Search results for 'tag:Constructions tag:Prepositional verbs' matching tags 'Constructions' and 'Prepositional verbs'

Verbs

ganesh77 — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 09:38:41 GMT

The list isn't meant to be exhaustive or carefully arranged. Any additions, corrections or further examples would be welcomed.

1 main verbs; lexical verbs (all verbs which are not auxiliaries or modals)

2 action verbs; event verbs; dynamic verbs (a verb which can be used in continuous tenses) i.e. eat, run, talk

3 state of being verbs; existence verbs; state verbs; stative verbs; static verbs (a verb which describes a state and is not usually used in a continuous tense) i.e. be, own, know

4 regular verbs (a verb that has four forms and follows the normal rules)

5 irregular verbs; strong verbs (a verb not following the normal rules for inflection)

6 auxiliary and modal verbs (which make up verbal phrases) â 23 in total

7 linking verbs; copulative verbs; copulas (a verb which links the subject and complement of a clause) i.e. It is warm today.

8 transitive verbs (a verb used to talk about an action or event that involves more than one person or thing, and so is followed by an object) i.e. Sheâs wasting her money.

9 intransitive verbs (a verb used to talk about an action or event that only involved the subject and so has no object) i.e. She arrived.

10 multiword verbs

a type 1 â intransitive [phrasal verbs; adverb particle

b type 2 â transitive (inseparable) [prepositional verbs; preposition particles]

c type 3 â transitive (separable) [phrasal verbs; adverb particle]

d type 4 â transitive (with two inseparable particles) [phrasal-prepositional verbs; first particle is an adverb, second particle is a preposition]

11 compound verbs

12 delexical verbs (a verb which has very little meaning in itself but is used with an object to describe an action) i.e. She gave a small cry.

13 ditransitive verbs (a verb which can have both a direct and indirect object) i.e. She gave me a kiss.

14 ergative verbs (a verb which can be used transitively to focus on the performer of the action, or intransitively to focus on the thing affected by the action) i.e. He boiled the water. The water boiled.

15 reporting verbs; performance verbs; performative verbs (a verb used with a quote or a reported clause to describe what people say or think) i.e. suggest, say, wonder

16 reciprocal verbs (a verb which describes an action involving two people doing the same thing to each other) i.e. They met in the street.

17 reflexive verbs (a verb which is typically used with a reflexive pronoun) i.e. Donât cut yourself with that knife.

18 defective verbs (a verb without all the inflected forms of a regular verb) i.e. modals

19 finite and non-finite

a infinitives

b gerunds; verbal nouns

c participles

20 catenative verbs (a verb that takes other verb forms as objects; found at the head of a series of linked constructions) i.e. We agreed to try to decide to stop eating snacks.

21 causative verbs (a verb that designates the action necessary to cause another action to happen) i.e. The devil made me do it.

Re: would have already been dead & would have already been died

CalifJim — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:31:32 GMT

Love should be died for is a highly irregular turn of phrase that comes from One should die for love. It's treating die for as a prepositional verb. It's not the passive form of die, but of die for, which is a highly suspect "verb".
Note that love is not died in this construction. Nobody is "dying love", whatever that could possibly mean. You can throw a ball, but you can't die love.

Compare:

The mayor should be relied on.

Here, the mayor is not relied. Nobody is "relying the mayor". That would be meaningless.
Instead, One should rely on the mayor.

CJ

Re: Differ between a preposition and an adverb in a phrasal verb.

CalifJim — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 07:19:40 GMT

I think maybe one of the other forum members would be better at this terminology. For example, I am not familiar with "unreal phrasal verbs". I would not call the b) sentences prepositional verbs.

I would call "to talk someone into something" a causative -- conceptually. The grammatical term "causative construction" may have other implications that I'm not familiar with.

I talked my mother into (buying / taking / wearing) the blue dress, depending on context.

went off on her

Bombs "go off"; they explode. The mother was very angry and made it clear by what she said to the daughter in an outburst.

Also,
gave her (the daughter) a piece of her (the mom's) mind
or, perhaps even more appropriately,
read her (the daughter) the riot act

CJ

Re: Differ between a preposition and an adverb in a phrasal verb.

Hela — Sat, 03 Feb 2007 08:21:49 GMT

Good morning Jim,

So should I call the verbs in sentences (b) "ordinary / plain verbs" or "prepositional verbs" (with a literal sense) as opposed to "phrasal verbs" (= with an idiomatic sense) ?

If the prepositional verbs in your list are separable is it not because they have a literal meaning and not an idiomatic one? Are they not "unreal" phrasal verbs and this is why we can place objects between them and the prepositions?

Having said that is the verb "to talk someone into something" an "unreal phrasal verb" / prepositional verb (?) or is it a true phrasal verb? Is this a causative construction?

Can a prepositional verb be intransitive?

Would you please give me the meaning of :

a) "I talked my mother into the blue dress"?

b) I know she got home late, but her mom just WENT OFF ON her, and now she's grounded for life.

All the best,

Hela

Re: Differ between a preposition and an adverb in a phrasal verb.

Hela — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 17:47:09 GMT

Dear teachers,

I've just realized that just as a phrasal verb can be a combination of a verb + preposition OR adverb, a ...... verb (which is not a phrasal verb) can also be followed by a preposition OR adverb. So I shouldn't call it a "prepositional verb". What do we call it then?

eg 1:
a) Charles came into a fortune = phrasal verb (= idiomatic)
b) Charles came into the room = prepositional verb (and not a phrasal verb since the preposition is not part of the verb, it's part of the adverbial, right?)

eg 2:
a) I've been running up debts these days = phrasal verb
b) I run up to get my Dady's wallet = (verb + adverb) â> "run up" here is neither a phrasal verb nor a prepositional verb, so what is it?

Something else, it is said that we can put an object between a verb and an adverb, but not between a verb and a preposition; so would you please explain the following construction?

"I TALKED my mother INTO letting me borrow the car."

Thank you in advance.
Hela

Re: Differ between a preposition and an adverb in a phrasal verb.

CalifJim — Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:12:24 GMT

What you call a "phrasal verb with a preposition" doesn't seem correct.
A verb-plus-preposition structure like expand on is usually called a prepositional verb.
Only a verb-plus-adverb structure like catch on is usually called a phrasal verb.
These are the terms I'll use below.

In the case of an intransitive like catch on, nothing resembling an object follows on, so it can't be a prepositional verb. It's a phrasal verb, not a prepositional verb.

It didn't take long for the hula-hoop craze to catch on in the 1950's.

The more difficult cases are when the phrasal verb (if it is one) has an object.

How do we identify ~~that~~ whether the word following the verb in a phrasal verb is an adverb or a preposition?

Let's use the example found in Radford's book Transformational Grammar.

The drunks would get off the bus. (prepositional verb)
The drunks would put off the customers. (phrasal verb)

Here are some tests:

1. If you can substitute other PPs (prepositional phrases) and get a parallel meaning, it's a prepositional verb. If you get nonsense or a new idiomatic meaning, it's a phrasal verb.
If the verb component of the phrase has a more-or-less constant meaning no matter what follows, it's a prepositional verb. If the meaning changes unpredictably, it's a phrasal verb.

The drunks would get off the bus. The drunks would get on the bus.
The drunks would put off the customers. ???The drunks would put on the customers. The drunks would put on dirty clothes.

2. If the range of complements that go with the verb phrase are similar with different prepositions, it's a prepositional verb. If the complements that make sense with the verb phrase change when you change the particle, it's a phrasal verb.

The drunks would get off the bus, off the train, off the plane.
The drunks would get on the bus, on the train, on the plane.

The drunks would put off the customers, put off the shoppers, put off the people nearby.
The drunks would put on dirty clothes, strange hats, wild-looking ties.

3. If you can move the whole structure that looks like a PP to another part of the sentence, it's a prepositional verb. If you can't move the PP, then it's not really a PP, and you have a phrasal verb.

Off the bus the drunks would get.
*Off the customers the drunks would put.

4. If you can use the PP as a fragment in the answer to a question, it's a prepositional verb; else, it's a phrasal verb.

-- Did they get off the train?
-- No, off the bus.

-- Did they put off the waitresses?
-- *No, off the customers.

5. If you can insert a verb-phrase adverb like quickly, slowly, or completely between the verb and the particle, then it's a prepositional verb; else, it's a phrasal verb.

The drunks got slowly off the bus.
*The drunks put completely off the customers.

6. If you can use and to combine the PP with another PP just like it, it's a prepositional verb; else it's a phrasal verb.

They got off the bus and off the train.
*They put off the waitresses and off the customers.

7. If you can omit the verb, keeping the particle, in an elliptical construction, it's a prepositional verb; else it's a phrasal verb.

Drunks would get off the bus, and junkies off the train.
*Drunks would put off the customers, and junkies off the waitresses.

8. If you can use a pronomial object in the PP without placing the pronoun before the particle, it's a prepositional verb; else it's a phrasal verb.

The trouble with the bus was that drunks would want to get off it every few miles.
*What worries us about the customers is whether drunks would put off them.

(The reverse works as well. When you place the pronoun before the particle, only the phrasal verb will be correct in the intended reading.)

*The trouble with the bus was that drunks would want to get it off every few miles.
What worries us about the customers is whether drunks would put them off.

CJ

Re: Prepositional Object, Complement of Preposition and other confusing stuff.

Anonymous — Tue, 17 Jan 2006 02:54:27 GMT

MichalS wrote:
Hi, I'm a new member on the forum. My name's Michal and I'm from Poland.

I've been learning descriptive grammar of Enlgish lately. Reading LONGMAN Grammar of Spoken and Written English, I've come across a couple of problems which are hard for me to overcome. I hope that you will help me with that

A lot of my doubts arose after reading a short passage about Prepositional Objects in the book mentioned above. I'll quote it so you know better what I'm refering to.

"(...) Prepositional objects and indirect objects are alike in that they require a mediating element (a preposition or a direct object). The correspondence is particularly close with indirect objects and corresponding prepositional construction:

Indirect object
He [gave] Carrie a ring.
Prepositional object
Mr Evans [gave] it [to] me.

To stress the correspondence, it may be convenient the use the term oblique object (...)"

And here are my questions:
1) Does Prepositional Object always follow a Prepositional Verb or does it appear in other contexts? And what follows a Phrasal Verb?
2) What's the difference between Prepositional Object and Complement of a Preposition and which one is called 'Oblique Object'?
3) I always thought that Indirect Object stays an object in passive but the passage above shows that it becomes Prepositional Object in this case... Or maybe I just get it wrong???

Please, answer to these questions if you can because these things are haunting me all the time.
Thank you,
Michal

Re: Phrasal Verbs

CalifJim — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 08:49:19 GMT

the issue of phrasals that are 'verb + prep' aren't an issue for me

One point I was trying to make is that (the way I look at it) there is no such thing as "a phrasal that is 'verb + prep'". If a preposition is involved, then the verb plus that preposition cannot be considered a phrasal verb.

AS LONG AS the same form in another context WOULD bring about a different meaning

No. I didn't intend to leave that impression. But, as you said, I did intend to say that 'verb + adverb' can be a phrasal verb even the combination does not have a particularly idiosyncratic meaning.

terms like 'operating as a unit' are meaningless unless there is some element which defines what makes a 'unit'

Yes. This is what I found the most interesting part of what you wrote. However, as you will see below, I don't think it is actually an 'element' that defines a unit, but a series of comparisons which can show whether or not a 'verb + particle' forms a unit.

In my opinion, you may find it useful to consider the following tests for determining whether a verb and particle combination 'operate as a unit', in spite of the fact that the phrasal verb construction is contrasted with a prepositional verb construction - the latter being the one that is not an issue for you. In any case, these are suggested by Radford in Transformational Grammar. The examples do not deal with the case where the object is moved before the particle, but starting from these, you may be able to modify the specifics so that you may be able to work out the answer to your own question by applying the general technique to examples of your own choosing.

Look out the window.
Take out the trash.

Each test below shows that "look out" (as illustrated above) does not operate 'as a unit', but "take out" does.

Movement test:
He wanted to look out the window, so out he looked.
*He wanted to take out the trash , so out he took.

Sentence Fragment test:
-- Did he look out the window?
-- No, out the peephole.
-- Did he take out the trash?
-- *No, out the old newspapers.

Adverb Distribution test:
He looked carefully out the window.
*He took carefully out the trash.

Ordinary Coordination:
He looked out the window and over the fence.
*He took out the trash and in the newspapers.

Shared Constituent Coordination:
He looked - and his sister also looked - out the window.
*He took - and his sister also took - out the trash.

Ellipsis
He looked out the window, and his sister out the peephole.
*He took out the trash, and his sister out the old newspapers.

Let me repeat that I can see that these might not strike directly at the problem you are concerned with, but I do think that they might give you an idea about how you might like to proceed in further investigations along these lines.

CJ

Phrasal prepositional verbs (three word phrasal verbs)

Riglos — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 00:50:12 GMT

Hi people!

What would you call the following verbs? Phrasal prepositional verbs, phrasal verbs, three word phrasal verbs, or just phrasals plus a preposition?

Put up with = TOLERATE.

Stand up for = DEFEND..

Catch up with = DISCOVER SOME WRONGDOING AND PUNISH IT / CAUSE PROBLEMS TO SOMEONE..

Get up to = TO DO SOMETHING, OFTEN SOMETHING THAT OTHER PEOPLE WOULD DISAPPROVE OF.

In fact, my question is: do you consider each of these verbs to be a unit or would you say they are a phrasal verb + a preposition? How would you parse these phrasals? What would you call each of the elements by which they are composed? Here's my view: VERB + ADVERBIAL PARTICLE + PREPOSITION.

In my opinion, they constitute a unit, and since they have a meaning of their own should be regarded as only one phrasal. Indeed, in The Cambridge Dictionary they appear as a unit. Besides, if we were to replace these phrasals with a word or a phrase, these would stand for all three words, namely VERB + ADVERBIAL PARTICLE + PREPOSITION, and not just for the first two. That is to say, when rephrasing, we do not need to replace the phrasal by a word or phrase and add the preposition the verb carries. The preposition "belongs" to the phrasal.

Examples:

1a. He's so moody - I don't know why she puts up with him.

1b. He's so moody - I don't know why she tolerates him.

2a. It's high time we all stood up for our rights around here.

2b. It's high time we all defended our rights around here.

3a. They had been selling stolen cars for years before the police caught up with them.

3b. They had been selling stolen cars for years before the police found out and punished them.

4a. I wonder what those two got up to yesterday.

4b. I wonder what those two did yesterday.

Now, I think they are different from other verbal constructions, such as: keep up (with) = STAY LEVEL OR EQUAL, since, in this case, we can do without the preposition "with", as this sentence shows:

5a. He started to walk faster and the children had to run to keep up.

Here, an example with the same phrasal, but including the preposition and, of course, we can't omit it in this case:

6a. Wages are failing to keep up with inflation.(All examples taken from The Cambridge Dictionary).

Now, if we were to replace this phrasal by another word or expression, the preposition would still be needed.

E.g.,

5b. He started to walk faster and the children had to run to stay level with him.

6b. Wages are failing to stay level with / stay equal to inflation.

What do you think?

Thanks a lot!

Mara.

Prepositional Object, Complement of Preposition and other confusing stuff.

MichalS — Sun, 23 Oct 2005 17:24:18 GMT

Hi, I'm a new member on the forum. My name's Michal and I'm from Poland.

I've been learning descriptive grammar of Enlgish lately. Reading LONGMAN Grammar of Spoken and Written English, I've come across a couple of problems which are hard for me to overcome. I hope that you will help me with that

A lot of my doubts arose after reading a short passage about Prepositional Objects in the book mentioned above. I'll quote it so you know better what I'm refering to.

"(...) Prepositional objects and indirect objects are alike in that they require a mediating element (a preposition or a direct object). The correspondence is particularly close with indirect objects and corresponding prepositional construction:

Indirect object
He [gave] Carrie a ring.
Prepositional object
Mr Evans [gave] it [to] me.

To stress the correspondence, it may be convenient the use the term oblique object (...)"

And here are my questions:
1) Does Prepositional Object always follow a Prepositional Verb or does it appear in other contexts? And what follows a Phrasal Verb?
2) What's the difference between Prepositional Object and Complement of a Preposition and which one is called 'Oblique Object'?
3) I always thought that Indirect Object stays an object in passive but the passage above shows that it becomes Prepositional Object in this case... Or maybe I just get it wrong???

Please, answer to these questions if you can because these things are haunting me all the time.
Thank you,
Michal