kvinchucas
Joined: 16 Dec 2005
Posts: 7
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:20 pm Post subject: phrasal verbs decoded, the position of the object/accuastiv |
 |
|
The various forms of phrasal verbs
Phrasal verbs can be transitive or intransitive, separable or inseparable.
The object or accusative can in the cases of separable phrasal verbs be placed before or after the particle.
With inseparable phrases, the object/accusative is fixed and its position either before or after the particle cannot be changed by the speaker.
Our analysis has shown that the position of the object/accusative assigns an importance, diminished importance, or a complete lack of importance from the speakers point of view.
If the particle is followed by the object/accusative then the importance is clearly shown.
If the object/accusative precedes the particle it has a diminished or lack of importance.
If the object/accusative can go before or after the particle, as is the case in separable phrases, then the importance assigned to it is decided by position the speaker places it.
The separable phrases are commonly described as having the same meaning, no matter where the object/accusative is placed, either before or after the particle and in general this may be true, however there is a difference, so small as to be unnoticed.
There nevertheless occasions when the object/accusative sounds to be misplaced to the ears of a native speaker.
There are in many phrases a word order that is generally accepted to be the norm, and a diversion from this order would immediately be noticed by a native speaker and not necessarily by a non-native.
For example, the colours of the Union Jack (the British national flag), are red, white and blue. If somebody described them as blue red and white, they are technically correct, but the native speaker would sense an uncomfortable feeling that the speaker was not quite right, or had spoken incorrectly.
There are many example of this: bacon and eggs (correct) eggs and bacon (uncomfortable). Black and white films (correct) white and black films (uncomfortable). Cup and saucer (correct) saucer and cup (uncomfortable).
There is nothing in English grammar that rules the order of these words and to a non-native speaker the fact that all the information is there, is all that matters, but the uncomfortable sensation felt by the native demonstrates that something very subtle is going on.
The same applies to the separable phrasal verbs. In most instances the subtle difference is unnoticed even by the native, yet in speaking the word order used demonstrates a particular importance or diminished importance that has subconsciously been attached by the speaker.
For example. �that man is chatting my girl-friend up�, in this phrase, I have given a diminished importance to my �girl-friend� and there is a subtle sense of indifference to the situation. Whereas �that man is chatting up my girl-friend�, in this phrase �my girl-friend� is after the particle and is subtly stressed. �My girl-friend� is shown to have more importance in this phrase and there is an implied sense of indignation as opposed to indifference.
When we use a pronoun instead of naming the object/accusative, the pronoun always goes before the particle. The reason being that once the object has been named the attached importance to the person or thing is slightly diminished, but the importance can be restated by the repetition of the name.
For example, �Is your girl-friend called Sarah?� �Yes why?� �Well, that man is chatting her up �. �Bloody hell, you�re right, he�s chatting up my Sarah�.
Here the indignation is obvious because of the naming of the girl a second time. If the phrase was �yes he�s chatting her up� the indignation felt by the speaker and heard by the listener would depend on the inflection of the voice, whereas in �my Sarah�, there is no doubt how the speaker feels. |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
