John,
I’ve used Lester’s book a number of times in a
course here for future English teachers. Overall, I’d say there’s
one major problem with it, but otherwise it’s extremely good. The problem
is that he doesn’t make a clear form/function distinction. I’m not
sure why he doesn’t – it could be that he’s trying to
stick to the K-12 school grammar tradition, which is understandable, but the
lack of that distinction is one of the things that constantly causes problems
for anyone trying to teach the material (“You said only nouns could be
plural, but in ‘accounts receivable,’ the adjective is”).
The book is so good in other respects that I’ve continued
to use it, using handouts to deal with the form/function distinction. But, of
course, then the students get annoyed because I’m disagreeing with the
textbook, and I get annoyed with them because the last thing future teachers
should do is view a textbook (or their instructor’s comments!) as Holy
Writ.
Sincerely,
Bill Spruiell
From: Assembly for the
Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John
Dews-Alexander
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 8:00 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Phrasal Verb Overview
Someone (I believe it was Herb) recently suggested a book to
me: Mark Lester's (1990) Grammar in the Classroom. I'm not sure why I
haven't discovered this book before, but I quite like it and would suggest it
to anyone reviewing grammar texts. Even if you can't use it in your classroom,
you and/or your students might enjoy knowing about it as a reference
text. I find Lester's writing to be straightforward and uncluttered.
Has anyone actually used this as a classroom text for teachers-in-training? If
so, I'd be interested to hear about your experiences.
I went to the text specifically to find some more
information on phrasal verbs, information that wasn't overly technical for
non-linguistic students but also not overly simplified so as to ignore
descriptive facts. I thought I'd share here a few of the main points about
phrasal verbs that Lester includes.
- Lester suggests that phrasal verbs are part of
Latin and Germanic languages' process of creating new words by adding
prepositions (functional words) to verb stems. Latin languages tended to add
the preposition to the beginning of the verb stem with Germanic languages
adding them to the end. (example, "devour" from "de-"
(down) and "voro" (swollow) in Latin)
- When English forms a new word by adding a
preposition to the beginning of a verb stem (example, "bypass"
"offset"), it is more quickly and easily recognized as a new
word; people forget that it used to be a phrasal verb/verb +preposition
combination because, orthographically, it is written without a space.
However, English tends to leave the space when the preposition is added to
the end of the verb stem. (example, "give up")
- While a sentence like "I give up" may
look like a pronoun, a tensed verb, and an adverbial preposition, it is in
fact a pronoun and a phrasal verb (note: I always learned to call the
preposition that has become attached to a verb in such a way a
"particle," but Lester continues to call it a preposition, which
doesn't bother me at all). Lester points out a fun test for phrasal verbs
-- can you replace the unit with a single word (almost always of
Latin origin) and retain the meaning? In this case, "I give up"
becomes "I surrender." (Lester points out the irony in the fact
that "surrender" was once itself a phrasal verb in Latin!)
- Phrasal verbs can be transitive; this can mark
the difference between a phrasal verb and a verb+preposition combo even
more. For example,
John
turned out the light. (Noun subject+phrasal verb+noun phrase object)
John
turned at the light. (Noun subject+verb+adverbial prepositional phrase)
Say
the sentences out loud and notice the stress. In phrasal verbs the preposition
is stressed while it is not in the PP.
- Phrasal verbs can have more than one
preposition/particle: look down on, talk back to, walk out on, etc.
- Lester points out that phrasal verbs were dumped
from traditional school grammars because the word "preposition"
in Latin literally means "to place before," and it was reasoned
that prepositions couldn't be connected to verbs if they came after
them. Sometimes phrasal verbs were treated as idioms.
- Structural linguists have noted the difference
between separable and inseparable phrasal verbs.Separable phrasal verbs
have prepositions that can be moved to a position after the object noun
phrase (example, "I gave up the game" vs "I gave the game
up" or "I gave it up"). Inseparable phrasal verbs have
prepositions that cannot be moved (example, "I depend on the
income" vs *"I depend the income on" or *"I depend it
on").
- As you can see from the above examples, when the
object of a separable transitive phrasal verb is a pronoun, the movement
of the preposition is obligatory. You would always say "I gave it
up" and never *"I gave up it." (I think I would cringe if I
heard this avoided with some clunky construction like, "Up it is that
I gave it.") In this sense, it is actually ungrammatical to
NOT end a sentence with a preposition.
Hope all the grammar nerds enjoy this as much as I did!
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's
web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select
"Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/