"give him up something" to mean "give up something to him"

Question

This is from a Mirror article titled "Navy captain jailed over sex scandal where he passed on classified information in return for prostitutes":

A high-ranking military officer has been jailed for nearly four years for passing on classified information in return for prostitutes.

Daniel Dusek, a US Navy captain at the time, must also pay around £70,000 in damages and a fine.

Judge Janis Sammartino told a court in San Diego it was “truly unimaginable” that Dusek gave up the information to a Malaysian defence contractor for hotel stays and sex workers.

In the boldfaced portion, let's say the "Malaysian defence contractor" was previously mentioned in the article, and that a pronoun "him" is used instead:
(1) ... Dusek gave up the information to him for hotel stays and sex workers.
(2) ... Dusek gave him up the information for hotel stays and sex workers.

I think that (1) works.
Now, does (2) work as well?

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

JungKimI think that (1) works.

Correct.

JungKimdoes (2) work as well?

No. It doesn't work. "gave up" is a phrasal verb here, so the best you can do is place its direct object between its two parts 'give' and 'up', thus:

... gave the information up to him for hotel stays ...

You can't put an indirect object (him in this sentence) between the two components of a phrasal verb.

CJ

JungKim · Answer

CalifJimYou can't put an indirect object (him in this sentence) between the two components of a phrasal verb.

Is it because it's a phrasal verb that you can't put an indirect object in between?
Or is it on a case-by-case basis?

Here are two phrasal-verb examples I can think of I think can have an indirect object between a verb and a particle:
Pick me up some ice cream on your way home.
Write me up an invoice.

Are these okay?

CalifJim · Answer

JungKimIs it because it's a phrasal verb that you can't put an indirect object in between?Or is it on a case-by-case basis?

It's not exactly a case-by-case basis. You can't split a phrasal verb with an indirect object UNLESS it's a "benefactive object", i.e., a "for" indirect object. (The kind you can't split like this is called a "dative object", i.e., a "to" indirect object".)

So, in brief, you can only split up a phrasal verb to insert an indirect object if it's a "for" indirect object, not if it's a "to" indirect object.

These are all right when you split them with the indirect object.
Pick up some ice cream for me. (not 'to me') > Pick me up ...
Write up an invoice for me. (not 'to me') > Write me up ...

Note that there are extremely few phrasal verbs that take a dative object, so you won't run into the problem presented in your original post very often. The only ones that I can think of have "back", and in these rare cases you can split the phrasal verb (although it doesn't always sound great). These are just about the only verbs you can do this with:

Give me back the money I lent you.
Could you please bring us back a few sandwiches for lunch?
Write him back a letter saying that we're not interested in that product.

CJ

Clive · Answer

To me, 'gave up' is not an appropriate verb phrase here. It suggests coercion. See the dictionary definition below, which speaks of surrender and forced.

I would just say . . . Dusek gave the information . . .
He wasn't tortured or under other duress.

Definition of give up

1 : to yield control or possession of : https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/surrender <forced to give up his job>

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/give%20up

"give him up something" to mean "give up something to him"

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Definition of give up

Related Questions