Postpositions take centre stage: What can we learn about Afrikaans postpositions from descriptions in Dutch and English?

Abstract

Lexical units that are identical in form and that are traditionally referred to as either adpositions, adverbs, or particles (based on their morphosyntactic properties), can also be grouped together (based on semantic properties) under the term P-items (see for example Fontaine 2017). Although it is for most linguistic endeavours sufficient to refer to these items as P-items, it is desirable and sometimes even essential in some usage contexts to be able to determine in which one of the subcategories such lexical items should be categorised. In general Afrikaans and Dutch, for example, a lexical item that functions as a verb particle would in some syntactic contexts be written conjunctively with the verb but in other syntactic contexts not, while this is never the case for an identical form of that lexical item functioning as a postposition. Like in Afrikaans and Dutch, the distinction between different P-items is also not always straightforward in English. This article explores different strategies to distinguish between P-items in these three languages and proposes a set of questions as a strategy to identify postpositions in a more systematic way.

Full text

How to cite this article:
Pilon, Suléne, Lande Botha, Maristi Partridge, Adri Breed, Anneke Butler, Monique Rabé & Gerhard B van Huyssteen.
2023. “Postpositions take centre stage: What can we learn about Afrikaans postpositions from descriptions in
Dutch and English?”. In Proceedings of the 4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop, edited by Adri Breed.
Potchefstroom: North-West University. pp. 171-190. DOI: 10.25388/nwu.25052828.
Copyright:
© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
Licensed via CC BY 4.0 171
Postpositions take centre stage: What can we learn
about Afrikaans postpositions from descriptions in
Dutch and English?
Suléne Pilon (University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa)
sulene.pilon@up.ac.za
Lande Botha (Understanding and Processing Language in Complex Settings (UPSET), North-West University,
Vanderbijlpark/Potchefstroom, South Africa)
lande.botha@nwu.ac.za
Maristi Partridge (Understanding and Processing Language in Complex Settings (UPSET), North-West University,
Vanderbijlpark/Potchefstroom, South Africa)
maristi.partridge@nwu.ac.za
Adri Breed (Understanding and Processing Language in Complex Settings (UPSET), North-West University,
Vanderbijlpark/Potchefstroom, South Africa)
adri.breed@nwu.ac.za
Anneke Butler (Understanding and Processing Language in Complex Settings (UPSET), North-West University,
Vanderbijlpark/Potchefstroom, South Africa)
anneke.butler@nwu.ac.za
Monique Rabé (Understanding and Processing Language in Complex Settings (UPSET), North-West University,
Vanderbijlpark/Potchefstroom, South Africa)
monique.rabe@nwu.ac.za
Gerhard B van Huyssteen (Centre for Text Technology, North-West University, Vanderbijlpark/Potchefstroom,
South Africa)
gerhard.vanhuyssteen@nwu.ac.za
Abstract
Lexical units that are identical in form and that are traditionally referred to as either
adpositions, adverbs, or particles (based on their morphosyntactic properties), can also be
grouped together (based on semantic properties) under the term P-items (see for example
Fontaine 2017). Although it is for most linguistic endeavours sufficient to refer to these items
as P-items, it is desirable and sometimes even essential in some usage contexts to be able to
determine in which one of the subcategories such lexical items should be categorised. In
general Afrikaans and Dutch, for example, a lexical item that functions as a verb particle would
in some syntactic contexts be written conjunctively with the verb but in other syntactic
contexts not, while this is never the case for an identical form of that lexical item functioning
as a postposition. Like in Afrikaans and Dutch, the distinction between different P-items is
also not always straightforward in English. This article explores different strategies to

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 172
distinguish between P-items in these three languages and proposes a set of questions as a
strategy to identify postpositions in a more systematic way.
Keywords: Afrikaans, adposition, adverb, closely related languages, Dutch, English, particle
(PTCL), P-item, postposition (POSTP), verb particle (PTCL.V)
Opsomming
Agtersetsels in die kollig: Wat kan Nederlands en Engels ons leer van agtersetsels in
Afrikaans?
Leksikale eenhede wat vormlik identies is en waarna tradisioneel verwys word as setsels,
bywoorde en partikels (op grond van hul morfosintaktiese eienskappe), kan ook saam
gegroepeer word (op grond van semantiese eienskappe) onder die term P-items (kyk bv.
Fontaine 2017). Alhoewel dit vir die meeste linguistiese ondersoeke voldoende is om na P-
items te verwys, is dit egter in sommige gebruikskontekste wenslik, en soms selfs noodsaaklik
om te bepaal in watter een van die subkategorieë ’n leksikale item gekategoriseer word. In
algemene Afrikaans en Nederlands, byvoorbeeld, word ’n leksikale item wat as ’n
werkwoordpartikel optree in sommige sintaktiese kontekste vas aan die werkwoord geskryf
en in ander nie, terwyl dit nooit die geval is met ’n identiese vorm van die leksikale item wat
optree as ’n agtersetsel nie. Net soos in Afrikaans en Nederlands, is die onderskeid tussen
verskillende P-items ook nie so eenvoudig in Engels nie. Hierdie artikel ondersoek verskillende
strategieë om tussen P-items in hierdie drie tale te onderskei en bied ’n stel vrae as strategie
aan om agtersetsels op ’n meer sistematiese wyse te identifiseer.
Sleutelwoorde: Afrikaans, agtersetsel (POSTP), bywoord, Engels, nabyverwante tale,
Nederlands, partikel (PTCL), P-item, setsel, werkwoordpartikel (PTCL.V)
1 Introduction
It is difficult to distinguish between Afrikaans adpositions, adverbs, and verb particles, and
therefore a clear set of guiding principles is needed for indisputable categorisation –
especially to distinguish between an Afrikaans verb particle (PTCL.V) and postposition
(POSTP). These lexical units, which are traditionally (and based on their morphosyntactic
properties) referred to as adpositions, adverbs and verb particles, can be formally identical
and can be grouped together (based on semantic properties) under the umbrella term P-items
(see for example Fontaine 2017). In some usage contexts, however, it is desirable, and
sometimes even essential, to be able to determine in which one of the subcategories a lexical
item should be categorised. For example, given the fact that a PTCL.V in general Afrikaans
should be written conjunctively with the verb in some contexts (as in 1), while an adposition
in the same contexts should not be attached to the verb, it is important for an Afrikaans text
editor to be able to distinguish between different P-items: to mark in geloop as an error in 2,
but accept it as correct in 3.

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 173
1 ʼn Paar matrieks kom ook ingeloop, elkeen met iets in bont papier
a few matrics come also in.walk.PST each.one with something in colourful paper
toegedraai ..1 (in = PTCL.V)
wrap.PST
‘A few matrics came walking in, each with something wrapped in colourful paper.'
2 ? ʼn Paar matrieks kom ook in geloop, elkeen met iets in bont papier
a few matrics come also in walk.PST each.one with something in colourful paper
toegedraai ...2 (in = PTCL.V)
wrap.PST
'A few matrics came walking in, each with something wrapped in colourful paper.'
3 ʼn Man het haar aan die hand gevat en die veld in geloop. (in = POSTP)
a man have.AUX her by the hand take.PST and the field in walk.PST
'A man took her by the and walked into the field.'
In many cases, it is still difficult to determine to which part-of-speech category a P-item
belongs. This is especially true in cases where the P-item occurs in the predicate after a noun
phrase (NP) where it can be either a PTCL.V (i.e., a phrasal verb) or a POSTP. In 4, for example,
it is unproblematic to categorise in1 as a preposition, since die wêreld is clearly the
prepositional complement. However, in2 can be regarded as a particle of the verb inloop, or as
a POSTP, in which case in...in should be categorised as a circumposition (CIRCP). It is also
possible to rewrite the sentence in 4 as 5, and because in2 can be separated from in1 die wêreld,
it would be more correct to categorise in2 as a PTCL.V, rather than as part of a CIRCP. The in
in 6 can similarly be categorised either as a PTCL.V or as a POSTP. Given the fact that it occurs
in the same syntactic position as in2 in 4, one could argue that in in 6 is also a PTCL.V. If that
is the case, die hut should be considered the object of inloop. But in in 6 can also be viewed
as a POSTP where the adpositional phrase die hut in functions as adjunct of the sentence.
4 Ons pad loop in1 die wêreld in2.
our road walk in the world in
'Our road leads into the world.'
5 In1 die wêreld loop hy in2.
in the world walk he in
'Into the world he walks.
6 Hy loop die hut in ...
he walk the hut in
'He walks into the hut.'
The problems surrounding the sub-categorisation of P-items are not unique in Afrikaans, as is
evidenced by existing literature that deals with P-items in other languages. In this contribution,
we will attempt to shed light on the problems surrounding the subcategorisation of P-items
by briefly reporting on existing literature in Afrikaans (§ 2) and two closely related languages,
1 Unless otherwise stated, all Afrikaans examples are taken from VivA's Korpusportaal: Omvattend (VivA 2021).
2 Adapted example.

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 174
namely Dutch (§ 3) and English (§ 4). In each section, we will focus on issues concerning the
distinction between POSTPs and PTCL.Vs, and what Afrikaans can possibly gain from these
distinctions. After investigating these issues and distinctions, we put forward a set of
guidelines (derived from the literature) and determine their applicability and usefulness in
identifying POSTPs in Afrikaans. Finally, we offer some thoughts on further research.
2 Postpositions in Afrikaans
De Villiers (1975:151-160) argues that Afrikaans "prepositions" can be used before or after
their complements. First, he addresses cases where prepositions occur after the prepositional
complement and are thus categorised as POSTPs. The first kind of POSTP he lists is
prepositions in infinitive constructions (illustrated in 7). In this example, the prepositional
complement, ’n huis, is separated from the preposition in. The second kind of POSTP he
mentions is prepositions in pronominal adverbs (illustrated in 8).
7 Ons het ook ʼn huis om in te bly ...
we have.AUX also a house to in PTCL.INF stay
'We also have a house to stay in…'
8 Nou moet ek oefen om daarin te stap.
now must I practice to there.in PTCL.INF walk
'Now I must practice to walk in that.'
Formally, pronominal adverbs are always compounds consisting of daar-, waar-, and hier-,
followed by an adposition. However, pronominal adverbs can also be split. When this happens,
the adposition occurs before its complement (see for example 9 where it is separated)3. In
instances where the pronominal adverb is split, two constructions are possible. If the first
constituent of the pronominal adverb is daar or hier, the adpositional complement will be dit.
If the first constituent of the pronominal adverb is waar, the adpositional complement will be
wat. In split pronominal adverbs, the adposition and its complement are sometimes separated
by other words, as in 10, where wat and in (waarin) are separated from each other (Kotzé and
Breed 2020b).
9 ... ek [um] het baie meer vertroue in dit.
… I [um] have very more trust in it
'… I, uhm, have more trust in it.'
10 Hoe vêr vir dit wat jy in glo?
how far for it what you in believe
'How far for what you believe in?'
As an example of a preposition that occurs before the prepositional complement, De Villiers
(1975) lists, inter alia, prepositions in elliptical constructions. An example can be found in 11,
3 This morphological construction is unique in Afrikaans, because the constituents exchange places (phrase = in
dit, compound = daarin) and also have different parts of speech (phrase = preposition + pronoun, compound =
adverb + postposition).

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 175
where the prepositional phrase is used without a prepositional complement such as die
vertrek. Kotzé and Breed (2020b) refer to prepositions such as these as intransitive
prepositions. They further distinguish between intransitive clauses with an external argument
as in 11, where kaste is the external argument (i.e., the thing that is in), and those without an
external argument as in 12. The latter are also called verb particles (Kotzé and Breed 2020b).
Verb particles "are selected by the verb" (Kotzé and Breed 2020b) and although they also have
independent meanings, the meaning of the PTCL.V is often dependent on that of the verb (see
also Van Huyssteen et al. 2022).
11 ... daar is ʼn vertrek met kaste in waar almal se klere
… there is a room with cupboards in where everyone PTCL.POSS clothes
gebêre word.
store.PASS become.AUX
'…there is a room with closets where everyone's clothes are stored.'
12 Ons pas in by wat gereël is.
we fit in at what arrange.PASS is.AUX
'We fall in with what is arranged.'
After a discussion of Afrikaans directional postpositions, Ponelis (1968:69) identifies the
problem that we are investigating, namely the "homonymy" that exists between POSTPs and
PTCL.Vs (compare the discussion in § 1 and examples 4 to 6). He proposes an easy test to
distinguish PTCL.Vs from adpositions: No passive can be formed from constructions with a
noun phrase (NP) and an adposition, while constructions with a PTCL.V can be passivised. He
presents 13 and 14 as proof.
13 a. Ek beveel dit aan. (=PTCL.V) 4
I recommend it on
'I recommend it.'
b. Dit word deur my aanbeveel.
it becomes.AUX through me recommend.PASS
'It is recommended by me.'
14 a. Ons vlug die veld in. (=POSTP)
we flee the field in
'We flee into the field.'
b. *Die veld word deur ons in gevlug.
the field becomes.AUX through us in flee.PASS
'*The field are fled in by us.'
However, Ponelis’s test is problematic for at least two reasons. Firstly, it is difficult to
determine whether the passive form of a sentence is acceptable or not, as its acceptability is
based on entrenchment. A sentence like the one in 14b does not appear often in spoken or
written Afrikaans and is therefore considered unacceptable by a user. However, it is also
4 Examples 13 and 14 are taken from Ponelis (1968:69). Examples 15 and 16 are passivations of example 14.

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 176
possible that the passive form of a sentence with a PTCL.V rarely occurs and that it will
therefore also be considered unacceptable. Ponelis (1979:233) includes aan as a PTCL.V and
gives as example bied my ‘n sitplek aan. However, there are no hits for ‘n sitplek aangebied
deur in KPO (VivA 2021) and therefore it will probably be considered unacceptable by users –
regardless of the fact that Ponelis (1979) classifies it as a PTCL.V and not a POSTP.
Secondly, the passive form of the sentence depends on the nature of the P-item. If in in 14 is
considered a POSTP following Ponelis (1968:69), then die veld in is an adpositional phrase
that functions as an adjunct of the sentence. This means that vlug in 14a is an intransitive
verb, which in turn means that the passive must be formed either with the dummy subject daar
as in 15, or by placing the full adjunct in front as in 16 (compare Conradie 2020). However,
when in in 14a is considered as a PTCL.V, die veld functions as the object of the transitive verb
invlug, and then it is possible to passivise the sentence as it is done in 14b. Yet, according to
Ponelis (1968:69), it is the passive form of the sentence with a PTCL.V that is unacceptable.
In our opinion, therefore, there is still no clear way to distinguish between PTCL.Vs and
POSTPs.
15 ?Daar word deur ons die veld ingevlug / in gevlug.
there become through us the field in.flee.PASS/ in flee.PASS
'?There is fled into the field by us.'
16 ?Die veld in word gevlug.
the field in become.AUX flee.PASS
'?The field is being fled into.'
Unlike De Villiers (1975), Ponelis (1968; 1979), and Kotzé and Breed (2020a; 2020b), who all
acknowledge that POSTPs do occur in Afrikaans, Van Schoor (1983:44) considers all words
after NPs that look like prepositions as adverbs. He gives two reasons for this view.
Firstly, there are words that can appear after NPs that can never be prepositions, for example
af in 17 and toe in 18, and according to Van Schoor (1983:66) these words are therefore always
adverbs. However, Kotzé and Breed (2020b) consider toe as the postpositional counterpart of
the preposition tot. In addition to toe, they also mention some other POSTPs that differ in form
from their prepositional counterparts (mee and met; voor and vir). This may seem somewhat
strange, since prepositions typically do not undergo change in form (see for example Biber et
al. 1999:74). Kotzé and Breed (2020a) mention heen as a POSTP in Afrikaans without a
prepositional counterpart (see 19 for an example).
17 Die vroue en kinders loop die berg af ...
the women and children walk the mountain down
'The woman and children walk down the mountain.'
18 Nou moet ek huis toe gaan.
now must I house to go
'Now I must go home.'
19 Ons is iewers heen op pad.
we be somewhere to on road

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 177
'We are on our way somewhere.'
Van Schoor (1983:66) further proposes that constructions such as those in 17 and 18 consist
of two adjuncts that appear together, as illustrated in 20 and 21 where the two adjuncts are
shown in square brackets. In frequently occurring constructions, the preposition introducing
the first adjunct (bold in 20 and 21) is often omitted. What remains are the constructions in
17 and 18 which look like postpositional phrases, but which actually consist of a prepositional
phrase (with a lost preposition) and an adverb.
20 Die vroue en kinders loop [van die berg] [af] ...
the women and children walk from the mountain off
'The women and children walk down from the mountain.'
21 Nou moet ek [na die huis] [toe] gaan.
now must I to the house to go
'Now I must go to the house.'
The second reason he gives, is that there are very few prepositions that can appear in this
construction – according to Van Schoor (1983:66), only about 17 out of the more than 90
Afrikaans prepositions. He then laments the fact that the adpositions that do occur in this
construction, are the ones that occur with the highest frequency in Afrikaans, and are therefore
also the most “recognizable” as adpositions (and this might be why P-items in this
construction are often, perhaps mistakenly, categorised as adpositions, and more specifically
POSTPs). Other sources agree on this. Ponelis (1979:176) points out that postposition groups
are rare and limited, and Kotzé and Breed (2020b) list some prepositions that are frequently
used as POSTPs. However, Van Schoor (1983:66) considers the fact that all prepositions
cannot be used as POSTPs as a reason to deny the existence of Afrikaans POSTPs.
In other words, apart from the fact that there is no solid and clear way in Afrikaans to
determine whether a word is a POSTP or a PTCL.V, there are also some scholars, like Van
Schoor (1983) for example, claiming that POSTPs do not exist in Afrikaans.
3 Postpositions in Dutch
Dutch grammars distinguish similar adpositional categories as in Afrikaans where POSTPs
are typically described as an adposition that follows the adpositional complement (Broekhuis,
2020). In addition to the syntactic position of POSTPs, Broekhuis (2020) also highlights a
semantic difference between prepositions and POSTPs. Where prepositions involve space
and time relations (22), POSTPs express motion and direction relations (23a and 23b).
22 Du: Jan zwemt in de sloot. (Broekhuis 2020, adapted)
Jan swim in the trench
'Jan swims in the trench.'
23 Du: a. Jan reed de sloot in. (Broekhuis 2020)
Jan drive.PST the trench in
'Jan drove into the trench.'

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 178
g
b. Jan kletste de hele voorstelling door. (Broekhuis 2020)
Jan chat the entire presentation through
'Jan was chattering throughout the complete presentation.'
The uncertainty as to whether a P-item should be classified as a POSTP or as a PTCL.V is –
as mentioned – also not limited to Afrikaans and is also mentioned in Dutch grammar
literature (compare e.g., Koopman 2000, Van Goethem 2007, Capelle 2015). Beliën (2021)
lists, among other things, numerous guidelines that can be used to identify a POSTP.
The first guideline has to do with the fact that a postpositional phrase can only be moved
around in a sentence as a unit. When a phrase consisting of a P-item and an NP moves as a
unit to, for example, the beginning of the sentence (compare 24a and 24b), the P-item would
be a POSTP.
24 Du: a. Ze moesten de straat op. (Beliën 2021)
they must.PST the street up
'They had to go out on the street.'
b. De straat op moesten ze. Beliën (2021)
the street up must.PST they
'Out on the street they had to go.'
The next guideline deals with the fact that adpositional phrases can serve as post-modifiers
of NPs. Like a prepositional phrase, a postpositional phrase (in 25) such as de haven in can
also be used as a postmodifier in a noun phrase where it modifies de weg.
25 Du: Gelukkig is [de weg de haven in] ... de enige in Antwerpen waar
luckily be the way the harbour in the only in Antwerp where
nooit een file staat.
never a traffic jam stand
'Fortunately, the road into the harbour is the only one in Antwerp where there is never
a traffic jam.'
The third guideline applies to sentences with two P-items that could potentially be PTCL.Vs
(for example weg and over in 26). In such cases, only one of the P-items can end up being a
PTCL.V while the other P-item should be regarded as a POSTP. In 26 weg is the PTCL.V (the
separable verb in question is wegtrokken) and over is a POSTP.
26 Du: Tijdens de Duitse aanval op de stad trokken zijn ouders met hem weg,
during the German attack on the city travel.PST his parents with him away
de Oeral over.
the Ural over
'During the German attack on the city, his parents fled with him, over the Ural
mountains.'
The last guideline has to do with transitivity. In 27a, uitduwen may seem to be a particle verb,
but a simple sentence may only have one direct object. If uitduwen is considered a particle
verb, this means that both de president and de zaal must be direct objects of the verb. Because
a transitive verb cannot take two direct objects, it means that de zaal would be a complement

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 179
of the POSTP uit. The fact that de zaal uit is grouped together as a unit in the passive
construction (compare 27b) further supports the postposition status of uit (compare the first
guideline above).
27 Du: a. Als ze bijna bij het podium zijn, duwen lijfwachten de president
when they almost at the podium be push body.guards the president
de zaal uit.
the hall out
'As they are almost at the podium, bodyguards push the president out of the hall.'
b. De president werd de zaal uit geduwd ...
the president become.AUX the hall out push.PST
'The president is pushed out of the hall...'
Beliën (2021) also offers various counterarguments to motivate that POSTPs should perhaps
not be considered as a separate part-of-speech category, but that they should rather be seen
as PTCL.Vs. The first argument entails that some P-items in some contexts (for example the
infinitive and passive constructions) are written attached to the verb (compare 28). This
argument does not really hold water as adpositions are never attached to verbs, and if a P-
item does attach to a verb in this way, it cannot be an adposition.
28 Du: Hij kan niet eens zijn eigen kind optillen.
he can not even his own child up.pick
'He cannot even pick up his own child.'
The second argument states that the characteristics or syntactic possibilities of POSTPs
correspond so strongly to those of PTCL.Vs that the morphosyntactic behaviour of the POSTP
looks more like that of a PTCL.V than that of an adposition. For example, it is possible for both
POSTPs and PTCL.Vs to be preceded by an adverb, as illustrated in 29 and 30.
29 Du: De supporters kwamen uiteindelijk de grens niet over. (=POSTP)
the supporters come.PST eventually the border not over
'Eventually, the supporters couldn’t cross the border.'
30 Du: De aanvoerder [...] had zijn tegenstander niet alleen vast,
the captain have.AUX his opponent not only firm
maar tilde hem ook op. (=PTCL.V)
but pick.up.PST him also up
'The captain [...] not only had his opponent in a grip but also lifted him up.'
Furthermore, it is possible to have the nominal adpositional complement of postpositional
constructions in sentence initial position, for example de telefoon in 31. Much in the same
way, the direct object of a separable verb, for example De Croix de Fer in 32, can appear in the
beginning of the sentence. The complement of an adpositional phrase cannot be placed in
this syntactic position.
31 Du: De telefoon nemen we al een tijdje niet meer op. (=POSTP)
the telephone take us already one time.DIM not more up
'For a while now already, we do not answer the phone anymore.'

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 180
32 Du: De Croix de Fer ben ik opgereden binnen twee uur,
the Croiz de Fer be I up.ride.PST within two hour
ruim op schema om goud te halen. (=PTCL.V)
ample on scheme to gold PTCL.INF get
'I cycled up the Croix de Fer within two hours, well ahead of schedule to win the gold.'
The third argument shows that sentences with POSTPs as well as sentences with PTCL.Vs
can be expressed in the passive voice. Ponelis' (1968:66) passivation test to distinguish
between PTCL.Vs and POSTPs in Afrikaans will therefore also not work in Dutch.
33 Du: Ik reed daar tachtig en werd door iedereen voorbijgereden. (PTCL.V)
I drive.PST there eighty and become.AUX by everyone past.drive.PASS
'I was driving eighty there and everyone was passing me.'
34 Du: De container werd opgetild en leeggekieperd. (POSTP)
the container become.AUX up.lift.PASS and empty.throw.PASS
'The container was lifted and emptied.'
In summary, the following criteria, drawn from available information in Dutch reference
materials, serve to distinguish POSTPs from PTCL.Vs:
(i) When a postpositional phrase can be moved around as a unit in the sentence, the
P-item can be classified as a POSTP.
(ii) A P-item can be classified as a POSTP if its postpositional phrase usage extends
to functioning as a postmodifier within an NP.
(iii) In sentences featuring two distinct P-items, one instance may be attributed to a
PTCL.V, while the other should be appropriately categorised as a POSTP.
(iv) In a sentence with a transitive particle verb, there cannot be two direct objects.
Therefore, in a sentence where this seems to be the case, the P-item of the
separable verb should be regarded as a POSTP and the verb as an adpositional
verb.
In conclusion, notwithstanding these criteria, a range of opposing viewpoints has been put
forth to justify why these POSTPs might be more suitably categorised as PTCL.Vs, namely:
(i) Adpositions avoid verb attachment, meaning any P-item that is attached to a verb
cannot be an adposition.
(ii) The morphosyntactic behaviour of POSTPs look more like that of particles than
adpositions.
(iii) Nominal adpositional complements or direct objects of separable verbs can start
sentences in postpositional constructions, unlike adpositional phrase
complements.
4 Postpositions in English
The P-items in English can be readily described without reference to POSTPs. Biber et al.
(1999:74) consider prepositions as links that introduce prepositional phrases and that
connect NPs with other sentence structures (Biber et al. 1999:74). They make a further

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 181
distinction between unbound (free) and bound prepositions. An example of an unbound
preposition can be found in 35.
35 Late one morning in June, in the thirty-first year of his life, a message was brought to Michael
K as he raked leaves in De Waal Park. (FICT)5 (Biber et al. 1999:74)
In this example, the meaning of the preposition in is not dependent on the meaning of any of
the other words in the sentence. Consequently, the preposition in in 35 has an independent
meaning and is considered unbound. In contrast, bound prepositions depend on the meaning
of another word in the sentence (usually a preceding verb). An example of this can be found
in 36.
36 She confided in him above all others. (FICT) (Biber et al. 1999:74)
A similar distinction is made by Huddleston (2002:273) with the terms "unspecified" and
"specified" prepositions. Unspecified/unbound prepositions can be replaced with other
prepositions depending on the relationship being expressed. However, specified/bound
prepositions cannot be replaced with other prepositions as can be observed in 37 where a
specific preposition is required by the verb.
Biber et al. (1999:74) consider verb + preposition combinations as in 36 as a type of multi-
word verb construction known as prepositional verbs (referred to as adpositional verbs in this
paper). They distinguish it from verb + adverbial particle combinations as in , another type of
multi-verb construction known as phrasal verbs (referred to as particle verbs in this paper)
(Biber et al. 1999:403). Next, they make a distinction between prepositions and “adverbial
particles” (Biber et al. 1999:78).
37 Margotte rarely turned on the television set. (FICT) (Biber et al. 1999:408)
Where prepositions have a special relationship with nouns, particles in turn have a special
relationship with verbs and have a core meaning of movement and result. The distinction
between adpositional verbs and PTCL.Vs can be made with the help of a particle movement
test (Biber et al. 1999:408). While the preposition in a transitive adpositional verb construction
cannot be moved to a position after the NP (see 38), the particle in a transitive PTCL.V
construction can be moved to the position after the NP (see 39).
38 a. I’ve never thought about it.
b. *I’ve never thought it about.
39 a. He had put on his spectacles. (FICT)
b. He had put his spectacles on.
5 Example 34 – 39, and 41 and 42 taken from Biber et al. (1999)

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 182
Huddleston (2002:273) also defines particles based on syntactic position and points out that
particles can stand both between the verb and the object, as in 39a and after the object, as in
39b.
A further complication is the distinction between particles and adverbs. In this regard, Biber
et al. (1999:78) offer a few ways in which particles can be distinguished from adverbs. They
point out that particles are shorter and less complex than adverbs. The core meaning of
particles is also limited, while the meaning of adverbs is more diverse. However, the most
important distinction can be made based on syntactic distribution. In 40a we see that the
particle can precede a specific NP with the function of object. However, an adverb cannot
occupy the same position, as can be observed in 40b.
40 a. It swallowed up the two men. (FICT)
b. *It swallowed completely the two men.
Huddleston (2002:281) also considers the fact that particles can precede the object as a
distinguishing characteristic of particles. It is, however, the case that the end-weight principle
in English in the case of "heavy" noun phrases lifts the restrictions on the position of adverbs,
as Huddleston (2002:280) illustrates using the following examples where down is a particle
(41a) and downstairs (41b and 41c) is an adverb.
41 a. She brought down the bed.6
b. *She brought downstairs the bed.
c. She brought downstairs the bed that she had recently inherited from her grandmother.
To distinguish between transitive adpositional verbs and a verb followed by prepositional
phrase that fulfils the role of adjunct, Biber et al. (1999:405) suggests creating interrogatives.
When an interrogative can be formulated with the words what or who, as in 42b, the noun
phrase that follows the preposition fulfils the role of direct object of the prepositional verb.
When an interrogative can be formulated with the words when or where as in 43b, the
preposition forms part of the adjunct and not of the verb.
42 a. The first goal came from Tim Cliss. (NEWS)
b. Who did the first goal come from?
43 a. Bert had appeared on the stairs. (FICT)
b. Where had Bert appeared?
Regarding the distinction between verb + particle + object and verb followed by a preposition
that fulfils the role of adjunct, Huddleston (2002:281) points out that movement is only
possible with the former, and illustrates this with the help of the following examples:
44 a. She took off the label.
b. She took the label off.
6 Example 40, 43 and 44 taken from Huddleston (2002)

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 183
45 a. She jumped off the wall.
b. *She jumped the wall off.
Furthermore, it is interesting to note that Huddleston (2002:280) still considers particles as a
type of preposition, namely an intransitive preposition: "The most central particles are
prepositions – intransitive prepositions, of course..." Capelle (2004:6‑7) points out, however,
that the term "intransitive prepositions" is problematic. Particles are intransitive clauses in the
sense that objects that follow particles are not controlled by the particles. However, some
intransitive prepositions do not behave like standard particles. Furthermore, there are some
elements that can be considered particles, but which are not prepositions.
In English there are also prepositions that are "stranded" in clause-final positions, and
therefore do not precede their complement, but the complement can be found elsewhere in
the construction (Pullum and Huddleston 2002:627) and these stranded prepositions are
therefore still seen as prepositions (rather than POSTPs) (see 46).
46 The bed looks as if it had been slept in. 7
Since the P-items in English can be easily described without reference to POSTPs, the
following criteria, derived from English reference sources, can be used to differentiate various
P-items and related constructions:
(i) Adpositional verbs vs. particle verbs: While the preposition in a transitive
prepositional verb construction cannot be moved to a position after the noun
phrase, it is possible with the particle in a transitive particle verb construction.
(ii) Particles vs. adverbs: Particles are shorter than adverbs, have more limited
meaning, and they can precede a specific noun phrase with the function of object,
where adverbs are not able to occupy this position.
(iii) Transitive adpositional verbs vs. verbs followed by a prepositional phrase
(adjunct): Interrogatives formulated with what or who are possible in sentences
containing a transitive prepositional verb, and ones formulated with when or where
are only possible when the preposition is part of the adjunct.
(iv) Verb + particle + object vs. verb + particle (adjunct): Movement in the sentence is
only possible in the case of the former and not the latter.
5 Dutch and English strategies applied to Afrikaans data
To devise an effective test for distinguishing among the potential categories of Afrikaans P-
items, we have rephrased the strategies used in Dutch and English as questions. This will
enable us to ascertain their applicability to Afrikaans. We will evaluate each question
individually below by presenting Afrikaans examples containing the relevant P-items. Since
the focus of this paper is to find strategies that can be used to distinguish between Afrikaans
POSTPs and PTCL.Vs, we will only focus on P-items occurring after an NP. We will
7 Example 45 taken from Pullum & Huddleston (2002)

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 184
subsequently list each of the formulated questions, followed by a discussion using examples
containing relevant Afrikaans P-items to test whether the Dutch and English strategies can be
applied to these examples.
1. CAN THE P-item MOVE INDEPENDENTLY?
This test is applicable in contexts where it is unclear whether the noun phrase is a complement
of the P-item, making the P-item a POSTP, or whether the noun phrase is a direct object of the
verb, making the P-item a PTCL.V (see 24 above).
47 a. 'n Paar keer klim hy af en stap die veld in nadat hy die leisels sekuur aan
a few times climb he off and walk the field in after he the reins secure on
een van die karwiele vasgemaak het.
one of th e cartwheels tie.PST have.AUX
' A few times he dismounts and walks into the field after securely tying the reins to one
of the cart wheels.
b. ?… stap die veld, nadat hy die leisels sekuur aan een van die karwiele
walk the field after he the reins secure on one of the cartwheels
vasgemaak het, in.
tie.PST have.AUX in
48 a. Hul moet saam met haar die veld in stap - sy met 'n graaf en hul met
they must with with her the field in walk she with a shovel and they with
die pakke vleis.
the packet meat
'They have to walk into the field with her - she with a spade and they with the packs of
meat.'
b. Hul moet die veld saam met haar in stap ...8
they must the field with with her in walk
'They must walk into the field with her.'
The test works very well for 47, where the construction is unconventional when the position
of the P-item is changed. However, the test works less optimally, for example 48. Although
there is a difference in meaning in 48a and 48b, both of these constructions are, in our view,
grammatically conventional and understandable. It is therefore not possible to determine
whether die veld in ‘the field in’ is a PP (and in ‘in’ a POSTP), or whether die veld ‘the field’ is an
NPOBJ (and in ‘in’ a PTCL.V). This test is therefore not a clear-cut way to distinguish between
Afrikaans POSTPs and PTCL.Vs.
2. IS THE P-item PART OF A PHRASE THAT IS A POST-MODIFIER IN THE NP?
If the answer to this question is yes, then the P-item in question is a POSTP and the phrase
that it is part of, is a post-modifier in the NP. The P-item can then not be regarded as a PTCL.V,
given that it serves as the head of a PP which post-modifies the NP. In 49, die ruimte in ‘into
8 Example 47b and 48b are modified versions of 47a and 48a, which are examples that were taken from VivA-KPO.

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 185
space’ is a postmodifier in the NP with head sprong ‘jump’, and in 50, die Ooskaap in ‘into the
Eastern Cape’ is a postmodifier in the NP with head sakereis ‘business trip’. Therefore, the P-
items in ‘in’ in both these examples are POSTPs.
49 Mercury Freedom 7 waag met Alan B. Shepard jr. van Amerika 'n geslaagde
Mercury Freedom 7 dare with Alan B. Shpard.jr of America a successful
sprong die ruimte in, maar sonder om om die Aarde te wentel.
jump the space in but without to around the Earth PTCL.INF orbit
'Mercury Freedom 7 venture with Alan B. Shepard jr. of America a successful leap into space,
but without orbiting the Earth.'
50 Na 'n onlangse sakereis die Ooskaap in, het ek huis toe gekom
after a recent business.travel the Eastern Cape in have.AUX I home to come.PST
vol beknelling.
full anxiousness
'After a recent business trip to the Eastern Cape, I came home feeling overwhelmed.'
If the answer to the question is no, then the status of the P-item is still unclear, and another
test must be used to determine the category of the P-item. In 51, the P-item by 'at' is not part
of a postmodifier in an NP (’n skaakvergadering by ‘a chess meeting at’ is not a postmodifier
of aand ‘evening’), and the test is therefore not applicable. In 52 below, the test is also not
applicable, since the P-item deur 'through', is also not part of a postmodifier (die winter deur
‘through the winter’ is not a postmodifier of ouens ‘guys’. These two P-items can therefore be
categorised as PTCL.Vs, but can also be POSTPs that are part of a PP that functions as
adjunct. Other strategies need to be used to make these distinctions.
51 Ek woon die aand 'n skaakvergadering by, en kom moeg terug by
I live the evening a chess+meeting by and come tired back by
die huis.
the house
'I attend a chess meeting in the evening, and come home tired.
52 "Hoe kry ons die ouens die winter deur," is van die aangeleenthede
how get we the guys the winter through be of the issues
wat bespreek is.
what address.PASS be.AUX
'"How do we get the guys through the winter," are some of the issues which was discussed.'
This test works well to identify a POSTP that functions as the head of a post-modifying PP. It
does however not help to distinguish between all POSTPs and PTCL.Vs in Afrikaans.
3. IS THERE ALREADY A PTCL.V IN THE SENTENCE?
This test will be applicable in Afrikaans sentences containing more than one P-item, where
one is a clear PTCL.V in the sentence. If this is the case, all other P-items in the sentence must
be adpositions. In 53, uit ‘out’ is clearly a PTCL.V because it lacks any complement and it is
not an adverb, as it cannot be replaced by any other adverb. Since uit ‘out’ is therefore already
a PTCL.V in the sentence, the other P-item in ‘in’ must be a POSTP. As illustrated here, this

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 186
test is very useful for identifying POSTP’s in Afrikaans sentences containing more than one P-
item.
53 Sy wip by die deur uit die tuin in agter haar broer aan.9
she jump by the door out the garden in behind her brother on
She jumps out the door into the garden, following her brother.
4. DOES REGARDING THE P-item AS A PTCL.V RESULT IN THE TRANSITIVE VERB
HAVING TWO OBJECTS?
A transitive verb cannot take two direct objects. In 52, for instance, deur ‘through’ cannot be
categorised as a PTCL.V, as that would mean that both die ouens 'the guys' and die winter 'the
winter' are direct objects of the transitive verb deurkry 'get through'. Instead, deur ‘through’
should be classified as a POSTP within the adverbial adpositional phrase that describes the
duration of the state denoted by the verb.
As illustrated here, this test is very useful for identifying POSTPs in Afrikaans sentences
containing a transitive verb.
5. CAN THE P-item BE MOVED TO A POSITION IN FRONT OF THE NPOBJ?
This test is used to identify PTCL.Vs in English, and more specifically to distinguish them from
the adpositions of prepositional verbs. An English PTCL.V can occur in two positions, viz.
before and after the object NP, while the adposition that is part of a prepositional verb cannot
be moved to a position after the NP (see 47 and 48 above).
54 a. “Spoeg uit die kougom,” sê Lisa met haar kwaai stem. 10
spit out the chewing gum say Lisa with her stern voice
'"Spit out the gum," said Lisa in her angry voice.'
b. Spoeg die kougom uit op pad uit.
spit the gum ou on way out
'Spit the gum out on the way out.'
55 a. Bobby van Jaarsveld tree op voor 'n volgepakte saal.
Bobby van Jaarsveld perform on before a full+packed hall
'Bobby van Jaarsveld performs in front of a packed hall.'
b. Bobby van Jaarsveld tree voor ‘n volgepakte saal op.11
Bobby van Jaarsveld perform before a full+packed hall on
'Bobby van Jaarsveld performs in front of a packed hall.'3
9 Example 52 was adapted –original sentence from VivA-KPO: Sy gooi die tafellaken wat sy en Ousus besig was om
op te vou, teen Ousus aan en wip by die deur uit die tuin in agter haar broer aan.
10 Example 54 taken from Google.
11 Example 55b is an adapted version of 55a.

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 187
We do not consider this test suitable for identifying PTCL.Vs in Afrikaans, as Afrikaans
speakers (while grammatically feasible) do not commonly place a PTCL.V before the noun
phrase. We were unable to locate any examples of a PTCL.V positioned after the noun phrase
in VivA-KPO. Only a limited number of examples were found on the internet (refer to examples
54a and 54b). However, what does happen in Afrikaans is that the PTCL.V can be positioned
both before and after an adverbial prepositional phrase (see 55a and 55b). The potential
positions of a P-item in relation to an adverbial PP might therefore be a more successful
means of distinguishing a PTCL.V from a POSTP. Further research is required to ascertain the
applicability of this modified test to Afrikaans data.
6. DOES THE P-item HAVE LIMITED MEANING, A SHORTER FORM AND CAN IT PRECEDE
THE NPOBJ?
In English it is possible to distinguish between particles and adverbs by observing their form,
their meaning and their syntactic position (see 40 and 41 above). However, this test is not
suitable for Afrikaans, given that identical Afrikaans P-items can be used as PTCL.Vs,
adpositions and adverbs. Also – as shown in the discussion of test 5 above – a PTCL.V very
rarely precedes the NPOBJ in Afrikaans.
7. IS THE INTERROGATIVE THAT CAN BE FORMED OUT OF THE SENTENCE
CONTAINING THE P-item, FORMED WITH WHAT/WHO OR WITH WHEN/WHERE?
In English, one can differentiate between a preposition that constitutes a part of a
prepositional verb and a preposition that constitutes a part of an adjunct by constructing an
interrogative sentence. If the interrogative can be phrased using 'what' or 'who,' the preposition
is part of a prepositional verb. If the interrogative can be phrased using 'when' or 'where,' the
preposition is part of an adjunct (refer to 42 and 43).
However, considering the objective of this paper to distinguish between PTCL.Vs, adpositions,
and adverbs, this test is not pertinent to the scope of this paper.
8. CAN THE P-item PRECEDING A NP BE MOVED TO A POSITION AFTER THE NP?
In English it is possible for a PTCL.V to move to a position after an NP, while it is not possible
for an adposition to move to a position after the NP (see 47 and 48 for examples).
As stated above, the PTCL.V does not frequently occur before an NPOBJ in Afrikaans, and
therefore this test is not usable on Afrikaans data.
6 In conclusion
Although it is unproblematic for most linguists not to make any distinction between different
P-items, in some user contexts it is necessary to be able to make a distinction. In this
contribution, we specifically focused on the issues surrounding the distinction between
POSTPs and PTCL.Vs in Afrikaans, English and Dutch. In § 2, the focus is on Afrikaans, and it
appears that there is no clear way to distinguish between Afrikaans POSTPs and PTCL.Vs in

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 188
the current literature. It is also not clear from existing literature whether POSTPs should at all
be recognised in Afrikaans. In § 3, the focus is on Dutch literature, and there too it appears
that the existence of Dutch POSTPs is not a foregone conclusion, and that there are linguists
who believe that everything that is currently categorised as POSTPs should be categorised as
PTCL.Vs. § 4 summarises information on English P-items presented in the standard
grammars of English.
In § 3 and 4, several tests for distinguishing between different P-items in Dutch and English
are presented. The possibility of adapting these tests to aid in the subcategorisation of
Afrikaans P-items is explored in § 5, where each test is formulated as a question and then
applied to Afrikaans data. The first test can distinguish between POSTPs and PTCL.Vs, but
the distinction is not clear-cut in specific example sentences. Consequently, it does not
provide a clear-cut strategy to distinguish between different P-items. The second test is useful
to identify POSTP’s in a very specific context (namely where the POSTP is part of a PP that
functions as a postmodifier in an NP). The third test is very useful for distinguishing between
PTCL.Vs and POSTPs in sentences containing more than one relevant P-item. Test four is very
useful in distinguishing between POSTPs and PTCL.Vs in sentences containing a transitive
verb. Test 6, 7 and 8 are not useful to distinguish between POSTPs and PTCL.Vs and more
research is necessary to determine whether a modified version test 5 can be used to sub-
categorise Afrikaans P-items.
In our opinion, it would also make sense to follow a language-comparative approach in the
description of the P-item subcategories. It already appears in this contribution that this issue
is a contentious one in Afrikaans and Dutch, and it is possibly also the case in other closely
related languages. P-items also show semantic and syntactic similarities across languages,
and it would therefore also be beneficial to study this phenomenon language-comparatively.
7 Recognition
The project Wat de Vloekwoord! Multidissiplinêre navorsing en wetenskapskommunikasie oor
vloek within which this research was carried out was made possible in part by financial
support from the South African Academy of Science and Arts. The in-kind contributions of
BlueTek Computers, WatKykJy.co.za, Afrikaans.com and Maroela Media are also gratefully
acknowledged. However, none of the opinions in this article can be attributed to any of these
institutions and/or their collaborators.
8 Author contribution
All six authors are part of a virtual construction grammar working group and thus constantly
work together in equal parts to create intellectual property. For this article, Suléne Pilon wrote
most of the text of the article; Lande Botha and Maristi Partridge wrote about adpositions and
particles in English; Adri Breed and Anneke Butler wrote about postpositions in Dutch;
Monique Rabé summarised the strategies in both the English and Dutch reference works to
be applied to Afrikaans data; and Gerhard B van Huyssteen conceptualised the article

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 189
structure. All authors participated equally in discussions about the conceptual framework,
research design and data analyses.
9 Declaration of interests
The authors declare that: (1) they are familiar with the content of the article and agree with it;
(2) the article is their original intellectual property, without any plagiarism; (3) the manuscript
was not submitted simultaneously to different journals for selection; and (4) there is no
conflict of interest – including financial interest – to declare. All the authors give permission
for the article to be published in the conference proceedings of the 4th International Afrikaans
Grammar Workshop.
It is stated here that, in consultation with the North-West University, it has been decided that
an independent project website for the above project be set up and maintained, in order to
operationalise the research in the best possible way. This website, vloek.co.za, was developed
and is owned by Viridevert NPC (2016/411799/08), a non-profit company registered with
SARS as an educational public benefit organisation (PBO) with tax exemption (a so-called
"section 18A-approved organisation”) and its own bank account at FNB. Gerhard B van
Huyssteen is one of the directors of the company.
10 Ethics clearance
This contribution appears under the auspices of a project whose overall ethics clearance was
registered with North-West University's Language Matters Ethics Committee on 21 May 2019;
the registration number is NWU-00632-19-A7..

© 2023 Pilon, Botha, Partridge, Breed, Butler, Rabé & Van Huyssteen
4th International Afrikaans Grammar Workshop 190
11 References
Beliën, Maaike. 2021. “9.2.3 Achterzetsels of partikels?" Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst.
Accessed 18 August 2023. https://e-ans.ivdnt.org/topics/pid/topic-15383924270796206.
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999.
Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Essex: Pearson Education.
Broekhuis, Hans. 2020. “1.1.1. Properties of adpositions.” Taalportaal. Accessed 18 August
2023.https://taalportaal.org/taalportaal/topic/link/syntax____Dutch__adp__adp1__p1_gen.
1.1.1.xml.
Capelle, Bert. 2004. “The particularity of particles, or why they are not just ‘intransitive
prepositions’.” Belgian Journal of Linguistics 18, no. 1:29–
57. https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.18.04cap.
Cappelle, Bert. 2015. “Achterzetsels: De spraakkunst uit ermee!” Over Taal 54, no. 1:14–17.
Conradie, C. Jac. 2020. Language change in the Afrikaans translations of the Gospel of
Mark. Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe 60, no. 4-1: 1047–1065.
De Villiers, Meyer. 1975. Die semantiek van Afrikaans. Kaapstad: HAUM.
Fontaine, Lise. 2017. “On prepositions and particles: A case for lexical representation in
systemic functional linguistics.” WORD 63, no. 2:115–
135. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2017.1309029.
Huddleston, Rodney. 2002. “The clause: Complements.” In The Cambridge grammar of the
English language, edited by Rodney Huddleston, and Geoffrey K. Pullum, 213–
321. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Koopman, Hilda. 2000. Prepositions, postpositions, circumpositions, and particles. In The
syntax of specifiers and heads, edited by Hilda Koopman, 204–260. London: Routledge.
Kotzé, Ernst, and Adri Breed. 2020a. “Classification of PPs: Postpositions.” Taalportaal.
Accessed 18 August 2023. https://taalportaal.org/taalportaal/topic/pid/topic-
20191114351204177.
Kotzé, Ernst, and Adri Breed. 2020b. “Preposition stranding and R-pronouns.” Taalportaal.
Accessed 18 August 2023. https://taalportaal.org/taalportaal/topic/pid/topic-
20191114696935360.
Ponelis, Fritz. 1968. Grondtrekke van die Afrikaanse sintaksis. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Ponelis, Fritz. 1979. Afrikaanse sintaksis. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Pullum, Geoffrey K., and Rodney Huddleston. 2002. “Prepositions and preposition phrases.”
In The Cambridge grammar of the English language, edited by Rodney Huddleston, and
Geoffrey K. Pullum, 597–661. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Goethem, K. 2007. De rol van scheidbaarheid bij de indeling tussen samengestelde en
afgeleide werkwoorden in het Nederlands. Studies van de Belgische Kring voor Linguïstiek,
2(1): 1-13. http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/70341.
Van Huyssteen, Gerhard B., Adri Breed, Anneke Butler, Lande Botha, Maristi Partridge, and
Suléne Pilon. Accepted. “’n Metodologie vir die beskrywing van konstruksionaliserings-
netwerke: Konstruksies met [in] as gevallestudie.” Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics.
Van Schoor, J. L. 1983. Die grammatika van standaard-Afrikaans. Kaapstad: Lex Patria.
Virtuele Instituut vir Afrikaans (VivA). 2021. Korpusportaal: Omvattend 1.9. Accessed 18
August 2023. http://viva-afrikaans.org.
View publication stats