Among the almost 250 diatheses that are distinguished in this book there are many that are frequently attested and that can be used with very many different verbs. In contrast, there are also many diatheses that only occur in very specific circumstances or that might otherwise be considered to be exceptions or incidental instances. Only the major diatheses, those that are of central importance to the grammatical structure of German, will be summarised in this chapter. Such a summary would normally be presented at the end of a book, but because of the often long-winding data-driven details of the subsequent descriptive chapters, I decided to present this summary here at the end of the introductory deliberations. Take it as a quick appetiser of things to come, with ample links to the actual discussion in later chapters. This chapter also provides a sketch of how diathesis could be approached in practical grammars of the German language.
To reiterate the basic premise of this book: in the Chapters [-@sec:case] to [-@sec:zuminfinitive] I aim to present a complete list of all coherent, and thus monoclausal, clause structures in German (cf. [@sec:intro-coherence] on defining monoclausality). All in all, in those chapters there are more than 300 separate sub-subsections that describe (often minor) variations of monoclausal structures. This diversity is condensed into about 120 major clause alternations as summarised here. Of those, about 80 are diatheses (i.e. clause alternations with role-remapping, discussed in this chapter), while only about 40 are epitheses (i.e. clause alternations without any change in role marking, discussed in the next chapter). So, diathesis ("grammatical voice") is a much more diverse grammatical phenomenon than epithesis ("tense-aspect-mood marking"). All these counts should be taken with some leeway, because a lot depends on individual decisions about splitting or lumping structures into groups (e.g. how many lassen+Infinitiv constructions are counted separately, cf. [@sec:infinitive-guises-of-lassen]). Although the analysis of German clause alternations might look cleaner when lumping structures into larger groups, that would not reduce the attested diversity, it would only hide the variation at the cost of larger within-group complexity.
Besides providing a basic summary, I also propose German names (sometimes based on Latinate terms) for all 120 major derived monoclausal sentence structures. Using suitable names is a central aspect of (scientific) communication. In grammar, names are like instruments that allow us to abstract away from individual details and manipulate classes of utterances that show a specific abstract structure. However, naming is hard and can also lead to miscommunication. When re-using available terminology, the terms are easily recognised and remembered, but they carry the weight of history. Even when detailed definitions are given (as I have tried to do throughout this book), unintended interpretations of previous usage inevitably seep through. In contrast, inventing new names introduces more precision, but the downside is often cumbersome terms that are difficult to remember.
In naming diatheses in this book I have tried to strike a balance between precise naming and good readability. For the English names in the detailed discussions in the coming chapters, I have decided in favour of precision. Each phenomenon is newly named with often long descriptive and unique names. In contrast, for the German names in this chapter I try to reuse available terminology as much as possible. When necessary, I propose new names that attempt to evoke a functional description like Reziprokativ or Erlebniskonversiv. However, the semantic characterisation has not been the main focus of this book, so it might become necessary to rename diatheses in the future once more detailed investigations have been performed. In some cases I have not been able to find a suitable semantic characterisation. For those diatheses I have resorted to using formal characteristics in the name, always written as separate words, like Reflexiv Erlebniskonversiv (i.e an Erlebniskonversiv that needs a reflexive pronoun) or Resultativ Delokativ (i.e. a Delokativ that needs a resultative preverbial).
In this chapter, the diatheses are organised in sections according to the grammatical macro-role remapping patterns as introduced in [@sec:intro-naming]. The different diatheses in each section are thus functionally highly similar, but they are structurally different. Inversely, there are various diatheses that are structurally highly similar, but are nonetheless repeated in separate sections under different names. This is necessary because superficially identical diatheses can have rather different structural repercussions depending on the verbs to which they are applied. This happens for example with different instantiations of the sein+Partizip or the lassen+Infinitiv constructions.
Before diving into the daunting diversity of German diathesis, a short note on German names for different clause types is in order (summarised in [@tbl:clause-types]). The distinction between sentence (German: Satz) and clause (German: Teilsatz) is customary made in the German grammatical literature when a precise description is needed. However, the term Satz is often used as a shorthand for both. When subdividing clauses, there is of course a basic distinction between main clause (German: Hauptsatz, more precise would be Selbständiger Teilsatz) and subordinate clause (German: Nebensatz or alternatively Untergeordneter Teilsatz).
Yet, a central thesis of this book is that there is a further subdivision for both main and subordinate clauses. First, a "basic clause" is a clause with a single finite verb in the Präsens or Präteritum. For German I propose to use the term Basissatz, or, to be more precise, Grundlegender Teilsatz. Various kinds of derived clauses can be constructed from a basic clause. For German I propose to call such a derived clause a Spezialsatz, or, to be more precise, Abgeleiteter Teilsatz.
There are two kinds of derived clauses. First, an epithesis is a clause alternation without role-remapping. For German I propose to use either the neologism Übersatz or the Greek-inspired Epithese, or, to be more precise, Erweiterter Teilsatz. Second, a diathesis is a clause alternation with role-remapping. For German I propose to use the neologism Wechselsatz or the Greek-inspired Diathese, or, to be more precise, Umgestellter Teilsatz.
| English Term | German Term | Short German Term |
|---|---|---|
| Main clause | Selbständiger Teilsatz | Hauptsatz |
| Subordinate clause | Untergeordneter Teilsatz | Nebensatz |
| Basic clause | Grundlegender Teilsatz | Basissatz |
| Derived clause | Abgeleiteter Teilsatz | Spezialsatz |
| Epithesis | Erweiterter Teilsatz | Übersatz (Epithese) |
| Diathesis | Umgestellter Teilsatz | Wechselsatz (Diathese) |
Table: German terminology for clause types {#tbl:clause-types}
An insubjective is a diathesis that completely removes the role marked as nominative subject without introducing a new subject. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-isolated-subject-diathesis], specifically starting at [@par:insubjective].
The unmarked Auslöserentfall (full discussion in [@sec:case-nominative-drop] and subsequent sections) is typically found with dispersion verbs like stinken 'to stink', klingeln 'to ring' or krachen 'to crunch' [@next a]. These verbs allow for a construction without explicit nominative subject when describing a general situation with unknown cause. An obligatory valency-simulating pronoun es is used as a replacement of the nominative subject [@next b].
::: ex a. Der Müll stinkt. b. Hier stinkt es aber. :::
The Aktionsbewertung (full discussion in [@sec:adverbial-reflexive-drop]) similarly replaces the nominative subject by a valency-simulating es. Additionally, this diathesis obligatorily needs a reflexive pronoun and an adverbial phrase describing an evaluation, like gut 'well' or angenehm 'pleasantly'. The Aktionsbewertung is typically used with agentive intransitive verbs like leben 'to live' or tanzen 'to dance' and describes a habitual situation. This diathesis is closely related to the Bewertungsantikausativ for transitive verbs (see [@sec:summary-wertungsantikausativ]).
::: ex a. Wir leben in diesem Haus. b. Hier lebt es sich gut. :::
The Zustandsbewertung (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-sein-adverbial]) is a somewhat formulaic construction dropping the nominative subject of an intransitive verb. This construction is constructed with sein and an infinitive. Additionally an adverbial phrase describing an evaluation is obligatory, like gut 'well' or schlecht 'badly'. A valency-simulating pronoun es instead of the dropped nominative is mostly not present. This construction expresses an evaluation and it typically used with a location, like with sitzen 'to sit' [@next].
::: ex a. Ich sitze zwischen den Stühlen. b. Zwischen den Stühlen ist schlecht sitzen. :::
The Möglichkeitsbewertung (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-lassen-reflexive-intransitive]) consists of the light verb lassen with the infinitive of an intransitive verb. This construction obligatory includes a reflexive pronoun and an evaluating adverbial expression like gut 'fine'. A valency-simulating pronoun es appears to be optional [@next]. This construction gives an evaluation about a possible situation. It is closely related to the Permissivpassiv for transitive verbs (see [@sec:summary-permissivpassiv]).
::: ex a. Ich arbeite zuhause. b. Zuhause lässt (es) sich gut arbeiten. :::
The Unpersönlicher Vorgangspassiv (full discussion in [@sec:participles-werden-impersonal-passive]) is a construction consisting of the light verb werden with a participle of an intransitive verb. Only agentive ("unergative") intransitive verbs like tanzen 'to dance' [@next] or schlafen 'to sleep' allow for this construction without any nominative subject (not even a valency-simulating es is needed). The name "passive" is rather unfitting for this diathesis, but it is retained here because of widespread usage. This construction is closely related to the Vorgangspassiv for transitive verbs (see [@sec:summary-vorgangspassiv]).
::: ex a. Die Jungs tanzen. b. Jetzt wird getanzt! :::
The Unpersönlicher Modalpassiv (full discussion in [@sec:zuinfinitive-sein-impersonal] and subsequent sections) consists of a light verb sein with zu and an infinitive. It is found with incidental intransitive verbs, but more typically with verbs with a dative argument (but no accusative) like helfen 'to help' or trauen 'to trust' [@next]. In this diathesis the nominative subject is dropped and cannot be retained in any other form. There is also no valency-simulating es present. The name "passive" is actually beside the point for this diathesis, but it is used here because this construction is closely related to the Modalpassiv (see [@sec:summary-modalpassiv]).
::: ex a. Ich traue ihm nicht. b. Ihm ist nicht zu trauen. :::
A desubjective is a diathesis that removes the role marked as nominative subject, though this role can still optionally be expressed as a prepositional phrase. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-isolated-subject-diathesis], specifically starting at [@par:desubjective].
The Möglichkeitsdesubjektiv (full discussion in [@sec:zuinfinitive-geben-demotion]) uses a subjectless light verb geben with zu and an infinitive [@next]. The removed nominative subject is replaced by a valency-simulating pronoun es, so the light verbs are always in the third person singular, resulting in a fixed expression es gibt. The removed subject can optionally be retained with a für prepositional phrase, though this is less frequent compared to the gelten+zu‑Infinitiv diathesis (see [@sec:summary-notwendigkeitsdesubjektiv]). Any other argument is simply preserved, like the accusative den Koffer 'the suitcase' in the example below. The Möglichkeitsdesubjektiv semantically invokes an option that is available to the original subject, i.e. a modal-like 'can' meaning. The same construction geben+zu‑Infinitiv is also used in a semantically and structurally quite different diathesis, namely the Möglichkeitskausativ (see [@sec:summary-moglichkeitskausativ]).
::: ex a. Wir kaufen den Koffer. b. In dem Laden gibt es den Koffer ^?^(für uns) zu kaufen. :::
The Notwendigkeitsdesubjektiv (full discussion in [@sec:zuinfinitive-gelten-demotion]) uses a subjectless light verb gelten with zu and an infinitive [@next]. The removed nominative subject is replaced by a valency-simulating pronoun es, so the light verb gelten is always in the third person singular, resulting in fixed expressions es gilt. The removed subject can optionally be retained with a für prepositional phrase. Any other argument is simply preserved, like the accusative den Koffer 'the suitcase' in the example below. This construction semantically invokes some kind of (self‑)assignment that should be fulfilled, i.e. a modal-like 'must' meaning.
::: ex a. Wir verlieren den Koffer nicht. b. Jetzt gilt es (für uns) den Koffer nicht zu verlieren. :::
The Aufforderungsdesubjektiv (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-heißen-demotion]) consists of the verb heißen with an infinitive. The meaning of this constructions is very close to the previous Notwendigkeitsdesubjektiv (see [@sec:summary-notwendigkeitsdesubjektiv]). The removed nominative subject is replaced by a valency-simulating pronoun es, so the light verb heißen is always in the third person singular, resulting in fixed expressions es heißt. The removed subject can optionally be retained with a für prepositional phrase. However, different from gelten+zu‑Infinitiv, the construction heißen+Infinitiv can only be applied to intransitive verbs. Note that there also exists a completely separate causative usage of heißen+Infinitiv, but that Aufforderungskausativ appears to be rather old-fashioned (see [@sec:summary-machenkausativ]).
::: ex a. Er redet weiter. b. Dann heißt es für ihn weiter reden. :::
A conciliative is a diathesis that completely removes the role marked as subject and promotes an instrument to be the new subject. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-subject-demotions], specifically starting at [@par:conciliative].
The Instrumentsubjektiv (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-intransitive-preposition-anticausative] and subsequent sections) promotes an instrument to nominative subject. For example, the instrument Schlüssel 'key' of the verb öffnen 'to open' is expressed with a mit prepositional phrase in [@next a]. Alternatively, it can be expressed with a nominative as in [@next b]. In that construction, the original agent cannot be expressed anymore. This diathesis looks very similar to the Kreationsubjektiv (see [@sec:summary-Kreationsubjektiv]), but there are crucial semantic and structural differences (discussed below).
::: ex a. Ich öffne die Tür mit dem Schlüssel. b. Der Schlüssel öffnet die Tür. :::
A fabricative is a diathesis that completely removes the role marked as subject and promotes an fabricated entity to be the new subject. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-subject-demotions], specifically starting at [@par:fabricative].
The Kreationsubjektiv (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-fabricative-accusative]) superficially looks very similar to the previous Instrumentsubjektiv. In both diatheses a mit prepositional phrase is promoted to nominative subject. However, with a verb like überraschen 'to surprise' [@next] the noun in the prepositional phrase, Aufgabe 'task', does not represent an instrument, but a fabrication by the subject of the sentence, Lehrer 'teacher'. This semantic difference is paralleled by a structural difference, namely that the mit prepositional phrase is a governed preposition [@next c]. Note that the verbs that allow for a Kreationsubjektiv show a substantial overlap with the verbs that allow for the Reflexiv Erlebniskonversiv (see [@sec:summary-reflexiv-erlebnispassiv]), though the two groups are not identical.
::: ex a. Der Lehrer überrascht mich mit der Aufgabe. b. Die Aufgabe überrascht mich. c. Der Lehrer überrascht mich damit, dass er die Aufgabe schon korrigiert hat. :::
The Auslösersubjektiv (full discussion in [@sec:zuminfinitive-sein-zum]) is constructed with the light verb sein with a zum‑Infinitiv. This diathesis can be applied to verbs of emotion with a governed preposition describing the trigger of the emotion. For example, heulen 'to whine' [@next a] uses the governed preposition über to describe the trigger, here Schaden 'damage' [@next b]. The result of the diathesis is that the trigger of the emotion is promoted to nominative subject [@next c]. The original subject, i.e. the perceiver of the emotion, cannot be expressed anymore.
::: ex a. Ich heule über den Schaden. b. Ich heule darüber, dass der Schaden so groß ist. c. Der Schaden ist zum Heulen. :::
An anticausative is a diathesis that completely removes the role marked as subject and promotes an object to be the new subject. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-subject-demotions], specifically starting at [@par:anticausative].
The unmarked Antikausativ (full discussion in [@sec:case-haben-anticausative] and subsequent sections) is attested with verbs like öffnen 'to open' or kochen 'to cook'. These verbs occur both as transitive [@next a] and intransitive [@next b] without any further grammatical marking. Crucially, the object of the transitive is the subject of the intransitive. Because this diathesis is unmarked, there is no formal indication of a direction. So, this diathesis could just as well be interpreted as a causative. However, there is a formal difference between verbs that allow for both a haben and sein in the intransitive [@next c,d] and those that only allow for a sein in the intransitive. There seems to be an interesting semantic correlate to this formal difference in that the verbs that allow for both haben and sein seem primarily transitiv. Consequentially this group is called Antikausativ (this section), while the second group with only sein is called Kausativ (see [@sec:summary-kausativ]).
::: ex a. Der Mitarbeiter öffnet den Laden. b. Der Laden öffnet gleich. c. Der Laden hat geöffnet. d. Der Laden ist geöffnet. :::
The unmarked Ortsantikausativ (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-haben-caused-location]) is similar to the previous unmarked Antikausativ. Verbs like kleben 'to glue, to stick' or klappen 'to fold' occur both as transitive and intransitive [@next a,b] with the object of the transitive being the subject of the intransitive. Likewise, the intransitive is possible with both haben and sein [@next c,d]. The only difference is the obligatory presence of a location. Note that there is also a parallel Ortskausativ (see [@sec:summary-ortskausativ]).
::: ex a. Ich habe den Zettel an die Wand geklebt. b. Der Zettel klebt an der Wand. b. Der Zettel hat an der Wand geklebt. c. Der Zettel ist an die Wand geklebt. :::
The Reflexiv Antikausativ (full discussion in [@sec:reflexive-anticausative] and subsequent sections) is attested with verbs like entscheiden 'to decide' or beschränken 'to limit'. Again, these verbs occur both as transitive and intransitive with the transitive object being the subject of the intransitive [@next a,b]. However, with these verbs the intransitive needs an obligatory reflexive pronoun [@next b]. The intransitive with reflexive pronoun typically takes haben in the perfect [@next c]. The intransitive perfect with sein [@next d] can now clearly be identified as a Zustandspassiv of the transitive (see [@sec:summary-zustandspassiv]).
::: ex a. Der Richter entscheidet den Fall. b. Der Fall entscheidet sich. c. Der Fall hat sich entschieden. d. Der Fall ist entschieden. :::
The Bewertungsantikausativ (full discussion in [@sec:adverbial-reflexive-transitive-anticausative] and subsequent sections) is possible with many straightforward transitive verbs, like with verkaufen 'to sell' or lesen 'to read' [@next a]. The anticausative intransitive obligatorily needs a reflexive pronoun, and additionally an obligatory manner adverbial is needed [@next b]. Just like the previous anticausatives, the intransitive occurs both with haben and sein in the perfect. However, haben is clearly used with the reflexive anticausative construction with obligatory adverbial [@next c], while sein is used with the Zustandspassiv (see [@sec:summary-zustandspassiv]) of the original transitive, without reflexive pronoun or obligatory adverbial evaluation [@next d].
::: ex a. Ich verkaufe das Buch. b. Das Buch verkauft sich gut. c. Das Buch hat sich gut verkauft. d. Das Buch ist verkauft. :::
The Inferenzantikausativ (full discussion in [@sec:participles-scheinen-anticausative]) is constructed with one of the light verbs scheinen or erscheinen with a participle of a transitive verb [@next]. This construction expresses an evidential inference by the speaker that something is the case. The retention of the original agent as a prepositional phrase seems to be mostly not possible [@next b], so this diathesis is classified as an anticausative here. With intransitive verbs this construction does not show any diathesis and is consequently called Perfektinferenz (see [@sec:summary-perfektinferenz]).
::: ex a. Der Pförtner schließt die Tür. b. Die Tür scheint *(von dem Pförtner) geschlossen. :::
The Sinnesantikausativ (full discussion in [@sec:participles-wirken-anticausative]) uses the light verbs aussehen or wirken together with a participle of a transitive verb to form an anticausative diathesis [@next]. This construction expresses that the speaker has sensory evidence about the state of affairs. The retention of the original subject is very rare, though it might to be possible with verbs describing a mental state, like entspannen 'to relax' [@next b]. With intransitive verbs this construction does not show any diathesis and is consequently called Sinnesevidenz (see [@sec:summary-sinnesevidenz]).
::: ex
a. Die Renovierung verändert den Bahnhof.
Der Bahnhof sieht *(von der Renovierung) verändert aus.
b. Die Stille entspannt ihn.
Er wirkt ^?^(von der Stille) entspannt.
:::
The Darstellungsantikausativ (full discussion in [@sec:participles-geben-reflexive-anticausative]) consists of the light verb geben with a participle and an obligatory reflexive pronoun. It expresses a conscious performance to appear in a certain way by the erstwhile accusative. The original nominative cannot be retained. The light verb zeigen can be used alternatively to geben. The difference (if any) between these two light verbs needs more investigation.
::: ex a. Die Stille entspannt ihn. b. Er gibt sich *(durch die Stille) entspannt. :::
The Erwartungsantikausativ (full discussion in [@sec:zuinfinitive-stehen]) uses a light verb stehen with zu and an infinitive. The original accusative object is promoted to subject and the erstwhile nominative subject cannot be retained, so this clearly is an anticausative diathesis. However, examples with an explicitly accusative noun phrase as in [@next a] are actually rare. Typically, this diatheses is found with cognitive predicates expressing an expectation, like befürchten 'to fear', with a dass complement clause [@next b]. Functionally, this complement clause has the same status as an accusative object. Note that complement clauses typically come towards the end of the sentence in German, and then the first position of the sentence often has to be filled with a position-simulating pronoun es (which is removed when the first position is filled otherwise).
::: ex
a. Ich befürchte einen weiteren Beschäftigungsabbau.
Ein weiterer Beschäftigungsabbau steht zu befürchten.
b. Ich befürchte, dass er zu spät kommen wird.
Es steht zu befürchten, dass er zu spät kommen wird.
:::
The Unmöglichkeitsantikausativ (full discussion in [@sec:zuinfinitive-gehen]) uses a light verb gehen with zu and an infinitive. This anticausative diathesis is typical for an informal register, but written examples can be found going back to the 19th century. The construction is typically used with an additional negation [@next b], though in contemporary online writing it is also attested without negation [@next c]. Because of the negation, the typical usage of the Unmöglichkeitsantikausativ is to express the impossibility to change something.
::: ex
- Ich lösche die Datei.
- Die Datei geht nicht zu löschen.
- Die Datei geht zu löschen. :::
A passive is a diathesis that removes the role marked as subject and promotes an object to be the new subject. The erstwhile subject can optionally be expressed as a prepositional phrase. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-subject-demotions], specifically starting at [@par:passive].
The Vorgangspassiv (full discussion in [@sec:participles-werden-passive]) is the infamous diathesis consisting of a light verb werden with a participle. Passives are very similar to anticausatives in that the transitive object is turned into the intransitive subject [@next]. The special characteristic of a passive is that the transitive subject can be optionally retained, typically as a prepositional von or durch phrase. However, note that this prepositional phrase is normally not used. The same werden+Partizip construction leads to a different diathesis with intransitive verbs, namely the unpersönlicher Passiv (see [@sec:summary-unpersonlicher-vorgangspassiv]).
::: ex a. Ich verkaufe den Schrank. b. Der Schrank wird verkauft (von mir). :::
The Zustandspassiv (full discussion in [@sec:participles-sein-zustandspassiv]) consists of a light verb sein with a participle [@next]. Although this diathesis is traditionally called "passive" in German grammar, the status of the retained agent is problematic and appears to be strongly dependent on the verb [@next b,c]. It might thus be better to consider this diathesis to be an anticausative. However, because of the long tradition I hold on to the term Zustandspassiv and the analysis of it being a passive. The closely related sein+Partizip Erlebniskonversiv (see [@sec:summary-erlebnispassiv]) retains the subject with a governed preposition. Also the sein+Partizip Perfekt as attested with some intransitive verbs is arguably a similar construction, though applied to different verbs (see [@sec:summary-perfekt]).
::: ex a. Ich verkaufe den Schrank. b. Der Schrank ist ^?^(von mir) verkauft. c. Der Schrank ist ^!^(vom Schreiner) gebaut. :::
The Fortsetzungspassiv (full discussion in [@sec:participles-bleiben-transitive]) is closely related to the sein-Zustandspassiv (see [@sec:summary-zustandspassiv]), but now the light verb bleiben is used with a participle [@next]. This construction expresses that a reached state is maintained. Like with sein, the retention of the original agent with bleiben is possible, but often difficult [@next b,c]. However, not all verbs can be equally used with sein and bleiben. For example, verbs like drucken 'to print' or schreiben 'to write' are fine with the sein-Zustandspassiv but not with the bleiben-Fortsetzungspassiv. This construction is only attested with transitive verbs. The same bleiben+Partizip construction can be used with intransitive verbs, but then it does not induce a diathesis and is called Perfektkontinuativ (see [@sec:summary-perfektkontinuativ]).
::: ex a. Der Pförtner schließt die Tür. b. Die Tür bleibt ^?^(durch den Pförtner) geschlossen. c. DIe Tür bleibt ^!^(durch einen Vorhang) verborgen. :::
The Modalpassiv (full discussion in [@sec:zuinfinitiv-sein-passive]) is constructed using the light verb sein with zu and an infinitive. When applied to transitive verbs like führen 'to lead' [@next a] or lösen 'to solve' [@next b] this diathesis promotes the accusative to nominative subject. The erstwhile nominative subject can be retained as a prepositional phrase. This diathesis has two different interpretations. It can indicate either an deontic modality ('must') as in [@next a] or an ability ('can') as in [@next b]. Note that the subject retention with the preposition für is only possible in the ability-interpretation. The closely related unpersönlicher Modalpassiv is used with intransitives and only allows for the deontic interpretation (see [@sec:summary-unpersonlicher-modalpassiv]).
::: ex
a. Der Besitzer führt den Hund an der Leine.
Hunde sind an der Leine zu führen (von ihren Besitzern).
b. Die Schüler lösen die Aufgabe.
Die Aufgabe ist (für die Schüler) leicht zu lösen.
:::
The Normpassiv (full discussion in [@sec:participles-gehoren-anticausative]) consists of the light verb gehören with a participle. It is only attested with verbs with accusative objects, like bestrafen 'to punish' [@next]. The diathesis expresses that the main verb ought to be applied to the object. The original subject can optionally be retained as a prepositional phrase.
::: ex a. Der Schiedsrichter bestraft den Spieler. b. Der Spieler gehört bestraft (durch den Schiedsrichter) :::
The Permissivpassiv (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-lassen-reflexive-passive]) consists of the light verb lassen with infinitive and an obligatory reflexive pronoun [@next]. The agent can be retained with an optional von prepositional phrase, so this diathesis is a passive. This diathesis expresses that something is permitted [@next a] or that something is possible [@next b]. A similar construction with lassen+sich+Infinitiv can be applied to intransitive verbs, which leads to a different diathesis, namely the Möglichkeitsbewertung (see [@sec:summary-unpersonlicher-moglichkeitspassiv]). Also the Permissivkonversiv (see [@sec:summary-permissivkonversiv]) and the Permissivinversiv (see [@sec:summary-permissivinversiv]) use the same construction with lassen, but they also show different role-remappings.
::: ex
a. Die Visagistin schminkt ihn.
Er lässt sich (von der Visagistin) schminken.
a. Der Pförtner schließt die Tür.
Die Tür lässt sich (von dem Pförtner) schließen.
:::
The Rezipientenpassiv (full discussion in [@sec:participles-bekommen-passive]) has become a mainstay in the German grammatical literature. It consists of the light verb bekommen with a participle (alternatively, the light verbs kriegen or erhalten can be used). With this diathesis, a dative recipient is turned into the nominative subject. Again, the erstwhile nominative can be retained as a prepositional phrase, though it mostly is not used (as with all passives). Note that the same construction can also be used in a different "achievement" interpretation without diathesis, called Effektiv here (see [@sec:summary-effekativ]).
::: ex a. Der Friseur schneidet mir die Haare. b. Ich bekomme die Haare geschnitten (vom Friseur). :::
The Pertinenzpassiv (full discussion in [@sec:participles-haben-passive]) is a special construction because it looks identical to the Perfekt (see [@sec:summary-perfekt]), often even being ambiguous among the two interpretations. However, the Pertinenzpassiv is functionally much closer to the Rezipientenpassiv. The new nominative subject der Minister 'the minister' [@next b] is the (dative) experiencer/beneficiary of the cutting [@next a]. The original agent of the cutting Friseur 'barber' can only be retained with difficulty, so this diathesis looks closer to an anticausative. However, there is a well-known effect that this Pertinenzpassiv becomes much more common when stacked with a modal auxiliary like wollen 'to want' [@next c]. In such a stack, the original agent can clearly be retained.
The designation pertinenz refers to the fact that the new subject is necessarily the possessor of the accusative object Haare 'hair'. Such inherent possessors turn up in various diatheses, and all instances will be designated with the qualifier pertinenz. The most famous one is the Pertinenzdativ (see [@sec:summary-pertinenzdativ]), but there are various others, like the Pertinenzinversiv (see [@sec:summary-pertinenzinversiv]) and the Ortspertinenzinversiv (see [@sec:summary-ortspertinenzinversiv]).
::: ex a. Der Friseur schneidet dem Minister die Haare. b. Der Minister hat die Haare geschnitten ^?^(durch den Friseur). c. Der Minister will die Haare vom Friseur geschnitten haben. :::
A conversive is a diathesis that removes the role marked as subject and promotes an object to be the new subject. The erstwhile subject can optionally be expressed as a governed prepositional phrase. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-subject-demotions], specifically starting at [@par:conversive].
The Reflexiv Erlebniskonversiv (full discussion in [@sec:reflexive-preposition-passive]) is a diathesis in which a verb, like empören 'to appall' [@next a], can be used both with and without a reflexive pronoun. The effect of adding the reflexive pronoun is a remapping of the accusative to nominative and demoting the erstwhile nominative to a prepositional phrase [@next b]. The prepositional phrase is a governed preposition [@next c]. The verbs that allow this diathesis are typically verbs that express an experience. This diathesis is functionally similar to the sein-Erlebniskonversiv (see [@sec:summary-erlebnispassiv]) and the lassen-Permissivkonversiv (see [@sec:summary-permissivkonversiv]). There are even many verbs that allow for all three diatheses, like empören [@next d,e]. However, not all verbs allow for all three diatheses, like verärgern [@nnext d,e].
::: ex a. Der Preis empört den Kunden. b. Der Kunde empört sich über den hohen Preis. c. Der Kunde empört sich darüber, dass der Preis schon wieder gestiegen ist. d. Der Kunde ist empört über den hohen Preis. e. Der Kunde lässt sich nicht empören vom hohen Preis. :::
The Erlebniskonversiv (full discussion in [@sec:participles-sein-conversive]) is constructed with the light verb sein and a participle. The form of this diathesis is identical to the Zustandspassiv (see [@sec:summary-zustandspassiv]), but there is a crucial difference in the remapping of the original nominative. Verbs that take a Zustandspassiv, like öffnen 'to open' only allow for the retention of the nominative with a von prepositional phrase, and only in special circumstances. In contrast, the verbs that take the Erlebniskonversiv can regularly retain the agent with a governed preposition. For example, with the verb verärgern 'to displease' the original nominative can be expressed with an über prepositional phrase [@next b], which is a governed preposition [@next c]. Verbs that take the Erlebniskonversiv are typically verbs the express an experience, similar to the next other two conversive diatheses, the Reflexiv Erlebniskonversiv [@next d], see [@sec:summary-reflexiv-erlebnispassiv] and the Permissivkonversiv [@next e], see [@sec:summary-permissivkonversiv].
::: ex a. Die schlechte Nachricht verärgert mich. b. Ich bin verärgert über die schlechte Nachricht. c. Ich bin verärgert darüber, dass die schlechte Nachricht verbreitet wurde. d. ^* Ich verärgere mich über die schlechte Nachricht. e. Ich lasse mich nicht durch die schlechte Nachricht verärgern. :::
The Permissivkonversiv (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-lassen-reflexive-conversive]) uses a light verb lassen with an infinitive and an obligatory reflexive pronoun. In this diathesis, the original dative is promoted to nominative subject, while the original nominative is demoted to a prepositional phrase, like with the verb begeistern 'to be enthusiastic' [@next a,b]. The preposition is a governed preposition [@next c]. The verbs that allow for this diathesis are highly similar, but not identical, to the verbs that take the Erlebniskonversiv [@next d], see [@sec:summary-erlebnispassiv], and the Reflexiv Erlebniskonversiv [@next e], see [@sec:summary-reflexiv-erlebnispassiv]. However, note the different prepositions in these constructions, as illustrated below.
::: ex a. Der neue Aufsatz begeistert die Forscherin. b. Die Forscherin lässt sich von dem Aufsatz begeistern. c. Die Forscherin lässt sich davon begeistern, dass der Aufsatz gut geschrieben ist. d. Die Forscherin begeistert sich für den Aufsatz. e. Die Forscherin ist begeistert über den Aufsatz. :::
An inversive is a diathesis that switches subject and object. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-symmetrical-subject], specifically starting at [@par:inversive].
The Restinversiv (full discussion in [@sec:zuinfinitive-bleiben]) uses the light verb bleiben with zu and an infinitive. This diathesis reverses the expression of the subject and object roles, in that the accusative is promoted to a nominative, while the original nominative is demoted to an (optional) dative. Because the demotion is "larger" than the promotion this diathesis can be interpreted as a demoted inversive. Semantically, this diatheses expresses that (some part of) the patient is still left over to be acted on.
::: ex a. Ich räume den letzten Schrank ein. b. Dieser letzte Schrank bleibt (mir) noch einzuräumen. :::
The Pertinenzinversiv (full discussion in [@sec:zuminfinitive-haben-am]) is constructed with the light verb haben with an am‑Infinitiv. This diathesis also reverses the expression of the subject and object roles, though in the different direction from the previous Restinversiv (see [@sec:summary-restinversiv]). In this diathesis the dative is promoted to nominative, while the nominative is demoted to accusative [@next]. Because the promotion is "larger" than the demotion this can be called a promoted inversive. Further, the dative dem Mieter 'tenant' is necessarily the possessor (pertinenz) of the nominative die Wohnung 'apartment', so it is a Pertinenzdativ (see [@sec:summary-pertinenzdativ]). Both in form and meaning this diathesis is strongly connected to the ensuing Ortspertinenzinversiv (see [@sec:summary-ortspertinenzinversiv]), in which the dative is the possessor of the obligatory location.
::: ex a. Dem Mieter brennt die Wohnung. b. Der Mieter hat die Wohnung am Brennen. :::
The Ortspertinenzinversiv (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-haben]) is closely related to the previous Pertinenzinversiv (see [@sec:summary-pertinenzinversiv]). Again, a dative is promoted to nominative, while the nominative is demoted to accusative. Also in both diatheses, the participant expressed by the dative is necessarily the possessor (pertinenz) of another participant. The difference is that with the current Ortspertinenzinversiv this other participant is an obligatory location, e.g. an der Nase 'on the nose' in [@next]. The dative in this diathesis is thus an Ortspertinenzdativ (see [@sec:summary-ortspertinenzdativ]). An further curious difference to the otherwise highly similar Pertinenzinversiv in [@last b] is that the infinitive hängen does not allow for the preposition am in this construction [@next c].
::: ex a. Ein Tropfen hängt ihm an der Nase. b. Er hat einen Tropfen an der Nase hängen. c. ^* Er hat einen Tropfen an der Nase am Hängen. :::
The Permissivinversiv (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-lassen-dative-reflexive-inversive]) is yet another diathesis using the construction lassen with obligatory reflexive and infinitive, this time with verbs that take a dative, but no accusative, like schmecken 'to taste' [@next]. In this diatheses a dative is promoted to nominative with an obligatory dative reflexive pronoun. The original nominative is demoted to accusative. Because the promotion is "larger" than the demotion this can considered to be a promoted inversive. Among the various lassen diatheses, this one is particularly close to the Permissivpassiv (see [@sec:summary-permissivpassiv]) and the Permissivkonversiv (see [@sec:summary-permissivkonversiv]).
::: ex a. Der Kuchen schmeckt ihr. b. Sie lässt sich den Kuchen schmecken. :::
A novative is a diathesis that introduces a new subject, while demoting the erstwhile subject to an object. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-subject-promotions], specifically starting at [@par:novative].
The unmarked Kausativ (full discussion in [@sec:case-sein-causative]) is found with verbs like schmelzen 'to melt', trocknen 'to dry' or zerbrechen 'break' [@next a,b]. These verbs both occur as intransitive and as transitive with the intransitive subject being the object of the transitive. The new nominative subject of the transitive is a causer. Because this alternation is unmarked, it is not immediately clear whether such a diathesis is an examples of a Kausativ or an Antikausativ. There are various indications pointing in the direction of causation (see full discussion). As a formal characteristic for the identification of this category I propose to look at the auxiliaries of the intransitive perfect: anticausatives allow for both haben and sein (see [@sec:summary-antikausativ]), while causatives only allow for sein [@next c,d]. Various umlaut-causatives like fallen/fällen and biegen/beugen also belong in this category (full discussion in [@sec:case-umlaut-causative]).
::: ex b. Der Krug zerbricht. b. Der Junge zerbricht den Krug. c. Der Krug ist zerbrochen. d. ^* Der Krug hat zerbrochen. :::
The Ortskausativ (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-sein-caused-location]) is similar to the previous Kausativ (see [@sec:summary-kausativ]), only that verbs like stürzen 'to fall/topple' [@next a,b] obligatory need a location (especially in the caused transitive). Just like the previous Kausativ, the current Ortskausativ only allows for an intransitive perfect with sein [@next c,d]. There is a parallel Ortsantikausativ in which the intransitive allows for both a sein and a haben perfect (see [@sec:summary-ortsantikausativ]). Various umlaut-causatives like liegen/legen 'to lie/to lay' and sitzen/setzen 'to sit/to put' also belong in this category (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-umlaut-caused-location]).
::: ex a. Der Elefant stürzt ins Wasser. b. Ich stürze den Elefanten ins Wasser. c. Der Elefant ist ins Wasser gestürzt. d. ^* Der Elefant hat ins Wasser gestürzt. :::
The Präverb Kausativ (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-causative] and subsequent sections) overtly marks the causative by a preverb [@next], i.e. either by a verb prefix (e.g. enden/beenden 'to end') or by a verb particle (e.g. bruzeln/anbruzeln 'to sizzle/to fry'). Preverbs are also frequently used with adjectival stems forming a causative transitive verb, e.g matt/ermatten 'lacklustre/to tire' or fähig/befähigen 'capable/to enable' (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-adjectival-causative]).
::: ex a. Der Wettkampf endet. b. Ich beende den Wettkampf. :::
The Direktivkausativ (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-schicken]) is a novative in which the new subject is gives orders rather than directly causing something to happen. This diathesis is constructed with the light verb schicken with an infinitive. The meaning of the construction is rather close to the full lexical meaning of schicken 'to send'. However, this construction is coherent, and thus monoclausal [@next c].
::: ex a. Er schläft b. Ich schicke ihn schlafen. c. (Es ist bekannt, dass) ich ihn schlafen schicke. :::
The Permissivkausativ (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-lassen-causative]) consists of the light verb lassen with an infinitive. This diathesis is widely acknowledged in German grammar. It is often simply called a Kausativ but this construction has actually at least two different interpretations, namely a causative [@next c] and a permissive [@next d]. It is widely used in German and there are only few verbs that do not allow for this diathesis (e.g. gefallen 'to like' or interessieren 'to interest' cannot be used).
::: ex a. Ich wasche die Kleider. b. Sie lässt mich die Kleider waschen. c. (= Sie verursacht, dass ich die Kleider wasche.) d. (= Sie erlaubt, dass ich die Kleider wasche.) :::
The Möglichkeitskausativ (full discussion in [@sec:zuinfinitive-geben-causative]) adds a new subject by using the light verb geben with a zu-Infinitiv. In this diathesis the erstwhile subject becomes a dative and not an accusative. In many examples the meaning of this diathesis is very close to the meaning of the lexical verb geben 'to give'. For example with the verb trinken 'to drink' [@next a] the construction allows both for a literal interpretation "he gives X to Y for drinking" and for a causative-permissive interpretation "he causes/offers Y to drink X". The causative-permissive interpretation of geben+zu‑Infinitiv is more clearly exemplified with verbs that take clausal complements, like bedenken 'to consider' [@next b].
This construction is coherent, and thus monoclausal [@next c], so, whatever the precise semantic interpretation, this alternation is structurally clearly a diathesis. Complicating things even more, the geben+zu‑Infinitiv construction is also used for a semantically and structurally quite different diathesis, namely the Möglichkeitsdesubjektiv (see [@sec:summary-moglichkeitsdesubjektiv]).
::: ex
a. Das Kind trinkt Milch.
Er gibt dem Kind Milch zu trinken.
b. Ich bedenke, dass es schon spät ist.
Er gibt mir zu bedenken, dass es schon spät ist.
c. (Es ist bekannt, dass) er dem Kind Milch zu trinken gibt.
(Es ist bekannt, dass) er mir zu bedenken gibt, dass es schon spät ist.
:::
The Fortsetzungskausativ (full discussion in [@sec:zuminfinitive-halten-causative]) uses the light verb halten with an am‑Infinitiv. This diathesis adds a causer to an intransitive verb. It is typically used with the verb laufen 'to run' [@next a], but it is also attested with other agentive intransitive verbs. However, the subject of the intransitive is typically an inanimate object, like Laden 'shop' in [@next a]. Additionally, verbs describing heat production like brennen 'to burn' [@next b] are frequently attested with this diathesis. The halten+am‑Infinitiv diathesis expresses that a process is kept ongoing by the newly added causer. The light verb halten is also used in the related Kausativkontinuativ epithesis (see [@sec:summary-kausativkontinuativ]).
::: ex
- Der Laden läuft.
Er hält den Laden am Laufen. - Das Feuer brennt.
Der Wind hält das Feuer am Brennen. :::
The Aufforderungskausativ (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-machen]) is probably the most pure causative of all the various novative diatheses. It uses the light verb machen 'to make' and adds a causer [@next a]. It is not in widespread use and often sounds like an English calque (cf. 'he makes me cry'), though it is probably an old Germanic construction. A highly similar construction uses the light verb heißen [@next b], though this is old-fashioned (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-heißen]).
::: ex
a. Ich weine.
Deine Späße machen mich weinen.
b. Er kniete nieder.
Der Henker hieß ihn niederknien.
:::
The Perzeptiv (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-sehen] and subsequent sections) is a novative that consists of one of the verbs of sensation sehen/hören/fühlen/spüren with an infinitive. The new nominative is an observer/experiencer of the main verb. The erstwhile nominative is turned into an accusative. This diathesis sometimes results in a double accusative construction, viz. when there already was an accusative present [@next a,b]. This diathesis can be used with all verbs that can be experienced as an observer. Note that these verbs of perception can also be used with an explicit dass complement clause [@next c], but such constructions are not coherent, and thus there is no diatheses in these constructions.
::: ex a. Der Bäcker backt einen Kuchen. b. Ich sehe den Bäcker einen Kuchen backen. c. Ich sehe, dass der Bäcker einen Kuchen backt. :::
The Opiniativ (full discussion in [@sec:participles-promotion-to-subject] and subsequent sections) is constructed with one of the light verbs wissen/glauben/sehen/finden with a participle. Applied to an patientive intransitive verb like einschlafen 'to fall asleep' it adds an opinionator who believes with more or less certainty (depending on the light verb that is used) whether the einschlafen has occurred or not. The original nominative is changed into an accusative.
::: ex
a. Der Säugling schläft ein.
b. Sie glaubt den Säugling eingeschlafen.
(= Sie glaubt, dass der Säugling eingeschlafen ist.)
:::
A novative with demotion is a diathesis that introduces a new subject, while demoting the erstwhile subject to a prepositional phrase. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-subject-promotions], specifically starting at [@par:novativedemotion].
The Transitiv Opiniativ (full discussion in [@sec:participles-wissen-commutative] and subsequent sections) is the same construction as the previous Opiniativ (see [@sec:summary-opiniativ]) but applied to transitive verbs. I have included this as a separate diathesis because with transitive verbs it shows a rather different role-remapping as with intransitive verbs. When used with a transitive verb like aufheben 'to preserve' [@next a] the erstwhile nominative Archiv 'archive' is demoted to a prepositional adjunct or completely left out [@next b]. The accusative Nachlass 'inheritance' remains unchanged.
::: ex
a. Das Archiv hebt den Nachlass gut auf.
b. Sie weiß den Nachlass (im Archiv) gut aufgehoben.
(= Sie weiß, dass der Nachlass (im Archiv) gut aufgehoben ist.)
:::
This Transitiv Opiniativ can of course easily be united with the previous Opiniativ into a single diathesis by noticing, for example, that both can be rephrased with a complement clause with sein and a participle, compare [@llast b] and [@last b]. However, when both Opiniativ diatheses are united, this implies that the sein-Perfekt in [@llast b], see [@sec:summary-perfekt], and the Zustandspassiv in [@last b], see [@sec:summary-zustandspassiv], have to be united as well (there is a perfect parallelism here). Now, there is nothing speaking against both these unifications, but exactly the unification of sein-Perfect and Zustandspassiv has been rather controversially discussed in the German grammatical literature (see [@sec:participle-different-diatheses] for a discussion). So either both are unified, or both are separated. Because I have separated the Zustandspassiv and the sein-Perfekt in this summary, I consequently also separate the two Opiniativ diatheses.
The Passivkausativ (full discussion in [@sec:infinitive-lassen-passive-causative]) can be seen as a variant of the Permissivkausativ (see [@sec:summary-permissivkausativ]). Both use the lassen+Infinitiv construction to add a new causer to the sentence. Additionally, in a Passivkausativ [@next b] the original nominative is demoted to a prepositional phrase (or it is left out completely). Different from the Permissivkausativ, the current Passivkausativ is only used to express causation. For a complete discussion of all different lassen+Infinitiv diatheses, see [@sec:infinitive-guises-of-lassen].
::: ex a. Die Wäscherei reinigt den Teppich. b. Der neue Besitzer lässt den Teppich (von der Wäscherei) reinigen. :::
An applicative is a diathesis in which a prepositional phrase is promoted to an object. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-applicative-antipassive]. Applicatives in German are typically marked by a preverb or an adverb, though possessor and beneficiary datives are also included under this heading.
The Präverb Applikativ (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-applicative] and subsequent sections) is a diathesis in which a prepositional phrase of an intransitive verb is turned into an accusative through the addition of a preverb. For example, the alternation from steigen to besteigen 'to climb' additionally induces a change from a preposition phrase with auf to an accusative [@next a,b]. There is a wide variety in preverbs (both Verbpräfixe and Verbpartikel) and a wide variety of prepositions that show such a diathesis. This diathesis is also attested with governed prepositions, for example with an as used with the verb arbeiten 'to work' [@next c]. The prepositional phrase turns into an accusative with erarbeiten 'to work something out' (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-governed-applicative]).
::: ex
a. Ich steige auf den Berg.
b. Ich besteige den Berg.
c. Ich arbeite an einem Plan.
Ich arbeite daran, den Plan zu verbessern.
d. Ich erarbeite einen Plan.
:::
The Resultativ Applikativ (full discussion in [@sec:adverbial-applicative]) is also an alternation that turns a prepositional phrase into an accusative, though in this instance the diathesis is induced by a resultative adjective, like leer‑ 'empty' or gesund‑ 'healthy'. When used with an intransitive verb like fischen 'to fish' [@next a] the prepositional phrase is turned into an accusative. The effect of this diathesis is that the new accusative Teich 'pond' is in the state described by the resultative preverbial leer‑ 'empty' as a result of the verbal action fischen 'to fish' [@next b]. This diathesis is also attested with governed prepositions, for example with the verb beten für 'to pray for' [@next c,d].
::: ex
a. Ich fische im Teich.
b. Ich fische den Teich leer.
(= Ich fische, und dadurch ist der Teich leer.)
c. Ich bete für den Kranken.
Ich bete dafür, dass der Kranke gesund wird.
d. Ich bete den Kranken gesund.
(= Ich bete, und dadurch ist der Kranke gesund.)
:::
The Präverb Dativ Applikativ (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-dative-applicative] and subsequent sections) is an alternation in which the prepositional phrase is turned into a dative (as opposed to an accusative as in the previous diatheses). Although the prepositions in this diathesis are often strongly lexicalised, like stammen aus 'originate from' [@next a], they do never allow for the daraus, dass... reformulation that is considered definitional here for them to be governed prepositions [@next c].
::: ex a. Ich stamme aus einem Adelsgeschlecht. b. Ich entstamme einem Adelsgeschlecht. c. ^* Ich stamme daraus, dass ich dort geboren bin. :::
The Pertinenzdativ (full discussion in [@sec:case-possessor-of-nominative-to-dative-experiencer] and subsequent sections) is a dative that is inherently the possessor of another lexical role. The term Pertinenz (from lat. pertinere 'to belong to') was proposed by Polenz [-@polenz1969: 160ff.]^[In proposing the term pertinenz Polenz was inspired by work by Isačenko using the term in the context of inalienable possession.] for this phenomenon and for the closely connected Ortspertinenzdativ, as discussed in the next section. I have extended the usage of this term to various other diatheses that involve a possessor of another role, see Pertinenzpassiv ([@sec:summary-pertinenzpassiv]), Pertinenzinversiv ([@sec:summary-pertinenzinversiv]) and Pertinenzakkusativ ([@sec:summary-pertinenzakkusativ]). The Pertinenzdativ is attested both for the possessor of a nominative subject of intransitives [@next a], see [@sec:case-possessor-of-nominative-to-dative-experiencer], and for the possessor of the accusative object of transitives [@next b], see [@sec:case-possessor-accusative-to-dative]. As for any Pertinenz-relation, it is crucial that the dative is necessarily the possessor of another lexical role. The term "possessor raising" is also often found in the literature to describe this phenomenon.
::: ex
a. Meine Hände zittern.
Mir zittern die Hände.
b. Ich schneide seine Haare.
Ich schneide ihm die Haare.
:::
The Ortspertinenzdativ (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-possessor-of-location-to-dative-experiencer] and subsequent sections) is closely connected to the previous Pertinenzdativ ([@sec:summary-pertinenzdativ]). The dative in [@next] is likewise obligatorily a possessor of another lexical role, though in this diathesis this other role is an obligatory location. For example, the verb hängen 'to hang' [@next a] necessarily needs a location where the hanging is taking place. The possessor of this location can be replaced by a dative. The obligatory location can also be introduced by another diathesis first, e.g. by a caused-movement diathesis (see [@sec:summary-verursachte-bewegung]). For example, the verb wehen 'to blow (of wind)' can be used with a caused movement, forcing the object (die Blätter 'the leaves') into an obligatory direction (in mein Gesicht 'in my face'). The possessor of this location can subsequently be turned into a dative by an Ortspertinenzdativ diathesis [@next b].
::: ex
a. Das Hemd hing aus seiner Hose.
Das Hemd hing ihm aus der Hose.
b. Es weht.
Der Wind weht die Blätter in mein Gesicht.
Der Wind weht mir die Blätter ins Gesicht.
:::
The Benefaktivdativ (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-benefactive-dative]) is a dative that alternates with a für prepositional phrase describing the beneficiary of an action. For example with the verb kochen 'to cook' the beneficiary of the cooking can be expressed with a für prepositional phrase [@next a] or with a dative [@next b]. Not all beneficiary für phrases can be turned into a dative. The Benefaktivdativ is only attested with transitive verbs. With intransitives like arbeiten 'to work' a für beneficiary is possible [@next c], but a beneficiary dative is not [@next d].
::: ex a. Ich koche eine Suppe für dich. b. Ich koche dir eine Suppe. c. Ich arbeite für dich. d. ^* Ich arbeite dir. :::
The Beurteilerdativ (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-judgement-dative]) is a dative that expresses an evaluator of an action. Such a dative can only be added together with an evaluation in the form of an adverbial phrase with zu 'too much' [@next a] or genug 'enough' [@next b] and a gradable adjective like schnell 'quick' or warm 'warm'.
::: ex
- Paul fuhr zu schnell (für den Geschmack von seiner Mutter).
Paul fuhr seiner Mutter zu schnell. - Das Zimmer war warm genug (für seinen Geschmack).
Das Zimmer war ihm warm genug. :::
An antipassive is a diathesis in which an object is demoted to a prepositional phrase. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-applicative-antipassive]. Antipassives in German are typically unmarked or marked by a reflexive pronoun.
The unmarked Antipassiv (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-accusative-antipassive] and subsequent sections) is a diathesis in which an accusative argument alternates with a prepositional phrase. This typically occurs without any overt marking other than the antipassive alternation itself. For example, the verb schießen 'to shoot' can be used both with an accusative and with an auf prepositional phrase [@next a]. The semantic effect of this diathesis is that the object is less affected when marked as a prepositional phrase. In some instances, like with glauben an 'to believe in' [@next b] the prepositional phrase is a governed preposition (see [@sec:prepositions-governed-antipassive]).
::: ex
a. Ich schieße den Bären.
Ich schieße auf den Bären.
b. Ich glaube deine Aussage.
Ich glaube an deine Aussage.
Ich glaube daran, dass deine Aussage stimmt.
:::
The Reflexiv Antipassiv (full discussion in [@sec:reflexive-accusative-antipassive]) is an antipassive in which additionally a reflexive pronoun is added. For example, the verb beklagen 'to lament' [@next] has a lamented object-role Lärm 'noise' that is expressed either as an accusative [@next a] or as a prepositional phrase with über [@next b]. The reflexive pronoun in [@next b] is not a self-inflicting reflexive, i.e. the lamenting is not about oneself. These reflexive antipassives always have governed prepositional phrases [@next c].
::: ex a. Ich beklage den Lärm. b. Ich beklage mich über den Lärm. c. Ich beklage mich darüber, dass es so laut ist :::
The Präverb Reflexiv Antipassiv (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-reflexive-antipassive]) is an antipassive with a reflexive pronoun and a preverb. For example, the verb kalkulieren 'to calculate' [@next a] allows for an antipassive diathesis in which an accusative argument is turned into an (optional) prepositional phrase when adding a prefix ver‑ to form verkalkulieren 'to miscalculate'. Additionally, an obligatory accusative reflexive pronoun is part of this diathesis.
::: ex
- Ich kalkuliere die Miete.
- Ich verkalkuliere mich bei der Miete. :::
The unmarked Dativ Antipassiv (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-dative-antipassive] and subsequent sections) is a diathesis in which a dative argument alternates with a prepositional phrase. In a few instances this is attested with a dative without accusative, like with entfliehen 'to escape' [@next a]. However, this diathesis is more widespread with verbs like berichten 'to report' [@next b] that allow for both an accusative and a dative argument.
::: ex
a. Er entflieht dem Gefängnis.
Er entflieht aus dem Gefängnis.
b. Er berichtet dem Vorstand die Ergebnisse der Untersuchung.
Er berichtet die Ergebnisse an den Vorstand.
:::
The Präverb Dativ Antipassiv (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-dative-antipassive]) is a diathesis in which a preverb induces the demotion of a dative argument. For example, schenken 'to gift' [@next a] has a dative recipient, while verschenken 'to give away' [@next b] has no dative anymore. The dative can be retained as a prepositional phrase, but it is typically omitted. Such antipassives marked by a preverb mainly occur with verbs that take both a dative and an accusative argument.
::: ex a. Ich schenke dem Kindergarten meine Bücher. b. Ich verschenke meine Bücher (an den Kindergarten). :::
The Reziprokativ (full discussion in [@sec:reflexive-mit-antipassive]) is a special kind of antipassive in which an accusative is replaced by a mit prepositional phrase and additionally a reflexive pronoun is added, as shown for the verb treffen 'to meet' in [@next]. This reflexive pronoun does not have self-inflicting reference, i.e. the meeting is not with oneself. Semantically this diathesis is found with verbs that can be construed as either reciprocal or non-reciprocal. For example, the verb treffen 'to meet' can be used without reflexive pronoun [@next a] meaning something like 'to bump into someone', while with a reflexive pronoun the meaning is clearly reciprocal 'to meet' [@next b].
::: ex a. Ich treffe dich. b. Ich treffe mich mit dir. :::
An objective is a diathesis in which a new object is added. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-objective-deobjective], specifically starting at [@par:objective].
The unmarked Ergebnisakkusativ (full discussion in [@sec:case-accusative-addition]) is highly similar to the Optionaler Akkusativ diathesis ([@sec:summary-optionaler-akkusativ]), but in reverse. In both diatheses, the same verb can be used with and without an accusative argument (a phenomenon sometimes called "labile" or "ambitransitive"). The special characteristics of the verbs in this section, like laufen 'to walk, to run' [@next], is that they are (a) basically intransitive and (b) the accusative represents the added result of the intransitive action. The difference between such an unmarked added accusative (Ergebnisakkusativ, this section) and an unmarked dropped accusative (Optionaler Akkusativ, [@sec:summary-optionaler-akkusativ]) is arguably small, and it remains to be seen whether this separation can be backed up by further distinguishing grammatical characteristics.
::: ex a. Er läuft. b. Er läuft den Marathon. :::
The Resultativ Akkusativ (full discussion in [@sec:adverbial-object-addtion]) is a diathesis in which the addition of a resultativ preverbial leads to an additional accusative argument. For example, the intransitive bellen 'to bark' [@next a] becomes a transitive wachbellen 'to wake by barking' [@next b] with the addition of the resultative adjective wach‑ 'awake'. Crucially, the new accusative object (Kinder 'children') is not expressible without a resultative adjective (like wach-) or a preverb (like an-, see the next [@sec:summary-praverb-akkusativ]). Care has to be taken to distinguish this diathesis from the highly similar Resultativ Applikativ ([@sec:summary-adverb-applikativ]).
::: ex a. Der Hund bellt. b. Der Hund bellt die Kinder wach. :::
The Präverb Akkusativ (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-accusative-addition] and subsequent sections) is a diathesis in which the addition of a preverb leads to an additional accusative argument. For example, the diathesis from zaubern 'to perform magic' to verzaubern 'to enchant' [@next] adds a completely new role in the accusative.
::: ex a. Sie zaubert. b. Sie verzaubert mich. :::
The Präverb Reflexiv Akkusativ (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-reflexive-resultative]) is a special variant of an objective diathesis in that the addition of the preverb leads to a new accusative argument, but also includes an obligatory reflexive pronoun. The new accusative role is semantically the result of the action of the main verb, which is actually similar to the Ergebnisakkusativ ([@sec:summary-resultatakkusativ]) and different from the Präverb Akkusativ ([@sec:summary-praverb-akkusativ]). For example, the diathesis from tanzen 'to dance' to antanzen 'to incur from dancing' [@next] adds the incurrence Muskelkater 'sore muscles' and a dative reflexive pronoun mir.
::: ex a. Ich habe gestern viel getanzt. b. Ich habe mir gestern einen Muskelkater angetanzt. :::
The Präverb Dativ (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-dative-addition] and subsequent sections) is similar to the previous Präverb Akkusativ in that the addition of the preverb also induces a new role, in this diathesis marked with a dative case. This diathesis is attested both with intransitive verbs like gehen 'to walk' when derived into preverbal entgehen 'to evade' [@next a] and with transitive verbs like lesen 'to read' when derived into preverbal vorlesen 'to read out' [@next b].
::: ex
a. Ich gehe (nach Hause).
Ich entgehe dem Urteil.
b. Ich lese ein Buch.
Ich lese dir ein Buch vor.
:::
A deobjective is a diathesis in which an object is removed. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-objective-deobjective].
An unmarked Optionaler Akkusativ (full discussion in [@sec:case-accusative-drop]) is a diathesis in which an accusative object can be left out without any further change in the construction (often discussed under the heading of "ambitransitive" or "labile" verbs). This is for example attested with the verb stören 'to disturb' [@next].
Various different kinds of "labile" verbs have to be distinguished and not all belong in the current category. First, when the accusative object of a verb allows for an Antipassiv diathesis ([@sec:summary-akkusativ-antipassiv]), then this argument can also be dropped. However, such antipassives should not also be included here. Second, in some examples the drop of an accusative is induced by an adverbial, which leads to an action-oriented focus, discussed below as the Aktionsfokus diathesis ([@sec:summary-aktionsfokus]). Verbs with such a diathesis should not also be included here. Finally, there is also a highly similar Ergebnisakkusativ diathesis ([@sec:summary-resultatakkusativ]) that should be distinguished. Once all those diatheses are separated, there turn out to be relatively few truly labile verbs with an Optionaler Akkusativ, mainly verbs that can be interpreted both as something one can do as well as something one can be.
::: ex a. Du störst die Veranstaltung. b. Du störst. :::
The unmarked Optionaler Dativ, i.e. the dropping of a dative argument without any further change in the construction, is both attested with nominative-dative verbs like entkommen 'to get away' [@next a], full discussion in [@sec:case-dative-drop], and with nominative-accusative-dative verbs like erzählen 'to tell' [@next b], full discussion in [@sec:case-dative-drop-accusative]. Like with Optionaler Akkusativ ([@sec:summary-optionaler-akkusativ]), datives that allow for a dative antipassive ([@sec:summary-dativ-antipassiv]) should not also be included here.
::: ex
a. Er entkommt seinem Feind.
Er entkommt.
b. Ich erzähle dir eine Geschichte.
Ich erzähle eine Geschichte.
:::
The Aktionsfokus (full discussion in [@sec:adverbial-action-focus]) is another diathesis in which object arguments can be left out to put the focus on the action of the verb itself, but only when also adding an adverbial to the sentence. For example, a transitive verb like sehen 'to see' [@next a] cannot be used without an object [@next b]. The occurrence of a dropped object is only possible here in combination with an adverbial specification [@next c]. The effect of such a diathesis is that the focus of the utterance is put on the manner in which the action is performed.
::: ex a. Ich sehe das Haus. b. ^* Ich sehe. c. Ich sehe gut. :::
The Endoreflexiv (full discussion in [@sec:reflexive-accusative-drop] and subsequent sections) is a special kind of object drop in which a reflexive pronoun is added. Such a diathesis looks superficially very similar to a regular self-inflicting reflexive ([@sec:summary-reflexiv]), but there is a crucial semantic difference. In a self-inflicting reflexive (e.g. 'he washes himself') the agent is doing something to him/herself. In contrast, an Endoreflexiv describes an action that is performed with the body of the agent, not to the body of the agent. For example, the verb äußern 'to remark' [@next a] can be used with a reflexive pronoun and without accusative object in the meaning of 'to express oneself' [@next b].
::: ex a. Er äußert sein Bedauern über den Fall. b. Er äußert sich über den Fall. :::
The Präverb Endoreflexiv (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-reflexive-accusative-drop]) is similar to the previous Endoreflexiv ([@sec:summary-endoreflexiv]) but with the addition of a preverb. For example, the verb wählen 'to choose/to dial' shows a diathesis with sich verwählen 'to misdial' [@next a] in which the accusative object is dropped. There are also a few very special endoreflexive verbs in which an adverbial is necessary instead of a preverb, for example fühlen 'to feel' [@next b], see [@sec:adverbial-endoreflexive].
::: ex
a. Er wählt die falsche Nummer.
Er verwählt sich.
b. Ich fühle den Schmerz.
Ich fühle mich gut.
:::
A locative diathesis is a diathesis in which an obligatory location phrase is added to the clause. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-locative-delocative]. Note that there is no direct grammatical connection between a locative diathesis and a locative case. Both terms simply use the same modifier because both are somehow related to the marking of location.
The Bewegungsart diathesis (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-manner-of-movement] and subsequent sections) is a diathesis that is specifically attested with verbs of movement like tanzen 'to dance' [@next]. In some contexts, movement verbs take an obligatory location phrase. This obligatory location coincides with the choice of auxiliary in the perfect, i.e. haben or sein. There is a crucial difference between these two options in that with sein in the perfect there is an additional directional phrase necessary [@next c,d].
Semantically, this construction expresses primarily a movement, here durch den Garten 'through the garden', in which the main lexical verb tanzen 'to dance' designates what kind of movement is performed. In a sense, the main lexical verb functions more like an adverbial designation in such constructions, i.e. sich tanzend bewegen 'to move in a dancing manner'. The same construction can also be used with non-movement verbs, but then an additional reflexive pronoun is necessary (see [@sec:summary-reflexiv-bewegungsart]).
::: ex
a. Ich habe im Garten getanzt.
b. Ich habe getanzt.
c. Ich bin durch den Garten getanzt.
(= Ich habe mich tanzend durch den Garten bewegt.)
d. ^* Ich bin getanzt.
:::
The Reflexiv Bewegungsart diathesis (full discussion in [@sec:reflexive-manner-of-movement]) is the same diathesis as the non-reflexive Bewegungsart diathesis in [@sec:summary-bewegungsart] but with an additional reflexive pronoun. This extra reflexive pronoun has to be added for verbs like zittern 'to shiver' that do not describe a change-of-location [@next a,b]. With the reflexive pronoun there needs to be an obligatory movement phrase [@next c]. Semantically, this construction describes an movement ('making the playoffs') that is achieved (metaphorically) by performing the intransitive verb (i.e. by shivering).
::: ex
- Das Kind zittert.
- Die Mannschaft zitterte sich in die Playoffs.
- ^* Die Mannschaft zittert sich. :::
The Verursachte Bewegung diathesis is attested in two variants. With intransitive verbs (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-intransitive-location-as-result] and subsequent sections) like schwitzen 'to sweat' [@next a] this diathesis adds both an accusative and an obligatory location. Semantically, this diathesis expresses that the verb causes the motion of the new accusative object role to be in the location. With transitive verbs (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-transitive-location-as-result]) like befehlen 'to command' the effect is similar, though there is no new accusative added. With an added location the semantic effect is that the verb causes the accusative object to move to the location [@next b].
::: ex
a. Ich schwitze.
Ich schwitze einen Fleck in mein Hemd.
(= Ich schwitze, und dadurch entsteht ein Fleck in meinem Hemd.)
b. Ich befehle eine Armee.
Ich befehle die Armee an die Front.
(= Ich befehle, und dadurch geht die Armee an die Front.)
:::
The Ergänzende Wirkung diathesis (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-performative-result]) expresses the result of performing the main verb. For example, a transitive verb like machen 'to make' can either take an object that is made, e.g. Aufgaben 'tasks' [@next a], or it can be used in a special construction [@next b] with an object, like Wiese 'meadow', that is changed into something else, like Garten 'garden', by performing the action. The term Ergänzende Wirkung originated in the influential educational grammatical work of Karl Ferdinand Becker [-@becker1833: 81] almost 200 years ago, but never caught on in the German grammatical tradition.
::: ex
a. Er macht seine Aufgaben.
b. Er macht die Wiese zu einem Garten.
(= Er macht etwas, und dadurch wird die Wiese zu einem Garten.)
:::
A delocative diathesis is a diathesis in which an obligatory location phrase is made optional and is regularly completely removed from the clause. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-locative-delocative], specifically starting at [@par:delocative].
The Präverb Delokativ (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-intransitive-antiresultative] and subsequent sections) is a diathesis in which an obligatory location loses its obligatoriness by adding a preverb. For example, the diathesis between steigen aus and aussteigen 'to get out' [@next] shows a small but crucial difference in that the prepositional phrase aus dem Auto loses its obligatory status.
::: ex a. Der Man steigt aus dem Auto. b. ^* Der Mann steigt. c. Der Mann steigt aus dem Auto aus. d. Der Mann steigt aus. :::
The Resultativ Delokativ (full discussion in [@sec:adverbial-antiresultative] and subsequent sections) is a parallel diathesis to the previous Präverb Delokativ ([@sec:summary-praverb-delokativ]). Instead of adding a preverb, this diathesis adds an obligatory resultative adjective, either los‑ 'loose', fest‑ 'tight' or frei‑ 'free'. For example, the diathesis between binden 'to tie' [@next a,b] and festbinden 'to fixate' [@next c,d] removes the obligatory status of the locative prepositional phrase.
::: ex a. Ich binde den Hund an die Leine. b. ^* Ich binde den Hund. c. Ich binde den Hund an der Leine fest. d. Ich binde den Hund fest. :::
A promoted object exchange is a chained diathesis in which a new object is introduced, while at the same time an existing object is demoted. The combination of these two changes is an overall promotion. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-object-exchange]. The newly introduced object is always a component part (meronym) of the original encompassing object (holonym).
The unmarked Teil/weg-Objekttausch diathesis (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-partitive-free]) is a chained diathesis. A new role is introduced, marked as accusative, and the erstwhile role marked as accusative is demoted to an obligatory aus or von prepositional phrase. These two remappings are tightly intertwined and have to occur together. Crucially, the new accusative role is a part of the old accusative role (hence Teil in the German name). Additionally, this construction is used to express that something is removed as a result of an action (hence weg in the German name). An example is shown in [@next] with the verb waschen 'to wash'. This verb can be used with an accusative argument describing the role of the washee, here Hose 'trousers' [@next a]. Alternatively, a different role can be introduced as accusative, here Fleck 'stain' [@next b]. This new accusative role is necessarily a component part of the former accusative. In this usage, a directional location aus meiner Hose 'from my trousers' is obligatory present in the sentence [@next c]. This obligatory location represents the former accusative role, i.e. the washee. Semantically, the new object (Fleck) is a part that is removed from the encompassing old object (Hose).
::: ex a. Ich wasche meine Hose. b. Ich wasche den Fleck aus meiner Hose. c. ^* Ich wasche den Fleck. :::
The Teil/fest-Objekttausch exists in three closely related variants, (i) as an unmarked "covert" diathesis discussed in this section, (ii) with a preverb discussed in the next section, and (iii) with a resultative adjective discussed in the section after that. Syntactically, in all these diatheses the object is exchanged. Crucially, the old object can be retained as an in or an prepositional phrase. The new object is always a component part (meronym) of the old encompassing object (holonym), hence the German name Teil. Additionally, the new object is physically attached to the old object, hence the German name fest.
The unmarked Teil/fest-Objekttausch (full discussion in [@sec:prepositions-partitive-fixed]) is exemplified with kleben 'to glue' [@next]. This verb shows a diathesis, but the direction of the alternation is not marked, viz. it is a "covert" diathesis. The verb takes either just an accusative object (here Vase 'vase') that is glued together, or an accusative object that is a component part (here Henkel 'handle'), which is glued to the erstwhile accusative object (Vase). Thus, the new object after the diathesis Henkel is a meronym that is attached to the old holonymic object Vase. Completely independent from this diathesis, the verb kleben also allows for a covert anticausative (see [@sec:summary-ortsantikausativ]).
::: ex
- Ich klebe die zerbrochene Vase.
- Ich klebe einen Henkel an die zerbrochene Vase. :::
The Präverb Teil/fest-Objekttausch (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-applicative-in-antipassive]) shows the same diathesis as the previous unmarked one, but now marked with a preverb ver-, be‑ or ein-. Without a preverb, the verb massieren 'to massage' [@next a] has an accusative object describing the massaged entity (here Muskel 'muscle'). Different from the previous diathesis, the new object to be introduced by the diathesis (here Salbe 'ointment') can already be expressed here with an optional mit prepositional phrase. After the diathesis, the verb einmassieren 'to massage in' [@next b] has the objects exchanged, optionally retaining the old object as a in prepositional phrase [@next c]. The preposition thus changes from mit to in/an, and this is exactly the reverse of the Präverb Ganz/voll-Objekttausch (see [@sec:summary-praverb-ganz-voll]). After this diathesis has been applied, the new object Salbe is a meronym that has become a part of the old holonymic object Muskel.
::: ex
- Ich massiere den Muskel (mit einer Salbe).
- Ich massiere die Salbe in den Muskel ein.
- Ich massiere die Salbe ein. :::
The Resultativ Teil/fest Objekttausch (full discussion in [@sec:adverbial-fest]) is a parallel diathesis to the previously discussed diatheses, but marked with the addition of a resultative preverbial fest-. For example, the accusative object Bluse 'blouse' of the verb nähen 'to sew' [@next a] is replaced with with another accusative object Knopf 'button' with the verb festnähen 'to tie by sewing' [@next b]. The original object can be retained with an optional an prepositional phrase [@next c]. Before the diathesis the accusative object describes a whole (Bluse 'blouse'), while after the diathesis the accusatives expresses a component part (Knopf 'button') that is attached to the whole.
::: ex
- Ich nähe eine Bluse.
- Ich nähe den Knopf an der Bluse fest.
- Ich nähe den Knopf fest. :::
A demoted object exchange is a chained diathesis in which an obligatory location phrase is promoted to object, while at the same time the existing object is demoted or even removed. The combination of these two changes is an overall demotion. For details on the definition see [@sec:intro-object-exchange]. The new object is always an encompassing entity (holonym) of which the old object is a component part (meronym).
The Ganz/leer-Objekttausch exists in two closely related variants, with a preverb (this section) or with a resultative preverbial (next section). Syntactically, in both variants the object is exchanged and, crucially, the original object cannot be retained after the diathesis. The prepositional phrase before the diathesis takes the prepositions aus or von. Semantically, the old object is a part of the new object and is removed from it. Both structurally and semantically this is the reverse of the Teil/weg-Objekttausch ([@sec:summary-teil-weg]).
The Präverb Ganz/leer-Objekttausch (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-location-antiresultative]) is marked by various different preverbs (typically, but not exclusively, aus‑ or ab‑). For example, the verb klopfen 'to pound' [@next a] can take an accusative result, here Staub 'dust', and then the verb also needs an obligatory location from which the result originates, here von meinem Mantel 'from my coat' [@next b]. With a preverb aus-, the verb ausklopfen 'to pound thoroughly' [@next c] completely drops the accusative Staub and the prepositional object Mantel is turned into a new accusative role. Semantically, the old accusative object Staub is a component part (meronym) of the new accusative Mantel (holonym). Additionally, the old accusative Staub is removed from the new accusative Mantel. The new accusative is thus a holonym (hence the word Ganz in the German name) that is emptied (hence the word leer in the German name).
::: ex a. Ich klopfe den Staub von meinem Mantel. b. ^* Ich klopfe den Staub. c. Ich klopfe meinen Mantel aus. :::
The Resultativ Ganz/leer-Objekttausch (full discussion in [@sec:adverbial-applicative-leer]) is basically the same diathesis as the previous one, but marked with a resultative preverbial leer‑ or frei‑ instead of with a preverb. For example, the verb pumpen 'to pump' can be turned into leerpumpen 'to pump until empty' [@next]. Just as above, the role marked as accusative (Wasser 'water') is completely removed and the obligatory location phrase is promoted to accusative (Keller 'cellar'). Also identically to the previous diathesis, the new accusative object Keller is semantically a container from which the former accusative object Wasser is removed.
::: ex a. Ich pumpe das Wasser aus dem Keller. b. ^* Ich pumpe das Wasser. b. Ich pumpe den Keller leer. :::
The Ganz/voll-Objekttausch exists in two closely related variants, with a preverb (this section) or with a resultative preverbial (next section). Syntactically, in both variants the object is exchanged. Different from the previous diatheses (see [@sec:summary-praverb-ganz-leer]), the old object can be retained as an optional mit prepositional phrase. The prepositional phrase before the diathesis takes the prepositions in, an or auf. Semantically, the new object is a holonym (hence the word Ganz in the German name) that is filled with the meronymic old object (hence the word voll in the German name).
The Präverb Ganz/voll-Objekttausch (full discussion in [@sec:preverb-applicative-antipassive]) is marked by various different preverbs. Almost all preverbs occur, though be‑ and ver‑ are particularly frequent. For example, laden 'to load' [@next a,b] takes an accusative object that is loaded (here Gepäck 'luggage') and an obligatory location onto which it is loaded (here in den Wagen 'into the car'). The diathesis to beladen 'to load onto/into' turns the locational object (Wagen) into a new accusative, while the old accusative (Gepäck) is turned into an optional mit prepositional phrase [@next c,d]. Note that the prepositional change from in/an/auf/um to mit is the reverse of the Präverb Teil/fest-Objekttausch (see [@sec:summary-praverb-teil-fest]). Semantically, the new object (Wagen) is the holonym and it is filled with the old object (Gepäck).
::: ex
- Ich lade das Gepäck in den Wagen.
- ^* Ich lade das Gepäck.
- Ich belade den Wagen mit dem Gepäck.
- Ich belade den Wagen. :::
The Resultativ Ganz/voll-Objekttausch (full discussion in [@sec:adverbial-applicative-voll]) is basically the same diathesis as the one in the previous section, but marked with a resultative preverbial voll‑ instead of a preverb. For example, the verb pumpen 'to pump' can be turned in vollpumpen 'to pump until full' [@next] with the same object exchange. Starting from pumpen [@next a,b] with an accusative object (Luft 'air') and an obligatory prepositional location (Reifen 'tire'), the diathesis to vollpumpen turns the prepositional phrase into an accusative and the accusative into an optional mit prepositional phrase [@next c,d]. Again, the semantics are such that the new object Reifen is a container that is filled with the old object Luft.
::: ex a. Ich pumpe Luft in den Reifen. b. ^* Ich pumpe Luft. c. Ich pumpe den Reifen mit Luft voll. d. Ich pumpe den Reifen voll. :::
Completely different from the various kinds of Objekttausch discussed previously, the Pertinenzakkusativ (full discussion in [@sec:perpositions-possessor-applicative]) is an accusative that alternates with a possessor of another accusative. A verb like bewundern 'to admire' marks the admired thing, e.g. Ehrlichkeit 'honesty' as an accusative [@next a]. After the diathesis, the possessor of this accusative seine 'his' is raised to accusative ihn 'him' [@next b], at the same time demoting the admired thing to a governed prepositional object with für [@next c].
::: ex a. Ich bewundere seine Ehrlichkeit. b. Ich bewundere ihn für seine Ehrlichkeit. c. Ich bewundere ihn dafür, dass er ehrlich ist. :::