I discuss the following three topics with respect to German particle verbs with a ground argument. First, I consider the difference between anlächeln and zulächeln ‘smile at’ in German. In the former the accusative argument represents a ground, whereas in the latter the dative argument is licensed by inalienable semantics. Second, I discuss why a ground can be expressed by a dative in the German verb zueilen ‘hurry toward’, whereas in the corresponding Dutch verb toesnelln the preposition naar or op ‘to’ is necessary. This difference is due to the fact that German has a low dative. Finally, I consider the question of why expressions like ∗pour the glass in or ∗load the truck on are not allowed in English, whereas the corresponding expressions are possible in German and Dutch. This results from a difference in the syntactic structure of particle verbs in the languages.*

This article puts forth a comprehensive set of etymologies for “fire” words in the Germanic languages that descend from Proto-Indo-Euro-pean (PIE) +péh2-. I propose that all relevant cognates are derived from the PIE holokinetic inflection, that is, +ph2-ōr (nominative-accusative) ~ +ph2-un- (oblique), and that all variants in the Germanic languages arose as a result of analogical changes in the Proto-Germanic and later periods. Furthermore, these etymologies cast doubt on reconstructions that require the positing of +ū in Proto-Germanic or Proto-Indo-European. In addition to providing cause to review existing reconstructions, this article also provides a closer philological view of the evidence of cognates in Germanic.