Talk:Separable verb

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Languages

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Possible examples in English?

In English one of the meanings of to pass on is the same as to onpass, the word upset used to mean to set up, and one of the meanings of to set off is to offset. Not sure how these compare to, say, German. If anyone knows the answer maybe you can add it to the article. --Yel D'ohan (talk) 14:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is: You could say “I screw up“ but you couldn't say “I am upscrewing“ like you would in German.

185.46.137.18 (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's because English syntax works different than German syntax. It seems that this article does not get the point at all: German and Dutch separable verbs are the equivalent to English phrasal verbs, the prefixed position of the verbal particle (unless V2 word order is applied) is caused by their basic Object-Verb word order. --2A0A:A541:10F4:0:2942:173E:5F5B:CC8B (talk) 20:58, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Stress difference for umfahren

German has lexical stress. Drive over is 'umfahren and drive around is um'fahren 185.46.137.18 (talk) 18:51, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Possible source

Duden, Band 4, - Die Grammatik, 8. Auflage, ISBN: 978-3-411-04048-3, page 696 ff, 2.3, Partikelverbbildung — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doppelkammertoaster (talk • contribs) 09:04, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The "catena analysis"

I removed this part because (a) it seems to be a self-made idea and no sources are cited (b) it does not constitute an analysis at all. It does not help to point out that the split construction kommt ... an and the connected particle verb ankommen will both be "a catena" – because (for all that we can see) they will be two different catenas. There is no indication of what connects the two tree diagrams to represent the notion of "a separable verb". Furthermore, an account of verb-particle combinations in terms of multiword expressions / idioms must also available in a constituent grammar. Alazon (talk) 00:15, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]