Questions about phrasal verbs

Question

Hi everybody,Not so long ago I started reading Cambridge Grammar Of English - A Comprehensive Guide (hereafter referred to as CGE):http://www.cambridge.org/us/esl/catalog/subject/project/pricing/isbn/item1155402/?site_locale=en_USAnd I tried learn everything about phrasal verbs and prepositional verbs but some things are still unclear to me.1. Monolingual Dictionaries use a sign (: &lt;-&gt;) to indicate that the particular phrasal verbs has two possible pattern:A: the particle goes before the objectB: the particle goes after the objectThe book English Phrasal Verbs In Use (EPViU) states that the particle goes after the object if that is a pronoun.The book CGE states that if the direct object is a personal noun, the pronoun always comes before the particle.What is the truth? Is it pronoun or personal pronoun?------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 2.A: There are phrasal verbs which requires that the particle goes before the object of the verb. (based on EPViU)B: There are phrasal verbs which requires that the particle goes after the object of the verb. (based on EPViU)But what do I have to do if I bump into a phrasal verb which has pattern 2/A and I have to use a pronoun? It would be inappropriate (based on the above-mentioned rule(s) which is/(are) in connection with pronouns). Is it a possible case at all?------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 3. CGE categorize these compound verbs (under the label multi-word verbs) as:phrasal verbstransitiveintransitiveprepositional verbsphrasal-prepositional verbsI saw come across as phrasal verb in Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary (OALD)but as prepositional verb in CGEOALD definition: to meet or find sb/sth by chanceExample: I came across children sleeping under bridges.CGE definition: foundExample: You said you'd already come across that sort of stuff in the library.OALD version shows that it has only one possible pattern: the particle goes before the object. Should I consider it as a prepositional verb (because it has such a patern)? Based on a rule in CGE, it seems logical:Prepositional verbs follow different rules from phrasal verbs. The direct object (in green in the examples below) must follow the preposition, even if it is a pronoun:It would resolve the problem mentioned in 2.4. How should I 'look for' / 'learn' prepositional verbs if these are not mentioned in dictionaries? There are patterns but those don't cover all the possibilities. Just to mention one example (If it is a prepositional use):I looked up the chimney to see if the cat was there.This 'up' is not mentioned in dictionaries. This is neither among the phrasal verb meanings nor at the patterns at the beginning. Should I rely on my intuitions (i.e. whether it makes sense or not)? I found some in CGE but those don't cover all the possibilities.  In this form:preposition: acrossverbs: come, cut, run, stumblepreposition: afterverbs: ask, inquire, look, take5. I hope you will see through this unorganized flood of data.Question: As far as I know, see through doesn't suit my previous sentence. I'm looking for a phrasal/prepositional verb which is good to the following meaning: to be able to understand the text despite being unorganizedThanks for your answer(s) in advance.

GPY · Accepted Answer

1.
"give up something" is OK, yet "give up it" is not
"hand out these" is OK, yet "hand out it" is not
"scare off others" is OK, yet "scare off him" is not
etc.

So there seem to plenty of examples where the pattern is not possible with personal pronouns and yet is possible with other types of pronoun. Is this the sort of thing you were looking for?

Hole One a New See · Answer

Thank you

Yes, it answers my first question partially. My question is that:

Are there cases when there are two possible patterns and non-personal pronouns can be only after the object? I ask this because the 2 definition doesn't state exactly the same. One of them say 'pronoun'. The other one say 'personal pronoun'. The latter is a narrower set.

These are the rules (loosely quoted from 2 different sources):

1. The book English Phrasal Verbs In Use (EPViU) states that the particle goes after the object if that is a pronoun.

2. The book CGE states that if the direct object is a personal noun, the pronoun always comes before the particle.

Having read your answer, it became clear that the first definition can't be completely true (because something, these, others went after the object). My question is that:

Can be the second definition completely true? In your examples the problematic cases were always personal pronouns (it, him). So far so good.

Thanks for your answer in advance.

GPY · Answer

There are many combinations often termed "phrasal verbs" that allow a personal pronoun at end. For example, "deal with it", "run into him", etc. However, I guess the book's position is that these are always prepositions and not particles. At the moment, I can't think of any cases that allow "verb + noun/pronoun + particle" and also allow "verb + particle + personal pronoun".

Hole One a New See · Answer

Thank you, GPY

Is the following possible

verb + noun/pronoun (personal + some other type) + particle
and also verb + particle + noun

?

Here I try to put emphasis on some other type.

In other words: Is there any non-personal pronoun that can go only before particle in some cases?

Based on definitions of CGE, only these are possible (in connection with pronouns):

- if it is a personal pronoun then it always goes before the particle (if it is a phrasal verb)
- if it is a personal pronoun then it always goes after the particle (if it is a prepositional verb)
- if it is a non-personal pronoun then it ????? ?????? (if it is a phrasal verb)
- if it is a non-personal pronoun then it always goes after the particle (if it is a prepositional verb)

The two books differs at the third case.

CGE states that non-personal pronoun can be in either position (transitive phrasal verb, 2 possible patterns)
English Phrasal Verbs In Use states that non-personal pronoun always goes before the particle (transitive phrasal verb, 2 possible patterns)

Both books are Cambridge type books. CGE seems a little bit better (more exact) if we deal with grammar issues.
Which book says the truth?

Thanks for your answer in advance.

Fivejedjon · Answer

The truth is that there is very little agreement among writers about what constitutes a phrasal verb. What one grammar/dictionary calls a phrasal verb, another might call a prepositional verb, a third a multi-word verb and a fourth a verb + prepostion. Some use the words 'preposition' and 'adverb', others the word 'particle'.

It is therefore very difficult indeed to compare what two writers claim, because they are using the terminology in different ways..

Hole One a New See · Answer

Thank you, fivejedjon

I try to approach my original first question in other way.

Could you mention an example when you use a non-prepositional pronoun and you can put it only before the particle?

If I knew the answer (i.e. there is example for this or not) that would help me.

I found these non-prepositional pronouns:

all, another, any, anybody, anyone, both, certain, each, either, enough, everybody, everyone, everything, everywhere, few, the former, half, itself, least, less, little, lot, many, more, most, much, myself, neither, nobody, none, nothing, one, oneself, other, own, plenty, same, several, some, somebody, someone, someplace, something, such, that, themself, themselves, this, what, whatever, when, which, whichever, who, whoever, whom, whomever, whose, anywhere, somewhere, umpteen, each other, no one, one another, a couple

For example if I could say:

I will put nothing on. I will be naked.
and couldn't say: I will put on nothing. I will be naked

that would be an example for this.

Thanks for your answer in advance

CalifJim · Answer

Hole One a New SeeI found these non-prepositional pronouns: all, another, any, anybody, anyone, ...

I've never heard of a non-prepositional pronoun.

You can reduce your list by removing all those that can't be used as objects, by the way, e.g., anywhere.

CJ

GPY · Answer

Hole One a New Seenon-prepositional pronoun

I assume that you mean "non-personal pronoun"? If so, "myself" and "oneself" shouldn't be in the list. (These would furnish examples such as "calm myself down" / "calm down myself", the latter of which is not possible in the same transitive sense of "calm down".)

As I'm sure you will realise, checking all those words against the myriad phrasal verbs is a big task. The first example of what you might be looking for that occurred to me is:

"leave something on" -- correct
"leave on something" -- incorrect

"leave on" in the sense of leave running or in an operational state.

CalifJim · Answer

GPY"leave something on" -- correct "leave on something" -- incorrect

Do you think this one qualifies as another?

throw this out -- correct
throw out this -- incorrect

CJ

GPY · Answer

CalifJimDo you think this one qualifies as another?throw this out -- correctthrow out this -- incorrect

It seems marginal to me. Certainly, I would say that "throw out this" is OK. However, it has also occurred to me that some of the other "forbidden" cases may actually be possible when the object is emphasised. For example, "leave on something", and possibly even "scare off him", e.g. not her (which was an original "impossible" example of mine).

Questions about phrasal verbs

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions