5.2.7 Phrasal verbs
A set of verbs which demonstrate some unique properties are known as phrasal verbs. These appear with what looks to be a preposition, traditionally referred to as a particle, following them:
| (122) | a | the plane took off |
| b | the patient came to | |
| c | time ran out |
One obvious fact about these verbs is that their meaning is usually idiomatic in that it is not straightforwardly computed from the meaning of the verb and the meaning of the preposition combined. To take off, for example, means ‘to become airborne’ and to come to means ‘to become conscious’.
These verbs do not behave like those which take a PP complement and the two types of verb can be distinguished in a number of ways:
| (123) | a | he took off his hat | he took his hat off |
| b | he lived in a hut | *he lived a hut in | |
| (124) | a | in this hut, he lived for ten years | |
| b | *off this hat, he took in an instant | ||
| (125) | a | he lived right near a mountain | |
| b | *he took right off his hat | ||
| (126) | a | he lived near the forest and next to a river | |
| b | *he took off his hat and off his coat | ||
Much of this evidence seems to suggest that the preposition does not act as the head of a preposition phrase, but forms a unit with the verb. For example, while (124a) shows that the PP complement of a verb can be moved to the front of the clause, it seems that the particle plus the following DP cannot be moved (124b), indicating that it is perhaps not a constituent. Moreover, as we have seen in (125a) a PP can be modified by an adverb like right, but this is not possible for the particle followed by a DP (125b). Finally, we can coordinate a PP complement with another PP (126a), but we cannot coordinate the particle plus the following DP with a PP, indicating that the particle does not form a PP with the following DP. For this reason, it is often claimed that the particle forms a syntactic unit with the verb, perhaps being adjoined to it:
| (127) |
However, it should also be observed that the verb and the particle do not seem to behave like a complex verb and in a number of ways, the verb is still independent of the particle, which would not be expected if (127) were the correct analysis. For one thing, the verb bears all inflections, and these are not stuck onto the end of the phrasal verb itself:
| (128) | a | faded out | *fade outed |
| b | fading out | *fade outing | |
| c | fades out | *fade outs |
From the other side of things, the particle seems independent of the verb, in that it can move separately from the verb, as already pointed out in (123), but demonstrated again here:
| (129) | a | he looked up the word | he looked the word up |
| b | she held up the bank | she held the bank up | |
| c | they put off the meeting | they put the meeting off |
A final problem for (127) is that it tends to go against the general pattern of compounding in English. When a complex head is formed from two heads by adjoining one to the other, it is generally the case that the head of the compound is the leftmost element. This is true in compound nouns and adjectives, but also with verbs:
| (130) | a | armchair, milk jug, family film, white lie, etc. |
| b | dark brown, ice cold, rock hard, squeaky clean, etc. | |
| c | outdo, undercut, overspend, over wrap, dry clean, etc. |
In all these cases of compounding, the rightmost element provides the compound with its syntactic and semantic properties. So an armchair is a kind of chair not a kind of arm and a white lie is a noun not an adjective.
We might assume that these compounds are formed by adjoining the modifying element to the left of the head:
| (131) |
This is clearly the opposite of the phrasal verb, with the preceding verb being taken as the head:
| (132) |
When the particle is separated from the verb by an object, it seems to have properties that it cannot have when it precedes the object. For example, we have seen that, unlike a preposition, the particle cannot be modified by an adverb in (125b). However, in the post-object position it can be modified by an adverb:
| (133) | a | *he took right off his hat |
| b | he took his hat right off |
Moreover, when the particle is behind the object, it cannot have an object of its own, but it can when it follows the object:
| (134) | a | *enough to put off his food the dog |
| b | enough to put the dog off his food |
Obviously, this is a very unique kind of construction with many mysterious properties. Let us see if we can solve at least some of these mysteries. When a phrasal verb has an object, this object is often a theme and hence we would expect it to go in a specifier position of the thematic verb. This verb should follow its specifier, leaving the complement position available for a PP complement. This works fine for an example such as (134b):
| (135) |
In this structure, presumably the main verb will move to support the light verb and the right word order will be achieved. It would seem reasonable to assume that the particle construction with the particle following the object is derived in exactly the same way, with the preposition heading a PP which has no other content:
| (136) |
Again the verb will move to the light verb position and the word order is predicted. The fact that the particle heads a PP accounts for its ability to be modified by an adverb, as in (133b).
The tricky part is to account for the pre-object particle. If we assume that (136) is the basic structure of the construction, then we might analyse the pre-object particle construction as derived by a movement of the preposition head to the verb, so that when the verb moves to the light verb position, the preposition is taken along with it:
| (137) | a | |
| b |
Note that the structure that is formed by the movement of the particle is the same as the one that is traditionally assumed to be the basic structure for a phrasal verb, with the preposition adjoined to the verb. Of course this means that the preposition does not form a PP with the following DP in the specifier of the lower VP and hence we account for why it does not behave like a PP complement, which would have an entirely different structure (see (136) for example).
The question needs to be addressed as to why the movement of the preposition is allowed and when it is not. Obviously not every verb that has a PP complement allows this movement, and indeed those verbs which do allow it do not allow it in all circumstances:
| (138) | a | they put the meeting off | they put off the meeting |
| b | he put the book on the shelf | *he put on the book the shelf | |
| c | they put the meeting right off | *they put off the meeting right |
It seems that it is only when the verb has a PP complement which consists only of a prepositional head that the preposition is allowed to move out of the PP. If the preposition itself has a complement, or if it is modified, then it is not allowed to move. It is not entirely clear why this should be, as other heads can move out of their own phrases when there are other elements in other positions within them. For example, we have seen many cases of a verb moving out of the VP when its specifier or complement are filled by its arguments. Another observation from (138) might help to shed some light on the problem. Note that when the verb has a simple PP complement, it has a different interpretation: to put something off does not mean the same as to put something somewhere. Similarly, put down, put on, put back, put over, etc. all have somewhat idiosyncratic meanings that are not simply related to the meaning of put as a verb of placement. So, put down can mean ‘to kill’ (of animals), put on ‘to fake’, put back ‘to delay’ and put over ‘to convey’. This might suggest that it is not the same verb we are looking at in all these cases and especially they are not the same verb as in (138b). If this is true then it could be that the ability of the preposition to move might be lexically restricted by the verb: some verbs allow it, others do not. Of course, this still does not explain why those that do allow the preposition to move only take ‘simple’ PP complements, which contain just the preposition and so we cannot be said to have solved all the mysteries of phrasal verbs here. In fact we have probably only just scratched the surface and it has to be admitted that phrasal verbs present many very difficult problems for analysis under any set of assumptions. We will therefore leave this topic at this point and be content with the meagre understanding of them that we have gained.