Cambridge University Press

978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present

Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
i

THE ENGLISH PHRASAL VERB,

1 6 50 – P R E S E N T

Providing a detailed and comprehensive account of the development

of phrasal verbs from Early Modern to present-day English, this
study covers almost 400 years in the history of English, and provides
both a diachronic and synchronic account based on over 12,000
examples extracted from stratiied electronic corpora. he corpus
analysis provides evidence of how registers can inform us about the
history of English, as it traces and compares the usage and stylistic
drifts of phrasal verbs across ten diferent genres  – drama, iction,
journals, diaries, letters, medicine, news, science, sermons, and trial
proceedings. he study also sheds new light on the morphosyntactic
and semantic features of phrasal verbs, proposing a new approach
to the category, considering not only their grammatical features, but
also their historical development, by discussing the category in terms
of a number of central mechanisms of language change.

P au l a R o d r í g u e z - P u e n t e is PhD Lecturer of English

Language and Linguistics at the University of Oviedo, Spain. She
has published widely in international journals such as English Studies,
English Language and Linguistics, and Folia Linguistica Historica and
has contributed to prestigious edited volumes.

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
ii

S TUD I E S I N E N G L ISH L ANGUAGE

General editor
Merja Kytö (Uppsala University)

Editorial Board
Bas Aarts (University College London),
John Algeo (University of Georgia),
Susan Fitzmaurice (University of Sheield),
Christian Mair (University of Freiburg),
Charles F. Meyer (University of Massachusetts)

he aim of this series is to provide a framework for original studies of English,

both present-day and past. All books are based securely on empirical research,
and represent theoretical and descriptive contributions to our knowledge
of national and international varieties of English, both written and spoken.
he series covers a broad range of topics and approaches, including syntax,
phonology, grammar, vocabulary, discourse, pragmatics, and sociolinguistics, and
is aimed at an international readership.

Already published in this series:

Christiane Meierkord: Interactions across Englishes: Linguistic Choices in Local and
International Contact Situations
Haruko Momma: From Philology to English Studies: Language and Culture in the
Nineteenth Century
Raymond Hickey (ed.): Standards of English: Codiied Varieties around the World
Benedikt Szmrecsanyi: Grammatical Variation in British English Dialects: A Study
in Corpus-Based Dialectometry
Daniel Schreier and Marianne Hundt (eds.): English as a Contact Language
Bas Aarts, Joanne Close, Geofrey Leech, and Sean Wallis (eds.): he Verb Phrase
in English: Investigating Recent Language Change with Corpora
Martin Hilpert: Constructional Change in English: Developments in Allomorphy,
Word Formation, and Syntax
Jakob R. E. Leimgruber: Singapore English: Structure, Variation, and Usage
Christoph Rühlemann: Narrative in English Conversation: A Corpus Analysis of
Storytelling
Dagmar Deuber: English in the Caribbean: Variation, Style and Standards in
Jamaica and Trinidad
Eva Berlage: Noun Phrase Complexity in English
Nicole Dehé: Parentheticals in Spoken English: he Syntax-Prosody Relation
Jock O. Wong: he Culture of Singapore English

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
iii

Marianne Hundt: Late Modern English Syntax

Irma Taavitsainen, Merja Kytö, Claudia Claridge, and Jeremy Smith:
Developments in English: Expanding Electronic Evidence
Arne Lohmann: English Co-ordinate Constructions: A Processing Perspective on
Constituent Order
Nuria Yáñez-Bouza: Grammar, Rhetoric and Usage in English: Preposition
Placement 1500–1900
Anita Auer, Daniel Schreier, and Richard J. Watts: Letter Writing and
Language Change
John Flowerdew and Richard W. Forest: Signalling Nouns in English: A
Corpus-Based Discourse Approach
Jefrey P. Williams, Edgar W. Schneider, Peter Trudgill, and Daniel Schreier:
Further Studies in the Lesser-Known Varieties of English
Jack Grieve: Regional Variation in Written American English
Douglas Biber and Bethany Gray: Grammatical Complexity in Academic
English: Linguistic Change in Writing
Gjertrud Flermoen Stenbrenden: Long-Vowel Shifts in English, c. 1050–1700:
Evidence from Spelling
Zoya G. Proshina and Anna A. Eddy: Russian English: History, Functions,
and Features
Raymond Hickey (ed.): Listening to the Past: Audio Records of Accents of English
Phillip Wallage: Negation in Early English: Grammatical and Functional Change
Marianne Hundt, Sandra Mollin, and Simone E. Pfenninger: he Changing
English Language: Psycholinguistic Perspectives
Joanna Kopaczyk and Hans Sauer (eds.): Binomials in the History of English:
Fixed and Flexible
Alexander Haselow: Spontaneous Spoken English
Christina Sanchez-Stockhammer: English Compounds and heir Spelling
David West Brown: English and Empire: Language History, Dialect, and the
Digital Archive
Paula Rodríguez-Puente: he English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present: History, Stylistic
Drifts, and Lexicalisation

Earlier titles not listed are also available.

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
iv

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
v

THE ENGLISH PHRASAL

V E R B , 1650 – P R E S E N T
History, Stylistic Drifts, and Lexicalisation

PAU L A RO D R Í G U E Z - P U E N T E
Universidad de Oviedo

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
vi

University Printing House, Cambridge cb2 8bs, United Kingdom

One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor, New York, ny 10006, USA
477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, vic 3207, Australia
314–321, 3rd Floor, Plot 3, Splendor Forum, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi – 110025, India
79 Anson Road, #06-04/06, Singapore 079906

Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.

It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of
education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.

www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107101746
DOI: 10.1017/9781316182147
© Paula Rodríguez-Puente 2019
his publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 2019
Printed and bound in Great Britain by Clays Ltd, Elcograf S.p.A.
A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Rodríguez-Puente, Paula, author.
Title: he English phrasal verb, 1650–present : history, stylistic drifts,
and lexicalisation / Paula Rodríguez-Puente, Universidad de Oviedo.
Description: Cambridge; New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2018. |
Series: Studies in English language |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identiiers: LCCN 2018039894 | ISBN 9781107101746 (hardback) |
ISBN 9781107499249 (paperback)
Subjects: LCSH: English language – Verb phrase.
Classiication: LCC PE1319.R74 2018 | DDC 425/.6–dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018039894
ISBN 978-1-107-10174-6 Hardback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy
of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication
and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain,
accurate or appropriate.

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
vii

Contents

List of Figures page x

List of Tables xiii
Acknowledgements xvii
List of Abbreviations xix

1 Introduction 1
1.1 he English Phrasal Verb 1
1.2 Purpose and Framework 8
1.3 he Importance of Phrasal Verbs 1650–Present 13
2 Corpus and Methodology 17
2.1 Introduction 17
2.2 he Corpora 17
2.2.1 ARCHER: A Representative Corpus of Historical
English Registers 17
2.2.2 he Old Bailey Corpus 22
2.2.3 he International Corpus of English, Great Britain 24
2.2.4 Further Sources of Data 25
2.3 A Note on the Genres 26
2.3.1 Journals/Diaries 27
2.3.2 Personal Letters 30
2.3.3 Drama and Fiction 32
2.3.4 News 33
2.3.5 Scientiic and Medical Discourse 35
2.3.6 Sermons 37
2.3.7 Trial Proceedings 38
2.3.8 A Reclassiication Proposal for the Genres in ARCHER and
the OBC 41
2.4 Methodology 43
3 Delimiting the Scope of the Study: What Are Phrasal Verbs? 46
3.1 Introduction 46
3.2 he Verbal Element 47

vii

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
viii

viii Contents
3.3 he Particles 48
3.3.1 Morphological Characterisation 48
3.3.2 he Semantics of Particles 55
3.3.3 Summary 74
3.4 Phrasal Verbs as a Unit 75
3.4.1 Semantic Types of Phrasal Verbs 76
3.4.2 Syntactic Characteristics: Tests of ‘Phrasal-Verbness’ 84
3.4.3 Summary 103
3.5 Summary and Conclusions 104
4 he Relationship between Phrasal Verbs and the Processes of
Grammaticalisation, Lexicalisation, and Idiomatisation 107
4.1 Introduction 107
4.2 Grammaticalisation 107
4.3 Lexicalisation 111
4.4 Idiomatisation 115
4.5 Views on the Efect of Grammaticalisation, Lexicalisation, and
Idiomatisation on Phrasal Verbs 117
4.5.1 Phrasal Verb Particles as Grammaticalised Items 118
4.5.2 Phrasal Verbs as the Result of Lexicalisation 120
4.5.3 Phrasal Verbs as Idiomatised Units 123
4.6 Proposed Model for the Relationship between Phrasal Verbs and
Grammaticalisation, Lexicalisation, and Idiomatisation 139
4.6.1 Graded Categorisation: Gradience and Gradualness 139
4.6.2 Phrasal Verbs as a Gradable Category 142
4.7 Summary 151
5 Phrasal Verbs 1650–1990: Linguistic Aspects 153
5.1 Introduction 153
5.2 Phrasal Verbs in Late Modern English and Twentieth-Century
English: Linguistic Aspects 154
5.2.1 Morphological Features and Distribution 155
5.2.2 Semantic Characteristics 181
5.2.3 Syntactic Features 194
5.2.4 Nouns and Adjectives Derived from Phrasal Verbs 205
5.3 Summary and Conclusions 211
6 Phrasal Verbs 1650–1990: Cross-Genre Distribution 215
6.1 Introduction 215
6.2 Cross-Genre Analysis of Phrasal Verbs in ARCHER and the OBC 218
6.2.1 Phrasal Verbs in Diaries and Journals 223
6.2.2 Phrasal Verbs in Personal Letters 235
6.2.3 Phrasal Verbs in Drama and Fiction 240
6.2.4 Phrasal Verbs in News 247

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
ix

Contents ix
6.2.5 Phrasal Verbs in Medicine and Science 253
6.2.6 Phrasal Verbs in Sermons 260
6.2.7 Phrasal Verbs in Trial Proceedings 264
6.3 Discussion of Findings 271
7 Conclusion 278

Appendix I: List of Phrasal Verb Constructions with a Fixed

Syntactic Order 287
Appendix II: Raw and Normalised Frequencies of Phrasal Verb
Particles in ARCHER and the OBC 289
Appendix III: List of the Twenty Most Common Combinations
Distributed across Genres 290
Appendix IV: Raw Frequencies of Particles Distributed
across Genres 292
Bibliography 293
Index 319

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
x

Figures

2.1 Distribution of genres in ARCHER and the OBC

according to the dimensions of (in)formality and their
speech-like vs. written characterisation page 43
4.1 Normalised igures of bring up per 1,000,000 words in the
HC and ARCHER 127
4.2 Normalised frequencies of bring up per 1,000,000 words in
the CLMETEV 128
4.3 Normalised frequencies of put down per 1,000,000 words in
the HC and ARCHER 131
4.4 Normalised frequencies of put down per 1,000,000 words in
the CLMETEV 131
4.5 Normalised frequencies of take in per 1,000,000 words in
the HC and ARCHER 132
4.6 Normalised frequencies of take in per 1,000,000 words in
the CLMETEV 133
4.7 Cline of lexicalisation in phrasal verbs 146
4.8 Cline of idiomatisation in phrasal verbs 146
5.1 Distribution of the combinations that break the
‘phonological constraint’ in ARCHER and the OBC.
Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 159
5.2 Distribution of phrasal verb particles in ARCHER and the
OBC. Normalised frequencies per 100,000 words 162
5.3 he development of particles which show a tendency
to increase in frequency in ARCHER and the OBC.
Normalised frequencies per 100,000 words 164
5.4 he development of recent phrasal verb particles.
Normalised frequencies per 100,000 words 165
5.5 he development of the particle forth in ARCHER and the
OBC. Normalised frequencies per 100,000 words 167

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
xi

List of Figures xi
5.6 he development of about, around, and round in ARCHER
and the OBC. Normalised frequencies per 100,000 words 169
5.7 he development of phrasal verbs from 1650 to 1990 in
ARCHER and the OBC 175
5.8 Diachronic development of phrasal verbs in ARCHER 177
5.9 Diachronic distribution of semantic types of phrasal verbs
in ARCHER and the OBC. Normalised frequencies per
100,000 words 187
5.10 Distribution of phrasal verb passives per genre in ARCHER
and the OBC. Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 199
5.11 Diachronic distribution of the VPO and VOP
arrangements with nominal objects in ARCHER and the OBC 201
5.12 Distribution across semantic groups of the VPO and VOP
arrangements with nominal objects in combinations with up 202
5.13 Diachronic distribution of -ing nominalisations in
ARCHER and the OBC. Normalised frequencies per
10,000 words 207
5.14 Cross-genre distribution of phrasal verb -ing
nominalisations in ARCHER and the OBC. Normalised
frequencies per 10,000 words 208
5.15 Diachronic distribution of phrasal verb derivations other
than -ing nominalisations in ARCHER and the OBC.
Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 210
5.16 Diachronic distribution of phrasal verb derivations other
than -ing nominalisations in ARCHER and the OBC
excluding the follow-up examples from 1950 to 1990.
Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 210
5.17 Cross-genre distribution of phrasal verb derivations other
than -ing nominalisations in ARCHER. Normalised
frequencies per 10,000 words 211
6.1 Frequency of phrasal verbs across genres in ARCHER and
the OBC. Boxplot analysis 219
6.2 Comparison of the frequency of phrasal verbs in diaries and
journals. Boxplot analysis 224
6.3 Comparison of the frequency of phrasal verbs in diaries and
journals over time. Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 225
6.4 he development of phrasal verbs in letters in ARCHER.
Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 236
6.5 Comparison of the frequency of phrasal verbs in drama and
iction. Boxplot analysis 241

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
xii

xii List of Figures

6.6 Comparison of the frequency of phrasal verbs in drama and
iction over time. Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 242
6.7 he development of phrasal verbs in drama excluding
the iles 1944bagn.d7b and 1960bolt.d8b. Normalised
frequencies per 10,000 words 244
6.8 he development of phrasal verbs in news in ARCHER.
Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 248
6.9 Comparison of the frequency of phrasal verbs in medicine
and science. Boxplot analysis 254
6.10 Comparison of the frequency of phrasal verbs in medicine
and science over time. Normalised frequencies per 10,000
words 255
6.11 he development of phrasal verbs in sermons in ARCHER.
Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 261
6.12 he development of phrasal verbs in the trial proceedings
from the OBC. Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 266
6.13 he development of phrasal verbs in the trial proceedings
from the OBC and the legal cross-examinations from the
ICE-GB. Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 266
6.14 Diachronic development of phrasal verbs in the speech-
related text types from ARCHER and the OBC.
Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 273
6.15 Diachronic development of phrasal verbs in the writing-
based and writing-purposed from ARCHER. Normalised
frequencies per 10,000 words 274

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
xiii

Tables

1.1 Classiication of group-verbs (Denison 1981: 24–33) page 4

1.2 Common classiications of phrasal verbs and related
structures 7
1.3 Periodisation of the English language 13
2.1 Number of words of British English across genres in ARCHER 18
2.2 Number of words of American English across genres in
ARCHER 19
2.3 Number of iles and words per subperiod in the OBC sample 23
2.4 Total iles and number of words of diaries and journals in
ARCHER 3.1 29
3.1 Raw and normalised frequencies (per 10,000 words) of
combinations containing up as an emphatic particle in the
text types from ARCHER and the OBC 65
3.2 Common terminology for the three levels of meaning in
verb-particle combinations traditionally distinguished in
the literature 77
3.3 Tests for phrasal verbs. Turn on as a case in point 106
4.1 Syntactic tests of cohesion applied to the combination
ring up 144
4.2 Degrees of prototypicality in phrasal verbs 149
5.1 Most common verbs used in the formation of phrasal verbs
in ARCHER and the OBC 156
5.2 Raw igures and normalised frequencies per 10,000 words
of verb types in ARCHER and the OBC 156
5.3 Diachronic distribution of most common verbs used in the
formation of phrasal verbs in ARCHER and the OBC 157
5.4 Comparison of the origin of the verbal element in the
combinations between the subperiods 1650–99 and 1950–90
in ARCHER 160

xiii

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
xiv

xiv List of Tables

5.5 Raw and normalised frequencies per 100,000 words of
the distribution of the eight most frequent particles in
ARCHER and the OBC 163
5.6 he development of about, around, and round in drama.
Raw and normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 170
5.7 Most common phrasal verb combinations in ARCHER and
the OBC 172
5.8 Diachronic distribution of the ifteen most common
combinations in ARCHER and the OBC 173
5.9 Ratio of type/token frequency of phrasal verbs in the seven
subperiods of ARCHER 179
5.10 Ratio of type/token frequency of phrasal verbs in the four
subperiods of the OBC 179
5.11 Raw and normalised frequencies per 10,000 words of new
types per corpus subperiod in ARCHER 180
5.12 Raw and normalised frequencies per 10,000 words of new
types per corpus subperiod in the OBC 180
5.13 Raw igures and percentages of the distribution of semantic
types of phrasal verbs in ARCHER and the OBC 187
5.14 Patterns of transitive phrasal verbs in ARCHER and the OBC 195
5.15 Distribution of the two main transitive phrasal verb
patterns and object types in ARCHER and the OBC 200
6.1 Raw and normalised igures of phrasal verbs per 10,000
words across the genres in ARCHER 221
6.2 Raw and normalised igures of phrasal verbs per 10,000
words in the OBC 221
6.3 Raw and normalised frequencies per 10,000 words of
phrasal verbs in diaries and journals 231
6.4 Diachronic distribution of semantic types of combinations
with up in diaries and journals. Normalised frequencies per
10,000 words 233
6.5 Raw and normalised frequencies (per 10,000 words) of new
types introduced over time in diaries and journals 234
6.6 Diachronic distribution of semantic types of combinations
with up in letters. Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 238
6.7 Raw and normalised frequencies (per 10,000 words) of new
types introduced over time in letters 240
6.8 Raw and normalised frequencies (per 10,000 words) of new
types introduced over time in drama and iction 245

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
xv

List of Tables xv
6.9 Diachronic distribution of semantic types of combinations
with up in drama and iction. Normalised frequencies per
10,000 words 246
6.10 Raw and normalised frequencies (per 10,000 words) of new
types introduced over time in news 252
6.11 Diachronic distribution of semantic types of combinations
with up in news. Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 253
6.12 Raw and normalised frequencies (per 10,000 words) of new
types introduced over time in medicine and science 258
6.13 Diachronic distribution of semantic types of combinations
with up in medicine and science. Normalised frequencies
per 10,000 words 259
6.14 Raw and normalised frequencies (per 10,000 words) of new
types introduced over time in sermons 264
6.15 Diachronic distribution of semantic types of combinations
with up in sermons. Normalised frequencies per 10,000 words 264
6.16 Raw and normalised frequencies (per 10,000 words) of new
types introduced over time in trial proceedings 269
6.17 Diachronic distribution of semantic types of combinations
with up in trial proceedings. Normalised frequencies per
10,000 words 270

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
xvi

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
xvii

Acknowledgements

his book deals with the development of phrasal verbs from the end
of the Early Modern English period to the present day, and with the
relationship between these structures and the processes of lexicalisation,
grammaticalisation, and idiomatisation. he manuscript is a revised
version of my doctoral dissertation, which was publicly defended at the
University of Santiago de Compostela in September 2013. he structure of
the chapters has been changed, new data have been added, and a number
of valuable comments that I  have received on the original version have
been taken into consideration. he inal result represents a signiicant
personal achievement, one which would not have been possible without
the help and support of many people over many years.
First of all, I  would like to acknowledge the support of the research
team Variation, Linguistic Change and Grammaticalization (University of
Santiago de Compostela), sponsored by the Spanish Ministry of Economy
and Competitiveness (grant FFI2017-86884-P). I  am especially grateful
to María José López-Couso, my PhD supervisor, for her professional
guidance, constructive criticism, and constant encouragement, and Teresa
Fanego, the team leader, for supporting my research from the outset.
I would like to express my deepest appreciation for the guidance of those
who have helped to orientate and reine my research during various visits
abroad, namely Christian Mair (University of Freiburg), David Denison
and Nuria Yáñez-Bouza (University of Manchester), and Terttu Nevalainen
and the members of the Research Unit for Variation, Contacts and Change
in English (VARIENG) at the University of Helsinki. he greatest debt of
gratitude goes to Nuria, not only as my ‘supervisor- and mentor-in-the-
shadows’, but for generously providing me with her self-collected data,
which made possible an important part of the corpus research presented in
this monograph. To her I owe my enthusiasm for historical sociolinguistics,
historical pragmatics, and corpus analysis. his book would not have been
written without her unfailing help and encouragement.
xvii

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
xvii

xviii Acknowledgements
I would also like to thank Helen Barton, the Commissioning Editor
for Linguistics at Cambridge University Press, for her support and
understanding from the irst moment she received the initial book pro-
posal and manuscript, and especially Merja Kytö, the editor of the series
Studies in English Language, for her valuable comments and suggestions
for improvements, these always made in a friendly and sympathetic way.
My gratitude also goes to colleagues and friends from various departments
of the Faculty of Philology of the University of Santiago de Compostela
and the Faculty of Philology and Translation of the University of Vigo
for support on both the academic and personal level. I am likewise very
grateful to my colleagues and friends from the Department of Philology of
the University of Cantabria, especially to my P., for his support, encour-
agement, and valuable friendship during the years I spent in Santander,
and to my friends and colleagues from the Department of English, French,
and German from the University of Oviedo, where I currently hold the
position of PhD Lecturer (Ayudante Doctora).
Last but by no means least, I would like to express my warmest grati-
tude to the closest members of my family. So, I dedicate this book to Uxía,
Álvaro, and mamá, in recompense for the many hours that it has kept me
away from them. hank you all for your patience, understanding, and
constant support.

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
xix

Abbreviations

Corpora
ARCHER = A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers
BNC = British National Corpus
BROWN = A Standard Corpus of Present-Day Edited American English
CED = A Corpus of English Dialogues
CLMETEV = A Corpus of Late Modern English Texts Extended Version:
1710–1920
COCA = A Corpus of Contemporary American English 1990–2010
COHA = Corpus of Historical American English
CONCE = A Corpus of Nineteenth-Century English
FLOB = Freiburg-LOB Corpus of British English
FROWN = Freiburg-Brown Corpus of American English
HC = Helsinki Corpus of English Texts 850–1710
ICE-GB = International Corpus of English, Great Britain
LOB = Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen Corpus
OBC = he Old Bailey Corpus

Dictionaries
BT = An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary
CCDPV = Collins Cobuild Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs
CALD = Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary
COD = Collins Online English Dictionary
DGTL = A Dictionary of Grammatical Terms in Linguistics
KCLL = Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics
LDOCE = Longman English Dictionary Online
MDO = Macmillan Dictionary Online
MPVP = Macmillan Phrasal Verbs Plus
MWO = Merriam-Webster Online
xix

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Frontmatter
More Information
xx

xx List of Abbreviations
ODCIE = Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English
OED = Oxford English Dictionary
RDLL = Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics
TFD = he Free Dictionary

Grammatical Terms
AdvP = Adverb Phrase
DO = Direct Object
IO = Indirect Object
NP = Noun Phrase
O = Object
P = Particle
PartP = Particle Phrase
PP = Prepositional Phrase
PredC = Predicative Complement
PrepO = Prepositional Object
S = Subject
V = Verb

Periods
EME = Early Middle English
EModE = Early Modern English
LME = Late Middle English
LModE = Late Modern English
ME = Middle English
OE = Old English
PDE = Present-Day English

Other
AN = Anglo-Norman
NF = Normalised Frequencies
Tkns = Tokens
TTR = Type/Token Ratio

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Table of Contents
More Information
vii

Contents

List of Figures page x

List of Tables xiii
Acknowledgements xvii
List of Abbreviations xix

1 Introduction 1
1.1 he English Phrasal Verb 1
1.2 Purpose and Framework 8
1.3 he Importance of Phrasal Verbs 1650–Present 13
2 Corpus and Methodology 17
2.1 Introduction 17
2.2 he Corpora 17
2.2.1 ARCHER: A Representative Corpus of Historical
English Registers 17
2.2.2 he Old Bailey Corpus 22
2.2.3 he International Corpus of English, Great Britain 24
2.2.4 Further Sources of Data 25
2.3 A Note on the Genres 26
2.3.1 Journals/Diaries 27
2.3.2 Personal Letters 30
2.3.3 Drama and Fiction 32
2.3.4 News 33
2.3.5 Scientiic and Medical Discourse 35
2.3.6 Sermons 37
2.3.7 Trial Proceedings 38
2.3.8 A Reclassiication Proposal for the Genres in ARCHER and
the OBC 41
2.4 Methodology 43
3 Delimiting the Scope of the Study: What Are Phrasal Verbs? 46
3.1 Introduction 46
3.2 he Verbal Element 47

vii

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Table of Contents
More Information
viii

viii Contents
3.3 he Particles 48
3.3.1 Morphological Characterisation 48
3.3.2 he Semantics of Particles 55
3.3.3 Summary 74
3.4 Phrasal Verbs as a Unit 75
3.4.1 Semantic Types of Phrasal Verbs 76
3.4.2 Syntactic Characteristics: Tests of ‘Phrasal-Verbness’ 84
3.4.3 Summary 103
3.5 Summary and Conclusions 104
4 he Relationship between Phrasal Verbs and the Processes of
Grammaticalisation, Lexicalisation, and Idiomatisation 107
4.1 Introduction 107
4.2 Grammaticalisation 107
4.3 Lexicalisation 111
4.4 Idiomatisation 115
4.5 Views on the Efect of Grammaticalisation, Lexicalisation, and
Idiomatisation on Phrasal Verbs 117
4.5.1 Phrasal Verb Particles as Grammaticalised Items 118
4.5.2 Phrasal Verbs as the Result of Lexicalisation 120
4.5.3 Phrasal Verbs as Idiomatised Units 123
4.6 Proposed Model for the Relationship between Phrasal Verbs and
Grammaticalisation, Lexicalisation, and Idiomatisation 139
4.6.1 Graded Categorisation: Gradience and Gradualness 139
4.6.2 Phrasal Verbs as a Gradable Category 142
4.7 Summary 151
5 Phrasal Verbs 1650–1990: Linguistic Aspects 153
5.1 Introduction 153
5.2 Phrasal Verbs in Late Modern English and Twentieth-Century
English: Linguistic Aspects 154
5.2.1 Morphological Features and Distribution 155
5.2.2 Semantic Characteristics 181
5.2.3 Syntactic Features 194
5.2.4 Nouns and Adjectives Derived from Phrasal Verbs 205
5.3 Summary and Conclusions 211
6 Phrasal Verbs 1650–1990: Cross-Genre Distribution 215
6.1 Introduction 215
6.2 Cross-Genre Analysis of Phrasal Verbs in ARCHER and the OBC 218
6.2.1 Phrasal Verbs in Diaries and Journals 223
6.2.2 Phrasal Verbs in Personal Letters 235
6.2.3 Phrasal Verbs in Drama and Fiction 240
6.2.4 Phrasal Verbs in News 247

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Table of Contents
More Information
ix

Contents ix
6.2.5 Phrasal Verbs in Medicine and Science 253
6.2.6 Phrasal Verbs in Sermons 260
6.2.7 Phrasal Verbs in Trial Proceedings 264
6.3 Discussion of Findings 271
7 Conclusion 278

Appendix I: List of Phrasal Verb Constructions with a Fixed

Syntactic Order 287
Appendix II: Raw and Normalised Frequencies of Phrasal Verb
Particles in ARCHER and the OBC 289
Appendix III: List of the Twenty Most Common Combinations
Distributed across Genres 290
Appendix IV: Raw Frequencies of Particles Distributed
across Genres 292
Bibliography 293
Index 319

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Excerpt
More Information
1

Ch apter 1

Introduction

1.1 he English Phrasal Verb

Phrasal verbs, or particle verbs, are one of the most idiosyncratic features
of the English language, as well as of other Germanic languages, such as
German and Dutch. hey pose multiple problems for non-native speakers,
because their meanings must be learned separately from those of their
verbal bases (give vs. give up, ind vs. ind out), as the union of two elem-
ents of the compound often gives rise to new non-compositional forms
outwardly similar to idioms, in which the meaning of the individual
elements a priori does not relate to the sense of the compound (e.g. fall
out ‘argue’, put down ‘criticise’). From the point of view of a researcher,
phrasal verbs are certainly an interesting and challenging topic of study
due to the peculiarities of these combinations, which is relected in the
vast amount of work looking into their nature from synchronic and dia-
chronic perspectives, but also within the ields of translation studies and
second-language acquisition, among others. It is widely acknowledged
that the frequency of phrasal verbs in English has increased considerably
from Early Modern English (EModE) times (see, e.g., Spasov 1966: 125,
Pelli 1976:  102, Martin 1990, Wild 2010:  227, Diemer 2014), but what
is it that brings a verb and a particle together in an idiomatic construc-
tion, and by what means? Why does the union between verb and particle
seem stronger in some cases than in others? Why are sometimes other
constituents allowed between the verb and the particle (e.g. hey cleaned
it all up vs. *hey found it all out) or why can the particle occasionally be
moved to clause-initial position (e.g. Out came the sun vs. *Up blew the
tank)? Is this linked to their relationship, if any, with the processes of gram-
maticalisation, lexicalisation, and idiomatisation? What are the deining
characteristics of phrasal verbs that distinguish them from other similar
structures? Can any verb function as the verbal element of a combination
or should it display certain characteristics to make it eligible? Moreover,

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Excerpt
More Information
2

2 Introduction
what is the nature of the particles? Are they adverbs, prepositions, or some-
thing diferent? What is the function, if any, of particles which apparently
combine redundantly with some verbs (e.g. He delivered [up] the certiicate;
hey illed [out] the form)? Has the range of available particles kept constant
over time or have new elements entered the inventory, whereas others have
fallen into disuse? Are (and indeed were) phrasal verbs typical of collo-
quial spoken language, and should they be avoided in formal writing? his
monograph addresses these and other questions concerning the nature and
development of phrasal verbs from the end of the EModE period to the
present day.
he term phrasal verb has been chosen because it is the most common
designation of the category and the predominant one in English grammar
books,1 although probably not the most appropriate (see Aarts 1992: 89,
Claridge 2000:  46, Cappelle 2007:  41–3). As noted by Huddleston and
Pullum et  al., the label suggests that the combinations at issue ‘form
syntactic constituents belonging to the category verb’, although this is
not necessarily so ‘despite their idiomatic interpretations’ (2002:  274).
Cappelle (2007: 41) also points out that the term implies that ‘a phrasal
verb is in the irst place still a verb, seemingly difering only from sim-
plex verbs […] in having a small added element’. However, the semantic
weight of such a small element has proved to be of great importance, and
thus the traditional ‘verbo-centric approach’ (Cappelle 2007:  42) needs
to be reconsidered. Other labels employed in the literature for the same
concept include verb-adverb combination (Kennedy 1920), compound
verb (Curme 1931, Kruisinga 1931), two-word verb (Anthony 1954, Taha
1960), discontinuous verb (Live 1965), verb-particle construction (Lipka
1972), verb-particle combination (Fraser 1976), particle verbs (Dehé 2002),
verbal idiom, and, more speciically, verb + intransitive preposition idiom
(Huddleston & Pullum et al. 2002).
here is widespread disagreement as to what the concept ‘phrasal verb’
refers to, mainly because it has often been used (and is still used) as a cover
term including related but distinct categories, such as the so-called prep-
ositional verbs and phrasal-prepositional verbs.2 In general terms, I under-
stand phrasal verbs as combinations of a verb and a post-verbal particle,

1
See, e.g., Mitchell (1958), Bolinger (1971), Quirk et  al. (1985), Alexander (1988), Palmer (1988),
McArthur (1989), Greenbaum (1996), Biber et al. (1999), Huddleston and Pullum et al. (2002: 274).
2
See, e.g., Halliday (1985:  184), and especially most phrasal verb dictionaries, such as the Collins
Cobuild Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs (CCDPV), Macmillan Phrasal Verbs Plus (MPVP), Oxford
Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English (ODCIE).

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Excerpt
More Information
3

1.1 he English Phrasal Verb 3

which function as relatively unitary structures lexically and semantically
as, for example, put up in (1) below.3
(1) More than 70,000 shopkeepers have been forced to put up the shutters
in the past year. (BNC CH2 W_newsp_tabloid)
One of the main distinguishing features of phrasal verbs has to do with
the nature of the post-verbal particle, which ‘is best of all described as
an adverb, but not as a preposition’ (Claridge 2000: 46; see also Heaton
1965: 45) or, in Huddleston and Pullum et al.’s (2002: 272, 597–661) ter-
minology, an intransitive preposition. Phrasal verbs are thus distinguished
from prepositional verbs, whose particle is a preposition (2), and phrasal-
prepositional verbs (3), which contain both an adverb and a preposition.
(2) So, I am looking after their interests. (BNC J9M S_meeting)
(3) Menzies was seething and he broke in on the last words. (BNC A0N
W_ict_prose)
Such terminology is based on a rather simplistic characterisation of
the type of particle present in each combination, as noted by Mitchell
(1958:  106), who distinguishes two main categories:  non-phrasal and
phrasal. Hence phrasal verbs are classiied under the heading ‘phrasal’,
indicating the presence of an adverbial element (see Spasov 1966:  11,
Claridge 2000:  32), whereas simple verbs and prepositional verbs are
classiied under the label ‘non-phrasal’ because they do not include any
adverbial component. In this way, Mitchell’s classiication agrees with one
of the most common views: that the particles in phrasal verbs qualify as
adverbs and those in prepositional verbs as prepositions, whereas phrasal-
prepositional verbs require both an adverb and a preposition (see also
Palmer 1988: 216).
A more complex and thorough classiication is suggested by Denison
(1981: 24–33, 1998: 222), who not only considers the particle-type, but also
the object-type of the combinations (see also Huddleston & Pullum et al.
2002: 286–90). He divides what he calls group-verbs into eight diferent
categories, whose features are synthesised in Table 1.1.
Denison’s eight categories, though, are not mutually exclusive. A verb-
particle combination can be classiied within more than one category
depending on the elements it combines with. Compare in this respect
(4a–b) and (5a–b).

3
For further discussion of this deinition, see Chapters 3 and 4 of the present work.

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Excerpt
More Information
4

4 Introduction
Table 1.1 Classiication of group-verbs (Denison 1981: 24–33)

Group-verb Particle DO PrepO Example

Class 1 (intransitive 1 Ø Ø back out ‘withdraw’

phrasal verbs)
Class 2 (transitive 1 + Ø bear out ‘conirm’
phrasal verbs)
Class 3 (prepositional 1 Ø + go for ‘attack’
verbs)
Class 4 (phrasal- 2 Ø + look forward to ‘anticipate’
prepositional verbs)
Class 5 (idiomatic 2 + + let (sb.) in on (e.g. a secret)
collocations)
Class 6 1 + + foist (sth.) on (sb.) ‘fasten or ix
unwarrantably’
Class 7 2 Ø Ø come on in ‘enter’
Class 8 2 + Ø put (sth.) back together ‘repair’

(4) a. He was installing a fuel gauge on top of the tank when it blew up.
(BNC K1L W_news_script)
b. US troops later blew up the radio transmitter to prevent further
broadcasts. (BNC AAL W_newsp_brdsht_nat_report)
(5) a. Meanwhile Mr. Cottle inally gave in and took a piece of bread and
butter. (BNC ACV W_ict_prose)
b. Norman Lamont declined the Prime Minister’s ofer of a move to
Environment Secretary and gave in his resignation. (BNC K1N
W_news_script)
As can be seen, both blow up and give in can be classiied within class
1 (see (4a) and (5a)) and class 2 (see (4b) and (5b)). he meaning of the
phrasal verb can be the same independently of whether it is used transi-
tively or intransitively, as is the case with blow up in (4a) and (4b), where it
means ‘explode’. However, in other cases the meaning of the combination
changes accordingly with transitivity. In (5a) give in means ‘yield’, whereas
in (5b) its meaning is ‘hand in’. Some combinations, in turn, can also be
classiied within both class 2 and class 3, as is the case with get through in
(6a) and (6b), respectively.
(6) a. You see the message had obviously got through. (BNC J8B
S_meeting)
b. I doubt that she’ll do it until you’ve got through your exams. (BNC
KB9 S_conv)

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Excerpt
More Information
5

1.1 he English Phrasal Verb 5

A ninth category can be added to Denison’s list, as discussed by Cappelle
(2005: 234–7; see also Huddleston & Pullum et al. 2002: 286–7): namely, a
ditransitive pattern which contains one particle and two objects, as in run
up ‘make (a garment, etc.) by sewing quickly or simply’ (OED s.v. run up
7.c.(b)) in Cappelle’s example in (7).
(7) hey ran him up a new coat.
Whatever the particle or the object, what seems clear is that all eight
categories in Denison’s classiication and the ditransitive pattern described
by Cappelle possess a number of common characteristics, which has often
led to their classiication within the larger group of the so-called multi-
word verbs (see, e.g., Biber et al. 1999: 403, Claridge 2000, Gries 2003: 1)
or group-verbs (see, e.g., Denison 1981:  9). Multi-word verbs are ‘com-
binations that comprise relatively idiomatic units and function like single
verbs’ (Biber et  al. 1999:  403). hey are, then, ‘analytic constructions’
which ‘nevertheless represent a semantic unity that is characteristic of a
single word or lexical unit’ (Claridge 2000: 26). his deinition of phrasal
verb as a discontinuous lexical item is one of the most common in the
literature,4 although the question of whether phrasal verbs belong within
the lexicon, syntax, or phraseology has been discussed at length in recent
years.5 As pointed out by Nevalainen (1999a:  421), ‘cases where phrasal
sequences of more than one word are reduced to one-word status fall
between grammar and lexis’, because multi-word units such as phrasal
verbs ‘do not always have the grammatical integrity required of words as
lexicographical units’. Similarly, Declerck (1991: 11) remarks that phrasal
verbs are variously treated as single words (two-part verbs) or as combin-
ations of verbs (two-word verbs), mainly because they present features that
favour a morphological analysis (e.g. their ability to be the input for mor-
phological derivation, as in lookers-on) and characteristics that lead to their
reading as phrasal representations (e.g. the ability of the combination to be
split by other syntactic elements such as noun phrases or adverbs).6
Although there is signiicant disagreement as to what structures should
be classiied as multi-word verbs, or as to the terminology which should
be used to refer to them, most works (Quirk et al. 1985: 1150–68, Biber

4
See, e.g., Mitchell (1958), Bolinger (1971), Lipka (1972), Declerck (1976), Denison (1981), Quirk et al.
(1985), Brinton (1988), McArthur (1989), Claridge (2000), Hampe (2002).
5
Recent neurolinguistic studies seem to support the idea that phrasal verbs belong to the lexicon,
rather than to syntax, since they behave as word-like stored items (see Cappelle et  al. 2010,
Pulvermüller et al. 2013).
6
For a detailed discussion, see Los et al. (2012: 14–51).

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Excerpt
More Information
6

6 Introduction
et al. 1999: 403–28, Claridge 2000: 26–45) seem to agree that sequences of
the type illustrated in Table 1.1 must be included in this category.7 Other
subtypes of multi-word verbs are verbo-nominal combinations (8),8 verb-
adjective combinations (9), or verb-verb combinations (see (10) and (11)).9
(8) Where’s Daddy’s gone to have a shower. (BNC KST S_conv)
(9) To that charge Shaun David do you plead guilty or not guilty? (BNC
F7W S_courtroom)
(10) I made do with peripheral vision, which, after all, is the next best
thing. (BNC FYV W_ict_prose)
(11) You know, think it was about ten year old when she got rid of it.
(BNC KB7 S_conv)
he subtypes of multi-word verbs shown in (8) to (11) bear certain simi-
larities with the structures in Table  1.1, inasmuch as they are also com-
binations of a verb and a post-verbal element, which, though difering
from particles in their form,10 behave very much as such in other respects.
Brinton and Akimoto (1999: 1–20), in turn, consider phrasal verbs within
the group of composite predicates because of the resemblance they bear to
the other two subtypes, complex verbs (similar to verbo-nominal combin-
ations as in (8)) and complex prepositions such as (12).
(12) he work is being carried out on behalf of English heritage. (BNC
K1F W_news_script)
Table 1.2 summarises some of the classiications that have been proposed
for phrasal verbs.
Whereas there seems to be general consensus in regarding phrasal verbs
as within the larger group of multi-word verbs, distinguishing between
them and other members of the class turns out quite problematic, mostly
because ‘phrasal verb’ is also used as a cover term for prepositional and
phrasal-prepositional verbs. A common topic of discussion here is precisely
where to draw the line between them and diferent though related multi-
word structures. he answer to this question is far from easy, though. It

7
For a diferent classiication, see Huddleston and Pullum et  al. (2002:  283–90), who distinguish
several types of ‘verbal idioms’ with regard to the type of particle but also to the type of object.
8
Another proof of the current terminological confusion with reference to the various verb-particle
combinations is that verbo-nominal combinations are called ‘group verbs’ by Spasov (1966: 11), a term
which overlaps with Denison’s (1981) label to refer to his eight classes of verb-particle combinations.
9
For further details on other subtypes of multi-word verbs, see Claridge (2000:  46–82) and
Rodríguez-Puente (2007: 43–61).
10
he post-verbal elements in verbo-nominal, verb-adjective, and verb-verb combinations are quite
often referred to as particles, because they are similar to those in phrasal verbs as regards their syn-
tactic and semantic behaviour.

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Excerpt
More Information
7

1.1 he English Phrasal Verb 7

Table 1.2 Common classiications of phrasal verbs and related structures

Multi-word verbs Multi-word verbs Multi-word verbs Composite predicates

(Quirk et al. 1985) (Biber et al. 1999) (Claridge 2000) (Brinton & Akimoto
1999)

phrasal verbs phrasal verbs phrasal verbs phrasal verbs

prepositional verbs prepositional verbs prepositional verbs –
phrasal-prepositional phrasal- phrasal-prepositional –
verbs prepositional verbs
verbs
verb-adjective – verb-adjective –
combinations combinations
verb-verb verb-verb – –
combinations combinations
– verbo-nominal verbo-nominal complex verbs
combinations combinations types
I and II
verb + PP verbo-nominal
combinations combinations type
III
– – – complex prepositions

For a diferent classiication, see Huddleston and Pullum et al. (2002: 272–90). hese authors
distinguish between prepositional verbs (e.g. refer to), which select a speciied preposition,
and verbal idioms or idioms whose major element is a verb. Transitive, intransitive, and
ditransitive phrasal verbs are included within the latter category, along with other multi-
word structures or ‘constructions’.

has been addressed in numerous works, which typically seek to delimit

the concept by looking at the meaning of combinations and applying a
series of syntactic tests. Regarding their semantics, one of the most com-
monly held views is that the meaning of phrasal verbs ranges on a scale
from literal to idiomatic (e.g. Bolinger 1971, Huddleston & Pullum et al.
2002, him 2012), although some authors employ the idiomaticity cri-
terion to distinguish phrasal verbs from other verb-adverb combinations
(e.g, Live 1965: 441, Fraser 1976), while others prefer the term ‘free combin-
ation’ (Quirk et al. 1985: 1152, 1162–3, Biber et al. 1999: 403, Huddleston &
Pullum et al. 2002: 280) to refer to combinations with a literal meaning.
he syntax of phrasal verbs has also received considerable attention. Under
the framework of transformational grammar, Fraser (1965, 1970a, 1970b,
1976) was one of the irst authors to try to trace a clear line between the
syntactic behaviour of verb-adverb combinations and phrasal verbs proper.

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Excerpt
More Information
8

8 Introduction
However, many of his tests were later refuted (see especially Bolinger 1971,
Declerck 1976, Lindner 1983, Darwin & Gray 1999, Cappelle 2005), not
least because many notable exceptions could be found.11 he diiculties in
drawing a clear-cut line between phrasal verbs and other related categories,
both semantically and syntactically, have led some writers to suggest a
‘fuzzy grammatical category’ (Gardner & Davies 2007:  341), which, for
reasons which will become clear over the course of this monograph, seems
ininitely more appropriate. As will be argued in Chapters 3 and 4, there
is much variability in the semantic and syntactic behaviour of combin-
ations which suggests that, although the verb and the particle seem to
form a single lexical unit, the degree of semantic and syntactic bondedness
between the two elements difers greatly and ultimately relates to gradual-
ness in change.
he remainder of this chapter deals with the purpose and framework
of the current book. Chapter  2 introduces the primary and secondary
sources, the methodology used for the extraction of examples, and also
explores some of the (diachronic and synchronic) features of the various
text types analysed herein. Chapter 3 reviews and assesses the morphosyn-
tactic and semantic features of Present-day English (PDE) phrasal verbs,
and Chapter 4 evaluates them from a diachronic perspective in relation to
the processes of lexicalisation and idiomatisation. Chapters 5 and 6 pre-
sent corpus indings on the linguistic features and distribution of phrasal
verbs from the end of the EModE period to the present day. More specif-
ically, Chapter 5 looks at the morphosyntactic and semantic properties of
these constructions, as well as their diachronic distribution, and Chapter 6
discusses aspects related to the distribution and characteristics of these
two-word combinations across ten diferent genres. Finally, Chapter  7
ofers some concluding remarks and some suggestions for further research.

1.2 Purpose and Framework

My approach is irst and foremost diachronic, focusing primarily on
the second half of the seventeenth century to the end of the twentieth
century, a period in the history of the English language which is clearly
underrepresented in the literature on phrasal verbs. British English is
used in the irst instance, although frequent comparisons will be drawn
with other varieties of English, especially American English. Empirical

11
hese and other questions relating the nature of the combinations to the elements that constitute
them will be fully discussed in Chapter 3.

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Excerpt
More Information
9

1.2 Purpose and Framework 9

evidence is drawn from various corpora. he core sources for quantita-
tive and qualitative data were A Representative Corpus of Historical English
Registers (ARCHER) and a sample of the Old Bailey Corpus (OBC),
although further examples and evidence have been used from the Helsinki
Corpus (HC), the Corpus of Late Modern English Texts Extended Version
(CLMETEV), the database of examples of the Old English Dictionary
(OED), the British National Corpus (BNC), a section of the International
Corpus of English, Great Britain (ICE-GB), the World Wide Web, and
several other diachronic and synchronic corpora representing both the
American and British varieties of English.12 hus, although the primary
dataset constitutes over 13,200 instances of phrasal verbs extracted from
ARCHER and the OBC, numerous illustrative examples are taken from
elsewhere.
In view of the diiculties of classiication discussed above, prior to
embarking on the task of tracing the recent history of phrasal verbs, one
of my irst goals was to review and assess the existing deinitions and syn-
tactic tests proposed in the literature, so as to arrive at a more solid initial
conceptualisation of phrasal verbs. I argue that some traditional tests for
the identiication of phrasal verbs must be ruled out, whereas others can
be employed to test the degree of unity between the verb and the particle,
rather than to distinguish phrasal verbs from verb-adverb combinations.
To this end, I begin with the premise that in a phrasal verb the verb and the
particle function as a single lexical and semantic unit, but that the degree
of unity between the two elements difers across combinations. hat is,
I will view phrasal verbs as a gradable category. his will be discussed at
length in Chapter 3, where attention is paid irst to the two elements of the
compound separately (the verb and the particle) and then to the morpho-
syntactic and semantic properties of the combinations themselves. While a
large part of Chapter 3 is concerned with a review of general observations
as to the status of phrasal verbs in PDE, building on previous research
(Rodríguez-Puente 2013) I  also argue for a more ine-grained classiica-
tion of the semantic types of phrasal verbs. Traditionally, phrasal verbs
have been ascribed to three, albeit overlapping, semantic groups: literal,
aspectual/aktionsart, and idiomatic (see, e.g. Spasov 1966, Bolinger 1971,
Fraser 1976, Quirk et al. 1985, Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman 1999). My
proposed classiication follows previous studies which have suggested that
the meanings of phrasal verbs are best understood within a scale ranging
from literal to idiomatic, but advocates a more ine-grained characterisation

12
A full description of all data sources is provided in Chapter 2.

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Excerpt
More Information
10

10 Introduction
which also includes reiterative, emphatic, and metaphorical combinations.
Reiterative combinations, where the particle repeats a semantic element
already present in the verb (e.g. rise up), have been considered ‘pleonastic’
(him 2006a) or ‘redundant’ (e.g. Hampe 2002, Jackendof 2002: 76, Wild
2010: 235f), yet both terms are unfortunate in that they seem to suggest
that the particle is an unnecessary element. Related to this are emphatic
combinations (e.g. wrap up), which contain an apparently superluous par-
ticle which alters neither the meaning of the verb it combines with nor its
argument structure or aspectual/aktionsart features.13 As opposed to pre-
vious classiications, and based on corpus results, I argue that such particles
in fact fulil several functions in the compound: reinforcing the meaning
of the verb, facilitating the division of labour between the verb and the
particle, allowing several alternatives in the organisation of the informa-
tion structure of the clause, and even providing the verb with a more col-
loquial, familiar tone.14 Finally, the metaphorical group includes those
combinations whose meaning is quite transparent but somehow removed
from its original connotation (e.g. throw away a fortune).
he view that phrasal verbs are a gradable category is further addressed
in Chapter 4 within the framework of lexicalisation. As noted by Brinton
and Akimoto, ‘the processes involved in the development of complex verbs,
phrasal verbs, and complex prepositions may be variously considered from
the perspective of grammaticalization, lexicalization and idiomatization’
(1999:  11–12). he efect of grammaticalisation on the development of
phrasal verb particles was amply discussed in Brinton’s (1988) compre-
hensive work (see also Denison 1985), but whereas phrasal verbs are often
deined as lexicalised or institutionalised structures, a full discussion of
phrasal combinations from the perspective of lexicalisation has not yet
been given. Based on the syntactic characteristics of phrasal verbs as set
out in Chapter 3, Chapter 4 aims to establish a cline of lexicalisation for
the development of these combinations. Hence, I argue that the varying
degrees of bondedness among PDE phrasal verbs relate to their histor-
ical development. Moreover, lexicalisation often (though not necessarily)
entails idiomatisation, or the acquisition of non-compositional meanings,
which accounts for the existence of varying degrees of compositionality in
the combinations. Using corpus evidence and also drawing on previous
research, Chapter 4 explores some of the ways in which idiomatic, non-
compositional meanings are acquired by these combinations over time.

13
As would be the case with aspectual/aktionsart particles (see Section 3.3.2.2).
14
See further discussion in Section 3.3.2.3.

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Index
More Information
319

Index

action nominal, see action nominalisation test language, 2, 22, 24–6, 230, 234, 260, 265,
action nominalisation test, 97–8 268–9, 275–6
adprep, 51, 52, 97 marker, 151
adverb, 2–3, 45, 48–52, 74, 86, 90–5, 97–8, style, 12, 15, 20, 42–3, 186, 198, 213, 227, 249
120–1, 166, 198 tone, 10, 46, 62, 68, 70, 74, 188, 215, 217, 279
intensive, 70 colloquialisation, 34, 43, 216–17, 249, 252, 265,
of motion, 77 275, 277
spatial, 126 complex preposition, 6, 10, 107
reduction to, 135 complex verb, 6, 10, 107
adverb insertion test, 92–5, 103, 105, 142, 147, composite predicate, 6
279 continuum, 18, 26, 42
adverbial particle, 50, 73, 85, 91, 104, 122, of compositionality, 117, 147
135, 151 formal–informal, 12, 16, 19, 27, 43, 217, 268, 271
aggregation analysis, 11, 180–1, 190, 212, 234, 239, oral–literate, 12
245, 251, 253, 258, 263, 268 speech–written, 12, 16, 17, 271–2, 282
aktionsart, 57–63, 69–70, 183–5, 282 Corpus of Late Modern English Texts Extended
meaning, 72, 104, 119–20, 123–5, 149, 193–4 Version (CLMETEV), 9, 25, 125, 127, 132
particle, 55, 57–61, 74, 76, 79, 126, 129, cross-examinations, see legal cross examinations
188, 213
phrasal verb, 82–3, 187, 278 decategorialisation, 109, 115–16
analogy, 68, 120, 125, 137, 151, 188, 212, 282 decolloquialisation, 43, 267–8, 270, 272, 275, 283
antonym test, 102–4 deinite noun phrase (NP) test, 90–2, 103, 105,
aspect, 36, 57–62, 66, 72, 74, 104, 108, 119–20, 147, 279
125, 151 degrammaticalisation, 111–12
aspectual democratisation, 216
meaning, 62–3, 69, 71, 83, 120, 123–5 derivation, 5, 52, 66, 74–5, 104, 122, 205,
particle, 57–61, 76, 79, 82, 126, 129, 167, 188, 208, 279
213, 278–9 diary, 12, 22, 26–31, 41–3, 208, 217–35, 238–40,
phrasal verb, 9, 82, 147, 182–3, 194, 239, 246, 255, 257–9, 271–2, 276–7
252, 258 dimension, 16, 18–19, 24, 26, 30, 32, 38, 117, 273,
atelic, 59 280, 285
directional prepositional phrase (PP), 77,
British National Corpus (BNC), 9, 25, 47, 64, 99, 99–100, 104, 196
125, 158, 215 directional prepositional phrase (PP)
test, 99–100
cleft-formation test, 102, 104, 105, 148, 279 dislegomena, 172
cline, 107–8, 145–7, 152, 280 division of labour, 10, 46, 72, 83, 119, 183, 188,
collocation, 90, 100, 116–17, 121, 126, 143, 150, 194, 279
195 drama, 18, 22, 26, 32–3, 40–3, 161, 170, 220, 223,
colloquial 240–7
expression, 137 Dutch, 1

319

© in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org

 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Index
More Information
320
320
Early Modern English (EModE), 13–15, 31, 124,
188, 193–4, 215–17, 257, 261–7, 271–7
emphatic
particle, 61–74, 82–3, 131, 136, 193, 252, 275–6
phrasal verb, 62, 64, 83–4, 182–4, 186–8, 193,
233, 238, 245–6, 252, 258–9, 263, 270
iction, 32–3, 220, 240–7, 276
igurative
meaning, 54, 70, 72, 74, 79, 105, 124, 128, 137,
182–6
particle, see metaphorical particle
phrasal verb, see metaphorical phrasal verb
formal
register, 16–19, 26–7, 37, 41–43, 64
style, 12, 34–5, 161, 244, 251
text-type, 194, 199, 208, 215–17, 222–3, 232,
253, 260, 263, 267–8, 271–6
writing, 2, 213, 228
free combination, 7, 77–8, 84, 94, 117, 182
French, 158–9, 211, 228–9, 238, 281
German, 1, 58
Germanic, 1, 47, 159, 211, 278, 281, 284
gradience, 110, 121, 139–51, 279
gradient, 109, 139–41, 151, 280
gradualness, 8, 121, 141, 143, 152, 279
grammaticalisation, 1, 10, 106–13, 115–20, 125,
138–9, 141, 151, 279
hapax legomena, 172, 178, 234
Helsinki Corpus (HC), 25, 67, 125, 132, 145,
236, 275
idiom, 1–2, 55, 79, 81, 116–17, 195, 230, 262
idiomatic
meaning, 10, 15, 79–81, 92–4, 115–117, 124–8,
133–4, 184–5, 188, 192–4
particle, 72, 74, 98–9, 119
phrasal verb, 79–82, 97–101, 124–38, 150,
182–7, 201, 233, 238–9, 245–6, 258–9, 263
phrase, 80, 113
idiomaticity, 7, 78, 88–9, 95, 103, 118, 201
idiomatisation, 107, 110, 115–17, 121, 123–39,
143–52, 186, 193–4, 213, 279–82
informal
phrasal verb, 215
register, 41, 43
style, 12, 15, 34, 230
text-type, 18–20, 26–7, 30, 182, 217, 222,
235–6, 240, 271
tone, 62
-ing nominalisation, 45, 154, 205–6, 208, 213
© in this web service Cambridge University Press
Index
International Corpus of English, Great Britain
(ICE-GB), 9, 17, 24–5, 44, 153–4, 202, 265,
267, 280
interrogatives test, see relatives test
intransitive preposition, 2–3, 48, 50, 74,
90, 117
journal, 18–19, 26–31, 42–3, 161, 199,
217–35, 272–3, 276
Late Modern English (LModE), 13–15, 30–1,
33–4, 154–213, 275–277, 281–3
Latin, 67–8, 158–60, 176, 182–3, 211, 215, 228–9,
238, 262, 275
Latinate, 11–12, 64, 75, 80, 120, 151, 158, 229,
257, 277
Latinisation, 229, 251, 284
legal cross-examinations, 24–5, 265, 267, 275
letter, 14–15, 18–19, 28, 30–3, 36, 42–3, 208,
220–3, 235–40, 257–8, 261, 271–6,
282–3
lexicalisation, 8, 10, 12, 106–8, 111–17, 120–3, 139,
141–6, 149–52, 279
literal
meaning, 7, 55–7, 73–4, 78–9, 92–5, 110,
115–30, 143, 150–52, 188, 276
particle, 55–7, 74, 99, 101, 204
phrasal verb, 76–9, 97–100, 103–105, 122–6,
182–3, 186–7, 238–9, 245–7, 268–9
literate register, 20, 36, 236, 248, 255, 260
medicine, 12, 19, 26, 35–7, 193, 209, 232, 253–60,
268, 271–3, 275–7
metaphor, 70–1, 79, 81, 126–7, 129–30, 133
metaphorical
meaning, 55, 70–2, 74, 88, 94–5, 115, 124, 128,
165–6, 183–4
particle, 70–1
phrasal verb, 10, 79–80, 147, 186–7, 278
metaphorisation, 109, 115–16, 126, 129
metonymic, 109, 119
metonymisation, 109
metonymy, 126
Middle English (ME), 13, 20, 68–9, 123–4, 161,
194, 202, 205–6, 213, 279, 282
multivariate analysis, 16, 20, 31, 33, 36, 41, 89,
273, 277, 282–3
multi-word verb, 5–6, 46, 72, 117, 176, 278–9
news, 18–19, 26, 33–5, 41–3, 161, 217–222, 234,
247–53, 259, 272
non-compositional meaning, 10, 55, 72, 76,
80–1, 101–2, 124–7, 130, 134, 138
www.cambridge.org
 Cambridge University Press
978-1-107-10174-6 — The English Phrasal Verb, 1650–Present
Paula Rodríguez-Puente
Index
More Information
321
Index
Old English (OE), 13, 20, 65, 108, 111, 114,
119–21, 123–5, 143, 161
oral
dimension, 30
language, 22, 26, 37, 41–2, 268
style, 34, 213, 231–2, 236, 241, 244, 249, 272
partially idiomatic phrasal verb, see
metaphorical phrasal verb
particle coordination test, 98–9, 101, 104–5, 148,
204, 279
particle placement test, 85–91, 103, 105, 279
passivisation, 96, 103, 105, 148, 150–1, 279
passivisation test, 96
phrasal verb particle, 48–61, 70–1, 90–2, 97–8,
102–7, 116–20, 165–6, 203–4
phrasal-prepositional verb, 2–3, 6, 15, 46, 48
pleonastic particle, 10, 82
popular written genres, 36, 231–2, 240, 244,
247–9, 251, 272, 283
pre-planned discourse, 26, 37, 41, 265, 268, 272,
276, 282
preposing test, 94–5, 103, 105, 279
preposition stranding, see stranded preposition
prepositional adverb, 49, 51–2, 74
prepositional verb, 2–3, 15, 46, 48, 84, 89, 96–8,
102, 117–18, 135, 145, 206
prescriptivism, 15, 176, 212, 216, 229, 277
productivity, 11, 54, 75, 110, 153–5, 157, 178–80,
209, 212, 213, 234, 245, 252, 258, 281
prototype theory, 139–40
reanalysis, 116, 125, 135–6
redundant particle, 10, 63, 74, 82, 104, 182–3,
229–30, 249, 276, 278, 284
reiterative
particle, 120
phrasal verb, 68–9, 82–3, 105, 147, 154, 182–3,
186–8, 193, 212
relatives test, 102, 105, 147, 279
science, 12, 18–19, 35–7, 42–3, 64, 161, 199, 208,
217–23, 253–60, 271–7
semantic spreading, 72, 75
semi-idiomatic phrasal verb, see metaphorical
phrasal verb
© in this web service Cambridge University Press
321
sermon, 18–19, 26, 37–8, 41–3, 161, 168, 200,
219–23, 260–3, 276
Spanish, 159, 185
specialisation, 115–16, 126, 129–30, 134
speech-based text type, 18–20, 26, 31–2, 37,
41–2, 218
speech-like text type, 42
speech-purposed text type, 42
speech-related text type, 41–2, 217, 222, 232,
236, 244, 260, 263, 265, 271–2, 276–7,
282–3
spoken language, 15, 20, 22–4, 26, 39–42, 64,
216, 221, 232, 264–5, 268, 273, 275–7
standardisation, 242
stranded preposition, 27, 52, 230, 232, 284
stylistic, 12, 16, 33, 36–8, 75, 80, 217, 228–9, 249,
251, 253, 273, 282, 284
stylistically neutral, 217, 271, 274–5, 283
substitution test, 100–1, 104
telic, 59–63, 70, 74, 83, 119, 124
telicity, 59
transitive preposition, 48, 90
trial proceedings, 16, 22–4, 38–43, 64, 217–23,
234, 247, 262–70, 272, 275
Twentieth-century English, 13, 15, 20, 154,
213, 282
type/token ratio (TTR), 178–9, 181, 212, 234,
239, 245, 251, 253, 258, 263, 268
verb gapping test, 101–2, 104, 105, 148, 279
verb-adjective combination, 6
verb-adverb combination, 7, 9, 84, 177, 275, 279
verb-object-particle (VOP), 85, 89, 154, 195–6,
200, 202–3, 213, 282
verb-particle-object (VPO), 85, 87, 89, 144, 154,
195–6, 200–3, 213, 282
verb-verb combination, 6
verbo-nominal combination, 6, 145
witness depositions, 39–40, 274
writing-based and writing-purposed text type,
42, 64, 74, 217, 221–2, 251, 263, 267, 271–2,
276–7
written text type, 15, 18–20, 22, 26, 30, 33, 194,
208, 216, 231, 275–6, 282
www.cambridge.org