In support verb constructions (SVC), as have poise , the support verb is explicitly assumed to be a verb, here have . However, during the last 50 years, the notion of SVC has been extended to a large range of new cases. With this new scope, the linguistic form that plays the role of the support verb can also be an expression not classified as a verb, such as be mad with , or an adjective, e.g. 있다 issta ‘there is’ in Korean. Calling ‘support verb’ a non-verb is a terminological issue. Beyond that, this article examines the validity of extending the definition of SVCs. After surveying the linguistic forms at stake and the reactions to such extension, we focus on delimiting the historical, stricto sensu SVCs based on criteria, in a way that matches the traditional intuition. Then, for each type of linguistic form proposed as an extension, we examine how far the extension distorts this notion. We find both SVCs and extensions of SVC to be of interest in a model of syntax and the lexicon. Finally, the ‘verb’ part of speech is not essential to any of the categories, which suggests adopting the terms of ‘support construction’ and ‘extension of support construction’ instead. • Many support verb constructions have variants, which are similar but distinct. • Extended support constructions convey aspect, modality, intensity, causation. • Some words and expressions behave as support verb but are not verbs. • Some supports of predicate nouns are adjectives or several-word expressions. • A predicate noun used with a support is not necessarily its direct object.