let go of

[lucy black]

Hello everyone.
Do you think "let go" is a phrasal verb, with "go" as a preposition?
Is the "of" in "let go of" used in any other situation? Does it mean anything?

[JuanTwoThree]

I'm going to jump in first and suggest that "let" +verb+ object is not so surprising.

We certainly have the pattern "let me think" "let them eat cake" etc .

We also have things like "let loose a barrage" and the admittedly a bit Shakespearian "let slip" where the word order seems to be "let slip the news that...."

There are also structures like "take hold of" and "get rid of" which might be similar to the "of" of "let go of"

I'm not at all sure that these second parts (loose, slip, hold, rid) are all definitely verbs though.

Nevertheless it's not such a big step from "let my hand go" to "let go my hand" to "let go of my hand" . It's the "of" that seems redundant.

[Andrew Patterson]

It's acting as a modal verb here because it carries deontic modality, although I'm sure others would argue that it is just an idiomatic expression.

"Let go" and "let rip" are the only instances that I knew of where "let" is followed by the bare infinitive and acts as a modal verb. I don't think we need to teach our students "let rip", though except at high levels as it is a particularly vulgar expression.

Thanks for "let loose" ond "let slip". I shall add them to the comments on my Venn diagram of English verb patterns.

[LarryLatham]

I don't think it's redundant. As Lucy pointed out at the get go, let go, at least as used in her examples, is a phrasal verb. I have never been able to understand explanations of phrasal verbs that suggest the second part of them is a preposition. The word "up" in "shut up" is not used in the same way as it is in "up the stairs." And when have you ever heard of "go" being a preposition, anyway? If you say, "let go of my hand", then, the way I see it, "of my hand" is a prepositional phrase (acting as a noun) that serves as the object of the phrasal verb, "let go."

It could be used in an entirely different way, though. "He was let go" or "he has just been let go," meaning he was fired from his job. How do we describe the phrase here? It looks to me like a passive construction, where "let go" now has become a past participle. In any case, you couldn't say that the verb was "let", and "go" was something else.

Either way, I don't think you can describe a phrase as a 'phrasal verb' and then claim only part of it is the verb, while the other part is a preposition (or even a modal, Andy), even though clearly a lot of phrasal verbs contain words which often are used as prepositions. A particular word's part-of-speech depends, overwhelmingly, on how it is used. A phrasal verb is the same as a compound verb, and it needs all of its parts to work.

Larry Latham

[metal56]

It's acting as a modal verb here because it carries deontic modality, although I'm sure others would argue that it is just an idiomatic expression.
.

That was the case originally, but now, IMO, it is lexicalised as an expression. At least, it would be a semi-modal and not a full modal if it were modal

"Let him go to the cinema" is deontic however.

"Let rip" is not always vulgar.

A: I need to tell you something that I've been holding back on.

B: So, let rip.

[JuanTwoThree]

Well, a commonsense definition of "phrasal verb" would be "a phrase that makes up a verb" and by this definition "let go of" is a phrasal verb. Or a verb phrase? But an awful lot of expressions would suddenly become "phrasal verbs" .

"Phrasal verb" is also strictly used to mean "verb plus particle" where the particle is either an adverb "put up the prices" or a preposition "look into the problem". I've never seen it suggested that a phrasal verb is no more than a verb and a preposition. On the contrary, I've even seen all verbs plus preposition EXCLUDED from even being "phrasal verbs". On which formal basis "go" is neither adverb nor preposition so "let go of" isn't a 3 part phrasal verb consisting of verb then adverb then preposition.

What's the difference between "Let go my arm" and "Let go of my arm" that makes the "of" so unredundant?

Andrew is making the point, I think, that "let" (like "make" and optionally " help" ) has some modality in that the following verb is neither to ...... nor .......ing. I too like the term semi-modal to describe how let, make, help, ought to , need, dare, used not to, etc. don't have their feet firmly in the category of either modals or full verbs.

[Andrew Patterson]

Andrew is making the point, I think, that "let" (like "make" and optionally " help" ) has some modality in that the following verb is neither to ...... nor .......ing. I too like the term semi-modal to describe how let, make, help, ought to , need, dare, used not to, etc. don't have their feet firmly in the category of either modals or full verbs.

Yes, but with the important proviso that they also carry modality. In US English, "Come" and "go" can be followed by the bare infinitive, but they do not carry modality and are not acting as modal verbs.

Are "Let", "Make" and "Help" modals, or semi-modal? Well it seems that they always carry modality. I would suggest that they could be termed transitive modals when followed by the object and bare infinitive and true modals when not. In many ways they are more modal than need and dare, which are often termed semimodals.

Where do the verbs of passive perception come into this, btw. Words like "see, hear, sense, etc can be followed by the object and bare infinitive. I feel that there is a sort of continuum here:
Passive perception implies impotence, "watch" may imply deliberate aquiecence-I can do sth, but won't - I'll watch you die; other times it can imply impotence - they made me watch him die; let implies aquiecence/permission, must implies obligation.

Impotence can't be described as deontic in the true sense, but it is an affirmation of the lack of deontic sense where when there is truly no modality, modality is simply not addressed.

[Andrew Patterson]

I just wrote that "come" and "go" don't carry modality. Now that I think about it they probably do carry deontic modality.

[fluffyhamster]

I posted something jokey about JTT's posts, but thought better of it and swiftly deleted it. Instead, I'd just like to ask if 'let go my hand' is real English, or simply meant to be an indeterminable and intermediate stage (with all sorts of dubious grammatical movement rules) between 'let my hand go' and 'let go of my hand' (and I also think 'let my hand go' sounds peculiar. Does this hand have a life of its own, perhaps a totally "separate" job to do, like "Hand" in The Addams Family?! If so, such hands should be kept well away from PCs when "Brain" is "out"! Heh, just wanting to give you guys a bonus here, a little taste of what I deleted, minus the sharp sauce. ).

Apologies if this has been answered elsewhere on this thread, but it is kind of hard to get into and digest.

[Andrew Patterson]

Either way, I don't think you can describe a phrase as a 'phrasal verb' and then claim only part of it is the verb, while the other part is a preposition (or even a modal, Andy), even though clearly a lot of phrasal verbs contain words which often are used as prepositions.

One of the most important things to consider when deciding if sth is a modal verb is whether it can exist in isolation. Modal verbs can never exist in isolation. They are either followed by the bare infinitive, or refer to the bare infinitive. One cannot answer, "Yes, I can," without knowing what it is that you can do. That is to say, modal verbs do their action to another verb, and this is what "let" is doing in "let go", "let slip", etc.

Modality is classified as deontic - trying to get a task performed or facilitating the performance of a task; epistemic or dynamic.

If one "lets" sth happen, one is facilitating the task, therefore I still contend that when "let" is followed by the bare infinitive it is acting as a modal verb, although I concede that when it is followed by an object and bare infinitive although it still carries modality, it carries its modality via an object, which means that it is not a modal in the conventional sense.

[JuanTwoThree]

"Instead, I'd just like to ask if 'let go my hand' is real English"

You had me worried for a while but a quick Google reveals "let go my hand" from Shakespeare, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Henry James, something called "the pick up guide", Adventist Today, Bram Stoker, Henry Fielding, Mark Twain, James Joyce, Ambrose Bierce, D¡ckens, Garth Brooks, Thomas Hardy, Coleridge, Bart Simpson, Engels, the title of a 1925 jazz track, Ricky Nelson, Tricky, Samuel Richardson, loads of porn (though why "hand" I can't imagine) and much much more.

[fluffyhamster]

Damn, there I was about to post my search results, and you beat me to it, JTT! (=fluffy trying to keep a straight face whilst acting all upset).

I guess I got a bit too busy checking how many porn sites that combination of words didn't appear in, or something like that...yeah, that's it, yeah!*

Not too familiar with any one you've mentioned other than Bart Simpson and Garth Brooks, JTT, are the others famous cartoon characters, popular singers, good writers etc?

* Be honest now, did you interpret that 'yeah, that's it, yeah!' as in 1) 'Yeah baby that's it yeah ooh yeah, harder baby!' OR 2) as in, 'Yeah, that's the reason why I posted late, I was caught up in some serious linguistic research, man!' ?

For those of you who don't know, or don't want to know what I'm talking about here, go watch Blue Peter or something. For those of you who do know, or think they know (heh heh! ), or are simply 'curious and would like to see I mean know more, lots lots more!', please ask Stephen Jones to supply you with a very full list of very "stimulating" websites via P.M.

[Andrew Patterson]

"Let rip" is not always vulgar.

A: I need to tell you something that I've been holding back on.

B: So, let rip.

I don't know where you got this idea, Metal. I agree that there is some sense of holding back first, but the only thing held back before letting rip is a fart.

[Harzer]

He let rip with a right and knocked her a over t.

I've got a good story about X - OK, let rip!

And how do you get those four-letter words through?

Harzer

[LarryLatham]

I've never really heard, "Let rip" until now. In my dialect of American English we always say, "Let 'er rip."

Larry Latham