Another exception to the general rule that adpositions do not take adpositional complements is the preposition voorfor in its function of expressing an intended goal. Consider first the examples in (45), in which the complement of voor is the person for whom the biscuits are intended.

The examples in (46) show that the intended goal need not be an animate entity, but can also refer to a particular occasion.

The examples in (47) show that the occasion in question need not be referred to directly, but can also be referred to indirectly by an element denoting a time, as in the (a)-examples, or a location, as in the (b)-examples.

Given that times and locations are typically expressed by a prepositional phrase, it need not surprise us that the occasion in question can also be referred to by means of a PP. In (48a) an example is given that involves the temporal PP na het etenafter dinner. That na het eten is a complement of voor, i.e. that we are not dealing with a compound voorna, is clear from the fact, illustrated in (48b), that after R-pronominalization, the R-pronoun intervenes between voor and the temporal preposition na, and cannot precede the preposition voor; cf. Section 32.2.1.

Example (49) gives comparable examples with the locational PP in de duinenin the dunes. Unfortunately, however, R-pronominalization is completely blocked in this case. The main argument for the claim that we are not dealing with the complex preposition voorin is that the PP can be replaced by a locational pro-form; this has already been shown in the (b)-examples in (47).

Finally, in (50a) we have a case in which the intended goal refers to an object in the process of being made; it expresses that the eggs are ingredients intended for the pancakes. Example (50b) again shows that the PP must be considered as a complement of voor, i.e. that voorin is not a complex preposition.