This master's thesis deals with the question how to deal with particles in phrasal verbs which are dealt with in different way. In the course of this work, it becomes obvious that particles are hybrids between prepositions and spatio-locative adverbs. But a clear assignment to one of the two categories is almost impossible as these elements provide a historically based interdependency between syntax and semantics.
Starting from this perspective, the major claim is that the particles, leaving their literal domain,lose their lexical autonomy as they attach to the verbal head. Literal particles, like prepositions, are syntactically and semantically autonomous. Therefore, they may be treated as a subclass of the category preposition. This is not possible with particles in phrasal verbs which in facts are grammaticalized. This aspect seems to be neglected by the generative grammarians who concentrate on the explanation of particle movement. The questions which are dealt with are, above all, how to account for the particle movement and if the particle moves away from the verbal basis, which constituent then does assign the Case to the object noun phrase.
Second aim of this paper is to risk attempt to provide some reason for the syntax-semantic interface within directional particles. It will be observed that today’s directional prepositions and adverbial particles are related in so far as they originate in phrasal adverbs, formerly separable prefixes (Hiltunen 1983) which, owing to their concrete meaning and strong stress, have survived the changes.
Thus, due to their favourable inherent semantics, adverbial particles in phrasal verbs have assumed three different forms and functions driven by the principle of split or divergence as proposed by Hopper (1991). Thereof, the various forms and functions of the adverbial particle have developed. In their spatio-directional meaning, the prepositions function as adverbs and prepositions. In their adverbial function, the directional particles have undergone second stage of divergence, namely they retain their adverbial function whereas in non-locative contexts, they undergo at least partial bleaching so as to grammaticalize as aspect markers as early as in the Middle English period.
This is the reason why particles in phrasal verbs are semi-dependent elements and oscillate between prepositions and adverbs and fail to be assigned to one clear-cut category.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 A Brief Introduction to Phrasal Verbs
2.1 Phrasal Verbs: The Definition of Phrasal Verbs
2.2 Syntactic peculiarities
3 Lexical status of particles in VPCs
3.1 Current Debate and Status quo
3.2 Towards A Solution to the Categorial Problem
3.2.1 Prepositions as Intransitive Prepositions
3.2.2 Adverbial Particles as a Separate Category
4 Syntax of Verb Particle Constructions
4.1 Particle Movement in Generative Grammar
4.1.1 Johnson (1991):Particle Verbs as Complex Heads
4.2 Small Clause Analysis in Particle Verbs
4.2.1 Elenbaas (2006): Lexical Decomposition Analysis in Particle Verbs
5 Diachronic Perspective of Phrasal Verbs
5.1 Grammaticalization and its mechanisms
5.2 A Brief Aside to the History of Phrasal Verbs
5.2.1 From Inseparable Prefix to Particle
5.2.2 Word order SOV > SVO
5.3 Semantic Change in the Particles in VPCs: Literal >Abstract
5.3.1 Aspect and S
5.3.2 Metaphorisation in Phrasal Verbs: Between Loss and Gain
6 Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This thesis examines the linguistic nature of particles in English Phrasal Verbs, specifically focusing on their challenging lexical status, syntactic behavior, and historical development within the X'-syntax framework.
- The syntactic and semantic interdependency of verb-particle constructions.
- The categorization of particles and their resistance to traditional parts-of-speech classification.
- Generative grammar approaches, including Complex Head and Small Clause analyses.
- The diachronic shift from inseparable prefixes to independent post-verbal particles due to word-order changes (SOV to SVO).
Excerpt from the Book
4.1.1 Johnson (1991):Particle Verbs as Complex Heads
In his analysis, Johnson (1991) studies complications which are bound to word-order alternations within in complex verbal structures, especially in verb-particle constructions for the reasons mentioned above. Johnson (1991) starts from the assumption that to receive the accusative case by the verb, the nouns must precede other verbal complements, XPs. To achieve this, main verbs in English have to move out of their VP. The nominal complements have the choice either to move to the specifier positions of the VP or to an abstract µ-head as the Case marking head to the object NPs (cf. Johnson 1991:577).
The driving mechanism is the NP-First principle which requires that in order not to violate the Case-Filter, the nominal complements to the VP are given the highest priority to other XPs (Johnson 1991:ibid.).
(28) Case Filter: “*NP if NP has phonetic content and has no case” (Ouhalla 1999:186)
Because the nominal objects do not form constituent with particles in phrasal verbs or are separated from the case assigning verb, they violate the Case filter. Thus, Johnson (199:590-591) suggests that the Case is assigned by the entire verbal complex: “Noun Phrases dependent on the particle verb for accusative Case may appear on either side of the particle, unless the Noun Phrase is a simple pronoun, in which case it must appear preceding the particle”. (Johnson 1991:595)
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter outlines the historical academic interest in particle verbs and identifies the primary challenge of describing these heterogeneous structures within generative grammar.
2 A Brief Introduction to Phrasal Verbs: This chapter defines phrasal verbs and details their complex syntactic behaviors, including word-order alternations and the idiomaticity gradient.
3 Lexical status of particles in VPCs: This chapter explores the difficult categorial classification of particles, debating whether they should be treated as intransitive prepositions or as a separate category.
4 Syntax of Verb Particle Constructions: This chapter analyzes various generative approaches to particle movement, including Complex Head, Small Clause, and Lexical Decomposition analyses.
5 Diachronic Perspective of Phrasal Verbs: This chapter traces the evolution of particles from Old English separable prefixes, highlighting the role of grammaticalization and word-order shifts in their modern usage.
6 Conclusion: This chapter synthesizes the research findings, confirming that particles are semi-dependent semantic modifiers that resist uniform classification.
Keywords
Phrasal Verbs, Particle Movement, Generative Grammar, X'-syntax, Grammaticalization, Small Clause, Complex Head, Lexical Decomposition, Word Order, Syntax-Semantic Interface, Aspect, Aktionsart, Diachronic Linguistics, Metaphorization, Case Assignment
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this thesis?
The thesis focuses on the linguistic description of English Phrasal Verbs, specifically investigating how particles interact with verbs both syntactically and semantically.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
The work explores lexical categorization, generative syntactic models, historical language development, and the interface between syntax and semantics.
What is the main objective or research question?
The objective is to analyze why particles in phrasal verbs resist standard classification and how different generative frameworks account for particle movement and case assignment.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The author employs a comparative analysis of existing generative literature, combined with a diachronic examination of language change in Old and Middle English.
What topics are discussed in the main body?
The main body covers the definition of particle verbs, the debate over their lexical status, analyses of particle movement within generative theory (Johnson, Kayne, Elenbaas), and the historical transition from pre-verbal prefixes to post-verbal particles.
What are the characterizing keywords of the work?
Key terms include Phrasal Verbs, Grammaticalization, Small Clause Analysis, Generative Grammar, and Syntax-Semantic Interface.
How does the author explain the difference between 'A-verbs' and 'B-verbs' as proposed by Aarts?
A-verbs are defined as spatio-resultative constructions that allow small clause complements, whereas B-verbs are idiomatic constructions with a tighter bond between verb and particle, thus excluding small clause analyses.
What is the significance of the shift from OV to VO word order?
The shift from Object-Verb to Verb-Object order is identified as a major trigger for the collapse of the Old English prefixal system, ultimately leading to the emergence of independent post-verbal particles.
How does Elenbaas's 'Lexical Decomposition Analysis' differ from previous approaches?
Elenbaas proposes a hybrid status for particles, where their movement is driven by the intersection of syntax, semantics, and discourse factors like focus and news value, rather than purely mechanical movement rules.
- Citar trabajo
- M.A. Beate Haba (Autor), 2009, Between Heads and Phrases, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/140783
