Dutch, English and German belong to the class of Germanic languages which, in typological terms, have been defined as satellite-framed languages (Slobin 2006, 2017; Talmy 2000, 2017). They express the path of motion preferably with satellites and the manner dimension in the main verb. Although these three languages belong to the same typological class, they differ in the way in which they realize these dimensions. With examples from the Sketchengine (https://www.sketchengine.eu/) our study aims to propose a more fine-grained description of the three Germanic languages and to show how expressions of motion and location are further dependent on morphosyntactic, semantic and pragmatic factors. More specifically, we will show how English has the possibility to make a difference between motion along a path and location simply with the use of different prepositions like in, on (location) vs. into, onto (motion along a path), e.g. (1) He is in the room/on the mountain vs. (2) He runs into the room/upon the mountain. By contrast, German does not use different prepositions for motion vs. location, as exemplified by the same sentences (1a) Er ist in dem Zimmer/auf dem Berg (location) vs. (2a) Er läuft in das Zimmer/auf den Berg (motion). Still, the difference between both events is expressed, but by means of morpho-syntactic case-marking after the two-way prepositions, i.e. with the dative case for location (see 1a) and the accusative case for motion (see 2a). Dutch does not have case-marking but uses prepositions for location and postpositions with the same form as the prepositions for motion along a path, e.g. (1b) Hij is in de kamer/op de berg vs. (2b) Hij loopt de kamer in/de berg op (Draye 1992; Leys 2014; Van Belle 2016). This last construction in Dutch (2b) has a German equivalent with the use of so-called anadeictic particles (Ãgel 2017). A literal translation of (2b) in German could be (2c) Er geht in das Zimmer hinein (lit. ‘He goes into the room into’). The presentation will further zoom in onto so-called ...