Particles and prefixes in Dutch and English

  • Ans Van Kemenade
  • Bettelou Los
Part of the Yearbook of Morphology book series (YOMO)

Abstract

This paper charts the historical development of two sets of verbal prefixes in the West-Germanic languages, which appear to show a large degree of functional equivalence, although they have rather different morphosyntactic properties. The first set is inseparable, as found in the Dutch verbs verbranden ‘burn’, beschrijven ‘describe’, ontmoeten ‘meet’; while the second set is separable, as found in the Dutch verbs opbellen ‘call up’, afzeggen ‘call off’, wegblazen ‘blow away’.

Keywords

Posit Eten Bleach Prefix Mast 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aarts, B. (1989). Verb-preposition constructions and small clauses in English. Journal of Linguistics 25, 277–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aarts, F. and J. Aarts (1982). English Syntactic Structures. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  3. Ackerman, F. (1987). Miscreant Morphemes: Phrasal Predicates in Ugric. Diss. Stanford University.Google Scholar
  4. Admoni, V.G. (1966). Stroj Sovremennogo Nemckogo Jazyka/Der deutsche Sprachbau. 2nd edition. Moscow/Leningrad.Google Scholar
  5. Anthony, E.M. Jr. (1953). Test Frames for Structures with UP in modern American English. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms.Google Scholar
  6. Berg, H. van den (2002). Spatial prefixes in Akusha Dargi (East Caucasian). Paper delivered at the 10th International Morphology Conference, Szentendre, Hungary, 9–12 May 2002.Google Scholar
  7. Bolinger, D. (1971). The Phrasal Verb in English. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Boogaart (1999). Aspect and Temporal Ordering: A Contrastive Analysis of Dutch and English (LOT Dissertations 27). The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.Google Scholar
  9. Booij, G.E. (1990). The boundary between morphology and syntax: Separable complex verbs in Dutch. In: G. E. Booij and J. van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1990. Dordrecht: Foris, 45–63.Google Scholar
  10. Booij, G.E. (1992). Morphology, Semantics and Argument Structure. In: I.M Roca (ed.), Thematic structure: Its role in grammar. Berlin/New York: Foris, 47–64.Google Scholar
  11. Booij, G.E. (1998). Samenkoppelingen en grammaticalisatie. Morfologiedagen 1996, edited by E. Hoekstra and C. Smits. Amsterdam: Meertens Instituut, 6–20.Google Scholar
  12. Booij, G.E. (2002). The Morphology of Dutch. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  13. Booij, G.E. and T. van Haaften (1988). The external syntax of derived words, evidence from Dutch. In: G E. Booij and J. van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1988, 29–44. Booij, G.E. and A. van Kemenade (this volume). Introduction.Google Scholar
  14. Brinton, L.J. (1988). The Development of English Aspectual Systems: Aspectualizers and post-verbal Particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Cappelle, B. (2002). And up it rises: Particle preposing in English. In: Dehé et al., 43–66.Google Scholar
  16. Claridge, C. (2000). Multi-word Verbs in early Modern English: A Corpus-based Study. (Language and Computers 32). Amsterdam/Atlanta: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  17. Dehé, N., R. Jackendoff, A. McIntyre and S. Urban (2002). Verb-particle Explorations (Interface Explorations 1), Introduction. Barlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1–20.Google Scholar
  18. Delbrück, B. (1910). Zur Stellung des Verbums im Gotischen und Altisländischen. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 36, 359–365.Google Scholar
  19. Delbrück, B. (1911). Germanische Syntax II: Zur Stellung des Verbums. Abhandlungen der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, philologisch-historische Klasse, 28.7. Lzipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
  20. Denison, D. (1981). Aspects of the History of English Group-verbs, with particular Attention to the Syntax of the Ormulum, diss. Oxford University.Google Scholar
  21. Denison, D. (1985). The origins of completive up in English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 86, 37–61.Google Scholar
  22. Dikken, M. den (1995). Particles: On the Syntax of Verb-particle, Triadic, and Causative Constructions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Dikken, M. den (2002). Review of Zeller, J. (2001). Particle Verbs and local Domains. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today), Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 4, 145–169.Google Scholar
  24. Eythórsson, Th. (1995). Verbal syntax in the early Germanic Languages. Diss. Cornell University.Google Scholar
  25. Fairclough, N.L. (1965). Studies in the Collocation of lexical Items with Prepositions and Adverbs in a Corpus of spoken and written Present-day English. MA thesis, University College London.Google Scholar
  26. Ferraresi, G. (1997). Word Order and Phrase Structure in Gothic. Dissertation Stuttgart University.Google Scholar
  27. Fischer, O., A. van Kemenade, W. Koopman, and W. van der Wurff (eds.) (2000). The Syntax of early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Fraser, B. (1965). An Examination of the Verb-particle Construction in English. Dissertation MIT.Google Scholar
  29. Fraser, B. (1976). The verb-particle combination in English. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  30. Grewendorf, G. (1990). Verbbewegung und Negation im Deutschen. Groninger Arbeiten zur germanistischen Linguistik 30, Groningen: Germanistisch Instituut, University of Groningen, 57–125.Google Scholar
  31. Harris, A.C. (this volume) Preverbs and their origins in Georgian and Udi.Google Scholar
  32. Healey, A.D. and R.L. Venezky (1985[1980]). A Microfiche Concordance to Old English. Toronto: The Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval StudiesGoogle Scholar
  33. Hiltunen, R. (1983). The Decline of the Prefixes and the Beginnings of the English Phrasal Verb: The Evidence from some Old and Middle English Texts (Annales Universitatis Turkuensis, Series B, 160). Turun Yliopisto (University of Turku, Finland), Turku.Google Scholar
  34. Hoekstra, T., M. Lansu and M. Westerduin (1987). Complexe verba. GLOT 10, 61–79.Google Scholar
  35. Hopper, P. (1975). The syntax of the simple sentence in Proto-Germanic. ai]The Hague etc.: Mouton.Google Scholar
  36. Hundschnurscher, F. (1968). Das System der Partikelverben mit AUS in der Gegenwartsprache. Dissertation Universität Tübingen.Google Scholar
  37. Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic Structures. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Jackendoff, R. (1997). Twistin’ the night away. Language 73, 534–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kemenade, A. van (1987). Syntactic Case and Morphological Case in the History of English. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
  40. Kemenade, A. van (1997). V2 and embedded topicalisation in Old and Middle English. In A. van Kemenade and N. Vincent (eds.), Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change. Cambridge: CUP, 326–352.Google Scholar
  41. Kemenade, A. van (2000). Jespersen’s cycle revisited: Formal properties of grammaticalization. In: S. Pintzuk, G. Tsoulas, and A. Warner (eds.), Diachronic Syntax: Models and Mechanisms. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 51–74.Google Scholar
  42. Kluge, F. (1901). Vorgeschichte der altgermanischen Dialekte. In: Paul, H. Grundriss der germanischen Philologie, Band 1. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner, 320–496.Google Scholar
  43. Koopman, W. (1985). The syntax of verb and particle combinations in Old English. In: H. Bennis and F. Beukema(eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1985. Dordrecht: Foris, 91–99.Google Scholar
  44. Koopman, H. (1995). De plaats van geincorporeerde hoofden in de werkwoordscluster. Tabu 25, 174–179.Google Scholar
  45. Kroch, A. and A. Taylor (2000). Verb-object order in early Middle English. In: S. Pintzuk, G. Tsoulas and A. Warner(eds.), Diachronic syntax: Models and Mechanisms. Oxford: OUP, 132–163.Google Scholar
  46. Kytö, M. (ed.) (1993). Manual to the Diachronic Part of the Helsinki Corpus of English Texts: Coding Conventions and lists of Source Texts. 2nd edition. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, English Department.Google Scholar
  47. Legum, St. E. (1968). The verb-particle constructions in English: basic or derived? In: B.J. Darden, Ch.-J.N. Bailey and A. Davidson (eds.), Papers from the Fourth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 50–62.Google Scholar
  48. Lehmann, W. (1906). Das Präfix uz-besonders im Altenglischen. (Kieler Studien zur englischen Philologie. N.F. 3). Kiel: Cordes.Google Scholar
  49. Lehmann, W.P. (1986). A Gothic Etymological Dictionary. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
  50. Leopold, M. (1977 [1907]). Die Vorsilbe ver-und ihre Geschichte. Germanistische Abhandlungen 27. Reprint Hildesheim: Olms.Google Scholar
  51. Lieber, R. and Baayen (1993). Verbal prefixes in Dutch: A study in lexical conceptual structure. In:.G.E. Booij and J. van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1993. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 51–78.Google Scholar
  52. Lipka, L. (1972). Semantic Structure and Word Formation: Verb-particle Constructions in Contemporary English. M:unchen: Wilhelm Fink.Google Scholar
  53. Lüdeling, A. (1999). On particle verbs and similar constructions in German (Sprachtheoretische Grundlagen für die Computerlinguistik: Arbeitspapiere des Sonderforschungsbereichs 340). Diss. Universität Tübingen. (Published by CSLI, Stanford, 2001).Google Scholar
  54. McIntyre, A. (2000). German Double Particles as Preverbs: Morphology and Conceptual Semantics. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
  55. McIntyre, A. (2001). Argument blockages induced by verb particles in English and German: Event modification and secondary predication. In: N. Dehé and A. Wanner (eds.), Structural Aspects of Semantically Complex Verbs. Berlin: Peter Lang, 131-164.Google Scholar
  56. Meillet, A. (1908). Notes sur quelques faits gotiques. Mémoires de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 15, 95–103.Google Scholar
  57. Metlen, M. (1933). What a Greek interlinear of the Gothic Bible text can teach us. Journal of English and Germanic Philology 32, 530–548.Google Scholar
  58. Neeleman, A. and F. Weerman (1993). Case theory and the diachrony of complex predicates in Dutch. Folia Linguistica Historica 13, 189–217. The Oxford English Dictionary on CD-ROM (1989). 2nd edition. Ed. by J.A. Simpson and E.S.C. Weiner. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Pintzuk, S. (1991). Phrase structures in Competition: Variation and Change in Old English Word Order. Dissertation University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  60. Pintzuk, S. (1996). Old English verb-complement word order and the change from OV to VO. York Papers in Linguistics 17, 241–264.Google Scholar
  61. Quirk, R. and S. Greenbaum(1973). A University Grammar of English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  62. Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech and J. Svartvik (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  63. Rappaport Hovav, M. and B. Levin (2001). An event structure account of English resultatives. Language 77, 766–797.Google Scholar
  64. Sawyer, J.H. (1999). Verb Adverb and Verb Particle Constructions: Their Syntax and Acquisition. (Boston University PhD Dissertation). Michigan: UMI Dissertation Service.Google Scholar
  65. Schmidt, J. (1883) Die Germanischen Praepositionen und das Auslautgesetz. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Sprachforschung 26, 20–43.Google Scholar
  66. Schultze-Berndt, E. (this volume) Preverbs as an open class in Northern Australian languages: Synchronic and diachronic considerations.Google Scholar
  67. Spencer, A. and M. Zaretskaya (1998). Verb prefixation in Russian as lexical subordination. Linguistics 36, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. von Stechow, A. (1993). Die Aufgaben der Syntax. In: J. Jacobs, W. Sternefeld, A. von Stechow, and Th. Vennemann (eds.), Syntax: Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1–88.Google Scholar
  69. Stiebels, B. (1996). Lexikalische Argumente und Adjunkte: Zum semantischen Beitrag von verbalen Präfixen und Partikeln. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
  70. Streitberg, W. (1920). Gotisches Elementarbuch. Heidelberg: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
  71. Streitberg, W (1965). Der gotische Bibel. Vol. I and II. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
  72. Toivonen, I. (2001). The Phrase Structure of Non-Projecting Words. Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  73. Vinka, M. (1999). On Swedish verb-particle constructions, ms. McGill University, Montréal.Google Scholar
  74. Visser, F. Th. (1963-73). An Historical Syntax of the English Language, Vols. 1-3b. Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
  75. Watkins, C. (1964). Preliminaries to the reconstruction of Indo-European sentence structure. In: H.G. Lunt (ed.), Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Linguists. The Hague: Mouton, 1035–1042.Google Scholar
  76. Weerman, F. (1989). The V2 Conspiracy: A Synchronic and a Diachronic Analysis of verbal Positions in Germanic Languages. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
  77. Weir, E.M.H. (1986). Footprints of yesterday’s syntax: Diachronic developments of certain verb prefixes in an OSV language. Lingua 68, 291–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Winkler, S. (1997). Focus and Secondary Predication. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  79. Zeller, J. (2001). Particle Verbs and Local Domains. (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 56), Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  80. Zeller, J. (this volume) Moved preverbs in German: displaced or misplaced?Google Scholar

Text Editions

  1. d’Ardenne, S.T.R.O. (1977). The Katherine Group, edited from MS. Bodley 34. Paris: Sociéte d’Edition’ Les Belles Lettres’.Google Scholar
  2. C. Clark (1970). The Peterborough Chronicle 1070-1154. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  3. Holthausen, F. (1967[1921]). Vices and Virtues: A soul’s confessions of its sins with reason’s description of the virtues, 2 vols. (EETS, original series 89, 159). London etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ans Van Kemenade
    • 1
  • Bettelou Los
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EnglishUniversity of NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations