Expansive complement . Expansive Predicative <nom> <nom> complements Nominal complement Nominal complement ≤adp <adi> Adjectival complement Adjecti Modificational complement Verbal complements <vb> <yb> Verbal complement Verbal complement Table 5 shows a comparison of the core syntactic valency complement types for English and German. A compromise had to be made with regard to the German ca complements as their function and use in german is not fully congruent with the chosen categories of subject complement <sub> and object complement <obj. However, since in the majority of occurrences the German cases can be matched to a respective syntactic function in English, function categories seem to be the most suitable categorisation to accommodate both languages. Thus, the nominative is generally equivalent to the subject <sub> in English, the accusative mainly corresponds to the direct object <obj>, and the dative often matches the ind irect object <ind> in English (Fischer 1997). These eleven English and twelve German valency complement types are sufficient to analyse any clause or sentence regarding its valency sentence patterns For the various individual verbs there are only a limited number of possible combinations (Schumacher et al. 2004); depend ing on how many complement types a verb can occur with, its valency number can be established as mono -, di-, tri-or tetravalent 2.1 The Valency Sentence Patterns of CONSIDER Table 6 shows the 17 valency sentence patterns identified for the verb CONSIDER based on 200 randomly chosen concordance lines. As can be seen, the core valency types are further differentiated depend ing on their realisation form. For example, the object in the di-valent pattern has four realisation forms: with a noun phrase <sub obi>, with a that-clause <sub obj-that>, with a wh-clause <sub obj-wh> and a non-finite ing- clause Table 6. Valency sentence patterns of CONSIDER Mono-valent <sub> (11) The Commission should hear the sectors views, consult, listen, consider9 Expansive complement Expansive complement Predicative complements <nom> Nominal complement <nom> Nominal complement <adj> Adjectival complement <adj> Adjectival complement --- <mod> Modificational complement Verbal complements <vb> Verbal complement <vb> Verbal complement Table 5 shows a comparison of the core syntactic valency complement types for English and German. A compromise had to be made with regard to the German case complements as their function and use in German is not fully congruent with the chosen categories of subject complement <sub> and object complement <obj>. However, since in the majority of occurrences the German cases can be matched to a respective syntactic function in English, function categories seem to be the most suitable categorisation to accommodate both languages. Thus, the nominative is generally equivalent to the subject <sub> in English, the accusative mainly corresponds to the direct object <obj>, and the dative often matches the indirect object <ind> in English (Fischer 1997). These eleven English and twelve German valency complement types are sufficient to analyse any clause or sentence regarding its valency sentence patterns. For the various individual verbs there are only a limited number of possible combinations (Schumacher et al. 2004); depending on how many complement types a verb can occur with, its valency number can be established as mono-, di-, tri- or tetravalent. 2.1 The Valency Sentence Patterns of CONSIDER Table 6 shows the 17 valency sentence patterns identified for the verb CONSIDER based on 200 randomly chosen concordance lines. As can be seen, the core valency types are further differentiated depending on their realisation form. For example, the object in the di-valent pattern has four realisation forms: with a noun phrase <sub obj>, with a that-clause <sub obj-that>, with a wh-clause <sub obj-wh> and a non-finite ing-clause <sub obj-ing>. Table 6. Valency sentence patterns of CONSIDER Mono-valent <sub> (11) The Commission should hear the sector’s views, consult, listen, consider