German (Indo-European, Germanic)

1. Verbs

German verbs with a prefixed element fall into two classes, the particle verbs and the prefix verbs:

• Particle verbs have an element which is separated from the verb stem when the verb is in second position,¹ and placed instead at the end of the clause. The infinitive marker zu and the past participle prefix ge- intervene between the prefixed element and the rest of the verb stem.
• Prefixed verbs have an element inseparably prefixed to the verb stem in all contexts. The infinitive marker zu (and the past participle prefix ge-, if used) must precede the verb form.

Verb second

Verb final

Infinitive with zu

particle verb:

Sie

taucht

gleich

unter.

Ich

glaube,

daß

sie

gleich

untertaucht

Sie

versucht

unterzutauchen.

she

dives

just

under

I

believe

that

she

just

under.dives

She

is

under.to.go

'She's about to dive down.'

'I think she's about to dive down.'

'She's trying to dive down.'

prefix verb:

Sie

untersucht

viel.

Ich

glaube,

daß

sie

viel

untersucht

Sie

hat

nichts

zu

untersuchen.

she

under.seeks

alot

I

believe

that

she

alot

under.seeks

She

has

nothing

to

under.seek

'She reserches a lot.'

'I think she researches a lot.'

'She's got nothing to research.'

But a number of verbs show varying degrees of resistance to the 'verb second' context. These are verbs which have been derived from compound or prefixed nominals through back-formation or conversion. Some examples of this sort of derivational process are given below:

landen	→	Landung	→	Notlandung	→	notlanden
'to land'		'landing'		'emergency.landing'		'make an emergency landing'
landen	→	Landung	→	Zwischenlandung	→	zwischenlanden
'to land'		'landing'		'between.landing' = 'stopover'		'make a stopover'
aufführen	→	Aufführung	→	Urufführung	→	urufführen
'perform'		'performance'		'original.performance' = 'premiere (noun)'		'premiere (verb)'

As a result, they contain an initial element which looks as if it could be a verbal particle or prefix. Some such verbs have accommodated to the one or the other type. But a number of them appear to be problematic in verb second position, at least for some speakers. It appears that they are construed as paraticle verbs (given the position of zu with the infinitive and ge- with the past particple).

Verb second

Verb final

Infinitive with zu

?? Sie

landet

gleich

not.

Ich

glaube,

daß

sie

gleich

notlandet.

Sie

versucht

notzulanden.

she

lands

just

emergency

I

believe

that

she

just

emergency.lands

She

tries

emergency.to.land

'She's about to make an emergency landing.'

'I think she's about to make an emergency landing.'

'She's trying to make an emergency landing.'

Consequently for such speakers, the finite forms of these verbs cannot be used in verb-second contexts.

Freywald and Simon (forthcoming) tested various factors which have claimed to play a role in conditioning this behaviour, and observe:

• The character of the first element plays a significant role. If it is derived from a noun, it is far more restitant to use in verb second contexts than if it is derived from a preposition. Thus notlanden 'make an emergency landing' -- literally 'emergency-land' -- is worse than zwischenlanden 'make a stopover (on a plane)' -- literally 'between-land'. They attribute this to the effects of analogy: the first element in normal particle or prefix verbs is typically derived from a preposition, and so provides support for superficially similar back formations.
• The claim that defectiveness is correlated with rarity of the lexeme not appear to be borne out.
• The claim has also been made that there is a tendency over time for such verbs to become settled in one pattern or the other, and so be available for use in verb second contexts. But this also does not appear to be borne out; in any event, there are some whose resitance to verb second use is quite persistent.

It might be argued that such verbs should not be considered defective. After all, they can be inflected for the full range of finite forms, just so long as they are clause-final. But the problem is ultimately a morphological one, and something like AB is a different form from B...A. Granted, the difference between the two series of forms cannot readliy be specified in morphosyntactic or morphosemantic term. However one labels this morphological contrast, the defective verbs are ones which are missing this series of B...A forms.

2. Nouns

German is not a language fond of pluralia tantum; the equivalents of trousers, glasses, scissors and the like are ordinary nouns. However, one of the few it does have, Eltern 'parents', is interesting in that it is a rare example of a genuinely defective plurale tantum, in that it is not only morphologically and morphosyntactically plural, but also semantically plural. Originally a plural adjective form meaning 'elders', a semantic justification for its plural status might once have been derived from the collective sense of 'father and mother'. In contemporary use, however, it can refer to any plurality of parents when no specific sex reference is desired, and as such there is no corresponding sex-neutral singular. Instead, the compound Elternteil, literally 'parental unit' may be used, a word which has its own dedicated plural (Elternteile).²

Notes

¹ 'Verb second' is something of an oversimplification, as it also involves initial position (questions, imperatives). In any event, it is opposed to clause final position.

² A back-formed singular Elter may be found in the technical language of science.

References

Freywald, Ulrike and Horst Simon. Forthcoming. Wenn die Wortbildung die Syntax stört: Über Verben, die nicht in V2 stehen können. In: Maurice Kauffer and René Métrich (eds) Verbale Wortbildung. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. Available at http://www.kcl.ac.uk/content/1/c6/02/55/59/FreywaldSimon-inpress-NonV2-Verben.pdf.