Re: Adpositions gaining new uses

The existence of a verb "opzitten" does not seem very plausible to me
(unless we're talking about a dog doing tricks). To me it seems that
your first two sentences are examples of sentences where the
combination of auxiliary+preposition allow the main verb to be left
out:

Hij / moet / op / de / computer [werken].
He / should / on / the / computer [work].
He should work on the computer.

Ik / wil / op / de / playstation [spelen].
I / want / on / the / playstation [play].
I want to play on the playstation.

Analogous to:

Ik / moet / naar / het / toilet [gaan].
I / must / to / the / toilet [go].
I have to go to the toilet.

Mag / ik / twee / bier [hebben]?
May / I / two / beers [have]?
Can I have two beers?

Mag / ik / naar / buiten [gaan]?
May / I / to / outside [go]?
Can I go outside?

Peter / kan / nog niet / op / de / computer [werken].
Peter / can / not yet / on / the / computer [work].
Peter cannot work on the computer yet.

René

2008/11/16 Ina van der Vegt <gijsstrider@...>:
> Something I've been noticing about my L1 (Dutch) is that in some
> situations, the adposition 'op' (Roughly the same as the English
> adposition 'on') has gained a new use.
>
> As I am no good at explaining, I'll give some examples, and try some
> of my theories afterward.
>
> Hij / moet / op / de / computer.
> He / should / on / the / computer.
> He should use the computer.
>
> Ik / wil / op / de / playstation.
> I / want / on / the / playstation.
> I want to use the playstation.
>
> Ik / zit / op / gitaarles.
> I / sit / on / guitar lesson.
> I am taking guitar lessons.
>
> Now, I think this use originally came from the last use, as 'op'
> defaults to 'zitten' (To sit), and 'zitten' is only removed when there
> is another verb. What I think is that 'opzitten' (Literally: To sit
> on) has gained the new meaning of 'to make use of' or 'to use', and
> that the 'zitten' part is left out when another verb is present. The
> reason that 'zitten' is still present in situations where there is no
> other verb is because there must be a verb.
>
> Does this sound plausible, and are there any situations similar to
> this in other languages?
>
> Ina van der Vegt
>