Click on Questions
and Answers to see the newest messages. If you want
to post a message or comment, you will be
prompted to login. (If you are not registered, you can do so
from the login box.) Remember to bookmark this page to make
it easier to return to it.
'English has both 'verb + particle' verbs, written as two words, such as run over and set up, and 'particle + verb' verbs, written as a single word, such as overrun and upset. The 'verb + particle' ones are generally called phrasal verbs, but there seems no reason why the term shouldn't be extended to cover the 'particle + verb' ones too .'
I would like you to give me some examples that side the part in bold.
I've come across a Web page that I think does quite a nice, easy-to-follow job of demonstrating particles vs. prepositions, Izzy. The page clearly shows the difference in usage with some simple examples. Here it is for you to click on:
And if you go up to the "Find" tab at the top and put in "particles and prepositions," you'll see a number of previous postings -- even from you -- on this very issue.
First, let's deal with technical stuff. The "Find" tab is at the very top of this thread where you first listed your posting, Izzy. Go scroll up to the very top and you'll find a whole row of tabs you can click on.
Now, as for particle + verb, what's to consider? Since many grammarians consider them particles if they change the meaning of the verb, they're particles when fronted.
So, for example, to lift something means "to pick up" or "to elevate" something, whereas to uplift means "to make somebody feel happy."
Another example: You know what to grow means, but to outgrow means "to become too big for the clothes you're wearing" if you're a child who is still growing.
Even a verb like understand falls into this category of particle + verb!
but there seems no reason why the term shouldn't be extended to cover the 'particle + verb' ones too .'
At present, "phrasal verb" usefully denotes a certain kind of verbal unit that has more than one component.
If we were to extend the definition to include e.g. "upset", "phrasal verb" might well be useful in some other way; but we would then need a new term for the multipart verbs that were previously described as "phrasal".
Also, "phrasal verb" would no longer be an entirely accurate description, since "upset", "understand", etc. don't consist of phrases.
All in all, it might be simpler to devise a new umbrella term for e.g. both "upset" and "set up" (if it doesn't already exist).
I hope you realize that I wasn't intimating that the combination of particle + verb is a phrasal verb. I don't go along with that as an umbrella term for this combination. That's why I like what you said above.
All in all, it might be simpler to devise a new umbrella term for e.g. both "upset" and "set up" (if it doesn't already exist).
Dear Mr Pedantic,
I can understand why you suggested a new umbrella to contain verbs like 'upset'. But what I don't fathom out is why you would like to add 'set up'. I mean, isn't 'set up' considered as a real phrasal verb?
Izzy, that's why Mr. P. is thinking we should come up with some umbrella term to include both phrasal verbs like set up and new verbs created with particles placed before them, which are not phrasal verbs.