and the verbal stem.

op-ge-bel-d

on-PTCP-phone-PTCP

phoned

neer-ge-daal-d

down-PTCP-descend-PTCP

descended

schoon-ge-maak-t

clean-PTCP-make-PTCP

cleaned

The participial prefix ge- cannot be added before the particle, because it requires a V as its base, not a V’. Yet, the semantic scope of the participial prefix-suffix combination is not only the verb, but the particle-verb combination as a whole.

[+]The syntax of SCVs

A preverb can be raised with its verb to a higher clause (17c), and can appear after aan het in the [aan het+ inf] construction (18a):

dat Hans zijn moeder op-bellen wil-de

CONJ Hans POSS.3SG.M mother.C up-phone.INF want-3SG.PST

that Hans wanted to phone his mother

dat Hans zijn moeder op wil-de bellen

CONJ Hans POSS.3SG.M mother.C up want-3SG.PST phone.INF

that Hans wanted to phone his mother

dat Hans zijn moeder wil-de op-bellen

CONJ Hans POSS.3SG.M mother.C want-3SG.PST up-phone.INF

that Hans wanted to phone his mother

*dat Hans wil-de zijn moeder op-bellen

CONJ Hans want-3SG.PST POSS.3SG.M mother.C up-phone.INF

that Hans wanted to phone his mother

Hans is zijn moeder aan het op-bell-en

Hans be.3SG.PRS POSS.SG.M mother(C)SG at DEF.N.SG up-call-INF

Hans is calling his mother

Hans is zijn moeder op aan het bell-en

Hans be.3SG.PRS POSS.SG.M mother(C)SG up at DEF.N.SG call-INF

Hans is calling his mother

*Hans is aan het zijn moeder bell-en

Hans be.3SG.PRS at DEF.N.SG POSS.SG.M mother(C)SG call-INF

Hans is calling his mother

Hans is zijn moeder aan het bell-en

Hans be.3SG.PRS POSS.SG.M mother(C)SG at DEF.N.SG call-INF

Hans is calling his mother

For the progressive construction aan het + infinitive at the V-INF V-ing (example (18a-d)), incorporation of the particle is the preferred variant, but both variants occur. This ambiguous behaviour of SCVs can be accounted for by incorporation: a bare element followed by a verb can be structurally interpreted as a syntactic compound. Hence,op-bellen may receive two structural interpretations: phrase [P0 V0](V') or syntactic compound [P0 V0](V0). Verb raising in standard Dutch raises V0, not V’, as shown by the ungrammaticality of (18c), where we see a simple verb, not a particle verb. Hence the variable behaviour of SCVs follows from the availability of two structural interpretations. Similarly, the progressive construction with simple verbs accepts only V0-infinitives.

SCVs with adjectives and adverbs exhibit the same behaviour. For instance, the adjective open open functions as a preverb. The difference with an adjective that is not a preverb, such as groen green, can be seen in the Verb Raising construction:

dat ik de deur wil-de open-maken

CONJ 1SG DEF.SG.C door(C)SG want-3SG.PST open-make.INF

that I wanted to open the door

dat ik de deur open wilde maken

CONJ 1SG DEF.SG.C door(C)SG open-make.INF want-3SG.PST

that I wanted to open the door

*dat ik de deur wilde groen verven

CONJ 1SG DEF.SG.C door(C)SG want-3SG.PST green paint.INF

that I wanted to paint the door green

dat ik de deur groen wilde verven

CONJ 1SG DEF.SG.C door(C)SG green paint.INF want-3SG.PST

that I wanted to paint the door green

Since groen does not form a verbal constituent with verven, the modal verb wilde cannot be adjoined to the word sequence groen verven because it does not form a SCV. On the other hand, the grammaticality of the sequence wilde open maken shows that open maken is a verbal unit. Thus, we must assume a constructional idiom [[open](A0) [x](V0)](V'), and a corresponding syntactic compound.

References

Los, Bettelou, Blom, Corrien, Booij, Geert, Elenbaas, Marion & Kemenade, Ans van (eds.)2012Morphosyntactic change: a comparative study of particles and prefixesCambridge University Press
Ackema, Peter1999Issues in morpho-syntaxAmsterdam / PhiladelphiaBenjamins
Ackema, Peter1999The non-uniform structure of Dutch N-V compoundsBooij, Geert & Marle, Jaap van (eds.)Yearbook of Morphology 1998DordrechtKluwer127-158
Blom, Corrien2004On the diachrony of complex predicates in Dutch: Predicative and non-predicative preverbsJournal of Germanic Linguistics161-75
Blom, Corrien2004On the diachrony of complex predicates in Dutch: Predicative and non-predicative preverbsJournal of Germanic Linguistics161-75
Blom, Corrien2005Complex predicates in Dutch. Synchrony and diachronyAmsterdamFree University AmsterdamThesis
Blom, Corrien2005The demarcation of morphology and syntax: A diachronic perspective on particle verbsDressler, Wolfgang U., Kastovsky, Dieter, Pfeiffer, Oskar E. & Rainer, Franz (eds.)Morphology and its demarcationsAmsterdam / PhiladelphiaBenjamins53-66
Blom, Corrien & Booij, Geert2003The diachrony of complex predicates in Dutch: a case study in grammaticalizationActa Linguistica Hungarica5061-91
Booij, Geert2002Separable complex verbs in Dutch: a case of periphrastic word formationDehé, Nicole, Jackendoff, Ray, McIntyre, Andrew & Urban, Silke (eds.)Verb-particle explorationsBerlinMouton de Gruyter21-42
Booij, Geert2002Separable complex verbs in Dutch: a case of periphrastic word formationDehé, Nicole, Jackendoff, Ray, McIntyre, Andrew & Urban, Silke (eds.)Verb-particle explorationsBerlinMouton de Gruyter21-42
Booij, Geert2010Construction morphologyOxford/New YorkOxford University Press
Hoekstra, Teun1988Small clause resultsLingua74101-139
Hoekstra, Teun1988Small clause resultsLingua74101-139
Neeleman, Ad1994Complex predicatesUtrechtUniversity of UtrechtThesis
Neeleman, Ad1994Complex predicatesUtrechtUniversity of UtrechtThesis
Neeleman, Ad & Weerman, Fred1993The balance between syntax and morphology: Dutch particles and resultativesNatural Language & Linguistic Theory11433-475
Neeleman, Ad & Weerman, Fred1993The balance between syntax and morphology: Dutch particles and resultativesNatural Language & Linguistic Theory11433-475

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Geert Booij, Jenny Audring

Category: Dutch Morphology

Keywords: separablecomplexverbscvparticle verbpreverb

Version: 1.0, December 2015

Version history:

version	editor(s)	date	remarks
1.0	Geert Booij, Jenny Audring	December 2015

printreport errorcite

Jump to:

introduction
references
related articles