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

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: please parse this sentence

Mister Micawber — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 03:59:45 GMT

1.-- I would guess that there are several ways to approach this; here's mine:

I - Subject

got - verb

used - predicate adjective

to - preposition

your - possessive adjective

being - gerund (object of preposition)

here - noun complement

2. Is 'used to' a prepositional verb?-- No, it is an adjectival structure; get is an informal copular verb.

3. How does 'here', which is an adverb, modify 'being', which is a gerund (noun)?-- Gerunds keep some of their verbal characteristics, including supporting objects or complements: Being a man is always difficult; Eating too many hamburgers may kill you.

4. What if 'your' was replaced with 'you', would the object of 'to' be a fused participle of you and being?-- You replaces your in casual English. I suppose that then you would be the object of the preposition and being here would be an object complement. This structure (without the possessive) is indeed sometimes called a fused participle.

please parse this sentence

Anonymous — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:39:26 GMT

I got used to your being here.

1. How would this sentence be parsed?

2. Is 'used to' a prepositional verb?

3. How does 'here', which is an adverb, modify 'being', which is a gerund (noun)?

4. What if 'your' was replaced with 'you', would the obect of 'to' be a fused participle of you and being?

Thank you in advance,

Donna

Re: Can a prepositional phrase function as a noun?

Mister Micawber — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:32:16 GMT

what is the role (or roles) of the word "about"? Clearly, it's part of the prepositional verb "told about". But is it also (and simultaneously) considered to be a separate entity - a preposition?

Given the sentence in isolation (i.e. outside this discussion), I'm sure we would call 'about the facts' a prepositional phrase with the preposition 'about' at its head. Some linguists may prefer to focus on 'tell about' + verb object-- I really don't know. It would be unwise, I think, to consider both simultaneously.

Re: Can a prepositional phrase function as a noun?

Anonymous — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 06:54:29 GMT

Thanks; that explanation was very informative.

There is one point I'm still unclear about. In the sentence "I told her about the facts," what is the role (or roles) of the word "about"? Clearly, it's part of the prepositional verb "told about". But is it also (and simultaneously) considered to be a separate entity - a preposition?

I ask this because it is my understanding that a prepositional complement cannot exist without a preposition. Since we have a prepositional complement ("the facts"), it would seem that we must also have a preposition ("about").

Does that make any sense?

Thanks again in advance!

Re: Can a prepositional phrase function as a noun?

Mister Micawber — Fri, 23 Nov 2007 03:23:56 GMT

Tell about is one of the 'prepositional verbs', where the prepositional phrase is considered an alternative 'paraphrase' of the direct object .

I told her (IO) the facts (DO)
I told the facts (DO) to her (prepositional complement)
I told her (IO) about the facts (prepostional complement)

I understand your reasoning, but this is the way it is explained in CGEL. Does that help?

Re: Is "mention about" wrong?

CalifJim — Tue, 23 Oct 2007 06:08:24 GMT

I checked the first couple of pages of Google hits for "mention about" and "discuss about" and most of them are totally wrong. Apparently it is a common mistake.

However, note that you will get hits on these combinations which are correct because mention (or discuss) goes in one phrase or clause and about goes in another.

There are many things to discuss | about this new software.
= There are many things about this new software to discuss.
You are discussing things (about the software), not 'discussing about' the software.

There is something I forgot to mention | about the restaurant.
= There is something about the restaurant that I forgot to mention.
You are mentioning something (that you forgot), not 'mentioning about' the restaurant.

Further, you will get hits where mention is not even a verb, but a noun.

The magazine gave a nice mention about the winner of the Nobel Prize.
This is not the act of 'mentioning about' the winner. This is saying something nice about the winner.

discuss about and mention about as prepositional verbs, followed by the object indicating what was discussed or mentioned, are incorrect.

CJ

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: all the way home

CalifJim — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 18:13:41 GMT

all the way home is an adverbial phrase indicating during/along the entire trip/path/way to their home. It is a curious mix of adverb of place (path, actually) and adverb of time (period, actually). Individually, all is an adverb of degree (how much of the way?), the way is an article and noun used adverbially, and home is a noun used adverbially (to where?).

There was a fly in my soup. (A fly was in my soup.) I [saw / realized / understood] that this was a fact (was true). Hence, I saw that (there was a fly in my soup). You can leave out the complementizer that: I saw there was a fly in my soup.

to get to in to get to school is not a phrasal verb. It's a prepositional verb. to get to (school) = to go to and successfully arrive at (school). (to get) (to school), not (to get to) (school).

By the way, phrasal verbs consisting of a verb and to are very rare.

Does that help?

CJ

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