Hello everyone,
Some time ago I read of a method to teach phrasal verbs that focused on the preposition, rather than on the verb. The method encouraged students to 'collect' phrasal verbs in a notebook, with each page in the notebook headed by a particular preposition. The idea is that the student begins to get a sense of the 'meaning' of the preposition. (For example, when the student finds 'to tear up a contract', 'to open up a gift' and 'to blow up a bomb' he or she will see that 'up' sometimes gives the idea of completeness to the verb).
What is your opinion of this? Does it work? Does anyone know of any exercises based on this idea?
Teaching Phrasal Verbs
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:59 pm
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
This is sth that I need to develop a little myself and I hope that this discussion will produce some good ideas for my own teaching.
I would alter what you say, slightly to "particle" as adverbs can also be the second element in a verb.
In theory, one could classify phrasal verbs according to:
1) the initial verb
2) the particle(s)
Each approach has its own pros and cons.
It is usually possible to work out what sb means if they miss the particles in a phrasal verb but not knowing the verb is a different matter.
Intuitively, I would have thought it best to mainly present delexical phrasal verbs by initial verb and other phrasal verbs mainly by particle. However, since approaching learning from different directions tends to reinforce learning, I think one should do both in both cases.
One problem springs to mind with classifying by particle and that is 3 part phrasal verbs.
In theory, one could:
1) list verbs followed by both particles together
2) List verbs by one or other of the particles.
One could consider the preposition as the most important element, or the adverb as the most important element.
As for my own teaching, I find that the metaphore of a journey can be used to explain a lot of phrasal verbs (and other idomatic language too.)
The classic examples of this approach are "come up against a problem" and "steer clear" of sth. Visualise yourself on a journey and all becomes clear.
Of course the level of idiomaticity varies a lot in phrasal verbs as does their meaning. Jokes based on phrasal verbs could be useful here to get the students thinking about literal vs metaphorical meanings (or just different meanings) and to inject a little humour into the lesson:
A man walked into a bar and said, "Ouch!"
"I picked up a little Italian on holiday... she was a very nice girl."
If you know any more, please let me know.
For lower level students, the exercise would be in analysing why the joke was funny (OK, at least why the joke was a joke) understanding at higher levels is indicated by response - whether they smiled laughed or groaned.
I've also just been given a book entitled "Mnemonic devices in language learning" by Patycja Marta Kamińska. Which has quite a lot of material on learning phrasal verbs.
I would alter what you say, slightly to "particle" as adverbs can also be the second element in a verb.
In theory, one could classify phrasal verbs according to:
1) the initial verb
2) the particle(s)
Each approach has its own pros and cons.
It is usually possible to work out what sb means if they miss the particles in a phrasal verb but not knowing the verb is a different matter.
Intuitively, I would have thought it best to mainly present delexical phrasal verbs by initial verb and other phrasal verbs mainly by particle. However, since approaching learning from different directions tends to reinforce learning, I think one should do both in both cases.
One problem springs to mind with classifying by particle and that is 3 part phrasal verbs.
In theory, one could:
1) list verbs followed by both particles together
2) List verbs by one or other of the particles.
One could consider the preposition as the most important element, or the adverb as the most important element.
As for my own teaching, I find that the metaphore of a journey can be used to explain a lot of phrasal verbs (and other idomatic language too.)
The classic examples of this approach are "come up against a problem" and "steer clear" of sth. Visualise yourself on a journey and all becomes clear.
Of course the level of idiomaticity varies a lot in phrasal verbs as does their meaning. Jokes based on phrasal verbs could be useful here to get the students thinking about literal vs metaphorical meanings (or just different meanings) and to inject a little humour into the lesson:
A man walked into a bar and said, "Ouch!"
"I picked up a little Italian on holiday... she was a very nice girl."
If you know any more, please let me know.
For lower level students, the exercise would be in analysing why the joke was funny (OK, at least why the joke was a joke) understanding at higher levels is indicated by response - whether they smiled laughed or groaned.
I've also just been given a book entitled "Mnemonic devices in language learning" by Patycja Marta Kamińska. Which has quite a lot of material on learning phrasal verbs.
Hi Andrew,
Thanks for your response. Good point about verbs with two prepositions, I hadn't thought about that.
I've been thinking about using jokes to teach phrasal verbs, too. I think the master of this kind of joke was Tommy Cooper (example : Police arrested two men yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. ). Just type 'Tommy Cooper Jokes' into a search engine and you'll find plenty.
Now, what about phrasal verb exercises? The problem is that many books have gap-fill type exercises that only seem to test a student's ability to deduce by elimination. Has anyone seen anything more innovative than that?
Thanks for your response. Good point about verbs with two prepositions, I hadn't thought about that.
I've been thinking about using jokes to teach phrasal verbs, too. I think the master of this kind of joke was Tommy Cooper (example : Police arrested two men yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. ). Just type 'Tommy Cooper Jokes' into a search engine and you'll find plenty.
Now, what about phrasal verb exercises? The problem is that many books have gap-fill type exercises that only seem to test a student's ability to deduce by elimination. Has anyone seen anything more innovative than that?
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:59 pm
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
Strider wrote:
1. a verb+adverb
2. a verb+preposition
3. a verb +adverb+preposition (and in that order.)
Strider, no verbs have two prepositions. A phrasal verb can be:Thanks for your response. Good point about verbs with two prepositions, I hadn't thought about that.
1. a verb+adverb
2. a verb+preposition
3. a verb +adverb+preposition (and in that order.)
Thanks for reminding me of that joke, it's pitched perfectly for the classroom. Most of Cooper's material was written by Tim Vine, it seems. Great commedian, Cooper, but he was said to have been an absolute git in real life. I thought that Les Dawson could be a good source too but I can't find any of his stuff on the net other than a few of his mother-in-law jokes.I've been thinking about using jokes to teach phrasal verbs, too. I think the master of this kind of joke was Tommy Cooper (example : Police arrested two men yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. ). Just type 'Tommy Cooper Jokes' into a search engine and you'll find plenty.
I think I can point you in the right direction, English teaching Gazette or English teaching Professional (can't remeber which) mentioned sth about Fred Halliday having written a lot about this. I haven't read the source material, but if anyone has, maybe they could post it here.Now, what about phrasal verb exercises? The problem is that many books have gap-fill type exercises that only seem to test a student's ability to deduce by elimination. Has anyone seen anything more innovative than that?