PPs that act as the subject or direct object of the clause can be topicalized. This is shown in (6) for the examples in (1): (1a) illustrates the case in which the subject PP onder het bed occupies its regular subject position of the clause, right adjacent to the finite verb, and (6a) provides the topicalization counterpart of this example; example (6b) is the topicalization counterpart of (1b).

The examples in (7) are the topicalization counterparts of those in (5). Examples (7a&b) show that PP-complements of verbs and predicatively used adjectives can easily be topicalized. Topicalization of the PP-complement of the definite noun phrase in (5c), on the other hand, seems impossible; in Subsection V we will briefly return to the topicalization of PP-complements of indefinite noun phrases, which have been claimed to behave differently.

Example (8) shows that PPs acting as the object of a vinden-construction can undergo leftward movement in the middle field of the clause, and so are able to precede or follow the adverbs. As with nominal objects, the two forms differ with respect to the information structure of the clause: if the PP precedes the clausal adverb, it is construed as belonging to the presupposition of the clause, while it is construed as part of the focus (“new” information) if it follows the clausal adverbial.

The examples in (9a&b) show that PP-complements of verbs and adjectives can also undergo scrambling, while example (9c) shows that, like topicalization in (7c), scrambling of the PP-complement of a noun leads to a degraded result.

In these examples, we are dealing with A'-scrambling, not A-scrambling; the difference in word order is not related to information structure (i.e. presupposition and new information focus), but rather triggers an emphatic or contrastive focus reading. The nominal part of a scrambled PP is selected from a set of possible alternatives: (9a) asserts that Marie likes to look at pretty boys (but not, e.g., pretty girls) and (9b) asserts that Jan is proud of his long hair (but not, e.g., his stupidity). We refer the reader to Chapter V13, for a detailed discussion of these two types of scrambling, which are called A and A'-scrambling, for the reasons explained there.

The primed examples in (10) show that PP-over-V of the subject/object PPs in the examples in (1) is excluded; they behave like regular nominal subjects/objects in this respect. The number sign # indicates that (10b') is acceptable when vinden acts as a transitive verb meaning “to find”, in which case the PP functions as a locational adverbial phrase, as is clear from the fact that it is optional; in this reading, which is also available in (6b) and (10b), the example is irrelevant for our present discussion.

The examples in (11a&b) show that PP-over-V of PP complements of verbs and predicative adjectives is possible. However, PP-over-V seems to be blocked with PP complements of definite noun phrases; in Subsection V, we will briefly return to the PP-over-V of PP-complements of indefinite noun phrases, which have been claimed to behave differently.

The argument PPs discussed above all allow R-pronominalization. However, they differ with respect to the question as to whether the R-word must remain adjacent to the preposition, or whether it can be separated from it by another element as a result of R-extraction. The examples in (12) show that pronominal PPs acting as the subject or the object of the clause cannot be split.

The examples in (13a&b) show that the split pattern is possible when the pronominal PP is the complement of a verb or an adjective. However, if the PP is the complement of a definite noun phrase, as in (13c), the split pattern seems to be ruled out; again, we refer the reader to Subsection V for a discussion of the behavior of PP-complements of indefinite noun phrases, which have been claimed to behave differently in this respect.

Table 2 summarizes the results of Subsections I to IV. The second column refers to PPs used in positions where we would normally have a nominative or accusative noun phrase. The third column shows the cases where the PP is used as a complement to V, A or N.

The data in Subsections I to IV suggests that PP-complements of verbs and adjectives differ from PP-complements of nouns in that only the former set can undergo topicalization, A'-scrambling, PP-over-V and R-extraction. However, it is not so clear whether it is really the case that PP-complements of nouns categorically resist these processes; if we are dealing with indefinite noun phrases, the results seem to be quite different. For instance, in (14a) the PP over ruimtevaartabout space travel is often claimed to be a complement of the noun boekbook, but still the examples in (14b-e) show that topicalization, scrambling, PP-over-V, and R-extraction are all possible if the noun phrase is indefinite.

However, the claim that we are dealing with a PP complement in (14) is not uncontroversial: it is sometimes claimed that, at least in (14b-e), the PP is not a complement of the noun but a restrictive adverbial phrase. We will not discuss this issue here, but refer the reader to Section N15.2.1 for a detailed discussion of this issue and other intricate questions concerning adpositional complements of nouns.