The Semantics of German Verb Prefixes is the most comprehensive study ever undertaken in this area of German grammar. Using an extensive collection of naturally occurring data, the author proposes an image-schematic interpretation for each of the productive prefixes be-, ver-, er-, ent-, zer-, um-, über-, unter-, and durch-. These abstract semantic patterns underlie a remarkable range of particular meanings, and they consistently account for subtle contrasts between prefixed verbs and alternative constructions such as simple verbs, particle verbs, and verbs with other prefixes. Furthermore, the author develops a schematic meaning for the prefixed verb construction itself. This grammatical meaning reflects the interpreter’s perspective and attentional focus as the objective event is imagined to unfold. Underlying all of these proposals is a novel conception of meaning as a dynamic and flexible process with a constantly active role for the interpreter. This volume will be of great value to cognitive linguists as well as scholars and students of German who want to gain insights into a central and puzzling part of the morphosyntax and semantics of the German language.

This is really two books in one: a valuable reference resource, and a groundbreaking case study that represents a new approach to constructional semantics. It presents a detailed descriptive survey, using extensive examples collected from the Internet, of German verb constructions in which the expressions durch ('through'), über ('over'), unter ('under'), and um ('around') occur either as inseparable verb prefixes or as separable verb particles. Based on that evidence, the author argues that the prefixed verb constructions and particle verb constructions themselves have meaning, and that this meaning involves subjective construal processes rather than objective information. The constructions prompt us to distribute focal attention according to patterns that can be articulated in terms of Talmy's notion of “perspectival modes”. Among the other topics that play an important role in the analysis are incremental themes, reflexive trajectors, fictive motion, “multi-directional paths”, and “accusative landmarks”.

While there have been many attempts in the literature to account for the semantics and syntax of individual German(ic)prefixes, this is the first time that the prefixes have been analysed in a unified way and a framework established that is capable of relating the prefixes to each other and to other areas of the grammar. The templates provide the means whereby a State/Change of State feature interacts with Figure and Ground arguments to generate prefixed verbs, noun- and adjective-incorporating verbs, and oblique case marking on the complements of simplex verbs and adjectives. This book presents a new and potentially powerful theory of lexical morphology that will be of interest not only to morphologists and those working on the grammar of German, but also syntacticians working on the Locative and Dative Alternations, and linguists whose prime concern is the organization of the lexicon, and the realization of the semantics of change of state predicates.

Particle verbs (combinations of two words but lexical units) are a notorious problem in linguistics. Is a particle verb like look up one word or two? It has its own entry in dictionaries, as if it is one word, but look and up can be split up in a sentence: we can say He looked the information up and He looked up the information. But why can't we say He looked up it? In English look and up can only be separated by a direct object, but in Dutch the two parts can be separated over a much longer distance. How did such hybrid verbs arise and how do they function? How can we make sense of them in modern theories of language structure? This book sets out to answer these and other questions, explaining how these verbs fit into the grammatical systems of English and Dutch.

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1888 edition. Excerpt: ...run); geriunen, jufammetmnneit (to run together, to curdle); teitcn (to conduct); gelcitett (to accompany); fyorett (to hear); gdjoren (to unite in hearing, i. e., when the master calls, hence, to belong to); fatten (to fall); gefattcit (to fall together, L e., as one would wish, hence, to please). 2. The sense is not discernible in many verbal forms, as gf is the weakest and most uncertain of all the particles as to its force and intention. In some forms its only intention seems to be to change the meaning of the stem: e. g., Imutcfyctt (to need); gcbraucfjen (to employ); bicten (to offer); ge= btcten (to command); ftefjen (to stand); gcftcfycn (to confess), where the nexus is lost. In other forma jje has entirely lost all force, as in gcbeifjeit (to thrive), gencjen (to recover), geniefeen (to enjoy). Compare with this weakness of ge its omission (as 68 (vie. of no importance) in getoorben in the formation of the passive voice, and compare fommen, etc., for gefommcn, etc., in colloquial style or in the dialects. In Anglo-Saxon gc could be prefixed to any part of the verb without appreciably affecting the sense, ) and it seems to have vanished from nineteenth centuiy English entirely. 3. (c)( with nouns has many meanings, showing the uncertainty of its original signification, but the notion of companionship, union, is found in forms derived from verbal stems, and from a few nouns: e. g., (c)cfptclc (play-mate); (c)cfcifyrte (companion); (c)c= fji'tlfc (assistant); ($cfd)tttftcr (brothers and sisters). 4 The notion of union produces collective nouns: e. g., (c)cftraud), (c)eioaffcr, (c)cbiifd), (c)enwrm (shrubs, waters, bushes, worms). 5. The notion of being together may, from verbal stems (nearly al

Verbs in German have varying syntactic properties. It is known that verbs with prefixes either separate or remain unseparated. A major question is how similar these verbs are as they are decomposed. What is it that blocks morpheme realization when these verbs form participles? After the analysis of multiple verbs, the framework of Distributed Morphology shows that there are certain syntactic and/or semantic features of prefixes that determine how these participles are formed. This study analyzes verbs with separable and inseparable prefixes, examining their properties from their smallest meaning bearing units to their fully composed participles. The analysis shows that there is a semantic relation between inseparable prefixes and shows that there is a strong connection between separable prefixes and prepositions. These semantic features are the key to understanding the decomposition of inseparable prefix verbs. Knowing the link between prepositions and separable prefixes is also crucial to understanding p elements as a whole.