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

Re: Any dictionary - Exception to the rule?

Kooyeen — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 18:02:12 GMT

Thank you very much, Jim and Yankee.

CalifJim wrote:
If I won't shoot at any soldier, I won't kill any soldiers.
Just my point. In both cases I would use the plural because both are complements, not adjuncts. That's why I said complement rather than object. shoot at is a prepositional verb with complement soldier. (I think you meant If I don't shoot ...) The conditional may also be complicating things.

Yes, I think that really makes sense, I should have used "soldiers" in both cases. I think it's really a matter of complements or objects of the verb. I feel a little more confident now!

Thank you again.

Re: Any dictionary - Exception to the rule?

CalifJim — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 05:58:27 GMT

If I won't shoot at any soldier, I won't kill any soldiers.

Just my point. In both cases I would use the plural because both are complements, not adjuncts. That's why I said complement rather than object. shoot at is a prepositional verb with complement soldier. (I think you meant If I don't shoot ...) The conditional may also be complicating things.

That aside, more problems are on the horizon with Yankee's examples, in which some abstract nouns are used in the singular (excuse, reason).

The whole problem may boil down to whether one or more than one of the thing in question is usually considered usual or normal in the context of the sentence.

Oh, how awful! He doesn't have any ears!
Oh, how awful! He doesn't have any nose! (not noses.)

CJ

Re: I have a question about phrasal verbs too

Mister Micawber — Mon, 08 Nov 2004 14:10:38 GMT

I guess if you don't know the verb at all, you're stuck, Lana. There are no prescriptive rules, only guidelines. Greenbaum & Quirk list five differences:

(1) The particle of a prepositional verb must precede the object, but the particle of a phrasal verb can either precede or follow the d.o.

(2) When the object is a personal pronoun, it follows the particle of a prepositonal verb but precedes that of a phrasal verb.

(3) An adverb adjunct can often be inserted between verb and particle of a prepositional verb, but not in the case of a phrasal.

(4) The particle of a phrasal cannot precede a relative pronoun or wh-interrogative.

(5) The particle of a phrasal is normally stressed; that of the prepositional normally unstressed.

Try 'em out, let me know how you like 'em.

Re: Prepositional phrases??

miriam — Fri, 30 Jul 2004 18:58:46 GMT

Hi again, Lupa.

You don't seem to have any problems with it! You got it right.

You're right that in a), "turn on" is a transitive phrasal verb; the adverbial particle "belongs" to the verb, so to speak.
In b), on the other hand, you have an intransitive verb followed by a prepositional phrase ("on a spit"), which is not a direct object but an adverbial adjunct of place.
What is an object, as you said, is "a spit"; but it isn't a direct object, it is the object of the preposition, also called "oblique object", and it has nothing to do with direct objects in this case (the verb "turn" is intransitive here).

I'm not sure what exactly you're being asked in #2, but let's give it a try.

- "Verb + preposition" can be either a "prepositional verb" (like "look at"), or simply a verb followed by a preposition that we may or may not associate with the verb so easily as we do "at" with "look" ("sit" on a chair, under a table, in an armchair, beside/behind/infront of me, etc).
Prepositional verbs are considered to be always transitive, that is, they take an object. And we cannot split them (we cannot place the object between the verb and the preposition).
"Look at me!" ("me" is the object)
Other prepositional verbs: believe in, look after, cope with.

There are people, however, who will analyse a sentence that contains a prepositional verb in a different way. They will separate the preposition from the verb:
"Look at me!" would be:
look: main verb
at me: prepositional phrase functioning as an adverbial.
As far as I know, though, this is not a very popular analysis.

----------------------------------------
I'm afraid I'm having problems here. I lost my connection 4 times in less than half an hour so it's taking me forever to answer you!
I'll post this now before I get cut off again so that you can have at least a partial answer. If I can stay online, I'll make another post in a short while.

Miriam