Turkish, German, Russian, Greek and Latin are examples of languages with declension. They also have lists of verbs for which the verb's single object takes a particular case apart from the "normal" object case (accusative, say). E.g., when I mention that I believe something in Turkish, I mention something in the dative case. To glance at those five languages, having verbs which can "case" their single objects different ways might appear normal for languages which use case.

Some examples:

German:

Ich sehe dich [2ps acc]
"I see you"

but

Ich helfe dir [2ps dat]
"I help you"

Turkish:

Seni [2ps acc] görüyorum
"I see you"

but

Senden [2ps abl] şüpheleniyorum
"I suspect you"

One needs to remember these case-object relations per verb. Russian seems to have quite a few verbs which "take" different cases. I wonder if all languages which use case are this way.

Searching about this tonight, I think it may be a type of "subcategorization" or "c-selection": verbs c-select particular types of complements/objects. I read half a dozen pages seemingly related pages which I think I did understand, and two or three I know I did not understand. I might be wrong in applying those two terms. I don't want to risk unwittingly asking a subtly different question by using them. I will say "casey verbs" and mean "verbs which normally don't follow the language's most common 'object case' for their complements."

Questions:

1. Those easy-to-search languages with cases above do have casey verbs. Is this representative of languages which use case?

2. If a language has several cases in addition to its nominative/accusative/ergative situation, e.g., it has dative, are there likely to be casey verbs for each of those several cases?

3. Specific examples of #2: are dative verbs common where there is a dative? ablative verbs, common? genitive verbs, common?

4. I am not sure how to phrase this question. Some English verbs seem "casey" to me as I have been thinking about this today. English doesn't have a "from" case, but some verbs are especially ready for an "incoming object": 'to defend,' 'to hear.' Casey verbs might have a "fromness," for example, built-in in this way. So my question is can they have all the "fromness" (say) built into the definition so that a verb 'to hearfrom' takes a "normal" direct object now because the declension to the "from" case would be redundant like "to hearfrom from Fred"?