Verb valency in translation is the pattern of participants and complements a verb requires or permits. “Give” normally involves a giver, something given and a recipient. “Sleep” normally has one central participant. “Put” usually requires an object and a location. Languages lexicalise these roles differently, so translating the verb without translating its argument structure can move who acts, who receives or what changes.
People searching for verb valency translation, transitivity, argument structure, verb complements, direct and indirect objects, experiencers, recipients or selected prepositions are solving a predicate-frame problem. A target verb can look like the right dictionary equivalent while requiring a different subject/object pattern. Precise translation therefore maps semantic roles first and target grammar second.
This article owns the valency-and-argument-structure precision layer. It covers intransitive, transitive and ditransitive verbs, agents, themes, experiencers, recipients, instruments, selected prepositions, causative alternations, psych verbs, motion verbs, complement clauses and QA. The central rule is: translate the verb together with the participants it licenses.
What Valency Means
The first precision question is what grammatical relation the source encodes. Valency describes how many and what kinds of arguments a predicate combines with. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is looking up a verb without its frame. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to write predicate plus slots For example, give = giver + thing + recipient. Before release, compare source and target slots. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Intransitive Verbs
This feature looks lexical on the surface but is controlled by the source language’s argument or noun system. Intransitive predicates normally do not take a direct object. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is using a target verb that requires an object or implies an external affected entity. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to test whether the event is complete with one participant For example, sleep, arrive and disappear are typically intransitive. Before release, check target complement requirements. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Transitive Verbs
Languages divide this semantic territory differently, so a one-word substitution is often unreliable. Transitive predicates relate an actor/experiencer to an object or affected entity. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is dropping object or turning it into prepositional adjunct. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to identify subject and object semantic roles For example, “the analyst reviewed the report.” Before release, who did what to what? This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Ditransitive Verbs
The safest method is to recover roles and quantity structure before choosing target morphology. Some verbs involve a giver, theme and recipient. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is swapping recipient and theme or selecting wrong preposition. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to map three roles before target syntax For example, “She gave Omar the file.” Before release, check who received what. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Agent and Patient
A natural target may require a different construction while preserving the same participants and relation. Agent initiates/control action while patient undergoes change, though not every verb uses both. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is assuming grammatical subject is always agent. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to label semantic roles independently of syntax For example, in passive “the file was deleted,” file is affected subject. Before release, compare role map. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Theme
The first precision question is what grammatical relation the source encodes. A theme is an entity moved, located, perceived or otherwise involved without necessarily being changed. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is treating every object as patient. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to ask whether entity changes state or simply participates For example, in “move the file to folder,” file is theme. Before release, preserve movement relation. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Recipient and Goal
This feature looks lexical on the surface but is controlled by the source language’s argument or noun system. Recipients receive transferred entities while goals mark endpoints more generally. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is using a location marker where target requires recipient construction. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to distinguish transfer from motion For example, “send the report to Lina” has Lina as recipient/goal depending on analysis. Before release, target should preserve receiving relation. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Experiencer Verbs
Languages divide this semantic territory differently, so a one-word substitution is often unreliable. Mental and sensory states often assign experiencer roles differently across languages. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is forcing English subject/object order onto target psych verbs. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to identify who feels/perceives and what causes/targets experience For example, “I like music” may correspond to a construction closer to “music pleases me.” Before release, same experiencer and stimulus. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Possessor-Like Experiencers
The safest method is to recover roles and quantity structure before choosing target morphology. Some languages express hunger, age, need or possession through dative/locative constructions rather than have/be. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is translating target grammar literally into unnatural or role-shifting English. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to map semantic state first For example, source may literally resemble “to me is cold” meaning “I am cold.” Before release, preserve experiencer. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Selected Prepositions
A natural target may require a different construction while preserving the same participants and relation. Predicates select particular prepositions or cases as part of their frame. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is translating source preposition instead of target verb frame. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to lookup target verb with complements For example, depend on may map to a case ending or different preposition. Before release, check native examples. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Verb + Clause Complements
The first precision question is what grammatical relation the source encodes. Think, want, expect, allow and force take different clause types and subject relations. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is choosing a target verb with different control/raising behaviour. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to identify subject of embedded action For example, “I want Lina to leave” makes Lina embedded actor. Before release, check who performs embedded verb. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Control Verbs
This feature looks lexical on the surface but is controlled by the source language’s argument or noun system. Verbs such as promise and persuade can determine which participant controls an omitted embedded subject. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is switching controller during translation. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to expand infinitive subject privately For example, “Lina promised Omar to leave” makes Lina the one leaving; “persuaded Omar to leave” makes Omar leave. Before release, name embedded actor. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Causative Alternations
Languages divide this semantic territory differently, so a one-word substitution is often unreliable. Some verbs alternate between spontaneous and caused forms. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is adding/removing causer. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to compare intransitive/transitive pair For example, “the door opened” vs “Lina opened the door.” Before release, map causer presence. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Change-of-State Verbs
The safest method is to recover roles and quantity structure before choosing target morphology. Break, melt, dry and widen can lexicalise causes and results differently. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is using a target form that implies intentional action. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to separate cause, process and result For example, ice melted vs heat melted ice. Before release, check causation. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Motion Verb Frames
A natural target may require a different construction while preserving the same participants and relation. Motion verbs can encode path, manner and goal in different grammatical places across languages. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is copying source verb while losing path or manner. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to map mover, path, manner and goal For example, English “run into room” lexicalises manner in run and path in into. Before release, all components accounted for. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Put-Type Verbs
The first precision question is what grammatical relation the source encodes. Some verbs require a location complement to be complete. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is dropping required endpoint in target. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to test sentence completeness without complement For example, “She put the book” feels incomplete without where. Before release, retain required argument. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Optional vs Required Complements
This feature looks lexical on the surface but is controlled by the source language’s argument or noun system. A phrase can be an argument selected by the verb or a freely added adjunct. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is dropping an argument as if optional. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to use valency dictionary or omission test For example, “reside in Singapore” needs location concept more strongly than “work in Singapore.” Before release, check target verb requirements. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Verb Sense and Valency
Languages divide this semantic territory differently, so a one-word substitution is often unreliable. Different senses of one verb can have different frames. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is choosing right word but wrong sense/frame. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to analyse verb and complements together For example, “run a company” differs from “run quickly.” Before release, target predicate fits all arguments. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Passive and Valency
The safest method is to recover roles and quantity structure before choosing target morphology. Voice can promote one argument and suppress another without changing core event roles. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is mistaking grammatical reordering for role change. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to map roles before voice transformation For example, “Omar received the file from Lina” and “file was sent by Lina to Omar” retain transfer roles. Before release, compare semantic participants. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Valency QA With Role Tables
A natural target may require a different construction while preserving the same participants and relation. A simple table can reveal whether every required participant maps correctly. The target may use a pronoun, case marker, classifier, preposition, verb alternation or word order that has no visible one-to-one match with the source. Precision therefore depends on preserving who participates, how entities relate, whether an action is self-directed or mutual, how a noun is counted, and what kind of possession or association is actually asserted.
The common failure is reviewing target only at sentence surface. Because the resulting sentence can remain fluent, the error may survive ordinary proofreading. It becomes important in instructions, science, education, legal documents, product descriptions, family relations and technical explanations, where one grammatical choice can change actor roles, quantity, ownership or the nature of an event. A dedicated relation-level review is therefore more reliable than intuition alone.
A practical method is to make columns ROLE / SOURCE / TARGET For example, Agent=Lina; Theme=file; Recipient=Omar. Before release, no role should disappear or swap without source support. This creates a language-independent checkpoint. When the source leaves a distinction unspecified but the target forces a choice, use context or a neutral construction rather than guessing. The goal is not to preserve surface grammar; it is to preserve the relation the grammar encodes.
Practical Diagnostic Workflow
For difficult material, build a compact role map before translation. Identify participants, event type, direction of action, count/mass status, units, ownership relation and any target-language distinction the source does not overtly mark. Draft after the map is stable. Then reconstruct the same map from the target. If the target adds a possessor, turns mutual action into self-action, changes an uncountable substance into individual objects or moves a recipient into a location role, revise.
AI-assisted translation benefits from the same discipline. Models can infer likely actors, classifiers, ownership relations and reflexive readings automatically. Those choices are often reasonable but are still choices. Treat them as hypotheses. Check the target against explicit source evidence, especially when person, number, gender, countability or participant roles affect real-world interpretation.
Recovery When the Relation Has Drifted
Repair the semantic relation before the wording. Strip away unsupported target detail, restore the correct participants or noun interpretation, and choose a target construction that carries the source relation naturally. Then inspect agreement, pronouns, articles, quantifiers and later references because these often depend on the corrected structure. Precision recovery is complete only when the entire local network becomes consistent again.
Quality-Assurance Checklist
- Translate verb with its frame.
- Map semantic roles separately from syntax.
- Check intransitive/transitive status.
- Preserve recipient/theme roles.
- Audit experiencer constructions.
- Use target-selected prepositions/cases.
- Resolve embedded-clause subject.
- Check control verbs.
- Preserve causer presence/absence.
- Account for path/manner/goal.
- Distinguish arguments from adjuncts.
- Verify every target verb sense with its complements.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is verb valency?
The pattern of arguments a verb requires or allows, such as who acts, what is affected and who receives something.
Is the subject always the agent?
No. Subjects can be experiencers, themes or patients, especially in passives and certain verb classes.
Why can the same concept use different subjects across languages?
Languages lexicalise experiencer and event roles differently; a target verb may reverse the surface subject/object pattern while preserving semantics.
Should source prepositions be translated directly?
No. Translate the target verb together with the complement pattern it selects.
What is a control verb?
A verb whose participant determines the understood subject of an infinitive or subordinate action, such as promise or persuade.
Can AI swap roles?
Yes, especially in long clauses or psych/transfer verbs. Role tables make these errors easier to detect.
Where This Fits in the eduKate Translation Architecture
Use the passive-agency article for voice, the causative-verbs owner for make/let/have/get, the sentence-structure owner for word order and the Context Stack for sense selection. Final verification belongs to the Translate Precisely QA article.
Final Principle
Translate verbs as participant frameworks, not isolated words. Identify who experiences, acts, moves, changes, receives or causes. Then choose the target verb and complement pattern that preserves those roles, even if subject, object, case or preposition changes.