The dative alternation sometimes also occurs with van-PPs. This holds especially for verbs with the verbal particle af. Some examples are afbietsen (van)'to wheedle out of', afnemen (van)'to take away (from)', afpakken (van)'to take away (from)', afpersen (van)'to extort/extract (from)', and aftroggelen (van)'to wheedle out of'. There are also one or two cases with the particle terug'back': terugvragen (van)'to ask back (from)' and, perhaps, terugeisen (van)'to reclaim'.

Constructions of this type are again directional in nature: the referent of the direct object is claimed to traverse a path that has its starting point at the referent of the indirect object, which thus acts as a source. Examples such as (363a) are therefore similar to constructions such as (364), in which the PP van de pan (af) functions as a complementive.

The fact that van-PPs can also be used as complementives is, of course, not surprising given the analysis of the dative alternation suggested in Section 3.3.1.2, sub III. It seems a bit harder, however, to show that van-PPs in examples such as (363a) do indeed function as complementives: the fact that the verb normally takes the particle af makes it impossible to empirically support this by means of the lack of extraposition given that such particles normally lift the ban on extraposition of prepositional complementives.

The fact that the element af (or the particle terug'back') is obligatory in the corresponding double object constructions can probably be accounted for in a similar way as the obligatoriness of toe in the goal constructions; see Section 3.3.1.2, sub III, for discussion.
      The examples in (366) show that dative phrases that function as sources can sometimes also alternate with aan-PPs. This holds especially for verbs prefixed with ont- like ontnemen (aan)'to take away from', ontstelen (aan)'to steal away from', ontfutselen (aan)'to diddle someone out of' and ontzeggen (aan)'to refuse'.