Running head: PHRASAL AND PREPOSITIONAL VERBS 1 Phrasal ...

Running head: PHRASAL AND PREPOSITIONAL VERBS

Phrasal and Prepositional Verbs Andy W. Fuller Colorado State University

1

PHRASAL AND PREPOSITIONAL VERBS

2 Abstract

Multi-word verbs (i.e. phrasal and prepositional verbs) are extremely difficult for English language learners to acquire; this difficulty is compounded by the fact that multi-word verbs are common in informal speech, often idiomatic, and highly productive in the English language (Davies and Gardner, 2007). The categories of multi-word verb forms are complex, thus, the focus of this analysis will be on phrasal verb (PV) and prepositional verb (PPV) forms. As many grammars discuss formal characteristic of PVs and PPVs somewhat differently, it is important to remain consistent in the following discussion. The basic forms of PVs and PPVs in this paper will be regarded as follows: PV (verb + adverb particle) and PPV (verb + preposition + NP) (Biber et al., 1999). This paper will examine the aforementioned verbs in terms of form and meaning to understand the complexities of these highly elusive verbs. Keywords: phrasal verbs, prepositional verbs, transparent, opaque, free combinations


3

Phrasal and Prepositional Verbs As previously stated, PVs consist of verb + adverb particle. PVs have two main subcategories: intransitive and transitive. Intransitive PVs are exemplified in the following: The man just gave in. The children are playing around.

You have finally caught on. The defendant just broke down.

When a PV takes a direct object, it can be described as transitive (i.e. verb + adverb particle + direct object). Some examples of transitive phrasal verbs are: Can you put away the dishes? I handed in my final paper. The protestors called off the march. I set up the projector. In the examples above, the adverb particle (i.e. away, off, up, in) comes before the direct object. However, with transitive phrasal verbs it is possible to place the direct object between the verb and the particle (e.g. I set the projector up). Also, this is “the normal word order when the object is a pronoun” (e.g. I set it up) (Biber et al., 1999, p. 408). Some transitive PVs do not allow the direct object to be placed between the verb and the particle unless it is a pronoun. According to Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, and Svartvik (1985), given up and laid down are two such PVs (e.g. The children gave up hope; ?The children gave hope up) (p. 1155). The inability of some transitive phrasal verbs to separate the particle from the verb can be linked to the idiomaticity of verb and object, as in the above example, or because of an –ing clausal object (e.g. He gave up climbing; *He gave climbing up) (p. 1155). In contrast to PVs, “all prepositional verbs take a prepositional object (i.e. the noun phrase occurring after the preposition) and have “two major structural patterns” (Biber et al., 1999, p. 413). The first pattern is as follows: verb + preposition + NP He looks like the boss They asked for the check

He fell down the stairs He thinks about her

This first pattern is said to be fixed. According to Huddleston and Pullam (2002), in a sentence like He fell down the stairs, the transitive preposition down has the stairs as its object and therefore


4

forms “… a single complement of the verb” , where down the stairs is “a single clause element and the order within this phrase is fixed” (p. 281). The fixed nature of this form is evident in the fact that *He fell the stairs down and *He thinks her about are ungrammatical. The second pattern allows the verb and preposition to be separated by a NP: verb + NP + preposition + NP He bases his ideas on love They reminded her of the time

They accused her of being dumb We said hello to the teacher

This second pattern can also be seen in passive constructions “where the noun phrase corresponding to the direct object has been placed in subject position” (e.g. I think the media is falsely accused of a lot of things; People falsely accuse the media of a lot of things) (Biber et al., 1999, p. 414). These two PPV patterns can be examined from two different and competing analyses. According to Biber et al. (1999), PPVs can be viewed as a lexical verb + prepositional phrase that functions as an adverbial because it is often possible to insert an adverbial between the verb and the prepositional phrase (e.g. They thought a lot about the proposition) (p. 414). The other analysis considers PPVs as a single structural unit. This is supported by the fact that the meaning of many of the PPVs that follow the first pattern (verb + preposition + NP) cannot be understood from the meanings of the individual parts, and that they can be replaced by transitive verbs without a change in meaning (e.g. They can deal with the problem- handle the problem; He looks like a chickenresembles a chicken). Phrasal verb vs. Prepositional verb One of the most challenging aspects of distinguishing PVs from PPVs is that the words that accompany the verb in the structure are part of two overlapping categories: prepositions and spatial adverbs (particles). According to Quirk et al. (1985, p. 1151), some of these words can only be used as prepositions (against, among, as, at, for, etc.), some can be used as both preposition and spatial adverb (about, above, down, on, out, etc.), and others can only be used as spatial adverbs


5

(aback, ahead, apart, aside, back, etc.). For a more complete list of these prepositions and particles, see Quirk et al., (1985) in 9.66 and 9.7. Due to the dual function of some particles as preposition or spatial adverb, it is sometimes unclear as to which form is being followed when they are used transitively (i.e. verb + adverb particle + direct object or verb + preposition + NP). Although there are many tests to determine what structure is being followed in a given text, one is perhaps the simplest to conduct. When using a structure that contains one of the particles that can be either spatial adverb or preposition, “only the transitive preposition can be followed by an unstressed personal pronoun” (Huddleston & Pullam, 2002, p. 281). For example, the sentences She took off the label; She jumped off the wall are both used transitively with the particle off. However, it is possible to write She jumped off it, whereas it is not acceptable to write *She took off it (p. 281). Therefore, the verb + preposition + NP construction allows the unstressed personal pronoun to follow the preposition, but the structure verb + adverb particle + direct object does not allow the unstressed personal pronoun to follow the adverb particle. Free Combinations Compounding this difficulty, what appears to follow the form of a PV or a PPV may actually be a free combination. While many PVs and PPVs often have meanings that cannot be derived from their individual parts, free combinations are typically transparent in meaning. This is because free combinations are structures where “each element has separate grammatical and semantic status” (Biber et al., 1999, p. 403). A few comparisons of free combinations and PVs/PPVs are examined below. Intransitive PVs and free combinations can be difficult to distinguish. According to Biber et al. (1999), “some combinations function as an intransitive phrasal verb when there is no following noun phrase, but as a free combination of verb + prepositional phrase functioning as an adverbial


6

when there is a following noun phrase” (p. 405). For example, He fell in is an intransitive use of a PV, but Over ten inches of snow fell in a few days is a free combination. PPVs can also be difficult to distinguish from free combinations because it “involves an interpretation of whether the noun phrase following the preposition is functioning as an object (referring to a person or thing) or as part of an adverbial (e.g. referring to a place or time)” (Biber et al., 1999, p. 406). In the construction verb + preposition + NP, when the NP that follows the preposition identifies location or time, and when wh-questions can be formed using where or when, it is usually functioning as a free combination (e.g. Tony appeared in the hallway; Where did he appear?). In contrast, the construction verb + preposition + NP, when the NP that follows the preposition refers to a person or a thing, and wh-questions are formed with who or what, it is typically functioning as a PPV (e.g. Tony appeared in the movie; Who appeared in the movie?) (p. 406). Additionally, notice how the question Where did he appear? does not contain the preposition in, whereas the question Who appeared in the movie? does contain the preposition in. This may be another reason to regard certain verb + preposition + NP constructions as one single unit. Opaque vs. Transparent As previously stated, many PVs and PPVs are opaque because the meaning cannot be derived from the individual parts. According to Huddleston and Pullam (2002), the verb take in has seven different senses that appear on a continuum ranging from transparent to opaque. In the sentence, We’d better take in the children’s toys, the verb take in has the sense ‘move into the house’ and is transparent in meaning. On the other side of the continuum, in the sentence, I’m not surprised he was taken in: He’s as gullible as a child, the verb take in has the sense ‘deceived’ and is completely opaque in meaning (p. 284). According to Huddleston and Pullam (2002), the aspectuality of verbs also creates instances of extended meaning (p. 284). PVs and PPVs that denote completion or perfectivity (break up,


7

catch up, come up, cut down, eat up, etc.) can have highly idiomatic meanings (e.g. He came up with a good idea; I caught up on the reading last weekend). However, some of these verbs can also be relatively transparent in meaning (e.g. Did you cut down the tree). Additionally, verbs that express repetition or duration (fire away, work away, carry on, keep on, push on, etc.) can have highly idiomatic meanings (e.g. He fired away at the mouth; We carried on until they got bored and left) (p. 284). One indication of the idiomaticity of a PV or PPV combinations is the process of order alternation. PVs and PPVs that allow order alternation tend to be more transparent in meaning (e.g. He carried out the table; He carried the table out). On the other hand, PVs and PPVs that don’t allow order alternation are typically fossilized and more opaque in meaning (e.g. She carried out her threat; ?She carried her threat out) (Huddleston & Pullam, 2002, p. 285). Three PVs fall into an interesting category of what is known as resulting copular verbs (i.e. turn out, end up, and wind up). Resulting copular verbs “identify an attribute that happens as a result of some process of change” (Biber et al., 1999, p. 436). The PV turn out is used to describe the finalization of a process with a positive or negative outcome (e.g. Every time he cooks, the soup turns out bad [good]). The PVs end up and wind up basically describe unintentional outcomes (e.g. She ended up winning the game despite the odds; He wound up homeless because he lost his job) (p. 446). Conclusion PVs and PPVs are extremely complex and difficult for language learners. They occur quite often in informal registers namely conversation and fiction (Biber et al., 1999, p. 410 & 416). The form of PVs and PPVs, the particles with which they occur, and their similarity to free combinations can prove difficult. However, tests such as (but not limited to) which wh-questions can be formed and the ability place an unstressed personal pronoun after a preposition can help us


8

distinguish between free combinations, PVs, and PPVs. Some particles can only operate as prepositions or spatial adverbs, whereas others can operate as both preposition and spatial adverb. Understanding these groupings will help me explain and categorize PVs and PPVs for my students. PVs and PPVs have many senses. The meanings of the many senses of one multi-word verb can be examined on a continuum: transparent meaning at one end, and opaque at the other. In general, it seems that the more fixed a PV or PPV is the more opaque the meaning tends to be. Conversely, PVs and PPVs that allow order alternation tend to be more transparent in meaning. It is extremely important that ESL/EFL teachers posses knowledge about difficult structures like PVs and PPVs. From my research, I learned that phrasal and prepositional verbs often appear in conversation and range from very literal to highly idiomatic in meaning. The ability of these verbs to be transparent or opaque contributes to the difficulties learners experience using them. Also, their separable and inseparable forms can confuse learners. Knowing these aspects of multi-word verbs, and the tests that help us determine their functions, can help me categorize and explain them to students.


References Biber, D., Conrad, S., Finegan, E., Johansson, S., Leech, G. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. England: Longman. Davies, M., & Gardner, D. (2007). Pointing Out Frequent Phrasal Verbs: A Corpus Based Analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 339-359. Huddleston, R. D., Pullum, G. K. (2002). The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., Svartvik, J., (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. England: Longman.

9