A shared feature of the Germanic languages is the occurrence of complex verbs consisting of the verb itself and what I refer to as the adverbal unit (AU). I examine the nature of the units that can be inserted into such complex verbs and compare intercalation patterns in AU-Vs and V-AUs. AU-Vs are found to be much more resistant to intercalation than V-AUs. The former accommodate the past participle marker, the infinitival linker, and—less commonly—verbs, whereas the latter accommodate NPs, ADVPs, and—less commonly—both phrase types concurrently. Thus, V-AUs may be split by more syntactic as well as heavier material than AU-Vs. I argue that this difference in cohesiveness is due to varying degrees of coactivation of Vs and AUs. The constituents of AU-Vs show a higher degree of coactivation than those of V-AUs. Adverbal units depend for their activation on the prior activation of verbs more than verbs depend for their activation on the prior activation of adverbal units. These different activation patterns lead to different degrees of cohesiveness and hence to different intercalation possibilities in the two verb types. Although intercalation is compulsory in some contexts, it proves to be a dispreferred option.*

中文翻译：

---

日耳曼复杂动词中的不对称插入

日耳曼语言的一个共同特征是出现由动词本身和我称为副词单元 (AU) 的复杂动词。我检查了可以插入这些复杂动词的单位的性质，并比较了 AU-V 和 V-AU 中的插入模式。发现 AU-V 比 V-AU 更能抵抗嵌入。前者容纳过去分词标记、不定式连接器和不太常见的动词，而后者同时容纳 NP、ADVP 和不太常见的两种短语类型。因此，V-AU 可能被比 AU-V 更多的句法以及更重的材料分割。我认为这种凝聚力的差异是由于 Vs 和 Aus 的不同程度的共激活。AU-Vs 的成分显示出比 V-AUs 更高程度的共激活。状语单元的激活依赖于动词的先前激活，而不是动词的激活依赖于副词单元的先前激活。这些不同的激活模式导致不同程度的凝聚力，从而导致两种动词类型的不同插入可能性。尽管在某些情况下嵌入是强制性的，但事实证明这是一个不受欢迎的选择。 *